Happy Independence Day

I've become quite annoyed that we, as a nation, are complacent with calling today's holiday "the Fourth of July" instead of its traditional, more meaningful name, "Independence Day."

Today's holiday celebrates the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which marks the birth of our great nation. Like Christmas, it is one of the few holidays we celebrate here in the USA that occurs on a specific date, as opposed to a specific day (such as the last Monday in May, when we celebrate Memorial Day, or the fourth Thursday in November, when we celebrate Thanksgiving).

We don't wish people a "Merry 25th of December" or a "Happy 11th of November"; why then, have we resorted to this downgrading of Independence Day by wishing folks a "Happy Fourth of July"?

A Long Day's Journey Into This Good Night (Part 1/3)

I wrote this on 30 March 2010 but just haven’t had a chance to post it until now. But then, something happened today (a few conversations with a few different TweePALs) that made my memory job back a few months and remember what I had written, and realize that now would be a great time to finally get this up on my blog:

I had to go into the City today and forgot to bring a book along with me to read on the train ride. While the ride isn’t that long (50-minutes tops, from my sister's home) it’s long enough to get through a few chapters of a good book.

I did, however, have my trusty laptop computer with me so I’ve brought it out as the train is departing and am just going to write down some of my thoughts until a few minutes before my stop, when I’ll have to start the process of hibernating the computer (it takes a few minutes to go into hibernation mode because writing 3,221,225,472 bytes (3GB) of data to a hard disk drive – no matter the speed and/or interface – still takes a few minutes!).

Today was perhaps the busiest day I’ve had in a few years. I made, and kept four different appointments (although technically, I combined two appointments into one by seeing two friends in NYC at the same time, in-between the 1^st and 3^rd appointments I had, which were more business-related).

First, I met with an individual from Twitter with whom I had become twendly (that’s Twitterspeak for “Twitter-friendly” or “friendly using Twitter”), Linda Rey, whose Twitter username is @ReyInsurance. I had an absolutely, fantastically fabulous time with her, and actually am quite glad that I managed to get up, go out, and do something that’s outside of my routine. 

Linda truly is an awesome, awe-inspiring individual. She’s warm, caring, intelligent, smart, friendly, funny, witty, compassionate, courageous, and a true wonder woman.

We talked shop for a bit and then talked about our lives. I look forward to building a relationship with her (boy, bet you’d never have heard those words coming out of THIS gay boy’s mouth, right? LOL!)—both business and personal—and having it grow as time move forwards. If I were straight, I could very well imagine myself falling in love with Linda—she’s just that sort of person. Linda was able to get me laughing quite often during our wonderful repartee, and actually said something which I thought would make a wonderful twote (that’s when we tweet quotations on Twitter—did I just coin another portmanteau?):

Linda was relaying a story of her dating escapades (or attempts thereof), and as soon as she said the following, I had to stop her and write it down. She asked if I was going to tweet that (GMTA!) and of course I told her that I was, because I thought it was such a fabulous thing that she revealed about her that also speaks volumes of truth about people and relationships in general these days. Thus sprach Linda:

What is it with all of these men putting all sorts of conditions and requirements into a relationship these days?? I’m at a point in my life now where I’m just, add water and I’m ready to go.

With that kind of humorous wit, how could anyone not fall in love with this great lady?

So not only have I made what hopefully will turn out to be a wonderfully productive and profitable business connection via Twitter for my new business venture, but I’ve hopefully made a wonderfully great, caring, and loving new friend as well. Talk about killing two birds with one stone! Linda is perhaps the fifth person I’ve met in-person whom I originally “met” via Twitter. And my meeting with her reinforces what I said in my blog posting around New Years of this year, that there are some absolutely phenomenal people in this world whom I never would have met without the benefit of being on Twitter. That I can turn an on-line relationship into a real-life relationship is an even greater benefit, and I expect that as I encounter more people around the world on Twitter such as Linda, I will find more and more people who possess the same wonderful and great qualities that I believe will make her a wonderful friend.

So after two hours flew by with Linda, she dropped me off at the train station where I caught the train into Grand Central and met up with two of my friends, one whom I haven’t seen in nearly a year and the other of whom I haven’t seen in nearly twice that amount of time. We went to Junior’s Restaurant (yes, of the same fame as Junior’s Most Fabulous Cheesecakes and Desserts from Brooklyn, NY) where I had a pretty decent Tuna Melt (on Rye, of course) served with the traditional, awesome, great-tasting New York Dill pickle. ;-) So we just chatted and caught up a bit and caught up with each other. I had to give one of my friends their tax return (it’s almost as if I were really killing three birds with one stone today, right?) so I was able to do that over lunch/dinner, as well.

One of my friends had to leave, so the other walked with me to my destination a few blocks away, a huge global law firm (somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,500 attorneys) where I might be able to get some work (after being unemployed for nearly three years!). Since I receive SSD income and have gone through my trial work period, I’m allowed to earn a whopping $1,000/month (gross income, pre-tax of course) and keep my benefits. That might not sound like a lot but believe me—it definitely comes in handy and having to live these past three years without that extra income has been an excruciating experience, to say the least!

If I actually could work enough hours to earn that (around 30 hours / month) amount, my net income would be more than double than what I’m receiving now from unemployment [note: my unemployment benefits ran out shortly after I wrote this; I haven’t received any unemployment benefits for nearly three months now!]. Add to that my work-from-home business (Tax Preparation, Business Consulting, IT Consulting, and Computer Repair/Instruction) and I might just start making enough money again to be able to afford a little present for myself every few months, instead of scraping by and worrying about finding something to eat on a daily basis. That would be a really nice—and welcomed—change of pace.

So my fourth and final meeting was actually to be tested at one of these firms (for about the past 8 years or so, the large firms don’t let one work for them, even through a temporary/employment agency that already has conducted its own testing, without first testing one’s skill set for their environment). The test took me a bit longer than I had thought as they tested me on the entire suite of MS-Office applications: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Outlook, as well as their document management system (DMS). In all honesty I haven’t used PowerPoint well over five years and they were using the 2007 version of MS Office, into which were incorporated some very drastic changes to the user interface (but that’s another story, for another time). So instead of finishing ahead of the “average” user who has taken the test, I took almost exactly the amount of time I was told the average user took to complete the test.

The one area where I think I may have not done so well, of course, is PowerPoint. After wasting around 15 minutes trying to modify the built-in templates to produce the document required by the test, I just scrapped everything and used the “screw it, do whatever works” method. I did manage to get the document completed and it looked fairly close to the original; however, it may not have been using the “best methods” or “best practices” that most firms like to see one use these days in MS Office applications. I’ll find out soon, and hopefully I will have scored well enough on the test so that they’ll call me in for work, during third shift (graveyard, a/k/a overnight shift). [UPDATE: I passed the test; the firm I tested at doesn’t score and only uses the pass/fail method, and I’m hoping to be called in for work soon!]

Another area where I actually was surprised was in the MS-Word portion of the test, because they required completion of a Table of Authorities, which is something that, normally, the paralegal or attorney would do. They also asked that citations to be inserted were formatted properly—again, something that usually is under the prevue of an attorney or paralegal. It’s a good thing that I went to law school and have worked as a paralegal, so I knew exactly what to do; I’ve never before seen a test given by one of these gigantic firms where such knowledge was required to successfully complete it.

So now I’m sitting on the Metro North train which is whisking me back toward my sister’s home. Once I get there, I’ll check into Twitter, update my blog with this posting, check into Farmville and see which of my crops had withered (I hadn’t planned to be off the Internet for such an extended period of time today), and just try to unwind. For me, this was a very, very busy day. While I feel drained of energy, at the same time I’m also excited, as I made new contacts, reconnected with old ones, and hopefully might have some work coming in that will replace the end of my unemployment benefits.

Coming soon:

Please read Part 2 of this posting to get an update on my family:

Then, read Part 3 of this blog post to learn why I decided to go back to what I had written a few months ago, dredge it up, and post it to my blog now.

