'Hope' Is no Way to Protect American Embassies

To contact us Click HERE
With each passing day it seems that the Obama Administration is looking more and more responsible for the success of the terrorist attack against the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Take the following developments since the initial news of the attack:

• The Obama Administration initially blamed the attack on protests against some crudely made internet video
• Prior to the terrorist attack, there were no protests outside the Consulate. The attack started at 9:40 PM.
• The Administration claimed to have no intelligence information suggesting any impending attacks, however they were informed both internally and from foreign sources.
• The attack happened on 9/11
• The Administration, including the President,  met during the attack and decided to take a 'wait-and-see' posture, deciding against sending forces to defend the consulate.
• The Ambassador himself alerted the State Department regarding threats to his life.
• The Ambassador had repeatedly requesting additional security.
• The requests were denied.
• the requests and the denials were kept from the public.
• The State Department even told the Ambassador to stop asking for additional support.
• It took weeks before the Consulate was investigated by the FBI. To this day, there is no evidence that the State Department did anything to secure the site or any confidential information still remaining in the Consulate.

 How is it possible, other than through a case of negligence, possibly bordering on criminal negligence, or through some huge misguided social experiment in 'Hope' is is possible for a consulate in a country full of persons violently hostile to Americans to have less security than the US Embassy in peaceful Helsinki, Finland. How is that possible? It's possible when you put a President in charge who does not believe in a strong defense. A President who believes that a strong defensive posture is what drives hate against Americans. 
All I can say to that is that letting those who hate America destroy our Embassies and kill Americans is not going to extinguish the hate. All it will do is make America look weak and fan the flames of more hate.
This is just one more reason to elect Mitt Romney as the next President. The haters around the world will hate us no matter who is President. We can however minimize the threat by having a strong a proud President at the helm.

This is just the latest example of how much of a failure President Obama's soft stance against terrorism is. Hugging terrorists does not reform them. It never will. The Obama Administration will never understand this. The only 'extremists' they can recognize are members of the 'Tea Party.'


UPDATE 10 October 2012
Above I had mentioned the possibility that persons in the State Department might have been criminally negligent. Well, take a look at this Congressional hearing questioning Charlene R. Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs. Here is a summary of what she is responsible for:

Diplomatic Security Senior Leadership » Lamb, Charlene R - Assistant Director for International ProgramsBiographyOther ReleasesBureau of Diplomatic SecurityWashington, DCShare on facebookShare on google_plusoneShareCharlene R. LambDeputy Assistant Secretary for International ProgramsAs the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Ms. Lamb is a key member of the DS management team, responsible for providing strategic planning, management support, and establishing budget priorities to senior DS management. Ms. Lamb manages more than $1.2 billion in security assets and programs and thousands of personnel dedicated to that purpose. She is also responsible for the safety and security of over 285 overseas Embassies and Consulates and oversees the 550 special agent/security professionals posted at those locations. - US State Department

That is a pretty impressive set os responsibilities. You know what else is impressive, her past history. Go ahead and read the rest of her bio which includes postings in a number of hot spots. It sounds like this is exactly the kind of person you would want overseeing embassy safety and security. Which makes this testimony all the more bizarre and I dare say damning. How on earth did she come to the conclusion that security in the consulate was anywhere near acceptable, especially considering that embassies in peaceful countries have much better security. 

Found here.
-------------------- --------------------

Obama's Sandra Fluke vs Clinton's Monica

To contact us Click HERE
First, there would have been no point to this story. But the Democrats had to insist in forcing companies and religious institutions to provide birth control to adults at no charge despite 'lack of access to birth control' not even being listed as any of the major reasons why women get accidentally pregnant.
One of Obama's major vote for free birth control warriors is Sandra Fluke. She has been activly promoted by Obama's re-election team, even given a speaking spot at the Democrat National Convention. Personally I do not know why, as the message of a 31 year old law graduate whining about her need to get free birth control does not really ring with me. It actually rings pretty hollow when you find out that a month's worth of birth control costs about $10. Everyone can pony up $10. The fact that Sandra can't gather a crowd of more than ten persons at an Obama re-election rally is pretty good evidence that her 15 minutes of fame is about over.
(Photo found at Ace of Spades)

Now take Monica Lewinsky. I had a chance to see her back in 1999 when she appeared in Helsinki Finland for her book signing. This was her second appearance that day and all of the people packed into the bookstore are trying to get a glimpse of her. the first bookstore was so packed that you could not get into it. All of this is 3 years after the scandal that made her famous.
So maybe Obama should ask Monica if she can help him campaign. Because Sandra's message is just not cutting it.


