Chay took a spill

Sphere: Related Content

Chay was trying out a ramp in the terrain park and took a fall.  He's fine, but did hurt his wrist.  I'm very glad he's wearing a helmet these days.  He snow-boarded very well the rest of the day.

Chay in Breckenridge, Colorado

Sphere: Related Content

It's cold & snowy here!

Mobile post sent by Mosqueda using Utterz.  Replies.

WSJ Editorial on What McCain needs to do next

Sphere: Related Content

OPINION

McCain's Challenge

By PETER WEHNER
February 14, 2008; Page A16

On Tuesday Barack Obama crushed Hillary Clinton in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia. He did this while winning significant support from older voters, women, lower income earners and Hispanics -- groups that had sharply favored Mrs. Clinton in other states. And he did this after turning in decisive victories over the weekend in Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington state and Maine.

Mrs. Clinton was supposed to deliver the knockout blow on Super Tuesday. But instead, after being fought to a draw and now facing an Obama avalanche, she is taking a Giuliani Light approach. She is counting on winning in Ohio and Texas on March 4. The problem is that March 4 is nearly three weeks away, or about the same length of time between when Republicans voted in New Hampshire and when they voted in Florida. During that span Rudy Giuliani went from one of his party's frontrunners to one of its also rans.

By the time voters in Ohio and Texas head to the polls, Mr. Obama could be on a 10-state winning streak and raising funds at a clip that far outpaces Mrs. Clinton. If so, Mrs. Clinton's support could drop precipitously -- and her party's super delegates could hand their support to Mr. Obama.

So in the race for the Democratic nomination, the odds now favor the junior senator from Illinois. And if he wins, the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain, will have his work cut out for him. Those who believe Mr. Obama will be an easy target because he is liberal and inexperienced haven't followed his campaign. If Mr. Obama is the nominee, Mr. McCain will face a politician of enormous talent and personal grace. So what can Mr. McCain do about it?

- First, he can make use of the gift of time. Having all but locked down the GOP nomination, Mr. McCain can use the next few months to reintroduce himself to the American people. It is not safe to assume that most voters have closely followed the race thus far. What many people know about Mr. McCain they like, based on his valor, honor and love of country. Now he needs to build on this by retelling his life story in a vivid, moving way.

- Second, create a compelling narrative that explains his candidacy. So far the GOP race has had a "check-the-box" quality to it. Mr. McCain needs to put issues under a broader banner. Defending American ideals against our enemies abroad, and being worthy of those ideals at home, is one banner that could have broad appeal. If Mr. McCain advocates policies that advance liberty and individual responsibility, strengthen the family, and promote prosperity, he will give his candidacy the context it needs.

- Third, turn Mr. Obama's strength into a weakness. Right now Mr. Obama is presenting himself as a figure who floats above politics. His allure is based on inspiring but vague calls for hope and unity. This airy appeal can and needs to be firmly strapped down to the policies Mr. Obama would put in place. This requires defining Mr. Obama's invocation of "change" for what it is: orthodox liberalism.

Mr. McCain, meanwhile, can be the man of substance, specific policies and reform. Presenting himself as that man, however, won't be easy. In the past, Mr. McCain has shown a lack of interest in economic and domestic issues. But it is essential now for his success. His policies need to be creative, aimed at everyday concerns, and show intellectual rigor. Remember that among the GOP's greatest electoral successes in recent decades (Ronald Reagan's election as president in 1980 and the Republican capture of Congress in 1994) were based on philosophical contrasts. Pale pastel campaigns (George H.W. Bush in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996) are a road to defeat.

- Fourth, repair the breach with key conservatives. Mr. McCain can begin to do this by stopping advisers from making silly attacks on talk-radio hosts and instead offering specific, concrete governing commitments. Picking fights with the right people, instead of people on the right, would also help Mr. McCain. Conservatives may never love Mr. McCain. But he can strengthen ties to them by cultivating common interests.

