Yea, Sure this is a fair country.

This is copied from the Washington Post.

==============

Full Up, Fed Up On God's Avenue

Along Crowded 16th St., Residents And Congregations Turn a Cold Shoulder To Mormons' Plans For a Church With A 105-Foot Steeple

By Paul Schwartzman

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 24, 2008; Page B01

If 16th Street is famous for leading straight to the White House, it is also God's Boulevard, with at least 45 congregations lining the seven-mile stretch between Lafayette Square and Silver Spring.

But love thy neighbor? Not this time.

The Mormon church's plan to build another house of worship, one with a steeple-topped tower that will rise 105 feet, is inspiring less-than-holy thoughts among residents who recoil at the prospect of a new flock traversing their streets.

It's not just the traffic and parking congestion that they predict the Mormons will bring to 16th Street Heights, their lush residential neighborhood north of Mount Pleasant. And never mind that the area already has a dozen or so congregations, not to mention a host of other institutions such as schools and day-care centers.

But a tower that's the equivalent of 10 stories high?

"What are they trying to prove?" said Stuart Peacock, a lawyer who resides around the corner, his narrowing eyes punctuating his disgust. "It's too much."

Gloria Eblan, a software engineer who lives across from the property, at 16th and Emerson streets NW, envisions the kind of raucousness associated with a throbbing nightclub, not a church. She insists that a jackhammer-thumping construction project, followed by a weekly parade of chattering congregants will disturb her ever-precious peace.

"I don't want to come off as the anti-Christ, because I'm not. I just have my apprehensions," said Eblan, a crucifix around her neck. "The noise is going to drive me crazy. We're just trying to live our lives."

Dozens of homeowners have expressed opposition to the new church with lawn signs that read, "Too Big, Too Much, Too Many." And the Mormons are finding little support from the neighborhood's clergy, including one pastor who said his objection is rooted not in architecture, but theology.

"They don't accept Jesus as the Messiah; they accept him as the prophet," said Edward Wilson, pastor at Church of Christ, a block from the Mormon site. "It's wrong, I disagree with it, and I wouldn't want them in the neighborhood."

Mormon leaders have been surprised by the opposition, in part because so many churches are located there. But they said they're confident that their reception will improve once they build their two-story brick church, which will host two Sunday services and seat 240. The church will offer underground and aboveground parking, which the Mormons promise will minimize the congregation's affect on the neighborhood.

As for the steeple's height, they said it is a stylistic flourish necessary for an attractive church. "If you take out the steeple, it looks like a big home," said Jeffrey Holmstead, an environmental lawyer who serves as first counselor for the Mormons' Washington stake. "We want something that will be a credit to our church and the community."

The Mormon's tower would dwarf the neighborhood's detached homes, many of which are two and three stories, as well as nearby congregations, although the Sixth Presbyterian Church, a few blocks north, rises to about 90 feet.

Yet the Mormon's tower would be shorter than other congregations, such as the 160-foot All Souls Church, a mile south at 16th and Harvard streets NW. There are several soaring steeples at that broad intersection, which is also home to several apartment buildings. And the Mormons' design is a veritable afterthought compared with their Silver Spring temple, which is 288 feet tall, or the National Cathedral, which reaches 301 feet.

Lawrence Cook, a Falls Church architect who designs churches, said a common guideline is that steeples or towers should be up to twice the height of the building's roofline. By that standard, he said, the Mormons' tower is more than appropriate. In fact, he said after seeing a rendering, "It's too low. It looks like it sunk into the ground a bit.''

Congregations have migrated to 16th Street since the early 1800s, when St. John's Church opened on Lafayette Square, across from the White House, and became known as the "Church of the Presidents."

As the city evolved, and wealthy homeowners gravitated to the 16th Street corridor for its proximity to power, an eclectic mix of congregations followed, from Baptists to Episcopalians, from Jews to Buddhists, a roster that reaches 75 if adjoining streets are included. Some denominations have built national headquarters along 16th Street to enhance their stature, including the D.C. Baptist Convention and the National Church of the Nazarene.

