This is how it should be done.

You may or may not be aware that federal law requires the Post Office to deliver mail to all US addresses 6 days a week. It makes sense, but I just never really thought about it.

Well, as the world goes digital and as private couriers improve service, the volume of mail delivered by the USPS has declined. In 2008, the USPS saw a decline of 4.5% in the volume of mail it delivered compared to the previous year. That's over 9 billion fewer pieces of mail.

The Post Office is exploring ways to streamline its operations. One such option is to eliminate one day of delivery each week.

I want to applaud the Post Office for looking for ways to reduce cost, rather than by just raising taxes (i.e. stamp prices). This is the example that the rest of the government should follow.

Instead of raising taxes, look for ways to be more efficient. If, for example, a private entity can do a job, let them (the biggest example I can think of for this is municipal WiFi). Some things that the government does should be left to the private sector.

Instead of making people who don't use the services pay for them, how about re-examining the services in general, to see if they are something that the government should be doing in the first place.

I know that it's not uncommon for me to get nothing besides junk mail. There are several companies that I do business with that do not send me paper bills. I also, pay all of my bills online. I don't remember the last time I wrote a check to pay a bill. I couldn't even tell you what a stamp costs these days.

One more thing that the Post Office should do is to reconsider how they spend their advertising dollars. Does the USPS really need to sponsor a professional cycling team? That's not to say they shouldn't advertise, and that they shouldn't advertise on sports, but does it make sense to advertise on a sport that virtually no Americans follow except for 2 weeks in July?

Let's not send the wrong message.

It's not often that a girls high school basketball game makes national attention. In fact, it's rare that many outside of the players and coaches and their families and friends even know how girls teams are doing.

But a recent match up between the Covenant School and Dallas Academy has been all over the news of late.

These two private schools in Texas played a game, a game that probably should not have been scheduled. The results of the game were a 100-0 score in favor of the Covenant School.

Now, there is pressure from all over for the Covenant School to forfeit the game. That's going too far.

The point of sports is to do your best. Win or lose, you give it your all. This same story comes up every time a college football powerhouse plays a smaller school with much less in the way of resources to recruit and train their players.

"Call off the dogs" is the cry. I say, if you don't want to get beat by 100, play some defense. Players will tell you that when you stop playing your hardest, that is when you are more likely to get hurt.

If I were from the Dallas Academy, I think I would be more offended at the forfeit than the 100 point beat-down. And any true competitor would feel the same way.

OK, I just rolled over and got my butt handed to me, but in the stat column, I win, and you lose? How is that right?

For the Covenant School to forfeit, is on the same page as not keeping score at little league games. It sends the wrong message.

A new chapter for America

Today marks the next chapter in American History. Barack Hussein Obama will be inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States of America.

There will be much ado going on in Washington DC as well as the rest of the country.

National TV coverage will be on all of the major networks.

Why such a commotion? Partly because it is the end of an era that the media and Hollywood celebrities portrayed as one of the darkest hours of American History.

One article I read reports that the outgoing president is "one of the nation's most unpopular and divisive presidents". It goes on to list several negative things that happened in the past 8 years.

One thing that was omitted from the article was the good that has happened during that time.

Things like the fact that the country has not been attacked on home soil since 9/11 (Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for attacks in London and Madrid since).

Or that despite being down now, the DOW has seen its highest levels during the Bush Presidency, but compare it to the level it was at when he took office, it isn't as bad as some would make it out to be.

Or that another country was liberated from a tyrannical dictator and had free and open elections.

Many will point to the number of dead American soldiers in Iraq (4229) and Afghanistan (641), but compare that to the dead on D-day (10,000 dead or missing) alone, never mind the 14 million ally soldiers dead during the entire WWII. What about the 36,516 American soldiers killed in Korea (not counting the 8276 MIA or 7245 POW). Or the 58,159 American Servicemen who never came back from Vietnam.

Sure this president did things that I disagreed with (the biggest being the bloated bailouts), but let's not discount the good that has come from it.

I will not agree with a majority of his policies, but I will respect the office. I will not be like the far left who crucified George W. Bush from day one. That is not to say that I won't stand up against policies that I disagree with. But my criticism will be policy based, not personal.

Thomas Jefferson said "That government is best which governs the least". It has also been said that "a government that is big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything that you have".

Does he really have nothing better to do?

It appears that all of our nation's problems have been solved. How do I know that? Well, Our soon to be fearless leader Emperor Obama has spoken out against the BCS again.