-------------------- --------------------

'Congressman' Gerry Connolly: "Vets Unqualified to Serve in Congress"

To contact us Click HERE
I just don't like my Congressman Gerry Connolly. He is a Liberal tool right behind Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. So I will be voting for the man seeking to replace him as my Congressman, Colonel Chris Perkins.
Here is a statement and video by Chris PErkins responding to comments made by Congressman Connolly, both touting his accomplishments in the district, which sounds lots like taking credit for securing Government funding for local projects in which he expects to be rewarded with being re-elected to his spot in Congress. Well, if that is how we should vote, then why not vote in the most corrupt people we can find. That will surely get the money flowing. Anyway, here is Chris Perkins statement:

I was forewarned that politics can be an ugly thing, but I was unprepared for the latest development in my congressional race to represent the 11th District of Virginia.

Incumbent Congressman Gerry Connolly has shocked many of his constituents by suggesting that career military veterans, like myself, are unqualified to serve in Congress – implying that their service to the nation at-large does not amount to sufficient “sweat equity” in the district they seek to serve in Congress.

While speaking to a local Chamber of Commerce and touting his own accomplishments during his 16 years in local politics, Mr. Connolly recently asked the audience: "Where has my opponent been?" Many in the room who were aware of my military career, including those wearing lapel stickers listing the Democratic Party ticket, were visibly taken aback and later distanced themselves from Mr. Connolly’s attack. Unrepentant, the congressman subsequently pressed his line of attack when he spoke to a local neighborhood civic association. Once again describing the work he did as a Fairfax County Supervisor in the building of schools and sidewalks for his community, Mr. Connolly again dismissed my more than 24 years of military experience, saying "I expect a candidate to have demonstrated some sweat equity!"

I am happy to answer the congressman's question. I was in Iraq trying to rescue American fighter pilots who had been shot down. I was hunting down war criminals in Bosnia, and I was evacuating U.S. Embassy personnel in Africa from armed mobs that would do them harm. I was at Arlington National Cemetery 17 times paying my last respects to brave men that I had the privilege and honor to serve with.

I am profoundly disappointed that Congressman Connolly believes career military men and women are unqualified to serve in Congress simply because they chose to serve and protect their country rather than enter local politics. Mr. Connolly’s statements are outrageous and demonstrate an out-of-touch career politician who thinks that only those who climb the ladder of local politics can graduate to higher office. By Mr. Connolly’s standard, many of our forefathers, including George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower, were unqualified to hold federal office. His statements are offensive to our service members and their families who have sacrificed so much for the country they love.

This country’s military veterans, professional intelligence officers and career first responders don’t just have sweat equity in their communities, they have blood equity in America. I believe the voters in Virginia's 11th District appreciate that.

Chris Perkins is a retired U.S. Army officer and congressional candidate for Virginia's 11th District. - Washington Times

-------------------- --------------------

'Pro-Oil' Obama Administration Now Closing Western Lands To Oil Drilling

To contact us Click HERE
During this last election, President Obama proclaimed that oil drilling in the US has never been greater, implying that he was responsible for this oil drilling boon. In reality, the increase in oil drilling had been taking place on private lands that the Government had little ability to stop.
Now, that President Obama has won re-election, his pro-oil Administration is planning to close off Western Government land from oil exploration.

The Interior Department on Friday issued a final plan to close 1.6 million acres of federal land in the West originally slated for oil shale development.

The proposed plan would fence off a majority of the initial blueprint laid out in the final days of the George W. Bush administration. It faces a 30-day protest period and a 60-day process to ensure it is consistent with local and state policies. After that, the department would render a decision for implementation.

The move is sure to rankle Republicans, who say President Obama’s grip on fossil fuel drilling in federal lands is too tight. - The Hill

The Obama Presidency, redefining 'Pro-Oil'. Then again, his 'All-of-the-Above' energy policy seems to mean 'None of the below'.
-------------------- --------------------

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Lies: 'Social Security does not add one penny to the debt. Not one penny.'