"The congregations are like anything else, they're competing for membership," said David Maloney, the District's state historic preservation officer. "The logical place to locate was 16th Street."

But 16th Street has also been a decidedly residential strip, and homeowners over the years have railed about the encroachment of not only churches but organizations such as day-care centers and schools, particularly those that take over properties once occupied by families.

Just north of where the Mormons are moving, a civic association in 1994 protested the migration of such institutions. District officials responded by adding a bureaucratic hurdle, requiring a special permit for groups using a property for anything but a residence along 16th Street, between Colorado and Military roads.

"If you left your house on a Sunday morning to get bagels, when you came back there would be no parking," said Ellen McCarthy, a consultant to the community group, who was also the District's planning director. "The expectation is that one can enjoy the neighborhood without people coming and going to dances, without loud conversations on the street, without Bible studies or AA meetings."

No such protections exist in the Mormons' new neighborhood, which they said they chose after searching for more than eight years. The Mormons paid $4 million for a 1.5-acre corner site, which had been occupied by a convent.

"It was hard to find something in the city, because there's so much development," said Gordon Daines, the project manager. "Every time we'd go look at something, someone else would get it."

At first residents paid little attention, assuming that the Mormons would move into the nuns' building. But then a demolition team showed up and cleared the property. "Everyone was in shock," said Doreen Thompson, an attorney for the District's Taxicab Commission, who lives across the street. "Can you imagine the trucks just rolling in?"

After the Mormons unveiled their plans, the neighbors organized a coalition, started a Web site, and printed 250 lawn signs, most of which they say they have distributed. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), who lives a block from the site, has not put up a sign, though he has listened to the opponents' concerns.

Residents are lobbying the District to extend the protections granted to the neighborhood to the north. Without the city's intervention, however, their capacity for stopping the church is limited because the Mormons do not need a zoning variance. Still, said Thompson, "We would hope that a church would be sensitive to us."

The Mormons, Holmstead said, are happy to talk about the building's design, including the tower's height. But he questioned whether a revision would "get us any good will with the neighbors."

The Mormons are not without support in the neighborhood, at least from one pastor who says residents opposed his church when it moved into a sanctuary on Colorado Road in 1986. "They tried to run me out but I pressed on," said Bishop Harvey Lewis, of the Star of Bethlehem Church of God in Christ. "I exercised my rights and my desires to move my church there, and the other brother has the same right."

True enough, acknowledged Barbara Flowers, a retired public school principal, sitting on her stoop a few blocks from the site. But her priority, she said, is far less lofty. When she drives to her church, Zion Baptist, around the corner from the Mormon property, will there be enough street parking?

Flowers shrugged and glanced at her husband, Hamilton, as she tried to summon biblical wisdom.

"If we can't agree . . .' What is that saying?" she asked.

"We will bless each other," Mr. Flowers said, "and go on our merry way."

Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.

God Bless America - Just Words!! (This Blog may offend and is political, This is your warning!)

I hate you!! their just words, they don't mean anything. I want to hang out this Friday. Just words, they don't mean anything. I hope that you guys that are reading this think that I am nuts, cause well. . . .I am!!! Sure they are "just words" but words are attached with meaning, and with power when they are spoken. They are something that can not be unheard once heard. There are some words, both positive and negative, that once heard, can not be forgotten and will be remembered for the test of time.

They are just actions. Don't look at my left hand, watch my right. The left hand means nothing. As a magician I often times need to get people to look at one hand and not the other. If they look at the other hand, the trick is ruined cause they either saw what I was doing or they now can see it coming so the excitement is now lost, and no longer magical. A good trick has misdirections, false promises, illusions, deception, hope, good acting, stage appearance, and a twist at the end that you didn't see coming.

Well my friends, all of us here in the Good Ol'e US of A are in the process of having a magic trick played on us, and it is the biggest trick of all. It is something that even though you are unaware of it, you are involved. If we don't "ruin" the trick we are going to be duped, and we are going to feel really foolish, and think to ourselves, "where did that come from?"

The following link is a video that will open your eyes just a little to something that is right in front of you and you may or may not even see it. Please watch this, and you will see what I am talking about.