- Fifth, broaden the national security debate beyond Iraq. Mr. McCain was right on Iraq, and he was right early. The success of the surge is a tribute to his wisdom and steadfastness on these matters. But Iraq is and will remain an unpopular war. Mr. McCain needs to speak more specifically about his policies beyond Iraq and the Middle East and articulate the philosophical core of his national security approach. And he needs to explain why he (unlike Mr. Obama) will keep America safe and on the offensive in our war against jihadism.

Mr. McCain's task will not be easy. If he is the nominee, Mr. Obama will be a formidable candidate and Democrats will likely enjoy advantages in fundraising, enthusiasm and party identification. But John McCain has overcome more difficult challenges in his life.

Mr. Wehner, formerly deputy assistant to President George W. Bush, is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

See all of today's editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal.

Out for Sushi

Sphere: Related Content

Chay just flew in to town. Skiing is in the plans!

Mobile post sent by Mosqueda using Utterz.  Replies.

Politics - 10 Tough Questions for the Democratic Candidates

Sphere: Related Content

From African-American radio personality Larry Elder:

http://www.larryelder.com

1. Sen. Clinton, you oppose the Bush tax cuts because they unfairly benefit the rich. Since the top 1 percent of taxpayers — those making more than $364,000 annually — pay 39 percent of all federal income taxes, don't all across-the-board tax cuts, by definition, "unfairly" benefit the rich?

2. Sen. Obama, you also oppose Bush tax cuts, and claim that they take money away from the Treasury. But President Kennedy signed across-the-board tax cuts in the 1960s and said, "It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low — and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now." Was he wrong?

3. Sen. Clinton, you criticize President Bush for inheriting a surplus and turning it into a deficit. The National Taxpayers Union added up your campaign promises, and they came to an increase of over $218 billion per year. What would this do to the deficit?

4. Sen. Obama, if elected, you promised to raise minimum wage every single year. But isn't it true that most economists — 90 percent, according to one survey — believe that raising minimum wages increases unemployment and decreases job opportunities for the most unskilled workers? What makes you right, and the majority of economists wrong?

5. Sen. Clinton, you want universal health care coverage for all Americans — every man, woman and child. When, as First Lady, you tried to do this, 560 economists wrote President Clinton, and said, "Price controls produce shortages, black markets and reduced quality." One economist who helped gather the signatures explained, "Price controls don't control the true costs of goods. People pay in other ways." Are those 560 economists wrong?

6. Sen. Obama, you once said you understand why senators voted for the Iraq war, admitted that you were "not privy to Senate intelligence reports," that it "was a tough question and a tough call" for the senators, and that you "didn't know" how you would have voted had you been in the Senate. And over a year after the war began, you said, "There's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." How, then, can you say that you consistently opposed the war from the start?

7. Sen. Clinton, you want to begin withdrawing the troops within the first 60 days of your administration, with all the troops out within a year. Former Secretary of State Jim Baker of the Baker-Hamilton report said that such a precipitous withdrawal in Iraq would create a staging ground for al-Qaida, increase the influence of Iran over Iraq, and result in "the biggest civil war you've ever seen." What would you like to say to Secretary Baker?

8. Sen. Obama, the church you attend, according to its Web site, pursues an Afrocentric agenda. Your church rejects, as part of their "Black Value System," "middleclassness" as "classic methodology" of white "captors" to "control … subjugated" black "captives." Your pastor, Jeremiah Wright, recently called the Nation of Islam's Minister Louis Farrakhan — a man many consider anti-Semitic — a person of "integrity and honesty." What would happen to a Republican candidate who attended a Caucasian-centric church, and who praised David Duke as a man of "integrity and honesty"?

9. Sen. Clinton, you recently criticized NAFTA, the free trade agreement signed into law by President Clinton. The conservative Heritage Foundation says that NAFTA-like free trade benefits the economies of the United States, Canada and Mexico, resulting in increased trade, higher U.S. exports and improved living standards for American workers. Explain how President Clinton and the Heritage Foundation got it wrong then, but that you are right now.