QOTD - Suze Orman

Found this awesome video clip from one of my favourite famous women who do not work in the field of entertainment, Suze Orman:



Here is a partial transcript of quotes that I thought should be transcribed for all to see:


Back [in the 1980s], there were ethics. There were ethics with money, believe it or not. You couldn't buy a house unless you had 20% down. They didn't give you credit cards unless you had the money to get out of credit card debt. They didn't give you a financial rope so that you could hang yourself.

Today's economy is based on the ignorance of the people everywhere in the hopes that you're going to make some serious financial mistake that makes these people over here be able to meet their earnings reports for the stock markets and the this and the that.


Way back when, money made sense. You could go to the university and pay $100 a semester to attend. Now we have kids graduating college with more student loan debt than they have any idea what to do with. Good luck if they ever are able to afford to buy a home, no matter where they live. Their jobs are being shipped overseas. And i can go on and on and on. The price of a gallon of gasoline—are you kidding?


All of everything ties to politics. Today it is so hard, you know I did this whole thing, this whole book deal that i did called The Money Book for the Young, Fabulous and Broke. I should've called it The Money Book for the Young, Fabulous, Depressed and Broke. And there's a good reason that the young ones today—I call them the wife & beers—that they're depressed: because nobody has their back, financially speaking.


You can tell—can you not tell I'm an emotional woman? I am passionate. I believe in what i'm saying. I've been doing this for 30 years. I have, and it's like, I'm going like, give me some emotion back...

However, it's worthless but through our own actions we can tape [the ripped up $20 bill] back together; we can bring these parts together—we can! But you're going to have to do it yourself because here's the bottom line: the government isn't gonna save you. Nobody's gonna save you. YOU have what it takes to save yourself. So when it comes to your money, I want you to look in the mirror because that's the best financial advisor you're gonna find. Please people, if you think other people have your best interests at heart when it comes to your money, I don't think so!

The End of a Friendship

I just wrote this to my supposed best friend:

We met almost two years ago and have been through a lot together. However, our friendship cannot continue. You have destroyed any and all trust that I had in you by your actions.

If I speak to you about this, instead of writing, I will be using words that you do not want to hear – language that you, or any person of your race, would want to hear. That is how upset I am. So instead, I leave you with this letter.

It does not matter how much you took, or what you took. It matters, simply, that you took, without asking and without informing me (after the fact), period. And you didn’t take just once, or twice, or thrice—you took multiple times. After I confronted you about it and left for my mother’s, you continued to take. That’s all that matters.
I wish you well; I do not wish you any ill will. I will try to help you when I can, but we are and can only be acquaintances now.

I don’t know if you’ll ever repay me the money that you owe me (a substantial amount, at that) and even if you do, I don’t know if it will restore my faith and trust in you.

I gave you multiple chances—moreso than I would give other folks these days—solely because of our history and what I thought was to be our lasting friendship.

But another thing you took from me is the respect that you had given me. You don’t treat or view me with respect. It’s either Johnny’s way or the highway, and that can’t work in a true friendship. You weren’t respectful of things I told you, or as you to do. You didn’t respect my opinion, you didn’t heed my advice. You just did whatever it is that you wanted, and everyone else be damned.

I know you’re going through a lot right now. I’ve been there, as you well know. But I never stooped to the level that you have stooped to. I always maintained my personal integrity, self-respect, and trust among others. I always kept my word. You, conversely, have not.

I’m finding that people I once thought I was able to trust I am not so certain I can, and I’ve been reevaluating and reexamining all of my relationships with everyone.

The way you spoke to my mother in your messages, and what you told her, just prove my point about you—that you cannot be trusted. I still care about you, and this is what hurts the most—that I can’t trust you any longer. Without trust, there is no friendship.

My mother has demanded that I completely remove you from my life; I’m not certain that that’s possible. Maybe one day in the future you will regain my trust, but that day—if ever it comes—is a long way off into the future.
I leave you with this message: I hope you’re able to ground yourself, to find yourself once again, and to find what it is that you’re looking for. I hope you’re able to ease the pain you’re suffering, and to find love and friendship from others.

I wish you well, []. Even though I am still upset and furious at your actions and your decision to destroy our friendship (as it has been solely your actions that destroyed it) but still, I wish you well and all the best that life has to offer.

Sincerely,
Peter C. Frank

Case Study: Why 1,138 federal marriage rights matter

AS OF MAY 2004—the last time this analysis was conducted, six years ago—there were ONE THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED and THIRTY-EIGHT FEDERAL LAWS where martial status is a factor in determining rights, benefits, responsibilities, obligations, protections, etc.

In the past ten years alone, the IRS code (Title 26 of the United States Code) has grown by some 35,000 page or approximately 50% (thanks to Dorian Davis for this video factoid); if we presume that the IRS code grew 3,500 pages per year over the past ten years (using simple math--not trying to do complicate things), then we can say that it grew 21,000 pages over the past six years. In those 21,000 pages, how much would you like to bet that there are some new laws where marital status is a factor—and that's just in the IRS code, which constitutes only a portion of the United States Code surveyed to determine the number of laws where marital status is a factor.

How does this affect the every day individual—"Joe Schmoe," so the speak—you ask yourself? I present you with a real-world example of just how horrible things can go when one isn't afforded all of the protections conferred upon married couples by those 1,138-or-so federal laws:

I'd like to introduce you to Clay Greene, since the press and news media have decided to ignore this story (thanks to the efforts of some of our staunchest stalwarts like Bil Browning (of the Bilerico Project, which initially broke this sordid story on 17 April 2010), Andrew Sullivan, and Michaelangelo Signorile, to name a few), with the notable exception of The New York Times, albeit only on its blog site and only for the SF Bay Area, and only after three days of hounding by the LGBT media to bring attention to this barbarous story (as Mr. Sullivan so aptly puts it):

In the event that you've missed any of the reporting surrounding Mr. Greene, here's a quick update:

Clay Greene, a 78-year-old gay man from Sebastopol, filed a lawsuit against Sonoma County claiming he sustained spate of indignities at the hands of county officials during a bizarre estate battle that took place when Harold Scull, Mr. Greene's partner of 20+ years who was 88 at the time, fell and became hospitalized in 2008.

[As an aside, The New York Times points out that news of Mr. Greene's case came out just as POTUS Obama published his Presidential Memorandum on hospital visitation, which I've previously debunked as being pure rubbish and amounting to a hill of nothingness.]

Sonoma County (California) officials successfully petitioned the court to gain some powers of conservatorship. Then they “sold, kept, converted to their own use, and otherwise disposed of” almost $500,000 worth of belongings from the home shared by the two men — including furniture, art objects, and memorabilia from the years Mr. Scull spent working in Hollywood, as well as a truck and two cats.

Mr. Greene has stated that he and Mr. Scull previously had specified each other as executors in case either became incapacitated; however, Sonoma County officials ignored the couple's previously prepared legal documents and the history of their relationship, and at one point referred to Mr. Greene as Mr. Scull’s “roommate.”

Citing the state of Mr. Greene’s "mental health," Sonoma County officials then moved him—against his will—into a nursing home, and sold the rest of his belongings. He was not allowed to visit Mr. Scull, who died several months later, in August 2008.

Long story short: elderly gay couple, with all of the legal documents they could muster, because they were not allowed to marry, had the state trample all over their life and literally tear apart and obliterate their lives and cherished possessions. You can read more about the couple on The National Center for Lesbian Rights' web site in an article (hosted by The Bilerico Project) written by its executive director, Kate Kendell.

Also, be sure to check out the update posted by OutQ News where Sonoma County's response alleges that it was acting "in good faith" on a domestic violence claim—a claim that neither police nor the district attorney's office know anything about. Perhaps even more disturbing is the answer by Sonoma County that the county's bookkeeping records are "awful" and they haven't a clue as to where or to whom the proceeds from the auctions were disbursed!

