8/20/2008The Mormon church is unique in their organization. Where most other denominations let the parisoners choose where they want to attend, the LDS church organizes geographically (at the most basic street by street level, these are called wards). Generally you are encouraged to attend your assigned ward based on where you live.
There are some exceptions to this rule. One is with regards to young single adult (YSA) wards. These are wards that are specifically for...well.... young single adults. They are still organized somewhat geographically, but those rules are a little more lax. These wards have two unique rules of their own: 1) If you get married you generally leave and join a regular ward. And 2) Upon turning 30 you generally leave and join a regular ward (I guess you aren't considered "young" at this point). The second point, in my experience, is at the discretion of the bishop.
And this is where the recent turn of events kicks in.
I like student wards. The people are younger and they have a lot of good energy. The ward its self is geared towards them, so they have lots of great social events. And the church meetings are quieter and it's easier to hear (a boon to someone like me who has trouble hearing at times) because there are no kids (versus family wards where the babies cry and the older ones fidget).
At the UTEP student ward, I made it point to avoid giving out my information to have my records transferred. The second bishop there was a stickler for procedure, and I had seen others previously "encouraged" to leave the ward "when it was time." Not wanting to draw attention, I just decided to keep a low profile. The issue wasn't pressed, so there was no need to force action. Everyone wins.
So I've been doing the same at the student ward in Coppell that I've been going to. In fact, I haven't put my name on a single sheet of paper there. None. So this past Sunday, I was doing some studying when there was a knock at the door. I opened it, and standing there were two missionaries and a member of the "big kid's ward" who came to say hello. They had just received my records and were there to welcome me "into the ward." I didn't recognize them from the student ward though. And as it turns out, they weren't. My records had been forwarded somehow to the "family ward" (anyone see where this is going?)
I invited them inside and we talked a little bit, however my paranoia was not alleviated by that conversation. It turns out that the third guy in the group (the non-missionary) just turned 31. He himself was in the student ward, and they actually asked him to change over (presumeably due to age).
Me being....well stubborn ole me...this has just increased my resolve to keep a low profile. But if that conversation is any indication, it's really just a matter of waiting for the other shoe to drop.
The REAL question....the one that has been burning in my mind for the past couple days....is how in the world did my records get transferred??? The student ward at UTEP didn't have them. My old ward in Houston didn't have them either. The last place I was "on record" (or so I think anyway) was my original YSA ward in College Station. I called a few people in El Paso that might have had anything even remotely to do with giving up my new address, and they didn't know anything.
So it's a realy mystery. I mean, the only other thing I can come up with is either someone got a hold of my snail mail forward, or from a credit report. But that's diving into some deep conspiracy theory waters right there, and I've always been an Occam's Razor kind of guy.
Looks like some of these "law talkin guy" skills may come in handy sooner than later. Stay tuned for the next exciting installment of "Can Scott jedi mind trick the bishop?" Law school classes started on Monday, but it feels like I've already had a week of class. These folks aren't messing around. 4 chapters of reading were assigned FOR ORIENTATION. And true to their word, we had two 2-hour classes during the orientation period. About a week before classes started, syllabuses were made available. Therein, each class had about 30 - 40 pages that had to be read before the first day. The classes themselves are mind bending affairs. The professors call on people and probe them with questions about the cases, what specific rules mean, how a case would be different if facts x and y were changed etc. And I'm *loving* every damn minute of it. I want to be called on. Picked on. Challenged. After three straight (correct!) answers in torts, the prof ignored me raising my hand and went on to others. This whole experience is different from my undergrad and masters. In each of those, the subjet material was all fine and good. But there was no active learning going on....no passion for the material. Well, my graduate econ classes had elements of that. But here, as I read, the mind is constantly working. I'm constantly thinking about what the implications of these are during. It's a much more active learning process. These classes are not for people who have a low tolerance for ambiguity or who feel the need for conclusive answers, because there aren't many. But they jive with me because the answer isn't what's important. It's the reasoning that counts. How you arrived at your conclusion is the real main event. I guess what I'm trying to say is that for this time and this place, I'm where I need to be. Good luck to those of you who are also starting up again this semester. May it be successfull. As tradition mandates (ya'all are probably sick of seeing them), here's some motivation for the new year:    8/5/2008
Every now and then on the internet, something comes along with so much win, we have to wonder how we ever carried on without it. And once it touches us, we will never be the same.