10. Sen. Obama, this question is about global warming, something about which you urge extreme action to fight. You criticize President Bush for going to war in Iraq, even though all 16 intelligence agencies felt with "high confidence" that Saddam Hussein possessed stockpiles of WMDs. Critics of Bush say he "cherry-picked" the intelligence. Hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists consider concerns about global warming overblown. Isn't there far more dissent among credible scientists about global warning than there was among American intelligence analysts about Iraq? If so, as to the studies on global warming, why can't you be accused of cherry-picking?

Current view from my new home

Sphere: Related Content

However, I'm pretty sure when the next building goes up we'll have a

limited view, if any, of Pikes Peak and the Front Range. But for now,

it sure is beautiful.









DSC04016.JPG

Mobile post sent by Mosqueda using Utterz.  Replies.

New House Update #2

Sphere: Related Content

So today, I drove out to my new townhome to check on construction and to ask a few questions primarily relating to appliances.  It was also an opportunity to see some of the design choices I made last week in the various model homes.  I'm going to blog on color choices after I make the final decisions in the next few days.

Below is the GE Profile stove with a glass cooktop.  It seems really nice.  I actually prefer gas, but these tend to be easier to clean.

This is the refrigerator they gave me - it's a really nice GE Profile side-by-side.

Below is my dishwasher, which is a fairly quiet "Tall" dishwasher meaning it can handle taller dishes and pans.

Here's a look at the construction:

Above is the garage.  The room on the right will be my workout room.  To the back is the crawl space which provides great storage.

Above you are looking at what will be the den with the powder room on the right.  You can also see a wall that is laying on its side awaiting placement.

To the left here is the firewall which provides fire protection between homes and eliminates any sound passing between residences.  It has insulation and dead air space between each home.

McCain Addresses CPAC

Sphere: Related Content

John McCain Addresses CPAC

Today, February 7th, John McCain addressed CPAC with the following remarks:

Thank you. Thank you for inviting me. It's been a little while since I've had the honor of addressing you, and I appreciate very much your courtesy to me today. We should do this more often. I hope you will pardon my absence last year, and understand that I intended no personal insult to any of you. I was merely pre-occupied with the business of trying to escape the distinction of pre-season frontrunner for the Republican nomination, which, I'm sure some of you observed, I managed to do in fairly short order. But, now, I again have the privilege of that distinction, and this time I would prefer to hold on to it for a while.

I know I have a responsibility, if I am, as I hope to be, the Republican nominee for President, to unite the party and prepare for the great contest in November. And I am acutely aware that I cannot succeed in that endeavor, nor can our party prevail over the challenge we will face from either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama, without the support of dedicated conservatives, whose convictions, creativity and energy have been indispensible to the success our party has had over the last quarter century. Many of you have disagreed strongly with some positions I have taken in recent years. I understand that. I might not agree with it, but I respect it for the principled position it is. And it is my sincere hope that even if you believe I have occasionally erred in my reasoning as a fellow conservative, you will still allow that I have, in many ways important to all of us, maintained the record of a conservative. Further, I hope you will grant that I have defended many positions we share just as ardently as I have made my case for positions that have provoked your opposition. If not, thank you for this opportunity to make my case today.

I am proud to be a conservative, and I make that claim because I share with you that most basic of conservative principles: that liberty is a right conferred by our Creator, not by governments, and that the proper object of justice and the rule of law in our country is not to aggregate power to the state but to protect the liberty and property of its citizens. And like you, I understand, as Edmund Burke observed, that "whenever a separation is made between liberty and justice, neither . . . is safe."

While I have long worked to help grow a public majority of support for Republican candidates and principles, I have also always believed, like you, in the wisdom of Ronald Reagan, who warned in an address to this conference in 1975, that "a political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers."