Don't get me wrong, I am in favor of a college football playoff of some sort. Or at least a 'Plus one' system where they play one more game to decide the championship. This year would feature either USC or Utah vs Florida.

Now, I am not discounting Obama's right to have an opinion about the BCS, nor his right to speak out about it. But he should be doing so as a fan, not as the Supreme Leader of the Galaxy. How the college football conferences operate is between them and their schools. If they choose to run the system in a way that generates more revenue than a clear cut champion, that is their decision. They are free to operate how they see fit.

Our government needs to occupy itself with more pressing matters than sports. We don't need to see Rafael Palmeiro insisting that he has never taken a banned substance in front of a congressional panel, only to test positive a few weeks later.

We also don't need to see Congressman Cliff Stearns (R, FL) asking Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) to reschedule votes scheduled for last night and this morning so that he could attend the game. The request was denied (one wonders if USC had been in the championship game, would her response have been different?) But should there be votes scheduled for a Thursday night? He could have done what Obama did, and just not be there for the votes.

What about Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff threatening to sue the BCS. He contends that the BCS unfairly favors schools from the larger conferences (i.e. the Pac 10, SEC, Big East, etc..) over schools from lesser conferences (like the Mountain West, home of the University of Utah Utes).

There is no shortage of talking heads on ESPN, Fox Sports, etc... who will debate on the air of different ways to decide the champion for the future, or who is the true champion this year. Let's leave the debate to them, leave the politicians out of it.

Memo to USC, U of U and UT: The Florida Gators are the National Champions of college football for the 2008 season. Until there is a different system, the BCS will decide it. (Oh and by the way, all of the conferences in the division of college football that play in the bowls agreed to the current system.)

On the other hand, if His Eminence and his colleagues occupy their time debating the details of a new college football playoff system, they will be to busy to drag us into full blow Marxist socialism.

Where do I sign up for one of these?

A settlement was reached between an airline passenger and Jet Blue airlines and agents of the NTSB. The settlement results in a payment of nearly a quarter million dollars.

How was this man wronged? He was asked to change his t-shirt at the airport. Call the ACLU! Well, someone did.

It turns out that Raed Jarrar was wearing a t-shirt that had, written in Arabic, "We will not be silent". When other customers voiced concern, he was asked by officials to change his shirt, and even provided a shirt to wear over his potentially offensive shirt.

I think that there are wrongs on many levels in this matter.

First of all, what have we learned about Islamic Extremist terrorists? They are trying to blend in. Many of them break the rules of Islam to blend in by shaving, cutting hair, even eating pork and drinking alcohol. Do you really think that if he was going to blow up the plane, that he would draw attention to himself before he gets on the plane? I doubt it.

The ACLU argues that it would be the same as someone "wearing a t-shirt at a bank stating, I am a robber". I beg to differ. Something written in Arabic at an airport is less of a threat than a robbery note written on a t-shirt at a bank.

Was it the best wardrobe decision that Jarrar could have made that day? Probably not. Maybe he was tired of the stereotyping that has been going on since 9/11. Is it fair that all Muslims and all Arabs are guilty until proven innocent in the court of public opinion at airports? Absolutely not. But given the current social climate, some people need to understand how things are. That's not to say that they should hide behind their heritage or beliefs, but they should choose their battles. While in the Lima, Peru airport in November, I saw a guy wearing a t-shirt that could have been considered more offensive than the one that Jerrar wore, it stated "100% Terrorist" and had a picture of an AK-47.

On the other hand, is a $240,000 payout justified? No. He wasn't refused the flight, he was given a t-shirt to cover the one he was wearing. I think that if anything, it could have been settled with a comped flight. But getting what equates to 5 years salary for many Americans for being asked to change his shirt? That is going too far. I think that the family that was denied service on an Airtran flight has more of a beef than Jarrer.

Have we really come this far?

It's a good thing the smart people all get jobs with the government.

Otherwise, how would we all still be alive?

It seems that if we didn't have the government to tell us what we can and can't do, and what is and isn't safe, we would be doomed to do something destined to kill us.

This latest example comes to us from the UK, but it is only a matter of time before a municipality in the States (Or in the colonies as they say in the UK).

It seems that the government there isn't convinced that the people who run children's paddling (wadding) pools are smart enough to run their own businesses.