Now before I give you the link I want to clear something up. I DO believe that words mean something, that words do have power, and that actions can speak even louder than words at times. I think that hateful words should not be directed at people, and even more so to the people that matter the most in your life. There are just some words that should not be used to describe how you feel when talking about or to an individual. Once a word is said it can not be taken back. A wise man once taught me, "you can only shut-up once."

Watch the video, and please see what is happening, and that words do indeed mean something.

Vote for this man and you will be tricked


Is it really that important to watch a persons words? Is it really a persons actions that speak louder than what a person is saying sometimes? I leave those answers up to you.

To clear up some misconceptions

I am engaged to the most wonderful girl a guy could hope for. Not only am I getting married, but I am getting married to my Best Friend. I know many of you are like, "yea I would hope she is your best friend." or "Yea my husband is my best friend too." but it is not like we just started dating and became friends as a result. We were best friends for a while before we started dating. There is no one that I would rather spend eternity with than her.

As I have been engaged I am learning that there are a lot of misconceptions about being engaged. Some of them are mine, and some of them are others. I will address some of both.

1. It is all fun and exciting. (mine)

Yes this is true to some extent, but they forget to let you know about all of the stresses that can be involved in planning to get married. Like where will you live, mixing finances, parents, picking a day that makes everyone happy, where to register (that one at times is really a lot of fun though), and the fact that everyone and their dog has an opinion about how you should do it. When on Earth will we get the time to do everything, now that we have moved up our Wedding a month and a half almost. There are others but I will stop there. The point is, there is a lot to get done, and for LDS people we tend to get married kind of fast, so that means that it needs to be done in a very short amount of time.

2. You are different and you don't want to spend time with us anymore. (what others say)

This one is more of a misunderstanding than anything. Allow me to paint a picture of my life. I work out of town 4 hours away for almost half of the month. So, 15 to 20 days a months I am gone, not here, can't be seen. Let me tell ya, when you are engaged it sucks to be gone like that. But alas that is life, and that is how I bring home money, so it must be done.

As a byproduct of this, when I get home I have three things I want to do above all else:


1. Spend time with my fiancee whom I have just spent days apart from.

2. Plan our wedding and two out of state receptions.

3. Wash my clothes from the week.

4. Yea I know I said three but here is a fourth, I often have work to do still when I am home.


Some people complain that I don't have time for them, or that I don't do anything fun anymore. Maybe I don't have time for some other people, but trust me I have plenty of fun. Some people have recently become quite frustrated that I don't ever do anything anymore, and that all I think about is my wedding, or people say that I have changed, and that I don't care about my friends anymore. Well let me clear all of that up for you.

I am about to be married, which means I am about to have a wife. Included in marriage is giving up single life. And I couldn't be happier to leave it.

I also want to clear up something else as well.

I never want to hear anyone blame my soon to be wife for me not doing something. If I don't do something it is because I chose to not do so, and not because she made me. Because it is time for me to grow up just a little bit more, and prioritize all of my life. She is not a controlling person that dictates what I can and cannot do. In fact she is exactly the opposite. However we do talk to each other about EVERYTHING. If I am going to go grocery shopping I tell her. Not because I have to, but because we are 100% involved in each others lives and we want to, and very soon our lives will become just that, OURS, combined forever.

I love this girl more than anything in the whole world. I know that this may seem odd to some people but, I would rather spend time with her than doing anything else. Period. She wins 100% of the time. Why? Because I love her, and I want to be with her. Not because she makes me do it. She never makes me choose, she just lets me make my own choices, and she knows that I will choose her all the time.

Is is not acceptable for someone to talk negative about my soon to be wife in any form. I will not stand for it, and I will not associate with anyone that does so. I will not associate with someone that does not like my soon to be wife. (think about that, if I did, what kind of message does that send to her if I do?) It is not appropriate to talk negative about me making the most important choice of my life, and also the happiest moment of my life. Guys, I am about to be sealed to my best friend whom I love more than anything, for all time and all eternity. That is such a wonderful thing. Some of you may not even comprehend how great that is. And the last thing is, it is not ok to think that I will do something without her, or at least without consulting her. I just will not do so, period. I will not go hang out with girls without her there, even if they are married or there are guys there. It is just NOT appropriate to do so, plain and simple. So if there are girls at all, and she is not with me. I am not going, sorry.

