Hello. Thanks for taking a look at this blog.
You've seen some of my personal and political views. You've experienced some of my trials and tribulations.
Now I'm going to put in a plug for what I do professionally.
www.msreeddesign.com
I'm a graphic designer, based currently in Houston, with over 15 years of experience in graphic design and production. I have the basic skills and basic know-how to create a basic, decent, good-looking logo that will address your basic needs.
But you deserve more than just a basic logo.
A logo is only part of your overall brand. A logo is NOT the brand itself. That's what most people don't understand.
A brand is a promise. A promise to your customers. And a promise to yourself as an organization. Your brand is who you are and what you stand for. Your brand sets the tone and sets expectations. Your brand helps your customers know right away why your customers should know or even care about you.
Your brand idea establishes 1) who your customers even are, 2) who your competition is, and 3) based on that, your basic strategy for success in the marketplace.
If you don't know your brand, you cannot have a good logo, no matter how talented a designer you get to create it.
Creating this brand, and the logo that's a part of it, takes time. This is NOT, I repeat, NOT something that can be done in a matter of hours. Nor should it. The success of your business is way too important to skimp on the time it takes to craft your brand message and logo.
Creating this brand also takes resources, and it takes an investment. With us, you're getting experience and knowledge at or pretty darn near the same level as the big national/global advertising and design agencies - for a fraction of the cost. And while that may seem expensive to you compared to a lot of other guys who can do it "faster" and/or "cheaper", it's both a relative bargain and an investment in building something that will last, and something that will return huge dividends down the road.
That something is your brand.
Don't skimp on your business. Don't skimp on your success. Don't skimp on your brand.
Chew on that as you consider my blog posts.
Thanks as always for your time.
www.msreeddesign.com
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Monday, January 30, 2012
Some ideas on how to fix downtown Houston
In response to an article in the Chronicle this morning, I decided to comment on how downtown needs to be improved.
I have only been in Houston about two years, but have lived in other cities around the country where downtown areas were in varied states. Houston needs to seriously learn what other cities are doing.
1. More apartment buildings like Houston House. High-rises with at or below market rate rent.
2. Semi-upscale residence hotels, as you see in New York and San Francisco.
2a. Why did you people tear down the YMCA with its weekly residence apartments???????? Stupid move.
3. Put a Target store, a flagship store like in downtown Minneapolis (that has a pharmacy and sells groceries) at the corner of Main and Polk and connect it to the tunnel. "But people can go to the Heights," you might say. I thought the point was convenience, so people can WALK to shopping destinations from their apartment. I thought the point was FOOT TRAFFIC to support all the retail people want to see.
4. Build a homeless services campus some distance away from downtown, but close enough to take the bus to needed services. Look up what they did in Phoenix. Look up what they did in Austin. National models.
4a. Attitudes about the homeless are way too hostile and negative in Houston, more so than in some other cities, and contribute greatly to the problem. Grow a pair and get some compassion. Many of you are one or two paychecks away from being on the street yourself.
5. METRO needs to operate the daytime park-and-ride buses during the midday and evening hours, not just rush hour (and especially for events at GRB and the Astros). Maybe someone wants to just quickly ride the bus to Macys and back but can't.
If you're just going to rely on people driving in from Katy or Cypress or Sugar Land to shop for some souvenirs, eat a slice of pizza, and get back on the freeway when they're done, you are asking to fight a losing battle.
I have only been in Houston about two years, but have lived in other cities around the country where downtown areas were in varied states. Houston needs to seriously learn what other cities are doing.
1. More apartment buildings like Houston House. High-rises with at or below market rate rent.
2. Semi-upscale residence hotels, as you see in New York and San Francisco.
2a. Why did you people tear down the YMCA with its weekly residence apartments???????? Stupid move.
3. Put a Target store, a flagship store like in downtown Minneapolis (that has a pharmacy and sells groceries) at the corner of Main and Polk and connect it to the tunnel. "But people can go to the Heights," you might say. I thought the point was convenience, so people can WALK to shopping destinations from their apartment. I thought the point was FOOT TRAFFIC to support all the retail people want to see.
4. Build a homeless services campus some distance away from downtown, but close enough to take the bus to needed services. Look up what they did in Phoenix. Look up what they did in Austin. National models.
4a. Attitudes about the homeless are way too hostile and negative in Houston, more so than in some other cities, and contribute greatly to the problem. Grow a pair and get some compassion. Many of you are one or two paychecks away from being on the street yourself.
5. METRO needs to operate the daytime park-and-ride buses during the midday and evening hours, not just rush hour (and especially for events at GRB and the Astros). Maybe someone wants to just quickly ride the bus to Macys and back but can't.
If you're just going to rely on people driving in from Katy or Cypress or Sugar Land to shop for some souvenirs, eat a slice of pizza, and get back on the freeway when they're done, you are asking to fight a losing battle.
Friday, January 27, 2012
How Swedes and Norwegians Broke the Power of the ‘1 Percent’ | Common Dreams
This is a must read, and makes me think there is truly hope for America.
This is a must read, and makes me think there is truly hope for America.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
The best of Michael: Being a liberal, and why
(The following was posted in May of 2008 on the Arizona Republic comments section. I was living in Phoenix at the time. Much of this, sadly, is still highly relevant four years later. Just separate "Texas" for Arizona - it's an apples-to-apple comparison. This is a good introduction to my basic views.)
Arizona has a reputation for being a conservative state. I am a liberal. Liberal seems to be a dirty word in this state, and in this nation, and it should not be so.