A new regulation requires all pools 18 inches deep be patrolled by trained life guards. Traditionally, the staff is trained in life saving skills, but aren't licensed lifeguards. Those who don't meet the requirement, face the risk of being shut down.

I guess that they should be glad that this new regulation exists.

Sure, it's going to raise operating costs, since licensed lifeguards would need to be paid more than regular staff who merely has life saving training.

But look at it from another perspective.. since it is going to lower the risk of someone actually drowning in the glorified puddles. It prevents a potential wrongful death suit. I'm not sure if the Britts are as litigious as we are, but I imagine it's close.

Before you say “that will never happen here”, remember, our leaders think that we aren't smart enough to decide whether or not its safe to talk on the phone when we drive, or that we need to be protected from those evil restaurateurs who serve that poison 'trans-fat', or that it is wrong to sell wine gift bags at liquor stores, or that a bar or restaurant owner cannot allow patrons to use a legal product in their establishment.

Whatever happened to personal accountability? They are legislating social Darwinism out of society. It used to be that stupid people did stupid things, and didn't last long enough to reproduce. But I guess it comes down to the fact that politicians need stupid people to keep them in office.

What's next? What personal liberty is on death row? Talk radio seems to be on life support, thanks to the impending rebirth of the 'Fairness Doctrine'.

It's that time of year again.

If it's New Years Day, then it can mean just one thing.. We are smack dab in the middle of college football bowl season. At least the ones that matter.

Let's face it, if you play in a bowl game before Christmas, it is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

Remember when going to a bowl meant you had a good season? Well, that's not the case any more. Not in the days of the Meineke Car Care Bowl, the Chick-Fil-A Bowl, the Insight.com Bowl, the GMAC Bowl, the PapaJohns.com Bowl, and the Eaglebank Bowl. Don't get me wrong.. I have nothing against a corporate sponsor for the bowls, (I'm looking for sponsors for my charity golf tournament), but when they don't even bother to name the bowls anymore, that's a sure sign that there are too many of them. They even had to go to Canada to find a site to play.

And getting back to the whole idea of earning a spot in a bowl being a sign of a good season, when you have teams like Notre Dame, who needed a win over Hawaii in the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl to finish above .500, it raises the question, what's the difference between the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame and Corn Flakes? Give up? Corn Flakes belong in a bowl! Let's be serious, winning 1/2 of your games is no accomplishment, and is not deserving of a reward, (unless you are the San Diego Chargers, and win the pathetic AFC West with a stellar 8-8 record).

Let's do some math. There are 119 teams in the NCAA D-I Bowl Subdivision. There are 34 Bowl games being contested in association with the 2008 season.

Assuming there are 2 teams in each bowl, (follow me here..) that means that 68 teams are playing in a bowl game this year. 68 is just under 60% of 119.

That means that 6 of 10 college football teams are ending their season at a bowl game. If more people do something than don't, it makes it less unique. If 6 of your 10 cars on the street was a Bentley, all of the sudden, a Bentley is just another car.

If the NFL decided its champion like the NCAA does, than last year's Superbowl would have been the Patriots against the Cowboys, and the Giants would have had to settle with the equivalent of the Cotton Bowl.

This is probably the only time I am going to say this, but Obama is right. There needs to be a play-off system for college football. D-I football is the only college sport that doesn't have an NCAA sanctioned national champion. In fact, the bowl games aren't even NCAA events.

People who work for colleges are supposed to be smart people.. That's why they work at colleges, right? (the old 'those who can, do, those who can't, teach' adage, can't be true, can it?) Let's let them get together and hash something out.

I guess it's just more fair if everyone wins. We wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of the team that lost half of their games, would we?


Oh yea, Happy New Year!

The latest sign of the Apocalypse

Just when you thought you'd heard it all, a government official goes and does something that makes you just shake your head and wonder..

Dateline Spokane Valley, WA. The Pacific Northwest community has gotten record snow fall this year, and the municipal snow removal crews are having difficulty keeping up with the shear mass of snow.

They are initially focusing on the main thoroughfares and highways. That's all well and good, but people don't live on the main thoroughfares and highways, they live in residential areas.

That's where Troy Garcia comes into play. Troy is a real American. He saw a problem, and a way to fix it. That is until the government stepped in to put a stop to anything that doesn't cost tax dollars, or employ minorities.

You see, Tony saw his 4 wheeler that happened to be fitted with a plow and set to work plowing his driveway, his neighbors' driveways and the streets that had yet to be plowed by the city.