How much win is this? Picture the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where they open the ark and everyone evaporates. Now replace the ghosts with win, and you start to get close to it.
Ladies and gentlement, without further delay I give you: Slip and Slide Elvis from last night's Chicago Cubs game.
The fark forums on this were epic as well:
"Just one of the many advantages to owning, rather than renting, your own Elvis suit."
"Truly, a king among men."
And of course the gold:
FARK.com presents... Real Men of Genius
Real Men of Genius
Today we salute you, Mr. Rain-delay Slip-n-slide Elvis Impersonator
Mr. Rain-delay Slip-n-slide Elvis Impersonator
70s night at the ballgame? Check. Rain covered tarp on the field? Check. Too many Old Styles? You know that's a check
I cannot resist temptation
If baseball teams didn't want fans sliding on the tarp in the rain, they wouldn't be so slippery when wet
Can you say attractive nuisance
Besides, what's a night in Cook County jail when you can be famous on YouTube for about 3 minutes?
Somebody call my agent
So here's to you Mr. Rain-delay Slip-n-slide Elvis Impersonator. You put the 'win' in window of opportunity
Mr. Rain-delay Slip-n-slide Elvis Impersonator 7/31/2008
What we have in this country cannot be considered capitalism by any stretch of the imagination. Instead we have an economy that is corrupt with corporationism and outlandish greed.
News blurb from this morning's second quarter income announcements:
Exxon-Mobil 2Q profit of 11.6 billion sets US Record
The Irving-based oil giant said net income for the April-June period came to $2.22 a share, up from $10.26 billion, or $1.83 a share, a year ago. But the results fell well short of Wall Street expectations, and shares fell in early trading.
Let's consider this for a moment. A firm sets a record (again!) for largest quarterly profit ever recorded in the U.S. And Wall Street punishes them.... because in the trader's eyes the firm didn't make enough money!?!? Setting a quarterly record for the second time in less than a year isn't enough?
Routine readers of this blog know that I'm no fan of the oil industry in general. But punishing a big money making stock merely because they didn't make as much as the traders think it should have....well that's just asinine.
This is just a symptom though. Wanton greed in the finacial and business sectors has already started to eat this country alive from the inside, the results of which can be seen in areas formerly dominated by manufacturing. 7/25/2008
- Q: A legislator has proposed a bill that prohibits physician-assisted suicide.
- What stages must this bill go through before it can be passed into law?
- If you were serving on the committee that is considering this bill, would you support it? Why?
What do you all think about part b? 7/22/2008
Senate votes 96 - 0 for new laws regulating oil speculators
That is indeed quite a margin.
There was one thing in the article that I had not heard before: A big number of investors that shunned gold and have turned to oil as a recession hedge. If that is indeed true, then with that much extra cash chasing oil futures I can easily see how THAT would indeed drive up oil futures.
I don't know. Limiting futures investing to those who can take possession of the oil they purchase sounds kinda un-democratic to me. Part of the beauty of our investment markets is that they're open to anyone with five dollars and a dream. On the other hand, oil is such a huge driver in our economy. That's not to say there isn't room for profit in the system, but should entities that have no stake in the using of the commodity be allowed to get in the way of those that do? The purpose of the commodities market is to link up resource buyers with resource sellers, and to facilitate efficient transactions. I wonder how efficient the market could be if there are a bunch of intermediaries buying resources they have no intent on using.
And from the article:
"Pelosi said more drilling would take a decade to have an impact on gas prices, and she argued that a faster way to lower gas prices would be to release oil from the 700 million-barrel Strategic Petroleum Reserve."
Let's see...700 million barrels in strategic reserve...the U.S. uses 20 million barrels of oil a day... that a grand total of 35 days of oil at current consumption rates. Yea, releasing oil from the national reserve is the way to go! Yes sir.