By way of introduction to my political views, which in part shape almost every other decision I make in life, I want to spend some time discussing the difference, in my opinion and my research and education, between liberal and conservative and use that to explain why I am a liberal. Much of this is restating what I have said on other comment forums.
I will start by quoting a quick blogger's comparison as found on Alternet.org:
"If you are conservative, you believe that the status quo is immutable...Conservatives look at the problems of today (read, other people's problems) and simply shrug their shoulders and say, there's nothing we can do to change that - or worse yet, that's the way it was meant to be.
If you are liberal, you believe the status quo is a starting point, a less than desirable situation that can be built on and improved..."
To expand on that simple comparison, let me continue:
The difference between liberal and conservative, to me, is that conservatives like to control and restrict things, as if people are sinful and don't deserve any of the benefits of life unless they toil for them, and that one need to fend for himself in life, Survival of the fittest (and a state which to them is immutable as our blogger said). Conservatives believe that certain elite people are the only ones worthy of the benefits of life (without such toil) because they are entitled to them, and any and all others worthy only of toil, labor and suffering (to help the elites get more benefits), and if you complain we will make things really bad for you. This is a preservation, a "conserving" of the status quo.
Conservatives believe that we are the masters of the planet; we have the divine right to use up all our resources as we see fit, because that's what the Bible says to do. And to Christians, what the Bible says is always more or less immutable.
Conservatives believe that man is by nature inherently, immutably evil and will rob, rape, pillage, steal from and kill you if you give him a chance, therefore you close yourself off- and better have that rifle handy (why do you think conservatives are so much against gun control, when as many - if not more - gun deaths happen in homes where guns are kept, as are a result of shootings by criminals?).
Conservatives believe that their tribe, their nation, their God is better than yours They are willing to fight and die for their tribe, their nation, their God, and will take you "different" people down with me if you dare have something to say about it. Even if we destroy the entire planet we share with one another in the process.
To me that whole mindset is mean spirited, counterproductive, sick, sad, and wrong. It frankly borders on psychopathic behavior.
As a contrast, the liberal mindset means that people (no matter how "different" you are) are considered worthy to be treated like human beings because that's precisely what we ALL are. To be a liberal means you are a person who has (and recognizes) the potential for greatness no matter who or what race, gender, whatever, you are, and whatever can be done to assist you in getting to that greatness, the community (a bunch of individuals who realize it's better to share rather than to hoard) will help do so (and not shirk the responsibility by saying "I'm not going to pay my hard earned money to help out lazy bums, welfare babies, druggies and illegals".)
Let me restate: Liberals believe that people (no matter how "different" you are) are considered worthy to be treated like human beings because that's precisely what we ALL are. Whether or not we are a "bum" or a "welfare queen" or a drug addict. Liberals have compassion for those less fortunate, and feel that more can be done to help people aside from shoving the burden on faith-based charities. Charities arose because government would not or could not do the job of taking care of ALL people. To me, why even have government at all if it is not there to enhance the quality of life for all citizens?
To be a liberal means not just settling for the status quo, but looking for the best and most fair way to improve, enrich and enhance that status quo situation for the greater benefit of everyone.
"Liberal" means we accept the fact we are individuals that have to share our resources, our town, our city, our planet with one another (even the druggies and the welfare mommas) in order for each to have the best possible individual life (again, seeking to improve upon that status quo situation), and we act accordingly.
Liberal means we try to be good stewards of the planet we have been charged to take care of. Liberal means that it's better to swallow our pride and give a guy a leg up every once in a while rather than the conservative way, which is to be cold and stubborn and let that same guy sink or swim, and if he sinks, chalk it up to "he was unqualified".
Conservatives = no compassion for the less fortunate, even those who work (and toil, labor and suffer) - no acknowledgement that we live in a global society and need to share the world with other nations, NOT occupy them with our troops - do not accept that we are a community of individuals with responsibility BEYOND ourselves, and sure the heck won't pay for it.
Liberals = we know it takes cooperation, conversation, diplomacy, and good usage of tax dollars to make EVERYONE's life as good as possible.
That means instead of government being the problem, government is the solution because WE choose it, WE elect who runs it and WE pay for it. Government is our tool to enhance, improve upon, and expand the status quo.
That means YES, some NEW taxes. That means don't cut the social safety net or even imply none is needed.
That means health care is a right, not some consumer product that you either can or cannot afford.
That means all citizens regardless of what neighborhood they live in, or what race they are, have access to top-quality education (collectively paid for through taxation) and top-quality jobs - so we can afford to pay those taxes needed to fund schools, roads, healthcare.
That means we figure another way to move our vehicles other than petroleum.
That means we have a Department of Defense, not the Department of Preemptive Strikes and Military Occupations.
That means the corporation and the military-industrial complex DO NOT OWN US. Corporations have a responsibility to be good citizens at all times. No price gouging, no environmentally unsustainable policies, no treating employees like dirt, no moving business overseas because it's cheaper and still reaping millions in profits, no escaping the duty to pay taxes.
And most of all, "liberal" means "We The People" means just that.
Again, we are a nation of individuals who like it or not, are together as a community, regardless of race, gender, economic status, or any other "divisive" factor. As a community, we need to STOP just accepting a status quo that frankly is leaving a lot of people high and dry. We need to stop saying "every man for himself, no new taxes, why should I be forced to pay for other irresponsible idiots" and figure out how to fairly share our community resources and community wealth to pay for what we as the community want and need in order for the community to be the most productive. That would mean some things are NOT left to the devious and shady whims of the free market.