To contact us Click HERE

So the latest story concerning the fiscal cliff the US is facing is news that some Republicans in Congress are thinking of being flexible when it comes to their 'Grover Norquist' no tax increase pledge. However, I think this issue brought out a huge lie pushed by Democrats in general but said by Illinois Democrat Senator Dick Durbin. He said that

 'Social Security does not add one penny to the debt. Not one penny.' 

His statement was in response to Republican demands that entitlement spending reform be on the table . Basically Senator Durbin is claiming that there is no need to reform Social Security Entitlements because Social Security is not a part of this nation's spending/deficit crisis. Unfortunately, this is not the case and Senator Durbin for sure knows that this is a lie. Zero Hedge explains:

This statement is a lie that is covered over by a dopy accounting system called the Unified Budget. In this magical world, the deficits driven by entitlements are hidden. The reliance on this accounting fiction is a dangerous path for liberals to take. The fact is, SS (and the other government retirement programs for Federal workers and the Military) are running billion dollar cash deficits today and will run Mega-Trillion dollar cash deficits for the next seventy-five years. Every penny of those deficits will result in more borrowing from the public.

These deficits may be “Off Budget” in the magical world of Unified Accounting, but they do add to the publicly held debt on a dollar-for-dollar basis. The Rating Agencies are part of the Cliff discussion (like it or not); those folks are no dopes and they fully understand that Senator Durbin is all wet with his talk of Off Balance sheet debt. - Zero Hedge

If a publicly traded company did this sort of accounting gimmickry, shareholders would eventually lose their investments and people would go to jail. Ironically, Democrat politicians would then be crowing to every TV camera how we need even more laws to prevent this kind of criminal behavior, all the time committing a much larger theft right out in the open.
Worse, the Social Security Trustee report notes that Social Security will run out of money around 2033, unless Social Security taxes are raised (or benefit rules reformed).
Finally, the Trillions of dollars in assets that the Social Security Trust fund has are currently held in the form of US Treasury Bonds. In short, the money was given to the Government and spent. The Government will then have to redeem the bonds as the money is needed to pay Social Security recipients. This means that they will have to get the money from somewhere. Given that the Government plans to run a deficit into the sunset, that means that they will either have to print or borrow the money.
Graphs pictured above were taken from the US Government's own Government Accountability Office. The article is titled 'Federal Debt Basics'. Clearly, this is a topic Senator Durbin and many of his follow Democrats would fail if a grade was given. Unfortunately, it is we who suffer as a result of their incompetence and criminal behavior if they had to be judged the same way that they demand businesses be held to account.-------------------- --------------------

'Hope' Is no Way to Protect American Embassies

To contact us Click HERE
With each passing day it seems that the Obama Administration is looking more and more responsible for the success of the terrorist attack against the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Take the following developments since the initial news of the attack:

• The Obama Administration initially blamed the attack on protests against some crudely made internet video
• Prior to the terrorist attack, there were no protests outside the Consulate. The attack started at 9:40 PM.
• The Administration claimed to have no intelligence information suggesting any impending attacks, however they were informed both internally and from foreign sources.
• The attack happened on 9/11
• The Administration, including the President,  met during the attack and decided to take a 'wait-and-see' posture, deciding against sending forces to defend the consulate.
• The Ambassador himself alerted the State Department regarding threats to his life.
• The Ambassador had repeatedly requesting additional security.
• The requests were denied.
• the requests and the denials were kept from the public.
• The State Department even told the Ambassador to stop asking for additional support.
• It took weeks before the Consulate was investigated by the FBI. To this day, there is no evidence that the State Department did anything to secure the site or any confidential information still remaining in the Consulate.

 How is it possible, other than through a case of negligence, possibly bordering on criminal negligence, or through some huge misguided social experiment in 'Hope' is is possible for a consulate in a country full of persons violently hostile to Americans to have less security than the US Embassy in peaceful Helsinki, Finland. How is that possible? It's possible when you put a President in charge who does not believe in a strong defense. A President who believes that a strong defensive posture is what drives hate against Americans. 
All I can say to that is that letting those who hate America destroy our Embassies and kill Americans is not going to extinguish the hate. All it will do is make America look weak and fan the flames of more hate.
This is just one more reason to elect Mitt Romney as the next President. The haters around the world will hate us no matter who is President. We can however minimize the threat by having a strong a proud President at the helm.