Now, had Messrs. Greene and Clay been married, this, to quote the inspector from Woody Woodpecker, would never have happened. In those 1,138 or so federal laws pertaining or relating to marital status, there are protections for couples to prevent the government from making such harsh and punitive intrusions into a couple's life. Absent these protections (i.e., absent marriage), this same scenario could happen to anyone.

And, in fact, it did happen to another couple a few years ago. An unnamed couple living in Westchester County, New York, had a very similar situation happen to them. Unfortunately, I'm still awaiting details of their situation from a friend who personally knows them and their situation (*ahem*, LG, if you're reading this, please hurry?).

"So what can or shoud I/we do about this?", you may be asking yourself? The answer is very, very simple: demand full marriage equality for all consenting adult couples.

In the meantime, we can make some noise about the unfortunate and undeserving circumstances of couples like Messrs. Clay & Greene. As one friend on Facebook put it, it's:

TIME TO MAKE SOME NOISE:
Sonoma County, California has a board of 5 Supervisors, and each one of them needs to hear how ANGRY we are that something so heinous occurred on their watch! You can contact each supervisor by e-mail below (individual email addresses). If you would rather phone, they are reached through a common switchboard at (707) 565-2241. ASK THEM WHAT IS BEING DONE WITH REGARD TO THIS INSTANCE, AND HOW ARE THEY GOING TO ENSURE NOTHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS AGAIN. DEMAND THE FIRINGS OF THOSE INVOLVED.

FIRST DISTRICT: Supervisor Valerie Brown
vbrown@sonoma-county.org
SECOND DISTRICT: Supervisor Mike Kerns
mkerns@sonoma-county.org
THIRD DISTICT: Supervisor Shirley Zane
szane@sonoma-county.org
FOURTH DISTRICT: Supervisor Paul Kelley
pkelley@sonoma-county.org
FIFTH DISTRICT: Supervisor Efren Carrillo
ecarrillo@sonoma-county.org

Additionally, we can write letters to the Editors of our local newspapers, asking them why this story hasn't run in their newspaper, and we can also contact our local press and news media offices, asking them the same question.

Bringing light to this issue will help educate the American public as to Why Marriage Equality Matters (note: this links to a PDF file) to us; it's not j!ust some abstract theory we're fighting for. This involves real people, and real lives. It truly is a matter of justice.

Just remember, there are over one-thousand, one-hundred and thirty eight reasons under federal law alone for couples to get married; Harold & Clay's story is but one of the myriad in which couples have suffered without these essential and necessary protections afforded to everyone else.

[Note: I am e-mailing each of the five Sonoma County Supervisors a copy of this blog article; any responses they provide will be published on my blog either as a comment herein or as a follow-up blog posting.]

[Note: This section was added after the initial posting, at 3:45pm]: A friend just reminded me of something: we can also ask our national LGBTQ organizations—those well-established organizations supposedly "have our backs", such as the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Lambda Legal, for starters, just where the *(!&_@! they have been during this tragedy. HCR, NGLTF, ACLU & Lambda are the oldest and most well-established organizations in the country fighting for LGBTQ rights. Just where have they been throughout Clay's & Harold's ordeal? And where are they now? The answer, to date: ominously silent.

We, as a community, should also direct our and and our outrage at our own organizations—the very organizations that are supposedly fighting for our rights. Well here sits an egregious story filled with unconscionable behavior, and the very organizations that purport to represent us are just sitting idly by (with the notable exception of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, of course, which has spearheaded Clay's cause), attending $30,000/plate dinners with POTUS Obama. What a farce they all are.

It's time, indeed, for new leadership, new organizations, and a new direction, if we ever are to achieve the equality that we so desperately seek and deserve.

[Updated 3 May 2010 4:55pm UTC] This is the full text of the 2004 report by the United States General Accounting Office [PDF].

QOTD

**le sigh**

They just don't make'm like this anymore ...

At this moment we are passing through a period of great unrest—social, political, and industrial unrest. It is of the utmost importance for our future that this should prove to be not the unrest of mere rebelliousness against life, of mere dissatisfaction with the inevitable inequality of conditions, but the unrest of a resolute and eager ambition to secure the betterment of the individual and the nation.

So far as this movement of agitation throughout the country takes the form of a fierce discontent with evil, of a determination to punish the authors of evil, whether in industry or politics, the feeling is to be heartily welcomed as a sign of healthy life.

If, on the other hand, it turns into a mere crusade of appetite against appetite, of a contest between the brutal greed of the “have nots” and the brutal greed of the “haves,” then it has no significance for good, but only for evil. If it seeks to establish a line of cleavage, not along the line which divides good men from bad, but along that other line, running at right angles thereto, which divides those who are well off from those who are less well off, then it will be fraught with immeasurable harm to the body politic.

*     *     *

As a matter of personal conviction, and without pretending to discuss the details or formulate the system, I feel that we shall ultimately have to consider the adoption of some such scheme as that of a progressive tax on all fortunes, beyond a certain amount, either given in life or devised or bequeathed upon death to any individual—a tax so framed as to put it out of the power of the owner of one of these enormous fortunes to hand on more than a certain amount to any one individual; the tax of course, to be imposed by the national and not the state government. Such taxation should, of course, be aimed merely at the inheritance or transmission in their entirety of those fortunes swollen beyond all healthy limits. Again, the national government must in some form exercise supervision over corporations engaged in interstate business—and all large corporations engaged in interstate business—whether by license or otherwise, so as to permit us to deal with the far reaching evils of overcapitalization.

*     *     *

No good whatever will come from that warped and mock morality which denounces the misdeeds of men of wealth and forgets the misdeeds practiced at their expense; which denounces bribery, but blinds itself to blackmail; which foams with rage if a corporation secures favors by improper methods, and merely leers with hideous mirth if the corporation is itself wronged.

The only public servant who can be trusted honestly to protect the rights of the public against the misdeeds of a corporation is that public man who will just as surely protect the corporation itself from wrongful aggression .

If a public man is willing to yield to popular clamor and do wrong to the men of wealth or to rich corporations, it may be set down as certain that if the opportunity comes he will secretly and furtively do wrong to the public in the interest of a corporation.

But in addition to honesty, we need sanity. No honesty will make a public man useful if that man is timid or foolish, if he is a hot-headed zealot or an impracticable visionary. As we strive for reform we find that it is not at all merely the case of a long uphill pull. On the contrary, there is almost as much of breeching work as of collar work. To depend only on traces means that there will soon be a runaway and an upset.

The men of wealth who today are trying to prevent the regulation and control of their business in the interest of the public by the proper government authorities will not succeed, in my judgment, in checking the progress of the movement. But if they did succeed they would find that they had sown the wind and would surely reap the whirlwind, for they would ultimately provoke the violent excesses which accompany a reform coming by convulsion instead of by steady and natural growth.

~Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
(October 27, 1858 – January 6, 1919)
26th POTUS, Statesman, Politician

The quotes published above by President Theodore were given during his “The Man with the Muck Rake” Speech on Sunday, 15 April 1906, at the laying of the corner stone of the Cannon Office Building in Washington, DC. (it truly is an awesome & awe-inspiring speech!)

It's so sad how much of what President Roosevelt said in his speech is still true today—over a century later!

POTUS Obama issues Memorandum on Hospital Visitation Rights

I read the memo that Obama wrote in its entirety, and I have to disagree with all of the hoopla that's being made about it--not with anything that he said but with how people are characterizing this as such a monumental change, etc.

This is not an order; it's a memo, and there's quite a big difference between the two. If Obama wished to place impetus into his words, he would (or should) have issued an Executive Order, NOT a memorandum seeking advice from the Dept of HHS on how it should be doing its job. In other words, it's a request, a comment, a call to action--not the action itself.