I attended my first CPAC conference as the invited guest of Ronald Reagan, not long after I had returned from overseas, when I heard him deliver his "shining city upon a hill" speech. I was still a naval officer then, but his words inspired and helped form my own political views, just as Ronald Reagan's defense of America's cause in Vietnam and his evident concern for American prisoners of war in that conflict inspired and were a great comfort to those of us who, in my friend Jerry Denton's words, had the honor of serving "our country under difficult circumstances." I am proud, very proud, to have come to public office as a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution. And if a few of my positions have raised your concern that I have forgotten my political heritage, I want to assure you that I have not, and I am as proud of that association today as I was then. My record in public office taken as a whole is the record of a mainstream conservative. I believe today, as I believed twenty-five years ago, in small government; fiscal discipline; low taxes; a strong defense, judges who enforce, and not make, our laws; the social values that are the true source of our strength; and, generally, the steadfast defense of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which I have defended my entire career as God-given to the born and unborn.

Those are my beliefs, and you need not examine only my past votes and speeches to assure yourselves that they are my genuine convictions. You can take added confidence from the positions I have defended during this campaign. I campaigned in Iowa in opposition to agriculture subsidies. I campaigned in New Hampshire against big government mandated health care and for a free market solution to the problem of unavailable and unaffordable health care. I campaigned in Michigan for the tax incentives and trade policies that will create new and better jobs in that economically troubled state. I campaigned in Florida against the national catastrophic insurance fund bill that passed the House of Representatives and defended my opposition to the prescription drug benefit bill that saddled Americans with yet another hugely expensive entitlement program. I have argued to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, to reduce the corporate tax rate and abolish the AMT. I have defended my position on protecting our Second Amendment rights, including my votes against waiting periods, bans on the so-called "assault weapons," and illegitimate lawsuits targeting gun manufacturers. I have proudly defended my twenty-four year pro-life record. Throughout this campaign, I have defended the President's brave decision to increase troop levels in Iraq to execute a long overdue counterinsurgency that has spared us the terrible calamity of losing that war. I held these positions because I believed they were in the best interests of my party and country."

Surely, I have held other positions that have not met with widespread agreement from conservatives. I won't pretend otherwise nor would you permit me to forget it. On the issue of illegal immigration, a position which provoked the outspoken opposition of many conservatives, I stood my ground aware that my position would imperil my campaign. I respect your opposition for I know that the vast majority of critics to the bill based their opposition in a principled defense of the rule of law. And while I and other Republican supporters of the bill were genuine in our intention to restore control of our borders, we failed, for various and understandable reasons, to convince Americans that we were. I accept that, and have pledged that it would be among my highest priorities to secure our borders first, and only after we achieved widespread consensus that our borders are secure, would we address other aspects of the problem in a way that defends the ru le of law and does not encourage another wave of illegal immigration.

All I ask of any American, conservative, moderate, independent, or enlightened Democrat, is to judge my record as a whole, and accept that I am not in the habit of making promises to my country that I do not intend to keep. I hope I have proven that in my life even to my critics. Then vote for or against me based on that record, my qualifications for the office, and the direction where I plainly state I intend to lead our country. If I am so fortunate as to be the Republican nominee for President, I will offer Americans, in what will be a very challenging and spirited contest, a clearly conservative approach to governing. I will make my case to voters, no matter what state they reside in, in the same way. I will not obscure my positions from voters who I fear might not share them. I will stand on my convictions, my conservative convictions, and trust in the good sense of the voters, and in my confidence that conservative principles still appeal t o a majority of Americans, Republicans, Independents and Reagan Democrats.

Often elections in this country are fought within the margins of small differences. This one will not be. We are arguing about hugely consequential things. Whomever the Democrats nominate, they would govern this country in a way that will, in my opinion, take this country backward to the days when government felt empowered to take from us our freedom to decide for ourselves the course and quality of our lives; to substitute the muddled judgment of large and expanding federal bureaucracies for the common sense and values of the American people; to the timidity and wishful thinking of a time when we averted our eyes from terrible threats to our security that were so plainly gathering strength abroad. It is shameful and dangerous that Senate Democrats are blocking an extension of surveillance powers that enable our intelligence and law enforcement to defend our country against radical Islamic extremists. This election is going to be about big thin gs, not small things. And I intend to fight as hard as I can to ensure that our principles prevail over theirs.