This is just the latest example of how much of a failure President Obama's soft stance against terrorism is. Hugging terrorists does not reform them. It never will. The Obama Administration will never understand this. The only 'extremists' they can recognize are members of the 'Tea Party.'


UPDATE 10 October 2012
Above I had mentioned the possibility that persons in the State Department might have been criminally negligent. Well, take a look at this Congressional hearing questioning Charlene R. Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs. Here is a summary of what she is responsible for:

Diplomatic Security Senior Leadership » Lamb, Charlene R - Assistant Director for International ProgramsBiographyOther ReleasesBureau of Diplomatic SecurityWashington, DCShare on facebookShare on google_plusoneShareCharlene R. LambDeputy Assistant Secretary for International ProgramsAs the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Ms. Lamb is a key member of the DS management team, responsible for providing strategic planning, management support, and establishing budget priorities to senior DS management. Ms. Lamb manages more than $1.2 billion in security assets and programs and thousands of personnel dedicated to that purpose. She is also responsible for the safety and security of over 285 overseas Embassies and Consulates and oversees the 550 special agent/security professionals posted at those locations. - US State Department

That is a pretty impressive set os responsibilities. You know what else is impressive, her past history. Go ahead and read the rest of her bio which includes postings in a number of hot spots. It sounds like this is exactly the kind of person you would want overseeing embassy safety and security. Which makes this testimony all the more bizarre and I dare say damning. How on earth did she come to the conclusion that security in the consulate was anywhere near acceptable, especially considering that embassies in peaceful countries have much better security. 

Found here.
-------------------- --------------------

Obama's Sandra Fluke vs Clinton's Monica

To contact us Click HERE
First, there would have been no point to this story. But the Democrats had to insist in forcing companies and religious institutions to provide birth control to adults at no charge despite 'lack of access to birth control' not even being listed as any of the major reasons why women get accidentally pregnant.
One of Obama's major vote for free birth control warriors is Sandra Fluke. She has been activly promoted by Obama's re-election team, even given a speaking spot at the Democrat National Convention. Personally I do not know why, as the message of a 31 year old law graduate whining about her need to get free birth control does not really ring with me. It actually rings pretty hollow when you find out that a month's worth of birth control costs about $10. Everyone can pony up $10. The fact that Sandra can't gather a crowd of more than ten persons at an Obama re-election rally is pretty good evidence that her 15 minutes of fame is about over.
(Photo found at Ace of Spades)

Now take Monica Lewinsky. I had a chance to see her back in 1999 when she appeared in Helsinki Finland for her book signing. This was her second appearance that day and all of the people packed into the bookstore are trying to get a glimpse of her. the first bookstore was so packed that you could not get into it. All of this is 3 years after the scandal that made her famous.
So maybe Obama should ask Monica if she can help him campaign. Because Sandra's message is just not cutting it.


-------------------- --------------------

'Congressman' Gerry Connolly: "Vets Unqualified to Serve in Congress"

To contact us Click HERE
I just don't like my Congressman Gerry Connolly. He is a Liberal tool right behind Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. So I will be voting for the man seeking to replace him as my Congressman, Colonel Chris Perkins.
Here is a statement and video by Chris PErkins responding to comments made by Congressman Connolly, both touting his accomplishments in the district, which sounds lots like taking credit for securing Government funding for local projects in which he expects to be rewarded with being re-elected to his spot in Congress. Well, if that is how we should vote, then why not vote in the most corrupt people we can find. That will surely get the money flowing. Anyway, here is Chris Perkins statement:

I was forewarned that politics can be an ugly thing, but I was unprepared for the latest development in my congressional race to represent the 11th District of Virginia.

Incumbent Congressman Gerry Connolly has shocked many of his constituents by suggesting that career military veterans, like myself, are unqualified to serve in Congress – implying that their service to the nation at-large does not amount to sufficient “sweat equity” in the district they seek to serve in Congress.