Yet, people continue to create fanfare and hoopla and praise Obama for barely lifting a finger. IMHO, this is not NEARLY as big as people are making it out to be. Essentially, this is Obama saying something along the lines of, "yes...well, people shouldn't be discriminated against and they should be allowed to have visitation rights but I'm not going to force the issue and start ordering people & hospitals to comply with what I'd like to see happen...."

So just what does it all boil down to you ask, boys & girls? Try this on for size:

The Dept of Health & Human Svcs basically can tell Obama to bugger off; if Obama had issued an Executive Order, things would be *quite* different. But this is, quite literally, the LEAST POSSIBLE ACTION that POTUS could take w/ respect to their admin.

And that, as they say, is that.

[TEXT AFTER THIS POINT ADDED 16 April 2010 5:00am UTC -- you folks just couldn't deal with me writing a short post to my blog, could ya? ;-) ]

I've been accused by some of being factually incorrect in stating that Obama has not ordered the Director of the US Department of Health & Human Services. I linked to the Memorandum as published by the US White House Office of the Press Secretary; however, just to clear things up (because apparently, most folk haven't taken the time to click through and actually read what Obama wrote), here is what President Obama actually wrote in his memorandum (this is a direct quotation from the Memorandum over which everybody is making such a great, big fuss):

By this memorandum, I request that you take the following steps:

1. Initiate appropriate rulemaking, pursuant to your authority under 42 U.S.C. 1395x and other relevant provisions of law, to ensure that hospitals that participate in Medicare or Medicaid respect the rights of patients to designate visitors. It should be made clear that designated visitors, including individuals designated by legally valid advance directives (such as durable powers of attorney and health care proxies), should enjoy visitation privileges that are no more restrictive than those that immediate family members enjoy. You should also provide that participating hospitals may not deny visitation privileges on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The rulemaking should take into account the need for hospitals to restrict visitation in medically appropriate circumstances as well as the clinical decisions that medical professionals make about a patient's care or treatment.
   
   
2. Ensure that all hospitals participating in Medicare or Medicaid are in full compliance with regulations, codified at 42 CFR 482.13 and 42 CFR 489.102(a), promulgated to guarantee that all patients' advance directives, such as durable powers of attorney and health care proxies, are respected, and that patients' representatives otherwise have the right to make informed decisions regarding patients' care. Additionally, I request that you issue new guidelines, pursuant to your authority under 42 U.S.C. 1395cc and other relevant provisions of law, and provide technical assistance on how hospitals participating in Medicare or Medicaid can best comply with the regulations and take any additional appropriate measures to fully enforce the regulations.
   
   
3. Provide additional recommendations to me, within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, on actions the Department of Health and Human Services can take to address hospital visitation, medical decisionmaking, or other health care issues that affect LGBT patients and their families.

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

[emphasis supplied; hyperlinks provided]

Now let's examine the language that President Obama used (please note that "emphasis supplied" means that I altered the appearance of the text by adding bold-face/italics to it; otherwise, apart from any formatting snafus, the text remains exactly as it was published by the White House Office of the Press Secretary):

As can be seen in the first sentence that is quoted, President Obama has requested that the Director of the US Department of Health & Human Services perform three actions, which he outlines. Within those three actions, he reiterates that he is requesting her to perform these actions. I think it's time to take a dictionary break:

re·quest

–noun
[ ]

–verb (used with object)
6. to ask for, esp. politely or formally: He requested permission to speak.
7. to ask or beg; bid (usually fol. by a clause or an infinitive): to request that he leave; to request to be excused.
8. to ask or beg (someone) to do something: He requested me to go.

ask

–verb (used with object)
1. to put a question to; inquire of: I asked him but he didn't answer.
2. to request information about: to ask the way.
3. to try to get by using words; request: to ask advice; to ask a favor.
4. to solicit from; request of: Could I ask you a favor? Ask her for advice.
5. to demand; expect: What price are they asking? A little silence is all I ask.
6. to set a price of: to ask $20 for the hat.
7. to call for; need; require: This experiment asks patience.
8. to invite: to ask guests to dinner.
9. Archaic. to publish (banns).

–verb (used without object)
10. to make inquiry; inquire: to ask about a person.
11. to request or petition (usually fol. by for): to ask for leniency; to ask for food.

or·der

–noun
[ ]

–verb (used with object)
37. to give an order, direction, or command to: The infantry divisions were ordered to advance.
38. to direct or command to go or come as specified: to order a person out of one's house
39. to prescribe: The doctor ordered rest for the patient.
40. to direct to be made, supplied, or furnished: to order a copy of a book.
41. to regulate, conduct, or manage: to order one's life for greater leisure.
42. to arrange methodically or suitably: to order chessmen for a game.
43. Mathematics . to arrange (the elements of a set) so that if one element precedes another, it cannot be preceded by the other or by elements that the other precedes.
44. to ordain, as God or fate does.
45. to invest with clerical rank or authority.

–verb (used without object)
46. to give an order or issue orders: I wish to order, but the waiter is busy.

di·rect

–verb (used with object)
1. to manage or guide by advice, helpful information, instruction, etc.: He directed the company through a difficult time.
2. to regulate the course of; control: History is directed by a small number of great men and women.
3. to administer; manage; supervise: She directs the affairs of the estate.
4. to give authoritative instructions to; command; order or ordain: I directed him to leave the room.
5. to serve as a director in the production or performance of (a musical work, play, motion picture, etc.).
6. to guide, tell, or show (a person) the way to a place: I directed him to the post office.
7. to point, aim, or send toward a place or object: to direct radio waves around the globe.
8. to channel or focus toward a given result, object, or end (often fol. by to or toward ): She directed all her energies toward the accomplishment of the work.
9. to address (words, a speech, a written report, etc.) to a person or persons: The secretary directed his remarks to two of the committee members.
10. to address (a letter, package, etc.) to an intended recipient.

–verb (used without object)
11. to act as a guide.
12. to give commands or orders.
[emphasis supplied]
[source: Dictionary.com, an Ask.com service]

So as we can see, there is a clear—and significant—difference between the words "request," "order," "ask," and "direct": to request and to ask are synonymous with each other; likewise, to order and to direct are synonymous with each other. With the first group, the connotation is such that one is seeking another to perform an action, without having authority to require such action of said individual. In other words, the decision on whether or not such action is to be undertaken is left with the person upon whom such action is being requested.

Contrary to the non-authoritative, permission-seeking words "request" and "ask," the words "order" and "direct" connote authority from the individual issuing such directives such that one can be fairly certain that the missives being commanded will be carried out. In other words, the decision on whether or not such action is to be undertaken is left with the person who is commanding such action.

I now bring your attention to the very last paragraph and sentence of Obama's Memorandum:

You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

[emphasis supplied]

Unlike the earlier paragraphs, where Obama requests the Director of HHS to undertake certain actions, here we see Obama directing the Director of HHS to take certain action.

Clearly, President Obama knows the difference in meanings among these words and has chosen the wording of his Memorandum very carefully. If you have any doubt as to this, then ask yourself, "Why did he only request that the HHS Director take the enumerated steps but direct her to perform other actions?" The answer should then become quite obvious, as I've implied above: President Obama has done the very least he could possibly do in order to throw some bread crumbs to the LGBTQ community, in an effect to begin soliciting funds for his fellow politicians so that they all may return to their thrones of power in this coming November's mid-term election.

I'm not going to get into the fact that Candidate Obama promised, upon his election, a repeal of DADT and a repeal of DOMA. To date, neither of his promises have been given even a scintilla of veracity by him.

Oh, and before I get to my next point, I do need to bring this to your attention once again (even though I've hyperlinked to the text and quoted it above, I set it apart here for your inspection).

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

And there you have it, in black & white. President Obama states, quite clearly, that his intention is not to actually confer upon any individual any right[s] or benefit[s] that can be enforced by any sort of legal mechanism, whatsoever.

If there is any doubt in anyone's minds that President Obama has absolutely no intention of having the Director of the US Department of Health & Human Services effectuate any of his "requests" then perhaps this will prove more probative in convincing any such individual.