Ugh. It must be an election year. 7/10/2008
I've had a few friends over the past two months ask me some employment related questions. After the doing the research, and at the risk of having Robby label me as a labor relations lawyer (again), I'm posting this here in case others have the same questions.
Note: This information is the best that I could find, and it represents the law as of July 10, 2008. I am not a licensed attorney and situations are fact dependant, so take it for what it is and consult a REAL lawyer if you need to
(basically, this advice is worth three times what ya'all paid for it :D )
Question 1: "If I quit a job, does my company have to pay me for the vacation time I have accrued?"
Relevant Law: Section 61.001 (7)(A and B) of the Texas Labor Code
The Texas code defines vacation pay as the equivalent of a paid wage that is agreed upon via a written policy.
And that's it. That's all the code has to say on the subject of vacation time.
The important part of that statute is the agreed upon written policy because it basically means that the employment contract is controlling. That is, the employer is bound to do whatever they said in the contract they were going to do. If the written policy is to pay out vacation time, then it's paid out. If not, then not.
The one exception here is if there is no written policy regarding the payout of vacation time. In that case, a dispute would go to the Texas Workforce Commission for arbitration. And it appears that in these cases, the outcome usually favors the ex-employee (they get paid).
Question 2: "What is the law on non-compete agreements in Texas?"
Criteria For Enforceability of Covenants Not To Compete
Procedures and remedies in actions to enforce covenants not to compete
Pre-emption of other law
Non-compete agreements have been legal in Texas since 1989. However a Texas Supreme Court ruling in 1994 esstentially rendered them toothless and damn near unenforceable. All that changed in 2006, when the court revisited that ruling and loosed their previous literal interpretation.
The important part of the law is here:
"...contains limitations as to time, geographical area, and scope of activity to be restrained that are reasonable and do not impose a greater restraint than is necessary to protect the goodwill or other business interest of the promisee."
The Texas constitution says that no entity be it government or private can restrain an individual from engaging in their choosen livelyhood. With that in mind, the reason that most non-competes fail is because they are way too broad. They will do things like restrict someone from working within the state of texas, or they will say that someone can not work in a given industry (at all!!) for a couple years.
The key things to remember with these is that
1) A company can only restrict employment in a limited manner, in a limited field, and within a limited geographical area in which they conduct business and
2) Only a court can rule that someone has violated the non-compete. A company can make all the threats they want, but they cannot enforce the provisions without going to court. This is important, as many employers will use veiled threats to ensure non-compete compliance. They operate on a "power perceived is power acheived" philosophy (and in many ways, they are right). But at the end of the day unless companies are willing to hike up their skirt, grab their balls, and launch a lawsuit then the non-compete isn't worth the paper it is printer on. 7/8/2008
Today I received the forward below. As with other forwards of its type, it is long on rhetoric and fallacies while being short on fact and reasoning. As if being an urban legend isn't bad enough, the text is just flat out historically wrong on several points.
This country has ALWAYS been anti-immigrant. Throughout the 1800's and 1900's there were ebbs and flows of anti-immigrant sentiment. The article says that hard working immigrants in the early 1900's were welcomed with open arms. But this just wasn't so. If the ignorant writer had bothered to open up a damn history book, he / she would have seen that in the early 1900's, there were ethnic riots all over the U.S. Why? Because the immigrants who were arriving were "different". Previously they had been western european (France, Italy, England). Now more eastern european immigrants were coming over (primarily polish jews, but also russians, refugees from Austria-hungry, etc). These new immigrants had different cultural norms, and it caused clashes.
I hear this myth of assimilation a lot. If previous immigrants assimilated as much as this article implies, then I wonder where we got Chinatowns, Vinatowns (Vietnamese), Greek quarters, "Little Italy", etc from? Every major city in America has ethnic quarters. These didn't arise because the immigrants were so good at blending in and were so willing to shed their ethnic identity.
The fact of the matter is that previous immigrants never really assimilated. They learned enough english to get by. They also settled in highly concentrated ethnic neighborhoods where they could maintain their ethnic identity.
This idea of wide spread assimilation is simply a work of fiction.
The truth is that the U.S. has NEVER welcomed "new" immigrants.....at least until OUR CULTURE adapted to them.