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama want to increase the size of the federal government.

I intend to reduce it. I will not sign a bill with earmarks in it, any earmarks in it. I will fight for the line item veto, and I will not permit any expansion whatsoever of the entitlement programs that are bankrupting us. On the contrary, I intend to reform those programs so that government is no longer in that habit of making promises to Americans it does not have the means to keep.

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama will raise your taxes.

I intend to cut them. I will start by making the Bush tax cuts permanent. I will cut corporate tax rates from 35 to 25% to keep industries and jobs in this country. I will end the Alternate Minimum Tax. And I won't let a Democratic Congress raise your taxes and choke the growth of our economy.

They will offer a big government solution to health care insurance coverage.

I intend to address the problem with free market solutions and with respect for the freedom of individuals to make important choices for themselves.

They will appoint to the federal bench judges who are intent on achieving political changes that the American people cannot be convinced to accept through the election of their representatives.

I intend to nominate judges who have proven themselves worthy of our trust that they take as their sole responsibility the enforcement of laws made by the people's elected representatives, judges of the character and quality of Justices Roberts and Alito, judges who can be relied upon to respect the values of the people whose rights, laws and property they are sworn to defend.

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama will withdraw our forces from Iraq based on an arbitrary timetable designed for the sake of political expediency, and which recklessly ignores the profound human calamity and dire threats to our security that would ensue.

I intend to win the war, and trust in the proven judgment of our commanders there and the courage and selflessness of the Americans they have the honor to command. I share the grief over the terrible losses we have suffered in its prosecution. There is no other candidate for this office who appreciates more than I do just how awful war is. But I know that the costs in lives and treasure we would incur should we fail in Iraq will be far greater than the heartbreaking losses we have suffered to date. And I will not allow that to happen.

They won't recognize and seriously address the threat posed by an Iran with nuclear ambitions to our ally, Israel, and the region.

I intend to make unmistakably clear to Iran we will not permit a government that espouses the destruction of the State of Israel as its fondest wish and pledges undying enmity to the United States to possess the weapons to advance their malevolent ambitions.

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama will concede to our critics that our own actions to defend against its threats are responsible for fomenting the terrible evil of radical Islamic extremism, and their resolve to combat it will be as flawed as their judgment.

I intend to defeat that threat by staying on offense and by marshaling every relevant agency of our government, and our allies, in the urgent necessity of defending the values, virtues and security of free people against those who despise all that is good about us.

These are but a few of the differences that will define this election. They are very significant differences, and I promise you, I intend to contest these issues on conservative grounds and fight as hard as I can to defend the principles and positions we share, and to keep this country safe, proud, prosperous and free.

We have had a few disagreements, and none of us will pretend that we won't continue to have a few. But even in disagreement, especially in disagreement, I will seek the counsel of my fellow conservatives. If I am convinced my judgment is in error, I will correct it. And if I stand by my position, even after benefit of your counsel, I hope you will not lose sight of the far more numerous occasions when we are in complete accord.

I began by assuring you that we share a conception of liberty that is the bedrock of our beliefs as conservatives. As you know, I was deprived of liberty for a time in my life, and while my love of liberty is no greater than yours, you can be confident that mine is the equal of any American's. It is a deep and unwavering love. My life experiences in service to our country inform my political judgments. They are at the core of my convictions. I am pro-life and an advocate for the Rights of Man everywhere in the world because of them, because I know that to be denied liberty is an offense to nature and nature's Creator. I will never waver in that conviction, I promise you. I know in this country our liberty will not be seized in a political revolution or by a totalitarian government. But, rather, as Burke warned, it can be "nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts." I am alert to that risk and will defend against it, and ta ke comfort from the knowledge that I will be encouraged in that defense by my fellow conservatives.