One neighbor, who happens to be a county roads supervisor (how much do you want to bet that he is union?) called the police.

Garcia was cited for several 'crimes' for disorderly conduct.

What happens if one of there was a fire and the FD couldn't get there in time because the streets weren't plowed? What about an elderly resident who may not have been able to get out to go to the pharmacy? The list of 'what ifs' limitless.

We can't allow this sort of anarchy! We can't be left to our own devices, that's what the government is for! Everyone's favorite words to hear "We're from the government, and we're here to help".

Maybe we are further down the road to complete socialism than I had feared. It has spread out of the Peoples Republic of New York and the Peoples Republic of California.

It's that time of year again.

If it's New Years Day, then it can mean just one thing.. We are smack dab in the middle of college football bowl season. At least the ones that matter.

Let's face it; if you play in a bowl game before Christmas, it is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

Remember when going to a bowl meant you had a good season? Well, that's not the case any more. Not in the days of the Meineke Car Care Bowl, the Chick-Fil-A Bowl, the Insight.com Bowl, the GMAC Bowl, the PapaJohns.com Bowl, and the Eaglebank Bowl. Don't get me wrong.. I have nothing against a corporate sponsor for the bowls, (I'm looking for sponsors for my charity golf tournament), but when they don't even bother to name the bowls anymore, that's a sure sign that there are too many of them. They even had to go to Canada to find a site to play.

And getting back to the whole idea of earning a spot in a bowl being a sign of a good season, when you have teams like Notre Dame, who needed a win over Hawaii in the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl to finish above .500, it raises the question, what's the difference between the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame and Corn Flakes? Give up? Corn Flakes belong in a bowl! Let's be serious, winning 1/2 of your games is no accomplishment, and is not deserving of a reward, (unless you are the San Diego Chargers, and win the pathetic AFC West with a stellar 8-8 record).

Let's do some math. There are 119 teams in the NCAA D-I Bowl Subdivision. There are 34 Bowl games being contested in association with the 2008 season.

Assuming there are 2 teams in each bowl, (stay with me..) that means that 68 teams are playing in a bowl game this year. For those of you bad at math, 68 is just under 60% of 119.

That means that 6 of 10 college football teams are ending their season at a bowl game. If more people do something than don't, it makes it less unique. If 6 of 10 cars on the street was a Bentley, all of the sudden, a Bentley is just another car.

If the NFL decided its champion like the NCAA does, than last year's Superbowl would have been the Patriots against the Cowboys, and the Giants would have had to settle with the equivalent of the Cotton Bowl.

This is probably the only time I am going to say this, but Obama is right. There needs to be a play-off system for college football. D-I football is the only college sport that doesn't have an NCAA sanctioned national champion. In fact, the bowl games aren't even NCAA events.

People who work for colleges are supposed to be smart people.. That's why they work at colleges, right? (the old 'those who can, do, those who can't, teach' adage, can't be true, can it?) Let's let them get together and hash something out.

I guess it's just more fair if everyone wins. We wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of the team that lost half of their games, would we?


Oh yea, Happy New Year!

Good Riddance!

We all have things that we are glad to see gone. Some things we hold on to that we need to let go.

Some of the things that one person will hold on to, another says good riddance.

Recently, a group in New York City organized 'Good Riddance Day'. Organizers encouraged people to bring things to put into a giant shredder and say 'good riddance' to. One woman brought a printed email from her ex-boyfriend breaking up with her. Others brought things representing stocks, or papers that read 'cancer'. A creative Yankee fan brought a Boston Red Sox poster (despite the fact that the Rays won the division, the Sox were the wild card winners this year). Top prize went to a man who brought a sock to represent all the widowed socks that lost their mates in the wash.

A clever idea.

What sorts of things are you saying good riddance to? What is easy to dismiss? What are we holding on to, that we really should let go?

Where does it stop?

We've all heard the phrase 'slippery slope'. Basically, it means that once we get started down a path, it gets harder to change course.

It started with the Thruway. We were told that the tolls would only be there long enough to pay off the cost of building the expressway. Then, the toll road will be solely funded by the tolls collected. Now, despite toll hikes, it draws operating funds from the state budget.

The next brilliant move by the the smart people in Albany are proposing an 'obesity tax'. This proposed tax would be a 15% tax on non-diet sodas. 'Big Nutra Sweet' got it's way. They are taxing sugar sodas. It is proposed under the guise that sugar is bad for us. This is the same group that told us that saccharin is bad for us.. and then changed their mind.