In his Memorandum, President Obama quotes four (4) distinct sections of US law:

42 U.S.C. 1395x
42 CFR 482.13
42 CFR 489.102(a) and
42 U.S.C. 1395cc

Let's take a brief, quick look at these sections of United States Law:

42 U.S.C. 1395x consists entirely of definitions used in "The Public Health and Welfare" section of United States law (Title 42 of the United States Code)

42 CFS 482.13, to the best of my knowledge, does not exist.

42 CFR 489.102(a) is a very short (three-columns) section of law pertaining to the requirements of providers of health services who accept payment from Medicaid and/or Medicare, particularly with respect to advanced directors. Unlike health proxies, advanced directives are generally used to confer upon another individual their wishes with respect to remaining or being removed from life support, should they ever find themselves in such a situation. Advances directives therefore usually are very limited forms of a health care proxy in that there is only one decision to be made: whether or not to continue life support for an individual (usually in some form of a vegetative state) who is unable to make that determination for themself. Oh, and about 1/3 of the text in these three columns provides exemptions from adhering to the wishes, desires, commands, directives, and orders from such health care proxy with respect to an advanced directive on the grounds that it is contrary to the provider's religious beliefs.

Finally, 42 U.S.C. 1395cc deals with billing agreements with health care providers who accept Medicaid and/or Medicare as a method of payment for the health services they render.

So, what do we really have here?

We have:

President Obama, approximately six months before the mid-term elections, throwing a few breadcrumbs to the LGBTQ community, as political strategy for fundraising efforts that will enable the return of the Kings and Queens in Congress to their respective thrones, asking the Director of the US Department of Health & Human Services to implement some vague changes that 95% of the nation agree should have been made ages ago, referencing some pretty irrelevant sections of the laws of the United States of America and perhaps even throwing in another reference just to make it look better, all the whilst stating that he has absolutely zero (0) intention of actually making any real changes that would actually benefit or confer a right upon anyone with respect to what he's requesting the US HSS Dep't director to do, and then commanding her to publish his so-called intentions.

In other words, what we have here is a big, fat, bulking heap of ...

ZERO!

Now do you folks get it, and why all of the fanfare, hoopla, and parades surrounding this are really, truly, honest-to-goodness, over nothing?
[Time Stamp - insertion of new section completed 16 April 2010 6:45am UTC]

How the UK tax system works, in pub English

A friend from the UK recently sent this as an explanation of their tax system:

This topical explanation may be of help in understanding the recent UK budget!

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all
ten comes to £100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go
something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.

So, that's what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with
the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to
reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20". Drinks for the ten men
would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So the first four men were unaffected.

They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men—the paying customers?

How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his
fair share?

They realised that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the
sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each
man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the
principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to
work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100%
saving).

The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).

The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began
to compare their savings.

"I only got a pound out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got £10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a pound
too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back,
when I got only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get
anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine
sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to
pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have
enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is
how our tax system works.

The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the
most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may
not show up anymore.

In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is
somewhat friendlier.

So to all of you in the USA who think you have it bad, just think how things could be...

I am an American, too!

Yesterday, 10 April 2010, Dixie Carter, an amazing American actress and lady of extreme talent and class, passed away. She was just 70 years old -- quite young, given today's longer life expectancies, although during her seven decades of life, she provided us with greatness that will always be remembered thanks to the invention we call television.

While Ms. Carter was an extraordinary actress on the stage and appeared as a star in numerous Broadway roles, she most likely will be remembered for her role playing "Julia Sugarbaker" from the hit 1980s American television sit-com, Designing Women.

Following is a video clip from the hit show, which shows not just the strength of character and talent of the show but but that of Dixie Carter, as well. Having seen Ms. Carter perform in person, and having watched various interviews of her, it's quite hard to make a distinction between Dixie Carter and the role that she plays as Julia Sugarbaker in the clip below.

And just because this is such a wonderful, moving, and relevant speech, I have transcribed it. Please note, that this was the 46th episode of Designing Women, which aired during its third season in 1989 -- 21 years ago (it was the 2nd episode of its !

Dixie Carter (as "Julia Sugarbaker"): No, Mr. Brickette, I have not forgotten. I was thinking that you seem to have forgotten the phrase, "Separation of Church and State." But the one thing I did forget was just how divisive and dishonest and distasteful someone like you can be. I've sat here today and listened to you pander to these people but you don't actually care about them or you wouldn't be sitting here reinforcing their ignorances and prejudices.

Jason Bernard (as "Mr. Wilson Brickette"): You heard that, callers. She just called you ignorant and prejudiced!

Dixie Carter (as "Julia Sugarbaker"): I do not think that everyone in America is ignorant—far from it! But we are, today, probably the most uneducated, under-read and illterate nation in the Western Hemisphere, which makes it all the more puzzling to me why the biggest question on your small mind is whether or not little Johnny is going to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every morning.

And I'll tell you something else, Mr. Brickette: I have had it up to here with you and your phoney issues and your yankee-doodle yakking. If you like reciting the pledge of allegiance every day then I think you should do it in the car, in the shower, wherever the mood strikes you. But don't try to tell me when or where I have to say or do or salute anything because I am an American, too–and that is what being an American is all about.

And another thing: I am sick and tired of being made to feel that if I am not a member of a little family with 2.4 children who goes just to Jerry Falwell's church and puts their hands over their hearts every morning that I am unreligious, unpatriotic and unAmerican because I have news for you, Mr. Brickette: all liberals are not kooks any more than all conservatives are fascists!

And the last time I checked, God was neither a Democrat nor a Republican.

And just for your information, yes—I am a liberal but I am also ... a Christian. And I get down on my knees and pray every day, on my own turf, on my own time. One of the things that I pray for, Mr. Brickette, is that people with power will get good sense, and people with good sense will get power, and that the rest of us will be blessed with the patience and the strength to survive the people like you in the meantime!

Rest In Peace, Dixie Carter!

My Roommate Situation

I sent this e-mail to my housing agency; in addition to sending it directly to my worker, I cc'd it to his supervisor and the director of the entire agency, as well as my therapist & a housing advocate.

Last night, I cooked a package of chicken wings (contained about 30 wings) belonging to my roommate. As I state in the e-mail, I'm now in a "tit-for-tat" mode of dealing w/ him: getting him to ask me before he just goes and eats my food hasn't been working, so now I just take what I want/need of his (and still, the balance is much more in his favor, as he consumes far more of my food products than I do of his). I ate about 4-5 wings, then went to sleep. Woke up to find that he'd eaten the rest of the chicken. Now granted, this was his food but now I'm left with absolutely nothing to eat but four boxes of pasta.

He finished off the rest of my butter, cooking oil, and whatever other ingredients I had left that I could use to make any of the boxes of pasta with.

People owe me money, and looks like I might just have to get a bill collector to start getting it from them. What fun!

Here's the e-mail that I sent, filing an official complaint with the agency (I redacted individual's names to protect their privacy but those were the only changes I made):

8 April 2010

Dear E:

I am writing to file an official complaint with you regarding my roommate, K, and three very specific issues that I have repeatedly brought up with you during our meetings (and with which I repeatedly engage Kenneth in conversation): (1) unsanitary bathroom conditions; (2) consumption of food products purchased by me; and (3) leaving the apartment door unlocked when he leaves.

First, I repeatedly have asked K to either raise the toilet seat or sit down when he urinates. While he has gotten better at this, after a few days, the bathroom indubitably falls into a condition whereby K's urination on and around the toilet comes to a point where it becomes quite uncomfortable, unsanitary, and extremely distasteful should either a guest or myself need to utilize the facilities. He continues--especially in periods of my absence--to urinate without regard as to whether or not his bodily fluids end up in the toilet bowel or on or even outside of it. As I have previously advised you, K's urine is very strong-scented and sticky (which you surmised was from his being diabetic).