I am not going to be one of those husbands that talks bad about my wife or complains about my marriage while I am not with her. If I have a problem you all can promise that I will not talk to you about it. Not even my parents will hear about it. So don't ask, and don't try to get me to talk negative. If I have a problem I will talk to her, and vise versa.

To some of you that all makes sense, and to some of you that may not. The point is, I hope that one day all of you feel this way about someone very special. I hope that one day everyone that reads this blog will realize that they have someone extremely special in their life, and or that you will one day have someone and that you should always treat that person right. Also I hope that you'll realize that what I am saying is right.

Love you all and I hope everyone is doing well. I am sad that I don't have the time to spend with everyone that I used to, but a new phase in my life is beginning, and I have a lot on my plate right now. I wish that I could make everyone, and everything a priority, but there is one person that will not be shortchanged when it comes to my time, energy, attention, and devotion, and that is The Girl, so as mentioned before, she wins. All the time!

Unions? Yea they suck!

Anyone that talks to me about what I do for longer than 5 minutes will hear about the nightmare of a Union that I have the pleasure of dealing with on a regular basis. Over the course of the last few months I have developed some very strong opinions about unions. In a nutshell I think they suck and that they need to be done away with and or they need to not be allowed to have so much power.

As an self employed person, and one of an entrepreneur type mindset I have very strong feelings on how business's should be run, regulated, and monitored. I am going to try my best to not get on a tangent and stay on the topic of Unions and why I just plain don't like them.


My Fiancee (The Girl) has a blog and she does something that I like and I am going to steal. She gives nicknames to people so that she can talk about them and not use their real names. So as time moves on and I write more and more about my opinions about where I work I am going to start using nicknames. First I am going to establish two names.

1. The Company - My Client that I am doing work for.
2. The Union - always with caps on "The" and "Union". This is the dreadful Union that The Company has a contract with.

When I came to work with The Company I did not really know much about unions, and how they worked. I knew a little bit but in my life I had no reason to interact with one, so I never really learned firsthand about them, and what kind of problems that they can cause. As time has moved on I have learned what the phrase "Welcome to ________(Company name)" means. It is something that can not be told, you can only experience it for yourself.

Please allow me to try to paint a picture of some of the stupid things that the union does. Today was trash pickup day in my office. Here at The Company we pick up trash twice a week and today is that day when I can get my waste that I so proudly created removed from my office. Now as I am one of the people that does all of the workloading, and developing of new policies, and procedures I don't want my office to be accesses by the workers that I am directly effecting. It is not that I don't trust the workers, it is just I don't . . . .ok I don't trust them, but if you were me you would as well. So when Gaps (another nickname) came into my little office suite to get my trash I kindly walked out of my office with my trash can in hand to hand to Gaps to dispose of it. I was working on her work route at the time, and I did not want her to go into my office with all of that strewn about my office. Now there where three other people in the suite, (try to keep these ones straight) F man, someone not worth getting a nickname, and Snake. Snake is a Union Shop Steward. I still to this day am not really sure what that job is other than to piss me off and everyone else at The Company. He thinks that he is the most high and mighty person that walks on the planet, and he knows all things (oh if he only knew how much he is ticking off the higher ups at The Company) Anyway I am standing there with my trash can in hand ready to give it to Gaps, (who is two feel away) and Snake looks over and says,

"you know she could do that for you" referring to me letting her get my trash.

I reply "I know, I don't want anyone in my office so I am giving it to her"

He looks kinda annoyed that I did not listen to him and says "that is bargain business and she can do it" (I am not really sure what that means but anyway)

So I decided to be a punk, and knowing that he wanted me to walk all the way back to my office and replace my container so that she could go and get it, I just stared at him for a moment, and placed the container at my feet. He looked happy and ticked at the same time. It was worth it too see that kinda of reaction.