Have we really learned from history? Have we learned that it's better to treat one another as people rather than units of labor to be outsourced when the cost is too high and the profit margin gets too low???? And it's not just poor people of color, be they Black or "Mexican".
The health insurer CIGNA throwing its Arizona customers under the bus because it wants to maximize profits over people.
Companies laying off workers like snakes shed their skin, and more easily.
Oil companies reaping the benefits of mass hysteria and speculation, much of it the result of conservative foreign policy of the kind Senator John McCain supports and promotes - it seems like everytime a roadside bomb goes off in Fallujah the price of gasoline goes up 10 cents. The cost of regular unleaded gasoline in the largest cities, like Los Angeles, San Francisco and NYC pretty much at $4/gal now.
And being in Iraq "maybe 100 years" is only going to drive up the price of fuel for you and me. I don't think ExxonMobil has a problem with that. I don't think ChevronTexaco has a problem with that. They got their money.
Unlike a lot of you and a lot of Arizonans, I prefer the liberal way of doing things, thank you very much.
Arizona has a reputation for being a conservative state. I am a liberal. Liberal seems to be a dirty word in this state, and in this nation, and it should not be so.
By way of introduction to my political views, which in part shape almost every other decision I make in life, I want to spend some time discussing the difference, in my opinion and my research and education, between liberal and conservative and use that to explain why I am a liberal. Much of this is restating what I have said on other comment forums.
I will start by quoting a quick blogger's comparison as found on Alternet.org:
"If you are conservative, you believe that the status quo is immutable...Conservatives look at the problems of today (read, other people's problems) and simply shrug their shoulders and say, there's nothing we can do to change that - or worse yet, that's the way it was meant to be.
If you are liberal, you believe the status quo is a starting point, a less than desirable situation that can be built on and improved..."
To expand on that simple comparison, let me continue:
The difference between liberal and conservative, to me, is that conservatives like to control and restrict things, as if people are sinful and don't deserve any of the benefits of life unless they toil for them, and that one need to fend for himself in life, Survival of the fittest (and a state which to them is immutable as our blogger said). Conservatives believe that certain elite people are the only ones worthy of the benefits of life (without such toil) because they are entitled to them, and any and all others worthy only of toil, labor and suffering (to help the elites get more benefits), and if you complain we will make things really bad for you. This is a preservation, a "conserving" of the status quo.
Conservatives believe that we are the masters of the planet; we have the divine right to use up all our resources as we see fit, because that's what the Bible says to do. And to Christians, what the Bible says is always more or less immutable.
Conservatives believe that man is by nature inherently, immutably evil and will rob, rape, pillage, steal from and kill you if you give him a chance, therefore you close yourself off- and better have that rifle handy (why do you think conservatives are so much against gun control, when as many - if not more - gun deaths happen in homes where guns are kept, as are a result of shootings by criminals?).
Conservatives believe that their tribe, their nation, their God is better than yours They are willing to fight and die for their tribe, their nation, their God, and will take you "different" people down with me if you dare have something to say about it. Even if we destroy the entire planet we share with one another in the process.
To me that whole mindset is mean spirited, counterproductive, sick, sad, and wrong. It frankly borders on psychopathic behavior.
As a contrast, the liberal mindset means that people (no matter how "different" you are) are considered worthy to be treated like human beings because that's precisely what we ALL are. To be a liberal means you are a person who has (and recognizes) the potential for greatness no matter who or what race, gender, whatever, you are, and whatever can be done to assist you in getting to that greatness, the community (a bunch of individuals who realize it's better to share rather than to hoard) will help do so (and not shirk the responsibility by saying "I'm not going to pay my hard earned money to help out lazy bums, welfare babies, druggies and illegals".)
Let me restate: Liberals believe that people (no matter how "different" you are) are considered worthy to be treated like human beings because that's precisely what we ALL are. Whether or not we are a "bum" or a "welfare queen" or a drug addict. Liberals have compassion for those less fortunate, and feel that more can be done to help people aside from shoving the burden on faith-based charities. Charities arose because government would not or could not do the job of taking care of ALL people. To me, why even have government at all if it is not there to enhance the quality of life for all citizens?
To be a liberal means not just settling for the status quo, but looking for the best and most fair way to improve, enrich and enhance that status quo situation for the greater benefit of everyone.
"Liberal" means we accept the fact we are individuals that have to share our resources, our town, our city, our planet with one another (even the druggies and the welfare mommas) in order for each to have the best possible individual life (again, seeking to improve upon that status quo situation), and we act accordingly.
Liberal means we try to be good stewards of the planet we have been charged to take care of. Liberal means that it's better to swallow our pride and give a guy a leg up every once in a while rather than the conservative way, which is to be cold and stubborn and let that same guy sink or swim, and if he sinks, chalk it up to "he was unqualified".
Conservatives = no compassion for the less fortunate, even those who work (and toil, labor and suffer) - no acknowledgement that we live in a global society and need to share the world with other nations, NOT occupy them with our troops - do not accept that we are a community of individuals with responsibility BEYOND ourselves, and sure the heck won't pay for it.
Liberals = we know it takes cooperation, conversation, diplomacy, and good usage of tax dollars to make EVERYONE's life as good as possible.
That means instead of government being the problem, government is the solution because WE choose it, WE elect who runs it and WE pay for it. Government is our tool to enhance, improve upon, and expand the status quo.
That means YES, some NEW taxes. That means don't cut the social safety net or even imply none is needed.
That means health care is a right, not some consumer product that you either can or cannot afford.