While speaking to a local Chamber of Commerce and touting his own accomplishments during his 16 years in local politics, Mr. Connolly recently asked the audience: "Where has my opponent been?" Many in the room who were aware of my military career, including those wearing lapel stickers listing the Democratic Party ticket, were visibly taken aback and later distanced themselves from Mr. Connolly’s attack. Unrepentant, the congressman subsequently pressed his line of attack when he spoke to a local neighborhood civic association. Once again describing the work he did as a Fairfax County Supervisor in the building of schools and sidewalks for his community, Mr. Connolly again dismissed my more than 24 years of military experience, saying "I expect a candidate to have demonstrated some sweat equity!"

I am happy to answer the congressman's question. I was in Iraq trying to rescue American fighter pilots who had been shot down. I was hunting down war criminals in Bosnia, and I was evacuating U.S. Embassy personnel in Africa from armed mobs that would do them harm. I was at Arlington National Cemetery 17 times paying my last respects to brave men that I had the privilege and honor to serve with.

I am profoundly disappointed that Congressman Connolly believes career military men and women are unqualified to serve in Congress simply because they chose to serve and protect their country rather than enter local politics. Mr. Connolly’s statements are outrageous and demonstrate an out-of-touch career politician who thinks that only those who climb the ladder of local politics can graduate to higher office. By Mr. Connolly’s standard, many of our forefathers, including George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower, were unqualified to hold federal office. His statements are offensive to our service members and their families who have sacrificed so much for the country they love.

This country’s military veterans, professional intelligence officers and career first responders don’t just have sweat equity in their communities, they have blood equity in America. I believe the voters in Virginia's 11th District appreciate that.

Chris Perkins is a retired U.S. Army officer and congressional candidate for Virginia's 11th District. - Washington Times

-------------------- --------------------

'Pro-Oil' Obama Administration Now Closing Western Lands To Oil Drilling

To contact us Click HERE
During this last election, President Obama proclaimed that oil drilling in the US has never been greater, implying that he was responsible for this oil drilling boon. In reality, the increase in oil drilling had been taking place on private lands that the Government had little ability to stop.
Now, that President Obama has won re-election, his pro-oil Administration is planning to close off Western Government land from oil exploration.

The Interior Department on Friday issued a final plan to close 1.6 million acres of federal land in the West originally slated for oil shale development.

The proposed plan would fence off a majority of the initial blueprint laid out in the final days of the George W. Bush administration. It faces a 30-day protest period and a 60-day process to ensure it is consistent with local and state policies. After that, the department would render a decision for implementation.

The move is sure to rankle Republicans, who say President Obama’s grip on fossil fuel drilling in federal lands is too tight. - The Hill

The Obama Presidency, redefining 'Pro-Oil'. Then again, his 'All-of-the-Above' energy policy seems to mean 'None of the below'.
-------------------- --------------------

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Lies: 'Social Security does not add one penny to the debt. Not one penny.'

To contact us Click HERE

So the latest story concerning the fiscal cliff the US is facing is news that some Republicans in Congress are thinking of being flexible when it comes to their 'Grover Norquist' no tax increase pledge. However, I think this issue brought out a huge lie pushed by Democrats in general but said by Illinois Democrat Senator Dick Durbin. He said that

 'Social Security does not add one penny to the debt. Not one penny.' 

His statement was in response to Republican demands that entitlement spending reform be on the table . Basically Senator Durbin is claiming that there is no need to reform Social Security Entitlements because Social Security is not a part of this nation's spending/deficit crisis. Unfortunately, this is not the case and Senator Durbin for sure knows that this is a lie. Zero Hedge explains:

This statement is a lie that is covered over by a dopy accounting system called the Unified Budget. In this magical world, the deficits driven by entitlements are hidden. The reliance on this accounting fiction is a dangerous path for liberals to take. The fact is, SS (and the other government retirement programs for Federal workers and the Military) are running billion dollar cash deficits today and will run Mega-Trillion dollar cash deficits for the next seventy-five years. Every penny of those deficits will result in more borrowing from the public.