Now why do I tell that story? Well the concept that he was trying to prove was that I am taking and union persons job. . . . . .ok. . . . . uhhh she is still going to take my trash, and I am positive that there is no shortage of work for her to do. I know cause I am the one that builds and designs it for the site.

Unions prevent me from taking care of my good workers, and punishing those that need it. you can work your tail off every day for years, and when a better spot opens up that other guy that sleep in his closet everyday gets it. Why? Because he was there 6 weeks longer than you. So why would you work hard if you get nothing in return for it? Slowly most of the good workers after getting passed up again and again quit working hard, and they become the lazy closet sleeper, and hall walkers that at they at one point hated so much. They do this cause there is just no motivation to work hard.

We had some great programs that we wanted to roll out that would really be good for The Union workers, and The Companies interest as well. The Union Leaders denied it, cause they knew that it would make it much harder for us, and would cause more problems. Last I checked when you caused problems for your boss you get fired right? Not with a Union, you just say. Oh I'm sorry how foolish of me and then you walk away.

Well I am done venting for now about unions. I know I did not really talk about unions as much as I did a personal experience but I will later. I am bored about blogging about politics.

This should be interesting

Hands are an interesting thing. human hands especially are an interesting thing, they allow us to do all sorts of different things. Anything from creating magnificent works of art, to punching some jerk square in the gut. It is an intricate and magnificent creation.

We have 10 fingers (most of us do as least) and 2 of them are thumbs. Each Thumb is controlled my 9 different muscles. The thumb is a really great part about our hands. Julius Caesar recognized this. During the Gallic wars, Julius Caesar ordered the thumbs of captured warriers amputated so that when they returned to their country, they would serve as examples and be unable to bear arms again. This practice was later used in a number of wars and in the slave trade. Who knew huh? Now as great as a thumb is it can sure be annoying when you hurt it. Like if you jam it, or if you break it you will find that life kinda sucks without the full use if one.

We also have fingernails. Yea I know I, Capitan Obvious, just pointed that out to you. They are wonderful, but some people just don't seem to think so. They seem to be so against them that they chew and rip them off every chance they get. Who knew that fingernails could be such tasty little moursels of delight. Well I don't really think so as I am a nail biter, not to a huge extent, I just don't like them long. I don't bite till I bleed or go too short or anything like that. Yes I know it is gross, and I need to stop. Maybe I can get my fiance to help me with that one. She seems to be able to help me with many other things. Did you know that your thumb nail grows that slowest and your middle fingernail grows the fastest?

Be glad you have hands. Lets look at some other creatures that the Good Lord did not bless to have hands.

-Worms, they just can't seem to get ahead in life without hands. Perhaps if they got some hands they would not have to come up from the ground to the concrete only to be squished by 3 year olds that think it is fun. Ok, so that would not matter probably, but you never know it might.

-Snakes. They at least have a good mouth for biting things, so they got something. If they had hands they just might be a lot more scary.

-Walruses. They have flippers but no hands. poor creatures.

-Flipper. ok well, dolphins, but to me all dolphins are flipper.

-spiders. Soooo if they had hands this world make the world a much scarier place. I can barely stand them now when they don't have hands. If they did, and could open doors and stuff that would SUCK.

So that is enough, just be happy that you have hands, and also that you not only have one but you have two of them. If you have three, maybe you should cut it off, and give it to someone who has only one. That is just not fair for you to have three. Unless of course you have 9 kids, then you deserve one more.

Is Wal-Mart really that bad?

so yesterday I heard a story about Wal-Mart and a lawsuit they've just recently been going through. I'll sum up briefly what happened in this lawsuit. there was a person that was hit by Wal-Mart truck and suffered severe brain damage as a result of the accident. Wal-Mart then willingly paid all medical expenses after this, making sure that they had everything that they needed taking care of and place them in the vicinity of $470,000 in a trust fund to cover future medical expenses, as well as past its expenses.