That means all citizens regardless of what neighborhood they live in, or what race they are, have access to top-quality education (collectively paid for through taxation) and top-quality jobs - so we can afford to pay those taxes needed to fund schools, roads, healthcare.
That means we figure another way to move our vehicles other than petroleum.
That means we have a Department of Defense, not the Department of Preemptive Strikes and Military Occupations.
That means the corporation and the military-industrial complex DO NOT OWN US. Corporations have a responsibility to be good citizens at all times. No price gouging, no environmentally unsustainable policies, no treating employees like dirt, no moving business overseas because it's cheaper and still reaping millions in profits, no escaping the duty to pay taxes.
And most of all, "liberal" means "We The People" means just that.
Again, we are a nation of individuals who like it or not, are together as a community, regardless of race, gender, economic status, or any other "divisive" factor. As a community, we need to STOP just accepting a status quo that frankly is leaving a lot of people high and dry. We need to stop saying "every man for himself, no new taxes, why should I be forced to pay for other irresponsible idiots" and figure out how to fairly share our community resources and community wealth to pay for what we as the community want and need in order for the community to be the most productive. That would mean some things are NOT left to the devious and shady whims of the free market.
Have we really learned from history? Have we learned that it's better to treat one another as people rather than units of labor to be outsourced when the cost is too high and the profit margin gets too low???? And it's not just poor people of color, be they Black or "Mexican".
The health insurer CIGNA throwing its Arizona customers under the bus because it wants to maximize profits over people.
Companies laying off workers like snakes shed their skin, and more easily.
Oil companies reaping the benefits of mass hysteria and speculation, much of it the result of conservative foreign policy of the kind Senator John McCain supports and promotes - it seems like everytime a roadside bomb goes off in Fallujah the price of gasoline goes up 10 cents. The cost of regular unleaded gasoline in the largest cities, like Los Angeles, San Francisco and NYC pretty much at $4/gal now.
And being in Iraq "maybe 100 years" is only going to drive up the price of fuel for you and me. I don't think ExxonMobil has a problem with that. I don't think ChevronTexaco has a problem with that. They got their money.
Unlike a lot of you and a lot of Arizonans, I prefer the liberal way of doing things, thank you very much.
Birdland (not the jazz club)
I have SiriusXM radio and listen to channel 68, Spa, quite a bit. I came across an interesting little piece of music:
Takagi Masakatsu Wikipedia profile. Check this guy out.
Takagi Masakatsu Wikipedia profile. Check this guy out.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
How a strong Federal social safety net will help Texas (part 2)
I said in a previous post that certain policy decisions need to be made within the next few years on the Federal level that will improve the lives of Texans without any intervention from state government in Austin.
Here now are a few other ideas:
1. Implement free tuition for college nationwide, at all community colleges and "land grant" universities (with an emphasis on encouraging students to get their general education requirements done at the community college level before transferring into a four year school). An educated workforce is a hugely critical strength and benefit to any nation. The increasing cost of higher education is hurting this nation's competitiveness.
2. Mandate that companies with more than 30% of their market share in the USA have 30% of their global product manufactured in the USA. That means companies such as Apple will have to bring a significant portion of manufacturing operations back on USA soil. Companies that don't comply will have tariffs placed on their products.
3. Amend the Taft-Hartley act, so that companies in "right-to-work" states, as a condition of being able to operate and sell their goods in the United States, must have wages, benefits and working conditions be completely and totally harmonized and equal to those in non-right-to-work states, on an industry by industry basis based on the latest collectively bargained agreements (that means, for example:
a. if the United Auto Workers (UAW) and GM and/or Ford reach an agreement, the general conditions and benefits of that agreement must be implemented in all auto factory worksites nationwide regardless of manufacturer, whether or not their workers are represented by UAW,
b. if AT&T reaches an agreement with its customer service call center workers represented by the Communications Workers of America (CWA), the general conditions and benefits of that agreement must be implemented in all teleservices call centers nationwide regardless of company and/or industry, whether or not their workers are represented by CWA),
and that "card check" be implemented (where employees sign authorization cards stating they want a union and the cards are submitted to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB); if more than 50% of the employees submitted cards, the NLRB requires the employer to recognize the union). Union membership and payment of dues should still be voluntary. Penalties for non-compliance: companies will be forced to exit the US market. For foreign companies, (or companies that move their jobs offshore) tariffs will be placed on any goods they want to sell in the US market.
3a: Unions should, whenever possible, open up associate or affiliate memberships to the public, regardless of whether or not they work in that union's profession and/or industry. This can help unions raise dues monies while more workers get union benefits and a limited amount of help and coverage with workplace issues. This will also help to increase the number of American workers who are unionized and sympathize/support the union movement. In Sweden, almost 70% of workers belong to a union, compared to about 12% for the United States.
What do you think about that? Feel free to comment.
Here now are a few other ideas:
1. Implement free tuition for college nationwide, at all community colleges and "land grant" universities (with an emphasis on encouraging students to get their general education requirements done at the community college level before transferring into a four year school). An educated workforce is a hugely critical strength and benefit to any nation. The increasing cost of higher education is hurting this nation's competitiveness.
2. Mandate that companies with more than 30% of their market share in the USA have 30% of their global product manufactured in the USA. That means companies such as Apple will have to bring a significant portion of manufacturing operations back on USA soil. Companies that don't comply will have tariffs placed on their products.