Second, K continues to consume my food products, groceries, and cooking essentials without first asking me. As with the situation about his urinating in the bathroom, I have had numerous, multiple conversations with him about this. He sometimes admits and sometimes denies consuming my groceries. For instance, right before I left to visit with my sister, I had purchased four jars of pasta sauce and five boxes of Ronzoni pasta. I used ONE of each of them (i.e., one jar of sauce and one box of pasta) before leaving. When I returned to the apartment approximately one week later, I found one-half box of opened Ronzoni pasta left, as well as one-half jar of pasta sauce, sitting in the pantry. K admitted to using one-half of a jar of sauce but said that he put the portion he didn't use back into the pantry; this leaves two jars unspoken for.

Speaking of placing partially-consumed items into the pantry, I have a number of marinades and salad dressings that have been in the kitchen cabinet, unused. I recently went through them and discovered that almost all of the bottles toward the back of the cabinet have been opened and partially consumed.

Aside from the fact that no one else -- to my knowledge -- has been in our apartment (and even if they were, they wouldn't have consumed my food without letting me know about it), any and all of my friends would know to place the unused portion of pasta sauce from a jar, the unused portion of marinade sauce or salad dressing in a bottle, into the refrigerator and not back onto the shelf or into the food pantry.

The other night, he purchased ice cream for me because he had consumed most of the ice cream that I had purchased. I went to the freezer to get a dish, and couldn't find it. I found the ice cream sitting in the refrigerator, and asked K about this. He advised me that he thought it would be OK in the 'fridge as it would keep the ice cream (now soup) cool so it wouldn't spoil.

I have attempted conversations with K about these matters to no avail. He states that he will replace the items he has consumed, which he sometimes does, but never all of the items. I have attempted assuming a "tit-for-tat" mode of operation with K, to no avail (the difference, however, is that instead of having him have to ask me if I've consumed any of his food purchases, I would tell him (were he home at the time, or the next time I see him) that I had consumed X of his because he had consumed Y of mine and hadn't replaced it -- to which he responded "Oh, okay."

Finally, I need to bring up the third issue with you. When K leaves the apartment, he does not lock the apartment door. This leaves the apartment exposed as an easy target for burglars, considering that without locking the deadbolt on the doorknob, one can easily break into the apartment using a credit card or similar instrument to bypass the doorknob-only lock. K thinks that the doorknob-only lock is enough to prevent invasion into the home by individuals seeking to steal the contents therein.

Additionally, this creates an additional problem, as K often locks himself out of the apartment. As before, I have had numerous conversations with K about locking the front door, explaining to him that without throwing the deadbolt lock utilizing his key, it leaves the apartment exposed to greater risk of theft. I told him that if he put his key into the lock before he closed the apartment door, it would assure him that (a) he had his keys with him and wouldn't be locked out and (b) the apartment would be more secured. Now that warmer months are coming, I expect the return of individuals to the building and its environs who come to the building for illicit purposes and who do not belong here, and whom my neighbors and I chase away whenever we see them. If they gain knowledge of the items belonging to me that are in the apartment and the easy access to the apartment, I can only imagine how devastating a loss it would be to me, both emotionally and financially (I have advised you that a great amount of the items I keep in my apartment are the legacy I have received from my grandparents, donated to me by my sister as she did not want them; therefore, there is great emotional attachment to these items).

Then, there is the aspect of personal safety; with such easy access to the apartment by using a credit card to bypass the doorknob lock, and the flimsy door that serves as a barrier to my own bedroom and private space (it's one of those hollowed-out wooden doors that uses perhaps 1/8" wood on each side of the door, with nothing in-between, and a simple, pickable, bypassable lock to gain entrance therein), who's to say what may happen to me when K leaves very early in the morning to go to his program (sometimes as early as 7am) while I am sleeping (or even not sleeping). Being physically handicapped, I would be at a great disadvantage were a burglar to enter my apartment and especially my bedroom in search of loot and I feel an increased risk for my own, personal safety every time K leaves the apartment without locking the door behind him.

I would hate to have to file a claim against Cluster in such an event of loss due to burglary, given the number of items of value that I own which are stored in the apartment, and in the even more severe situation should I come unto undue harm due to the lack of my roommate properly securing the premises upon his departure therefrom.

As has been the case with my last two roommates, K is not paying his portion of the cable bill (the agreement with which we had finally worked out, months after he has been living here) in a timely fashion. He is in serious need of money management skills and assistance. I have witnessed his CD / DVD collection grow from nothing to nearly one-hundred various CDs/DVDs in the six months or so that I have had K as a roommate. (You will recall that I have asked K to pay $10/week for cable--he hasn't paid in I believe it is three weeks, and considering that the cable-only portion of my cable bill is around $118/month, even you agreed that having K pay ~1/3 of that amount is quite generous of me--I pay for 100% of the Internet/VOIP portion of the cable bill).

Finally, I need to point out to you that contrary to a New York State Law which went into effect on 22 February 2010, there is no carbon monoxide detector installed anywhere in the apartment (for that matter, I believe that no such detectors are installed anywhere within the building).

I cannot continue to live under these conditions, and I never had to deal with such conditions with either of my two previous roommates. I never before experienced issues with my roommate consuming my food (or my consuming theirs) with either Fred or David; I haven't had to deal with them not locking the door when they leave the apartment (if anything, it was the opposite), and I never had to deal with unsanitary living conditions in the common/shared living areas.

I get along with K and I think he's a nice guy; however, I believe that he's in need of serious help and greater supervision. I haven't had these problems with my two previous roommates. I mean, putting my ice cream in the refrigerator after taking some, and thinking it would be OK?

I hope that we will be able to achieve a swift resolution to these issues.

As I have been doing since returning from holiday during the holidays, I am making a more concerted effort to come to the office at least once per week either to see and meet with you or to attend the weekly housing meeting. I will continue to keep to this commitment; however, please do be advised that I have as of yet been unable to resolve my inability to obtain my prescription medication (antidepressants) due to an increase in my Medicare Part D deductible and cannot afford the $216 that CVS is charging for the four generic prescription medications I have been taking and, as such, ran out of meds over the weekend and have begun going through SSRI withdrawal. As such, I've been feeling, to be blunt, like horse-dung.

Thank you for your time and courteous cooperation.

Sincerely,
-Peter C. Frank

A possible taxpayer's revolt

I have just sent the following Letter to the Editors via e-mail:

Westchester-Putnam
Letters to the Editor
The Journal News
1 Gannett Drive
White Plains, NY 10604

To the Editors:

I recently blogged about the severe fiscal crisis in which the State of New York has found itself. Various state agencies' bills are not being paid and as a result, they are losing services. In particular, the Office of Mental Health is set to lose all of their administrative and support staff as of 1 April 2010 as the entirety of such staff is employed through a temporary employment agency, whose contract has not been renewed by the state.

There are rumors abound that state income tax refunds are being withheld until as long as the fall -- refunds that many people are relying upon. Local governments and school districts are still waiting for payments owed to them by NYS.

Under New York State law, a Writ of Mandamus can be issued under an Article 78 Proceeding to "compel a government agency or official to do something they are required by law to do."

I wonder if it would be possible for the County of Westchester, as well as other local municipalities and school districts to file an Article 78 proceeding on behalf of its citizens, compelling the State to release the funds owed to the local municipalities, school districts, and individual taxpayers. As a tax preparer, many of my clients are relying on their state refunds to help pay bills, and without such funds forthcoming in a timely fashion, it most certainly will negatively impact their credit ratings.

Perhaps the citizens of NYS could file an Article 78 Proceeding against all lawmakers in Albany, compelling them to pass a budget on 1 April 2010 (the start of New York's fiscal year), forcing the state to release funds owed to all those who are waiting for such monies to enter their coffers.

Or, perhaps even a class action lawsuit could be filed by the citizens of New York against the State for its fiscal irresponsibility.