These deficits may be “Off Budget” in the magical world of Unified Accounting, but they do add to the publicly held debt on a dollar-for-dollar basis. The Rating Agencies are part of the Cliff discussion (like it or not); those folks are no dopes and they fully understand that Senator Durbin is all wet with his talk of Off Balance sheet debt. - Zero Hedge

If a publicly traded company did this sort of accounting gimmickry, shareholders would eventually lose their investments and people would go to jail. Ironically, Democrat politicians would then be crowing to every TV camera how we need even more laws to prevent this kind of criminal behavior, all the time committing a much larger theft right out in the open.
Worse, the Social Security Trustee report notes that Social Security will run out of money around 2033, unless Social Security taxes are raised (or benefit rules reformed).
Finally, the Trillions of dollars in assets that the Social Security Trust fund has are currently held in the form of US Treasury Bonds. In short, the money was given to the Government and spent. The Government will then have to redeem the bonds as the money is needed to pay Social Security recipients. This means that they will have to get the money from somewhere. Given that the Government plans to run a deficit into the sunset, that means that they will either have to print or borrow the money.
Graphs pictured above were taken from the US Government's own Government Accountability Office. The article is titled 'Federal Debt Basics'. Clearly, this is a topic Senator Durbin and many of his follow Democrats would fail if a grade was given. Unfortunately, it is we who suffer as a result of their incompetence and criminal behavior if they had to be judged the same way that they demand businesses be held to account.-------------------- --------------------

Don't make people pay for parking they don't need

To contact us Click HERE
Below is an email I wrote a year ago regarding a development in our neighborhood. I happened to find a printed copy while cleaning out some files, and decided to post it. While this was written about one particular project, it summarizes a problem that is common to many residential developments: Parking is included in the cost of more expensive apartments, and if a resident doesn't need the parking, they have no way of recovering the cost of the parking they are paying for.

Despite what some people think, not everyone owns a car. Especially in urban areas, parking can be quite costly, and no one should be forced to pay for it if they don't want it.

So below is the letter I wrote to city commissions when our neighborhood association wanted to force the developer guarantee a parking spot as part of the rent for all residents. They wanted to avoid more people parking on the streets in the neighborhood, but I thought their concerns were misplaced.

I know I may be in the minority among the people you hear from, but I will reiterate what I said at the meeting Monday night. Requiring all tenants to pay for a parking spot, whether they own a car or not, is both unfair, and bad for the neighborhood. If [the project] includes a parking spot with every apartment, you are forcing people to pay for something they don't need, don't want, and won't use. And it's not a community asset, like a green roof, patio, or work out room, that tenants may or may not use. A parking spot adds significantly to the cost of an apartment, so makes the apartment less affordable.

It also makes the apartment only attractive to those who own cars. Is that what [the neighborhood] wants? Is that good for the neighborhood? Do we want to only have drivers and car owners moving into an already crowded area? I don't think so.

To make sure I had my facts straight, I checked with [a representative of the developer.] They do not want to allow tenants to reassign the spot - the one they are required to pay for - to a friend, work colleague, or other party. Tenants would not be able to resell or rent the spot to someone else. [The building owners] considers that too much of a security risk.

So the expensive parking spot included with the apartment will not only be unused by the tenant, but will not be able to be used to get one more car off the neighborhood streets during the day. Again, is this in the interest of the neighborhood?

So, my request to you is: Do not ask that a parking spot be included with each apartment. It is bad public policy and bad for the neighborhood. If you are determined to require a parking spot be paid for by each tenant, then ask that [the building owners] allow the spots to be reassigned to outside parties. This will be more fair to tenants that do not own cars, and it will also get cars off our neighborhood streets.

As to commercial and visitor parking - i.e. short term parking - as a neighbor that lives one block from the site, I can tell you that there IS parking available on our neighborhood streets, although one might have to walk a block or two. Despite what some think, we live in an urban area, and one cannot expect to park directly in front of one's destination. The streets are a public area, and anyone can use them, including for parking. We have two hour limits during the day, and that's appropriate. I have no problem with commercial customers parking on my block, nor do I think that a lack of commercial or visitor parking will doom the project.

When we visit the Monroe, Atwood, or Williamson St areas, whether to visit friends, shop, or enjoy dinner or a drink, we often have to park on the street, and possibly several blocks away. (OK, Monroe has a parking garage at Trader Joes, but the east side areas do not.) That does not keep us from visiting these areas, nor does it seem to impede the success of businesses. Just as with our neighborhood, these areas were built for and continue to be accessible by foot, bike, and transit. People who live and visit these area expect that parking may be less convenient, but they also enjoy a wonderful neighborhood experience, highlighted by easy, pleasant walking. 