3. Amend the Taft-Hartley act, so that companies in "right-to-work" states, as a condition of being able to operate and sell their goods in the United States, must have wages, benefits and working conditions be completely and totally harmonized and equal to those in non-right-to-work states, on an industry by industry basis based on the latest collectively bargained agreements (that means, for example:
a. if the United Auto Workers (UAW) and GM and/or Ford reach an agreement, the general conditions and benefits of that agreement must be implemented in all auto factory worksites nationwide regardless of manufacturer, whether or not their workers are represented by UAW,
b. if AT&T reaches an agreement with its customer service call center workers represented by the Communications Workers of America (CWA), the general conditions and benefits of that agreement must be implemented in all teleservices call centers nationwide regardless of company and/or industry, whether or not their workers are represented by CWA),
and that "card check" be implemented (where employees sign authorization cards stating they want a union and the cards are submitted to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB); if more than 50% of the employees submitted cards, the NLRB requires the employer to recognize the union). Union membership and payment of dues should still be voluntary. Penalties for non-compliance: companies will be forced to exit the US market. For foreign companies, (or companies that move their jobs offshore) tariffs will be placed on any goods they want to sell in the US market.
3a: Unions should, whenever possible, open up associate or affiliate memberships to the public, regardless of whether or not they work in that union's profession and/or industry. This can help unions raise dues monies while more workers get union benefits and a limited amount of help and coverage with workplace issues. This will also help to increase the number of American workers who are unionized and sympathize/support the union movement. In Sweden, almost 70% of workers belong to a union, compared to about 12% for the United States.
What do you think about that? Feel free to comment.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Some fast thoughts, and my crush on a pundit
I was in Austin over the weekend trying to visit my son. My son was too busy with catching up on his math curriculum to even take a couple of hours for breakfast, but he told me over the phone that he needed to focus on getting his grades to an acceptable level.
With that, I re-explored Austin. If you have gone back to look at my earliest entries on this blog, I lived in Austin from February through August 2010, and came here to Houston after struggling to get a decent job there. This was the first time I was back in Austin since that time.
1. I stayed at the Austin Airport Hilton. Pretty nice place, re-purposed from the former base HQ at Bergstrom. The place was fairly busy Saturday, but Sunday it was dead. It's in a pretty isolated location.
2. I ate twice at two different Rudy's BBQ locations. The brisket is absolutely the best I have ever had, anywhere. The banana pudding is almost as good as what my grandmother used to make back in Oakland. And yes, Dr. Pepper DOES taste better with cane sugar.
3. The GOP South Carolina primary was a little bit of a surprise. As I was taking my rental car back today I was listening to that moderate centrist Michael Smerconish, who surmised that the reason Newt gingrich won the SC Primary is that he excited the Tea Party, ultra-right wing base with his feisty responses in the last two debates. I guess people think he's going to be bolder and stronger to go up against President obama in the general election debates.
But from what I understand, Newt has a tendency to get angry and sulky and pissed off if he doesn't get his way. I sensed that with his remarks after losing Iowa. Nia-Malika Henderson of the Washington Post (damn that woman is fine!) mentioned that just last Wednesday, when Mitt Romney was still considered the frontrunner and the man to beat in South Carolina (presumably because most of the state is a bunch of New York transplants who can relate to the Northeast feel of Romney), Gingrich was angry and irritable and had no idea what his message was going to be. All that changed with the ABC News interview with Newt's ex-wife and Newt's prickly responses to Juan Williams and John King. Mitt Romney's hemming, hawing and flip-flopping on the issue of releasing his tax returns didn't help.
3a. I watched the clip from Current TV where Nia-Malika discusses this with Keith Olbermann. I watched that clip about five times. Man, that woman is cute!!!!
4. Rick Perry dropped out of the GOP race. Frankly that man had as much business running for president as Herman Cain.
Thoughts on the Newt and his victory speech:
Newt seemed to relish his frontrunner status. He made a clear effort not just to sound victorious, but to sound presidential. And in doing so, he completely repudiated the political left and tried to paint President Obama the (incorrect) way a lot of conservatives like to do: as some subversive influenced by radical elements hell-bent on destroying America.
Newt demonized and marginalized a lot of things during that speech, including President Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline (which was the right decision IMO); food stamps and the people who have to use them (good luck reaching Black voters Newt); and what he termed as "anti-religious bigots" (he was really shilling for the conservative Christian vote courted by the likes of Rick, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum). But what really got me, is his using his favorite meme of "American exceptionalism". He ranted about how certain "elites" want to turn America into something other than his twisted right-wing wacko view of America. Umm. Mr. Speaker: the problem we have in this country is that America HAS REJECTED some of the best international ideas when it comes to social justice, income equality, and providing opportunity for all citizens.
Newt and the other GOP field promise more of the same, tired, "let business and the private sector handle it" nonsense that ALWAYS has gotten our nation deeper in trouble, farther into poverty and deeper into debt. Newt is basically implying that the policies of President Obama, and obama himself, are un-American. How dare that crazy old "Grinch" say that. Seriously. That makes me angry. Conservatives can disagree with liberals, but please don't imply that we are un-American, anti-American, and out to destroy America. That's flat out wrong and that stance will backfire HARD on you and on the Tea Party.
By the way: none of the GOP candidates in their speeches once mentioned the Occupy movement. The last I checked, the Occupy movement is still alive and kicking and actually making a difference in many areas of the country. Ignoring the impact of Occupy will be just another factor that will hasten the GOP demise this election cycle.
People are sick and tired of the obstructionist ways of the GOP, especially in Congress. But some right wingers aren't even satisfied with the mess they've already gotten away with!
Well, that's enough for right now. I still have to post the second part of my comments on how a strong safety net will help Texas. That's coming soon.
Did I mention Nia-Malika Henderson is one freakin' fine ass woman?????