Here is the forward below:
Orange County California Newspaper
This is a very good letter to the editor. This woman made some good points.
For some reason, people have difficulty structuring their arguments when arguing against supporting the currently proposed immigration revisions. This lady made the argument pretty simple. NOT printed in the Orange County Paper..................
Newspapers simply won't publish letters to the editor which they either deem politically incorrect (read below) or which does not agree with the philosophy they're pushing on the public. This woman wrote a great letter to the editor that should have been published; but, with your help it will get published via cyberspace!
From: 'David LaBonte'
My wife, Rosemary, wrote a wonderful letter to the editor of the OC Register which, of course, was not printed. So, I decided to 'print' it myself by sending it out on the Internet. Pass it along if you feel so inclined. Written in response to a series of letters to the editor in the Orange County Register:
Dear Editor:
So many letter writers have based their arguments on how this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one, suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because the people now in question aren't being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry.
Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented . Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.
They had waved good bye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.
Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from Germany , Italy , France and Japan . None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan . They were defending the United States of America as one people.
When we liberated France , no one in those villages were looking for the French-American or the German American or the Irish American. The people of France saw only Ameri cans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.
And here we are in 2008 with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country. I'm sorry, that's not what being an American is all about. I bel ieve that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900's deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raisin g future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.
And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of Liberty , it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill I wouldn't start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.
(signed) Rosemary LaBonte
KEEP THIS LETTER MOVING. FOR THE WRONG THINGS TO PREVAIL THE RIGHTFUL MAJORITY NEEDS TO REMAIN COMPLACENT AND QUIET!!
LET THIS NEVER HAPPEN!!
I sincerely hope this letter gets read by millions of people all across the nation!! 7/6/2008
The apartment complex has a laundry room right next to the pool. So while the camping clothes were going through the washer, I figured it would be a nice time to have a couple beers and a cigar.
Suddenly this oriental lady walks over and looks at me:
Her (snootily): "What are *you* doing?"
Me: "My laundry, what does it look like?"
It's times like these that make wonder if I was Brooklyn cabbie in a former life.
A couple weeks ago, I decided it was time to do something I hadn't done since sometime in the mid-90's: go backpacking.
Friday was a late start due to last minute procrastination. Also had to stop by REI to get a tent replacement and some food (in an unrelated note, camping technology has come a LONG way in 10 years). I wanted to be at the trail head by 11 a.m. Yea....
So after arriving at Lake Texahoma around 2:45, it was time to start hiking!
There were some ominous clouds in the distance. Ahead of me coming down the trail, three people were coming at me like their asses were on fire. 45 minutes and two miles later, the rain started coming down as a drizzle. A few minutes after that, it was coming down in horizontal sheets so thick that the lake just 20 feet off the trail was completely invisible. And there I am, with a big ole grin on my face, loving every minute of it!
The good news is that all the clothes and food stayed dry. The bad news is I think my IPOD Shuffle shorted out. An hour into the hike, and no more music :(
By 7:00, it was clear that I wasn't going to get as far as I hoped. It was also clear that daylight was becoming increasingly scarce (it turns out that trees are amazingly good at blocking the sun). Just up the trail, there appeard this flat meadow right next to the lake's edge. It was the perfect camping spot. While stopping meant that I wouldn't be able to go as far as I wanted, it was also a way to bring day one to a nice conclusion (we're talking the difference between a pleasant evening versus me bitching about having to claw around in the dark to setup the tent).
Camping out in the wilderness is always worth it for the sheer number of stars and the beauty of the night sky. This being the fourth of July, the lake was also full of revelers shooting fireworks from their boats well into the night.
The next morning the sun hit my tent at 6:45 (ugh). There were fresh animal tracks through my campsite and down towards the lake (the idea of animals lurking that close always creeps me out for some reason). The hike back to the car was fairly uneventful.
Overall it was a nice trip, although I only had one pair of socks and they were soaked the entire time (queue the wrath of Wilkinson here). Now that I know what to expect, I think I'll try the trail again soon (mid august perhaps?) This time the IPOD will have a waterproof covering on it. |
|
|
|
|