Unfortunately, when elections come this fall, given the historic short-term memories of those who vote, I doubt very much that anyone will remember these goings-on and instead, voters will return most of the currently elected state officials to their thrones of power.

Sincerely,
-Peter C. Frank a/k/a @NiteStar
[address removed]
Yonkers, New York
[contact information removed]

New York State in Severe Fiscal Crisis

Every Sunday around midnight, for more than the past two years, I've logged into the New York State Unemployment Insurance web site to certify my weekly claim for unemployment benefits (my whopping $60/week!).

This past weekend, around midnight on Sunday, I logged into the web site without any difficulty. When I attempted to certify my weekly claim, as I had always done, I was advised that the site was experiencing technical difficulties and could not be access at that time. I tried, for the first time ever, to certify my weekly claim by calling in to the NYS Unemployment Office Certification number. I got up to the point where I choose the option to certify my weekly claim, and was advised that my request could not be completed at that time due to "technical difficulties."

When I am able to certify my weekly claim before noon on Sunday, I receive my money on my debit card (issued by NYS thru Chase bank) very late Monday night. If I complete my weekly unemployment certification between noon on Sunday and late Sunday evening, the money goes onto my card late Tuesday night. After late Sunday evening, the money goes onto my card late Wednesday night.

I repeatedly attempted to file my weekly certification for unemployment benefits at various points throughout Sunday, both online and via telephone. I was unable to do so until very very late Sunday night. I find it very convenient that New York State's fiscal operating budget expires tomorrow, Wednesday, 31 March 2010 and the State Legislature has failed--yet again--to pass a new budget (I think the last time a budget was passed by the New York State legislature on time was at some point before the birth of my now-deceased grandparents).

To make matters even more interesting (and dire), I was advised by a source (who must remain anonymous) about conversations that were overheard today while they were inside of a state-run mental health clinic (owned and operated by the NYS Office of Mental Health (NYS OMH)). Apparently, their (the office's) telephone service wasn't working properly because the telephone bill hadn't been paid. Other overheard conversations were that half the power in the building wasn't working because the electric bill hadn't been paid.

The final overheard conversation was that the entire administrative staff throughout the entire NYS OMH will no longer be employed as of 1 April 2010, as they are all temporary employees employed via an employment agency under contract with NYS, and as the state budget has yet to be passed (and a vote to extend financing of vital NYS operations also has failed to have passed), the contract will not be renewed and all administrative workers throughout the agency state-wide will be without a job. This also leaves the entire agency, on a state-wide basis, without any administrative workers; just the clinicians and doctors will be left to run things.

This paints a very pretty picture of the current fiscal condition that New York State is in. Forget getting your income tax refund from New York State any time in the near future; right now they can't even pay their own bills to keep their own offices running and pay the employees who have kept state government running for ages (thru the contractual employment of temporary employees via an employment agency, which--of course--obviates the need to provide such employees any benefits).

Given all of the above information, things do not look good at all for the fiscal state of the State of New York--and this is but a minute piece of the pie.

Healing Thoughts & Energies Requested

Please take a moment and send some healing thoughts & energies or prayers for my sister, Jennifer. She SMSd me (texted me) a short while ago that they her OB/GYN team has been unable to stop her labor and they are therefore going to have her undergo an emergency cesarean section to deliver the twin baby girls she's been carrying for the past nine or so months.

Her OB/GYN team originally had scheduled a somewhat-less-of-an-emergency cesarean section for tomorrow afternoon, because my sister had taken aspirin today (or some other NSAID). Unfortunately, when one has taken any NSAIDs 24 hours before surgery, the risks during and after surgery for complications to arise are greatly increased, mostly due to the ease at which a person will bleed with NSAIDs like aspiring in their bloodstream. She actually had been admitted to hospital & was undergoing an intravenous "flush" (using saline solution) to try to clear the aspirin out of her system more rapidly.

So right now, as I write this, my sister should be in the operating room and the doctors preparing to deliver her twin baby girls.

Yours thoughts, etc. on her behalf for a good delivery and uncomplicated surgery are most appreciated....

Another Soldier Falls

I received this e-mail late last night. It saddens me that I didn't get a chance to know Rev Brett better than the little contact I had with him. He was a true pioneer, a soldier, a human being filled with love and compassion, and he will most definitely be missed. Our only comfort is in knowing that his energy persists, and that the mission he started will be continued and carried out by others.

[UPDATE] Apparently, Rev. Harris suffered a heart-attack last week.

Rest In Peace, good Reverend!

Rev. Brett Harris, the founder of Friends of Bryce and Ergonomical Ministries, passed away on New Years Day 2010. He was 48 years old at the time of his death.

In honor of the man and his work there will be an online visual here on the Friendsofbryce ning network in the chat room.

Date: This Sunday 3 January 2010

Time: 9PM Central Standard Time

Where: on the Friends of Bryce network on Ning

Come and meet other network members and lets remember the man and his vision that started all of this and brought us together.

FYI on Friends of Bryce

The ministry of Friends of Bryce has been in contact with most ministers. It has been decided that the work of Rev. Brett Harris should not stop with his sudden death. Myself with Gary Konnecky are working with the other ministers to continue both FOB and Ergonomical Ministries. The Mari Rev's work will not be lost and his vision will move forward.

We will be having a private Ministry meeting in 2 weeks after mourning Rev. After the meeting there will be an official release as to when and how Rev's work will continue.

As of right now the private network is going to stay up and running and as far as we know his other websites will too. In the event that everything is taken down I have all of your email address's and the private network will be rebuilt and one by one the others will follow.

Any questions on FOB need to be directed to me at the Ministry of Civic Awareness: Sheilaputang on yahoo

Hope to see you all Sunday Night.

Lets Remember the Man

that brought this movement together.

Rev you're free now to soar with the other angels.

You will be truly missed but never forgotten.

A New Decade, Unconditional Love

Approximately one decade ago, Westchester County (where I live) was debating the passage of legislation that would establish its own Human Rights Law/Commission. The proposed legislation was extremely controversial because it included "sexual orientation" as a protected class--something the New York State law did not do at the time.

As someone who has been politically involved since high school and active in the LGBTQ rights movement, I wrote a letter to the editors of our local newspaper in support of the passage of the county's proposed Human Rights Law. For whatever reason, somewhere around 90% of the letters to editors that I write actually get published, and this was no exception.

My letter appeared in the local paper, signed with my name & village of residence. My grandmother, very frail of health (at that time she'd had four major coronary infarctions and a series of minor strokes, along with the usual health problems associated with someone approaching their 80th birthday who had been smoking for 60+ years...), came into my room carrying the newspaper (while not bed-ridden, she didn't often get out of bed except to use the facilities and go to doctor's appointments).

She asked me how I could be so stupid as to have such a letter published with my name & location. I was very puzzled by her reaction, as she had tears in her eyes (I had already come out to her by this point, so it's not like she didn't know I was (am) gay). I asked her what the big deal was, and she told me that there are very crazy people in the world and having my name & location published, someone could be hiding in the bushes outside of our house and attack me for being gay, or come by the house & throw rocks at me, or while I'm out and about someone could try to kill me, etc. It was a cause of great consternation for her that I would be harmed by one of these crazy people.

I responded by telling my grandmother that it was she who instilled in me the values to stand up for what I believe in, to exercise my rights as guaranteed to me in the United States Constitution, and not to back down when I know I am fighting a just & worthy cause. My grandmother hugged me, told me that she loved me, and urged that I be cautious and safe. She said she would pray that I not ever fall into harm's way because of who I am, and advised that she would be worrying over me whenever I left the house (a promise she kept, as whenever I left she wouldn't go to sleep until I returned home safe & sound).

A few days later, a public hearing was being held on the proposed Human Rights Law. I was getting ready to leave the house, and my grandmother asked me where I was going. I told her that I was going to speak in support of the law at the public hearing (I had to explain a bit what was going on). She asked me if I could wait 5 minutes, and I said sure.