With that, I re-explored Austin. If you have gone back to look at my earliest entries on this blog, I lived in Austin from February through August 2010, and came here to Houston after struggling to get a decent job there. This was the first time I was back in Austin since that time.
1. I stayed at the Austin Airport Hilton. Pretty nice place, re-purposed from the former base HQ at Bergstrom. The place was fairly busy Saturday, but Sunday it was dead. It's in a pretty isolated location.
2. I ate twice at two different Rudy's BBQ locations. The brisket is absolutely the best I have ever had, anywhere. The banana pudding is almost as good as what my grandmother used to make back in Oakland. And yes, Dr. Pepper DOES taste better with cane sugar.
3. The GOP South Carolina primary was a little bit of a surprise. As I was taking my rental car back today I was listening to that moderate centrist Michael Smerconish, who surmised that the reason Newt gingrich won the SC Primary is that he excited the Tea Party, ultra-right wing base with his feisty responses in the last two debates. I guess people think he's going to be bolder and stronger to go up against President obama in the general election debates.
But from what I understand, Newt has a tendency to get angry and sulky and pissed off if he doesn't get his way. I sensed that with his remarks after losing Iowa. Nia-Malika Henderson of the Washington Post (damn that woman is fine!) mentioned that just last Wednesday, when Mitt Romney was still considered the frontrunner and the man to beat in South Carolina (presumably because most of the state is a bunch of New York transplants who can relate to the Northeast feel of Romney), Gingrich was angry and irritable and had no idea what his message was going to be. All that changed with the ABC News interview with Newt's ex-wife and Newt's prickly responses to Juan Williams and John King. Mitt Romney's hemming, hawing and flip-flopping on the issue of releasing his tax returns didn't help.
3a. I watched the clip from Current TV where Nia-Malika discusses this with Keith Olbermann. I watched that clip about five times. Man, that woman is cute!!!!
4. Rick Perry dropped out of the GOP race. Frankly that man had as much business running for president as Herman Cain.
Thoughts on the Newt and his victory speech:
Newt seemed to relish his frontrunner status. He made a clear effort not just to sound victorious, but to sound presidential. And in doing so, he completely repudiated the political left and tried to paint President Obama the (incorrect) way a lot of conservatives like to do: as some subversive influenced by radical elements hell-bent on destroying America.
Newt demonized and marginalized a lot of things during that speech, including President Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline (which was the right decision IMO); food stamps and the people who have to use them (good luck reaching Black voters Newt); and what he termed as "anti-religious bigots" (he was really shilling for the conservative Christian vote courted by the likes of Rick, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum). But what really got me, is his using his favorite meme of "American exceptionalism". He ranted about how certain "elites" want to turn America into something other than his twisted right-wing wacko view of America. Umm. Mr. Speaker: the problem we have in this country is that America HAS REJECTED some of the best international ideas when it comes to social justice, income equality, and providing opportunity for all citizens.
Newt and the other GOP field promise more of the same, tired, "let business and the private sector handle it" nonsense that ALWAYS has gotten our nation deeper in trouble, farther into poverty and deeper into debt. Newt is basically implying that the policies of President Obama, and obama himself, are un-American. How dare that crazy old "Grinch" say that. Seriously. That makes me angry. Conservatives can disagree with liberals, but please don't imply that we are un-American, anti-American, and out to destroy America. That's flat out wrong and that stance will backfire HARD on you and on the Tea Party.
By the way: none of the GOP candidates in their speeches once mentioned the Occupy movement. The last I checked, the Occupy movement is still alive and kicking and actually making a difference in many areas of the country. Ignoring the impact of Occupy will be just another factor that will hasten the GOP demise this election cycle.
People are sick and tired of the obstructionist ways of the GOP, especially in Congress. But some right wingers aren't even satisfied with the mess they've already gotten away with!
Well, that's enough for right now. I still have to post the second part of my comments on how a strong safety net will help Texas. That's coming soon.
Did I mention Nia-Malika Henderson is one freakin' fine ass woman?????
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
New website is up and running!!!
http://www.msreeddesign.com/
Take a look and let me know what you think! There are still a few things left to finish up, but at long last I have a website and a domain. I've been wanting to do this for at least 5 years!
Take a look and let me know what you think! There are still a few things left to finish up, but at long last I have a website and a domain. I've been wanting to do this for at least 5 years!
How a strong Federal social safety net will help Texas (Part 1 of a series)
I am of the opinion that while Texas, and Houston, has one of the nation's strongest economies, much more can be done to improve the quality of life for all citizens. There are still many people - far too many - living in a state of poverty, and this is not a problem facing Texas alone, but it is a national issue.
Efforts throughout our nation's history to tackle the issues of poverty are well-known, and well-loved in many cases. From the New Deal of Franklin Delano Roosevelt to the Great Society and War on Poverty of one of the great Texans, LBJ, to current programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, America has realized, at least among some in public policy and government, that if you help out the most needy and vulnerable citizens, the productivity of the nation is helped.
Texas is known, conversely, for rugged individualism and a mistrust of "big government". Conservative political thought - and the market-based solutions that rise from that thought - rule the day in Texas and are not likely to disappear anytime soon. Because of that, certain policy decisions need to be made within the next few years on the Federal level that will improve the lives of Texans without any intervention from state government in Austin. (Unless Texas decides to secede from the Union, which some in this state would like to do.)
On the Federal level we need to:
1. Implement universal single-payer health care coverage, by expanding and reforming the Medicare system so that all U.S. citizens, regardless of age, are covered. H.R. 676 is a good starting point to get this done. Single-payer health care has been estimated to be able to provide basic medical coverage for all citizens without the interference of the for-profit insurance industry and for the same, if not lower, cost that what is being paid now.