Please don't let a few loud voices push you to make suggestions to the city committees that are in opposition to the interests of the neighborhood and the best practices of urban design. Several people have contacted me since the meeting to tell me they agree with me, so I am not alone. We all know that those opposed are often the loudest and most strident, but maybe not the majority.

What do you mean you don't have guest bike parking?

To contact us Click HERE
Today I am at the Wisconsin Bike Summit, being held at Inn on the Park in Madison. Since the weather and outlook was a typically late-winter mix of precipitation - a bit of wet snow, and maybe rain and/or snow later - I thought it would be best to try to find sheltered bike parking, if possible. My bike has weathered many years of abuse, but I'd rather not have a wet ride when I get ready to leave.

The Inn on the Park has valet car parking, so as I rolled up, I thought I'd ask if they had indoor or covered bike parking as well. After all, the Concourse, just a couple blocks away, has bike racks in their garage, and they have provided a separate bike room for storage for some conferences.

Alas, they looked at me as if I had two heads when I asked about sheltered bike parking. So I parked at the side of the building and covered my seat with the plastic bag I keep stashed under my seat.

Now, being a local, I was pretty sure that there was no covered bike parking at Inn on the Park. I also know where to find covered bike parking within a couple of blocks, but I was late for my meeting, so was hoping that some accommodations were made for the Bike Summit and the anticipated large number of people arriving by bike today.

I also wanted to make a point as a customer, and this is really the lesson from this blog post. People who drive are quick to tell businesses if they find it difficult or inconvenient to park. Ask almost any business, and they will be glad to tell you how important [car] parking is to their customers. No conference hotel would dismiss the [car] parking concerns of their customers. Yet I was being sent out into wet weather to fend for myself with my vehicle.

Bicyclists need to be more vocal about their needs as well. Accommodating bicycle parking needs is relatively simple and inexpensive. Yet we as bicyclists meekly accept locking up to a sign post, overcrowded rack, or in the rain. We as customers need to ask for safe and convenient bicycle parking.

I'm not suggesting being mean or indignant, just asking, "Excuse me, could you tell me where I can park my bike?" And if you get a blank stare, or if the bicycle parking is not serving your needs, drop a note to the management suggesting how they can better provide for bicyclists. After all, you are a customer too.

Keeping older people mobile shouldn't just involve wider roads and bigger signs

To contact us Click HERE
This is a theme in transportation policy: If people are driving off the road or otherwise having crashes, the obvious solution is to make the road more "forgiving," that is make it easier to drive faster and without paying attention. The solution isn't to make people drive slower or be more alert; it's an engineering problem, not a human problem.

Talk about enabling bad behavior. How would the tough-love people feel about fixing the problem of irresponsibility in other areas of our lives by making sure there aren't harsh consequences? I'd love to hear this in a debate among conservatives.

Here's another example, a report on "Keeping Baby Boomers Mobile: Preserving Mobility and Safety for Older Americans."

As a baby boomer myself, I hate to think that national researchers think I won't be mobile soon. But I admit that not only am I on the young end of baby boom, but we all get older, and it's probably a good idea to think about all those people that will need to stay connected to the world. We have built a country where driving is almost required to participate, so this report emphasizes bigger, brighter signs, wider roads with fewer curves, and less things to run into on the side of the road - like bus shelters, benches, trees, or buildings.

No mention at all that maybe people shouldn't drive, if they can't use the roads in a safe and responsible manner. How about building communities where driving is but one option to move around? How about making sure that people that can't drive can walk, take transit, or get a ride another way for their daily activities, entertainment, and social interactions?

But I'm going to let the words that came via email this morning, from David Burwell at the Carnegie Endowment, speak to that issue:

Report of the Week: The Transportation Research Information Program (TRIP) the research affiliate of the Highway Users Alliance, has blessed America with a new report documenting innovative strategies for keeping our senior drivers safe on the roads. Noting that while seniors represent only 8% of the driving public but 18% of driver fatalities, the TRIP report, Keeping Baby Boomers Mobile: Preserving Mobility and Safety for Older Americans, suggests such innovations as requiring "clearer, brighter and simpler signs with large letters." Great idea--and how about the pedestrians, bicyclists and other road users--maybe we (actually, they, since your reporter is a baby boomer) all should be required to carry bright signs in large letters saying "please don't hit me!" Wider left turn lanes are another helpful idea, along with longer turning and exit lanes--providing more pavement for those pesky walkers and bicyclists to cross. One can page through the entire report for programs to provide baby boomers with options to driving--ride-sharing, mixed use developments that reduce the need to travel, more transit options--nope, not there. But this is a Highway Users Alliance publication after all. If seniors don't want to use the highways they are on their own. http://www.tripnet.org/docs/Older_Drivers_TRIP_Report_Feb_2012.pdf.