Less than five minutes later, my grandmother had her purse & winter coat on, and told me that she was coming with me (despite her frail health). There was nothing I could do to change her mind, so I brought her along to the public hearing.

We arrived a bit late, but not too late. We took seats near the front. When the legislators asked if anyone else wished to speak, I began to rise but my grandmother put her arm on me to keep me seated and instead rose herself and approached the podium.

At the podium, my grandmother relayed how she read my letter to the editor in the newspaper, and how scared she was for my safety. She told the legislators that she was a devout Catholic, but that I was her grandson and she loved me no matter who I was or what I did. She implored the legislators to pass the Human Rights Law, so that she could stop worrying about the safety of her grandson, and not have to worry that he would be fired from a job for being who he was, etc.

I had absolutely no idea that Grams was going to do this. Tears filled my eyes (just as they are now as I recount these events). It was then, right there in the public hearing, that I came to know the true meaning of Unconditional Love. I couldn't have been more proud, happy, or loved than I was at that point in time .... until now.

The past decade has been a roller coaster of events that have affected me in various ways. Let's view the events that have affected me over the past decade:

1999

• Moved to Phoenix, AZ with a friend; experienced unrequited love.
• Moved back to NY after disastrous fallout w/ aforementioned friend.
• Came out to my grandparents.
• Successfully advocated for passage of Westchester County's Human Rights Law.

2001

• Missed being caught up in 9/11 by about two hours (I was working the night shift on 10 September 2001; left work @ 7:30am -- was asked to stay until 9am but was too tired -- got home, went to sleep, woke up shortly after 5pm & the world had changed).

2002

• Was in a car accident that I should not have survived.
• Was institutionalized for my chronic severe Depression for the first time in my life; tried numerous times to commit suicide but was obviously unsuccessful, mostly due to the fact that I was so doped on on narcotic painkillers (under the supervision of a pain management specialist) I didn't know what I was doing.
• Suffered the loss of my grandmother, while in hospital. My father's brother, in his infinite wisdom, convinced the hospital unit's psychiatrist to discharge me rather than release me on a pass to attend her funeral; I attempted to wheel myself into the path of oncoming traffic in order to join my grandmother in the heavens of our universes. Had it not been for my younger brother's diligence, I would have been successful.
  
• My father remarried, after some 30+ years, and told me months after the event.
• A close friend whom I had made while institutionalized hung herself in hospital, and I was there when they discovered her hanging from the ceiling of the bathroom and saw her body twitching. At the time, I was wheelchair-bound, and some of the staff attempted to blame me for their negligence by saying that I had helped her (had that been the case, I would have been hanging with her, not present in my chair when they opened the bathroom door and discovered her body).
  
• My mother was first diagnosed with breast cancer.
• My grandfather was diagnosed with melanoma, and suffered with pneumonia during the holidays.
  
• Between the physical & mental hospitalizations, I spent almost all of 2002 in hospital.

2002 – 2007

• I spent nearly half of my time in this years institutionalized for my chronic severe Depression. Either I was attempting to commit suicide, or in later years, I started feeling the desire to do so and put myself in hospital as a precautionary measure.
  
  Unfortunately during this time, mental health care changed to the point where feeling the need to be in hospital in order to remain safe was not really something that they did anymore. They just medicated you and kicked you out the door. What would happen is that for one reason or another (either I couldn't afford the medications, couldn't get into a treatment program, or couldn't physically travel to obtain treatment/medications), I would go off my anti-depressants and end up with the same ugly suicidal thoughts after a few months, and end up back in hospital.
  
  I am happy to report that since my last hospitalization in 2007, I have been able to remain on my medications and in therapy, have not had bad thoughts to the point where I have felt a need to be hospitalized, and have thus avoided hospitalization.
• During this time frame, my mother underwent two or three lumpectomies, each a few years apart.

2004

• My sister gave birth to a beautiful baby girl, who on her 2nd day of life, had a stroke.

2005

• I learned that the friend I moved to Phoenix, AZ with in 1999 died in June 2002, the same month as my grandmother's death. The circumstances of his death were sketchy and learned he may have committed suicide. I had been thinking of him and actually wanted to apologize for the way I left things with him in Phoenix in 1999, so I Googled his name to see if I could find him and instead saw the death notice dated from 2002. I was floored, and it sent my Depression into a dovetail, as I was still in love with him but hadn't spoken with him since leaving him.
• Coming into this knowledge brought bad thoughts into my head, and was arrested while attempting to purchase illicit narcotics to use in a home-brewed death cocktail.

2006

• My grandfather's melanoma spread to other parts of his body.
• While in hospital, my father's brother illegally evicted me from my home by bringing all of my clothing in trash bags to hospital, so that he could move in to my grandfather's house. My father's brother, a retired psychiatric nurse, knew better than to bring so much of my clothing to hospital. While I was in hospital he threw away (or sold, who knows!) a great number of my possessions.
• Became homeless, due to the aforementioned illegal eviction by my father's brother.
• Plead guilty to possession of a controlled substance and was sentenced to three years of probation

2007

• My brother's girlfriend gave birth to his daughter
• For the first time since it happened, I went back to the town/location where my accident occurred, and as a result I finally started living again after having been "stuck" in time since my accident in 2002.
  

2008

• Finally got into a housing program, after being homeless (couch-hopping among friends) for just over 2.5 years.
• Had to move three times in a period of six months, due to issues w/ the housing program & new ownership/management of the building that I was initially placed into with a roommate.
• My only sister was diagnosed with Stage 3 Breast Cancer. She underwent a bilateral mastectomy, and then underwent reconstructive surgery
• My grandfather died. I wasn't named in the will at all--thanks, again, to my father's brother. It's as if hadn't existed. I was there, thanks to my sister, when he passed away in his home, so I did at least get to say goodbye to him and let him know that I still loved him, despite everything that had happened.

2009

• My 5 year-old niece underwent a partial, then a full hemispherectomy.

As this list indicates, there have been many more downs than ups in my life over the course of the past decade. If you've gotten this far, you may be wondering why all of this matters.

Approximately 2.5 years ago, I discovered the true power of the Internet: I began connecting with other people who shared similar experiences. At first, it was done solely through my blog. Then I moved into the realm of the MMORPG (in particular, Daimonin MMORPG, a free, free-to-play, open-source MMORGP). Finally, I discovered social networking.

Through all of these various media, I have connected with people from all over the world. When I say "connected with" I'm talking about real, emotional and social connections. Although I have not met the vast majority of those with whom I communicate, I consider them friends, best friends, even family. They are my lifeline, my support system, my shoulder & ear, as well as my second opinion.

With the support of the network of individuals I have connected with over the past few years via my blog, MMORPGs, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter, I have encountered individuals with whom I could not possibly have dreamed I would ever encounter in my lifetime, from all walks of life and corners of the world.

I have weathered the low recent points in my life better, because of the connections I have made. I cannot possibly begin to create a list of these individuals; however, if you're reading this, then chances are good that you are one such individual.

And for that, I owe you my life. Truly, without your support, assistance, advice, laughs, and love -- yes, love! -- I could not have gotten through these last few years without you.

And so we come back to unconditional love; it is mostly through Twitter (and Facebook to a lesser extent) that I have once again experienced unconditional love--that feeling first felt when I sat in my seat in the auditorium and listened to my grandmother admonish the legislators for even thinking of voting against the Human Rights Law because it covered sexual orientation, and implored them to protect her beloved grandson.

I feel this same connection, the same kindred spirits now, as I did then.

Through all of you, the love my grandmother has for me lives. And it is through you that I can honour her memory and return the gifts upon which she has so lovingly blessed me.

As such, I resolve to continue doing just what I've been doing in the coming year, decade, and for all eternity: to love all of you as I have been loved by you, to appreciate you as I have been appreciated, and to be there for you as you have been there for me.

Happy New Year!