What happened to letting people make their own decisions and live with the consequences of said decisions? You know the way that they do it in a free country like the United States? Not the way that the government knows whats best, the way that it is in the Peoples Republic of New York.

OK, now that they have opened the door for regular soda to be taxed, what's next? Tax Honey Nut Cheerios, but not regular Cheerios? Frosted Flakes, but not Corn Flakes? This doesn't take into account that when most people pour sugar on Cheerios and Corn Flakes before they pour the milk. What about taxing whole milk, but skim gets a pass..

My brother made this analogy when it comes to the state budget deficit. "It's like there is a big hole in the ground, and instead of filling the hole, they dig out around it, so we are all on the same level as the bottom of the hole." It is what the Democrats' plan usually involves. Let's not bring up the bottom, let's lower the top. That isn't the way to make a society successful.


** Editors note **

The proposed tax is 18% not 15% as noted.

Does it really work?

Remember a couple of years ago, in a move for solidarity, Hispanic community leaders called for a call in day. They asked for all Latinos, regardless of legal status or citizenship to call in from work on the same day.

The goal was to show how many Latinos there are, and how big of an impact they have on the economy.

The place that I was working at the time (a call center) employed a large group of people from Puerto Rico, Mexico and other Latin countries. As best as I could tell, they all disregarded the irresponsible call to skip work. Many of them were in a Spanish language queue, and primarily spoke with other Latinos. They took calls from upset callers because they went to work on the 'Lets not go to work today' day.

Well, it seems that today is another sort of "We'll show them how many of us there are" days. Today is 'Call in Gay' day. It seems that the leaders of Gay and lesbian community have called for a form of protest.

What do they expect will come of such an action (or inaction)? I think that it will cause more damage than good to their cause. There are far fewer gays than they would like us to think there are. According to a report, between 4 and 5% of Americans admit to being gay. In another report, the number is 1.3%.

Even if everyone who chooses that lifestyle called into work today, how many people would be missing from the workforce today? 5 out of 100? Is that going to cause a wave? Sure, in some cases it may cause an inconvenience to employers and customers, but in most places, it would be less than a ripple. Although, I imagine it would be tough to get your hair styled in San Francisco today.

I don't think that it will cause any broad changes in public perception, but I think the more likely change in attitude will be that there are less of them than the noise they make, and that less accommodations will be made for them. Even in California, when it was put to a public vote, more than 52% of voters supported the proposition to formally define marriage as a union of a man and a women. This is the 2nd time that it was put to a public vote in California, with the same end result.

How far is too far?

I know that a lot of people around the world and in the US are excited with the prospect of a black president.

There are baby Barack Obamas all over country and in Kenya.

But a news story that I came across today is going too far, at least this soon.

It seems that a county in Alabama has already declared the second Monday in November to be "The Barack Obama Day".

Perry County Al is this county. In the article that I read (it was an AP story that can be read here), it says the majority of the 12,000 county residents are black, but it doesn't say how big of a majority it is.

On this day, all county offices would be closed, and the employees would get the day off with pay.

Time will tell the impact that he will have on this country. There are those who say he is going to be remembered as one of the greatest president in the history of this nation. Honestly, I have no idea what they are basing it on, since he has no real experience beyond the 6 months he spent in the Senate before he started his campaign. I hope that he does a better job than what I think he will. My prediction is that he will be less remembered as the next George Washington and more as the next Jimmy Carter. As a matter of hope, just remember, it took a Carter to bring us a Regan.

But none of us can predict the future, he may end up being one of the best presidents this country has seen, but let's give him a chance to prove it before we coronate him. It took over 100 years for George Washington to be honored in such a way.

My Peru Trip

I know it's satire, but it hits pretty close to the mark..

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

The law needs to change.

The law I am speaking about is 'insider trading'.

This week, it came out that the SEC has filed a civil suit against Dallas Maverick owner Mark Cuban for allegedly using inside information to sell stock that prevented a $750,000+ loss.

What was he supposed to do? Just sit on it and take the hit? I thought that was what capitalism was all about.. using what you know to make decisions to generate revenue. 

Now.. I'm no stock market genius.. but it seems to me that it would have been pretty irresponsible of him to not make a move to head off a loss of more than 3/4 of a million dollars. I understand to someone worth over 10 figures, you can probably find $750,000 between the cushions of his couch.. but that isn't the point.