Thanks for clearing your sidewalk!

To contact us Click HERE
First, thanks to all who promptly cleared their sidewalks. I know how hard it can be, as my back will attest after going through 3 rounds of manual snow/ice removal in the last 24 hours, including removing the ice wall in front of my driveway this morning. (Not only do I not own a snow-blower, but without a garage, I'm not sure where I'd put one.)

One of the local business
that didn't clear their walk,

even though they managed
to fully clear their parking lot.

I am frankly stunned that some of the commercial properties - in front of apartment buildings and stores - are so poorly cleared. Since the stores are open for business and people are coming and going from the apartments, I know it's not a case of no one being able to physically get to the location.

City ordinance requires that sidewalks be cleared within 24 hours of the end of the storm. If you can't get all the ice off, the city expects that salt/sand be applied. 
I am very happy that we have this ordinance, because not everyone is physically capable of navigating snow banks, icy sidewalks, or narrow paths stamped down only by others' feet. A few years ago there was a news story about a student at the UW who was trying to get to classes but couldn't because he was in w wheelchair, and the sidewalk between his apartment and the corner had not been cleared. Not only that, he couldn't even get to a bus stop because the curb cuts at the corners had not been cleared. Even people with poor balance or less sure footing in general often can't navigate an uncleared sidewalk or blocked curb cut.

My neighbors shoveled.

Walking is not just an enjoyable activity, it is an integral part of our transportation system. Every trip begins and ends with walking, and walking is certainly safer than driving when the roads are still not completely cleared. And when the buses are up and running again, we will all need to walk to get to and from the bus. (And again, riding the bus is both safer for the individual, but also keeps lots of cars off the roads, thereby making icy roads safer for others as well.)
One of the other nice features of living in Madison is that there are locations around the city with sand piles (mixed with salt, which both keeps the salt from freezing into a solid mass and helps melt snow/ice.) This is free of the taking for use on your sidewalk, stairs, or driveway. I have used perhaps one bag of salt in 20 years of home ownership. I use the sand from the city instead. The darker color of the sand also helps the sun take care of the final melting.

Trail Food: Justin's Honey Peanut Butter

To contact us Click HERE
While shopping at a local Target department store, we were browsed the food aisles looking for possible backpacking fare. While standing in front of a wall of peanut butter, we noticed some small boxes with individual packets of peanut butter. From the four boxes we selected a small packet of Justin's Honey Peanut Butter to sample at the office. Today was the day.

The packet of peanut butter stated to knead before opening. Being a military veteran, this brought back memories of little green packets of peanut butter in the ubiquitous Meals-Ready-to-Eat (MREs). We once failed to knead and were punished with oil and a thick peanut flavored nougat. We rolled the packet between our palms rapidly.

Finding a small nick along the side, we opened the packet slightly and squeezed a dollop onto a waiting cracker. We definitely tasted peanut butter, but not a heavy taste of peanut butter. On our second dollop we distinctly could identify the taste of honey. Finally, we tore open the pouch and dug in with a small plastic spoon. The peanut butter was tasty, but a bit mealy feeling in the mouth. Perhaps we had not spent enough tie kneading it before use.

The packet indicates Justin's Honey Peanut Butter is kosher and gluten-free. A 1.15 oz. (32 grams) packet provides 190 calories. The very high calories to weight ratio and the good taste makes packets of Justin's Honey Peanut Butter a new inclusion on our backpacking meal plan this year. Last year we flagged a bit after a few days out, so we'll toss in some peanut butter packets to see if that helps us maintain our appetite around day four.

UPDATE 5/31/12 - We bought ten packets of Justin's Honey Peanut Butter for our upcoming 10-day section hike of New York.

Disclosure: We select and purchase the product(s) reviewed. We have no material connection to either the manufacturer nor the retailer(s).