You have heard me say before that for all my reputation as a maverick, I have only found true happiness in serving a cause greater than my self-interest. For me, that cause has always been our country, and the ideals that have made us great. I have been her imperfect servant for many years, and I have made many mistakes. You can attest to that, but need not. For I know them well myself. But I love her deeply and I will never, never tire of the honor of serving her. I cannot do that without your counsel and support. And I am grateful, very grateful, that you have given me this opportunity to ask for it.

Thank you and God bless you.

Gifts

Sphere: Related Content

"4There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. 6There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men." 1 Corinthians 12:4-6

On January 8 a phone call came in that day from a dear friend telling me there was something wrong on Twitter (a social networking site http://www.twitter.com/) causing many thoughts to go through my head along the lines of somone said something terribly rude, feelings were hurt or something like that. My friend stuttered a bit, and I implored her to tell me. "Ashley was in an accident." Silence.

Ashley Dianne Brewer Spencer was the victim of a terrible vehicle accident. From her obituary: "She is survived by her husband, Peter Spencer, a native of Reading, England; father and mother, Joseph B. and Dianne Montgomery Brewer; daughter, Lucy Dianne Spencer; son, Toby Peter Spencer; two sisters, Stephanie and Cresta Brewer; brother, Craig Brewer; maternal grandmother, Ava Leonard; father-in-law and mother-in-law, Ron and Sue Spencer; brother-in-law and sister-in-law, David and Linda Spencer; and numerous aunts, uncles and cousins." And at least 209 followers on http://www.twitter.com/ where she warns us "The postpartum hormones are raging, watch out! "

"Why thank you @mosqueda, have a cupcake" was the first Tweet from Ashley to me on July 7, 2007. I think it had something to do with her Twitter avatar, a small photo usually depicting the user in some way. With Ashley it was often related to Louisiana State University. On this day, her avatar must have had something to do with a cake. I don't remember. I only see 28 tweets from Ashley invovling me directly, but I most certainly remember following her preganancy and really enjoying getting to know her. Out of her 5,595 twitter postings, I was a tiny little percentage.

Yet I still felt very connected to her. She was clearly vivacious, but with a real, gritty side to her. "So... looked down and realized i'm POPPING out of my shirt, hello third trimester girl growth... should've noticed before left for work." It was just the genuine look at her that drew me in to actually pay attention to her tweets.

When I found out she had passed, I was crushed. The night before we had a small exchange "@mosqueda um, no question, y'all need to yell Geaux Tigers!" 08:16 PM January 07, 2008. About 12 hours or so later, we lost her earthly presence, though she remains in many hearts.

What to do? I'd seen many folks raise money for different causes, and I literally felt (didn't hear Him) God nudge me to do something for her family. I knew she and her husband, Peter, were young. I remembered going through the death of my twin girls shortly after they were born, and the pain we felt. There wasn't much I could do, but the idea of getting folks together to chip in lingered.

I visited http://www.chipin.com/ and took the plunge. I picked a number out of the air: $5,000. That amount was raised in less than 3 days. I was stunned. Behind the scenes it was recommended I up the goal to $6,000. The goal sat unmet for a few days, but one morning I "retweeted" the donation website http://ashpeamama.chipin.com/ashley-spencers-family link. And watched the donations flow in until finally we hit $8,050.

After PayPal fees, the gift given to Peter, Toby and Lucy Spencer was $7,800. Peter will use this money to help pay cash for a reliable vehicle to replace the vehicle "totaled" in Ashley's accident.

A lot of people thanked me for putting this together and frankly I was honored, yet embarassed. But what this whole experience showed me was that I answered God's call by using gifts he gave me to help Ashley's family. What are those gifts? I'd say compassion and empathy first and foremost. I just felt a terrible loss and resulting love and compassion for Ashley's family. 1 Corinthians 12 tells us that God describes some us as "those able to help others, those with gifts of administration." I guess that's me. So, I must give glory to God for making our collective gift to Ashley possible.

MacBook Air Review by Walt Mossberg

Sphere: Related Content