As Americans, we must adopt the mindset that basic medical coverage is a basic human right that must be unconditionally accessible to all citizens, regardless of ability to pay. Until that change in national thinking occurs, we are stuck with the unfortunate and ill-advised market-based ideas that healthcare is nothing more than a consumer commodity to be bought and sold like anything else.
2. Increase the Federal minimum wage by pegging it to historical values adjusted for inflation. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. In 1970 (the first full year of my life) the federal minimum wage was $1.45 per hour. Adjusted for inflation (using www.usinflationcalculator.com) that value should actually be $8.45 per hour in 2011 dollars.
Several states do currently have minimum wage requirements higher than the federal minimum, which is good; however, the very idea behind the minimum wage, as stated in the Fair Labor Standards Act itself (29 U.S.C. 206), is to promote "the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers". Some people extend that concept to mean that workers should earn a wage good enough to support them as well as any dependents in the specific local area they live in.
I would suggest that the federal minimum wage be increased to $9.25 per hour and automatically increased annually based on the rate of inflation. Many argue that increasing the minimum wage would be a burden on business - but putting more money in the pockets of workers would be one of the biggest and easiest stimulus packages that could be used.
I have some more ideas on this that I'll try to cover tomorrow! Feel free to comment!
Efforts throughout our nation's history to tackle the issues of poverty are well-known, and well-loved in many cases. From the New Deal of Franklin Delano Roosevelt to the Great Society and War on Poverty of one of the great Texans, LBJ, to current programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, America has realized, at least among some in public policy and government, that if you help out the most needy and vulnerable citizens, the productivity of the nation is helped.
Texas is known, conversely, for rugged individualism and a mistrust of "big government". Conservative political thought - and the market-based solutions that rise from that thought - rule the day in Texas and are not likely to disappear anytime soon. Because of that, certain policy decisions need to be made within the next few years on the Federal level that will improve the lives of Texans without any intervention from state government in Austin. (Unless Texas decides to secede from the Union, which some in this state would like to do.)
On the Federal level we need to:
1. Implement universal single-payer health care coverage, by expanding and reforming the Medicare system so that all U.S. citizens, regardless of age, are covered. H.R. 676 is a good starting point to get this done. Single-payer health care has been estimated to be able to provide basic medical coverage for all citizens without the interference of the for-profit insurance industry and for the same, if not lower, cost that what is being paid now.
As Americans, we must adopt the mindset that basic medical coverage is a basic human right that must be unconditionally accessible to all citizens, regardless of ability to pay. Until that change in national thinking occurs, we are stuck with the unfortunate and ill-advised market-based ideas that healthcare is nothing more than a consumer commodity to be bought and sold like anything else.
2. Increase the Federal minimum wage by pegging it to historical values adjusted for inflation. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. In 1970 (the first full year of my life) the federal minimum wage was $1.45 per hour. Adjusted for inflation (using www.usinflationcalculator.com) that value should actually be $8.45 per hour in 2011 dollars.
Several states do currently have minimum wage requirements higher than the federal minimum, which is good; however, the very idea behind the minimum wage, as stated in the Fair Labor Standards Act itself (29 U.S.C. 206), is to promote "the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers". Some people extend that concept to mean that workers should earn a wage good enough to support them as well as any dependents in the specific local area they live in.
I would suggest that the federal minimum wage be increased to $9.25 per hour and automatically increased annually based on the rate of inflation. Many argue that increasing the minimum wage would be a burden on business - but putting more money in the pockets of workers would be one of the biggest and easiest stimulus packages that could be used.
I have some more ideas on this that I'll try to cover tomorrow! Feel free to comment!
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
A quick word on SOPA
I am firmly opposed to SOPA (the Stop Online Piracy Act, also known as House Bill 3261). I feel that if SOPA is passed, it would almost irreparably hinder the free and unencumbered flow of information. The strength of the internet is that it is a conduit for learning, knowledge, commerce and entertainment. Anything that slows down or stops it, in the supposed name of protecting intellectual property - which is nothing more than protecting profits for segments of the "one percent", is a slap in the face not just to such pursuit of knowledge, but potentially even to democracy and freedom itself.
Legislators appear to be backing down on SOPA, but Wikipedia plans to shut down for 24 hours in protest, and I fully support that move. A strong signal needs to be sent to Congress as well as the international community that blatant censorship and/or criminalization of the free and open internet shall not be tolerated and will be vigorously fought against.
Legislators appear to be backing down on SOPA, but Wikipedia plans to shut down for 24 hours in protest, and I fully support that move. A strong signal needs to be sent to Congress as well as the international community that blatant censorship and/or criminalization of the free and open internet shall not be tolerated and will be vigorously fought against.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Some thoughts on this King Day 2012
The legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is the legacy of targeted and principled civil disobedience, and the appeal to the moral character of a culture and nation, that is the ancestor of the current Occupy movement.
In recent years, conservatives (such as the Heritage Foundation and Dr. King's own niece) have been trying to rewrite history and paint Dr. King as someone who espoused conservative principles. The reality of the situation, as I have come to understand it, is that Dr. King was not well liked by political conservatives in his day. Some of Dr. King's views, especially later in his career, were just as radical as anything coming from far-left activists today (I'm thinking of his support for a guaranteed minimum income as one big example of this).