Presumably, someone who is in a position to lose that much money has employees. What would have happened if he had not made the sale, and he did in fact lose the money, how many people would have lost their job?

I am not a fan of Martha Stewart, but the same thing happened to her, and she went to jail for it. Ironically, if she had not made that transaction, and just sat on the stock, she would have made more money in the long run.. but that's a story for a different time.

We are one of the only industrialized nation that has such restrictions on trading. With such restrictions in place, the stock market is little different from sports gambling.

Sometimes, they are just right.

While I was waiting for a flight at JFK, I picked up a copy of Newsday, a newspaper from NYC.

In it, there was an article about a talk given by former Democrat Presidential nominee, Michael Dukakis at Hofstra University. It can be read here.

In it, he calls for an overhaul of the election and primary process.

I have to agree. I think that the process used to select the nominee is flawed. Why is it, that when we vote for the office, we all vote on the same day, but when we vote for the person that we will vote for, the process is spread over several months?

Doesn't it make more sense that we all vote on the same day? Shouldn't the primary be all on the same day as well?

By spreading it out as long as the current process does, causes some states to not be able to vote for candidates. I was not able to vote for the candidate I would have liked to, because he didn't do well in states that held their primary before the People's Republic of NY held theirs, and the candidate had already dropped out of the race.

Dukakis suggests a consolidation of the process to 6 regional votes. The votes would be held 2 per month in February, March and April. He suggested that the votes would rotate each presidential election cycle. The article didn't go into more details than this, so I'm not sure of the finer details.

As far as the regular election process, I think that it might be time to consider an update to the Electoral College process. I know that the Founding Fathers put in the Electoral College for a reason, that the people then weren't as educated on the candidates as the delegates are, and that they would not be able to make accurate decisions. This may not be far off from the process today, but the reason for the lack of education is different now, than back then. Technology is a key in this. People can be educated, many choose not to.

We need not completely abandon the Electoral College, but I think it should evolve. As it stands now, each state gets as many electoral votes as members of federal representatives (2 Senators and as many Congress as the population calls for), so each state gets at least 3 votes. Every vote a state gets, goes to the party of the majority of the voters.

Here is my suggestion: break down the delegate votes should be divided by Congressional District rather than states. If a Congressional District votes different than the entire state, the votes of that district don't really count. Especially if there are districts that have much larger populations. For example, in NY, in a state of around 20 million population (enough to earn 31 electoral college votes), nearly 1/2 (around 8.2 million) of the population live in New York City. If you count the population center, the number goes up. The NYC market is nearly 19 million by itself (if you count those living in NY, NJ and PA), and over 12.3 million in just the state of New York. More than half of the population of the state is in one market. Nearly 2/3rds (18 of 29) of Congressional districts are 'Downstate'.

Instead of it being an 'all or nothing' process for the electoral college votes, how about giving each congressional district 1 vote, and let the remaining 2 votes for each state, go to the states overall winner.

This way would give us a more representative view of the views of population of the Country.

This is one of around 700 pictures I have taken on my trip to Peru. When I am back in the States, I´ll upload more. They will probably be at shutterfly.com, I´ll post a link here when they are up.

Well, I'm off..

I'm just finishing up packing for my trip to Peru. I'll be leaving for the airport in about an hour. I will have limited to no access to email or the internet while I am gone.

I will be taking tons of pictures, and will post a link to an online gallery when I return.

It will be interesting to see the election coverage (if any) in another country. (I've already mailed my absentee ballot)

Where do you draw the line?

The line I'm referring to is the line between news and advertising.

I understand that it's the responsibility of the news media to report on important events, but where do you draw the line between broadcasting news, and free advertisement?

I'm specifically referring to a paid advertisement that will be on national television tonight. I won't go into more detail, because I'm not in the business of giving free plugs to people who I disagree with.

It's been all over the news all day that there will be this paid infomercial on TV tonight, less than 1 week from election day.

There was even an article on ESPN.com last week about it, since it would be preempting the World Series (assuming a game 6 would be needed, or in case weather permitting, they finish the last 3 innings of game 5). The article talked about how Major League Baseball agreed to postpone the first pitch to accommodate the advertisement. They also said they would be willing to do the same thing, should John McCain decide to do the same thing.

I think that every time a news room reports on this show, they should bill the Obama campaign for ad time. It's not their responsibility to drive viewers, it is the Obama campaigns job to let people to know about it.. and radio commercials aren't free.