This family then decides to sue Wal-Mart about a year or two later, does not win, but then appeals and wins on their appeal. They had entered into an agreement with Wal-Mart that if they do in fact decide to sue that they would have to give back the money that Wal-Mart initially paid willingly out-of-pocket to cover medical expenses. Wal-Mart and then decided to come back and ask for the money. And when they did they'd been met with nothing but resistance saying Wal-Mart doesn't mean it's not your money we need more than you do. There is even an article in the LA Times at talks about this and presented in this sort of light. Please read this link article.

now, I for one actually agree with Wal-Mart on this one. I don't think Wal-Mart did anything wrong. Sure I do agree with the families reasoning that they need the money more than Wal-Mart. But where do you draw the line? When do you decide who needs the money more and who gets to keep it based on need as opposed to who it rightfully and lawfully belongs to. The money right rightfully and lawfully belongs to Wal-Mart it does not rightfully and lawfully belonged to the individual mentioned in this article. Yes, I'll agree they could use the money more than Wal-Mart can, as Wal-Mart grosses somewhere in the vicinity of $90 billion.

everyone's making Wal-Mart out to be the bad guy in this deal, but if we were to make this on a much smaller scale people would now be calling Wal-Mart, the bad guy and they would be calling the person that I got for going after company. They would be calling them someone that takes advantage of companies and looking for an extra free dollar because they don't want to take responsibility for what happened. I am not in any way saying that that is really what happened with this individual, or the wonder motives may be because I just don't know. All i'm talking about right now is perception, and when Wal-Mart is introduced into the equation the perception is completely changed to big bad business taking advantage of a small person.

as I mentioned earlier, this was in the contract, this was an agreement that the individual went into knowing that if they decided to sue and won, that they were going to have to give the money back. Wal-Mart did not do anything unfair in any way by doing this. The individual's lawyer even went as far as to say that Wal-Mart does not have a right to ask for this money. Since when, can one dictate when the law applies and when it does not?

so you have to ask yourself, is it really that important that Wal-Mart gets their money back? is it really Wal-Mart's right task for their money back?

Pushing the envelope

I have been slacking on this and not posting like I should. For the whole 3 of you that read this I am sorry for leaving you hanging like this I'll repent and mend my ways.


Todays blog is about media. The Media today is very different than it was 10 years ago. What is
"The Media?" It seems to be this strange entity that is all around us. Or better yet what is "Hollywood?" It seems to be this strange collaboration of minds that shape what reality should be, or at least what they think it should be.

As time moves on it seems more and more things that were once taboo are now becoming ok and acceptable to have in the open. Things that were once only found in a pg-13 movie are now right in front of you on normal cable television and there is nothing wrong with this. At least society would have you think that there is nothing wrong with this. That there is nothing wrong with desensitization, and that we should all be "more open" to the things of the world.

There are movies now that get a pg-13 rating that 10 years ago would have been R without question. Why has this changed? Why have we allowed this to happen, and better yet how did this happen? There are words on TV that would never have been allowed to be said 10 years ago. Same thing, how did we allow this to happen? How did we allow people to push the envelope to the point where we are today.

There are images of a sexual nature that are in commercials, and normal sitcoms that would NEVER have been allowed to be placed in front of kids and yet prime time television which was once the family time to watch TV is full of sexual images, and story lines. Sex sells and people that produce TV shows know this and use it to the maximum. Does that make it ok? Does that make it ok for us to watch these things? There are people that would say that it is ok. That it does not effect me at all and that I can take this and I can watch this without issue.

There are many problems with that mentality. One is that our line on what is not ok to watch slowly moves over time. What we would once not watch we will now watch. The gray area will constantly move to allow more if we have this mentality of I can handle it. Before we know it we are "ok" with things that in reality are much closer to things that we are not ok with. If one is not careful we will be carefully cheated in to believing that they can watch things that they do not want to. The Devil carefully will cheat you to hell. He is very good with what he does, and there is a reason that the word "cheat" is used in that phrase. That is exactly what he is doing, cheating you out of things that you want. Cheating you out of your morals, and standards. He wants this, and he really wants to do this without you knowing. Many many small threads will one day become powerful cords that will control you.

I know that this is a topic that can get people going, and that some people are going to think that I am ridiculous, but I hope that what I am really trying to say will come across with this blog.

Is it really that big a deal concerning what we watch? It is really being done intentionally by people in the media? Is it really that important?