The late Jesse Helms, the arch-conservative GOP senator from North Carolina, made a good part of his reputation as a TV political commentator in Raleigh by slamming Dr. King and the civil rights movement, in widely viewed on-air rants. Many conservatives and moderates were uncomfortable with the civil rights movement and felt the Black community was asking too much of America.
At all times during his career as the leader of this movement, Dr. King respectfully yet emphatically challenged all Americans to check their principles and reflect on what it really meant to be an American, and on the fairness and morality of systematically denying the rights and privileges of a nation to a certain portion of its people.
Dr. King was the most prominent public face of a civil rights movement (some call it a civil rights revolution, which is an equally correct way to refer to it) which included many, many people. I don't have to name them, but a little research will show that many prominent African-Americans of the mid-century period had at least a small role in the movement.
Some of those people paid the ultimate price in their quest for freedom and equality. Their sacrifices need to be regarded and respected as much as any soldier or military person in uniform, who gave his/her life in service to our nation.
This day of honoring Martin Luther King, Jr., should be a day in which we all reflect on the principles of fairness and equality for all citizens. These principles are what the Occupy movement is fighting so strongly and eloquently for.
Today should be a day in which we ask ourselves, "Are all Americans truly free and equal? If not, why is that, and how do we best get to that place?"
In recent years, conservatives (such as the Heritage Foundation and Dr. King's own niece) have been trying to rewrite history and paint Dr. King as someone who espoused conservative principles. The reality of the situation, as I have come to understand it, is that Dr. King was not well liked by political conservatives in his day. Some of Dr. King's views, especially later in his career, were just as radical as anything coming from far-left activists today (I'm thinking of his support for a guaranteed minimum income as one big example of this).
The late Jesse Helms, the arch-conservative GOP senator from North Carolina, made a good part of his reputation as a TV political commentator in Raleigh by slamming Dr. King and the civil rights movement, in widely viewed on-air rants. Many conservatives and moderates were uncomfortable with the civil rights movement and felt the Black community was asking too much of America.
At all times during his career as the leader of this movement, Dr. King respectfully yet emphatically challenged all Americans to check their principles and reflect on what it really meant to be an American, and on the fairness and morality of systematically denying the rights and privileges of a nation to a certain portion of its people.
Dr. King was the most prominent public face of a civil rights movement (some call it a civil rights revolution, which is an equally correct way to refer to it) which included many, many people. I don't have to name them, but a little research will show that many prominent African-Americans of the mid-century period had at least a small role in the movement.
Some of those people paid the ultimate price in their quest for freedom and equality. Their sacrifices need to be regarded and respected as much as any soldier or military person in uniform, who gave his/her life in service to our nation.
This day of honoring Martin Luther King, Jr., should be a day in which we all reflect on the principles of fairness and equality for all citizens. These principles are what the Occupy movement is fighting so strongly and eloquently for.
Today should be a day in which we ask ourselves, "Are all Americans truly free and equal? If not, why is that, and how do we best get to that place?"
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Deep house: my favorite house music on YouTube
I have been into house music, mainly deep house, for about the past ten years or so. Much of this music is, in my opinion, so much better than mainstream R&B.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4C2E63A4A0471CBE
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4C2E63A4A0471CBE
The right woman
One of my goals in life is to be married again. I'm 42 now, so i don't think I'm too old to remarry, but I'm wondering if I should keep being as picky as I am about the kind of woman I want.
If you search on PlentyofFish.com for "micmac99" you will find my profile. It's pretty detailed. Sometimes I wonder if it's too detailed, but I'm a little concerned that if it's not detailed, the wrong woman will be attracted to me (I'm not THAT ugly) and be disappointed when she finds out how weird I really am.
I'm not like most African American men. I'm fairly well educated, and while I don't read a lot of books, I do spend a lot of time online and like to keep up with politics and economic topics. I have a lot of bookmarks to several dozen favorite sites that I check on from time to time. I have progressive magazines bookmarked, such as Mother Jones, the Nation, Boston Review, Harper's and the like. I also have certain "think tanks" bookmarked, such as the Brookings Institution. I also have a lot of fine arts and graphic design links.
Maybe as I go along I will share some of these links with you so you can get a sense of the kind of person I am and what I like.
But as for the kind of woman I like, she has to be beautiful, but not wear that beauty on her sleeve. She has to be educated, but still have one ear to the plight of the people. She has to be reserved, but with an inner energy that drives her actions. She must be different in spirit and attitude from her peers, but able to relate at some level with everyone she meets.
Bottom line: Sometimes I wonder if I'm just too weird, different, eccentric, intelligent, for the majority of women out there. Or maybe the problem isn't with me, maybe it's that the majority of women out there are no longer the kind of women I want as a life partner and a soulmate. (Is soulmate an overused word?)
If you search on PlentyofFish.com for "micmac99" you will find my profile. It's pretty detailed. Sometimes I wonder if it's too detailed, but I'm a little concerned that if it's not detailed, the wrong woman will be attracted to me (I'm not THAT ugly) and be disappointed when she finds out how weird I really am.
I'm not like most African American men. I'm fairly well educated, and while I don't read a lot of books, I do spend a lot of time online and like to keep up with politics and economic topics. I have a lot of bookmarks to several dozen favorite sites that I check on from time to time. I have progressive magazines bookmarked, such as Mother Jones, the Nation, Boston Review, Harper's and the like. I also have certain "think tanks" bookmarked, such as the Brookings Institution. I also have a lot of fine arts and graphic design links.
Maybe as I go along I will share some of these links with you so you can get a sense of the kind of person I am and what I like.
But as for the kind of woman I like, she has to be beautiful, but not wear that beauty on her sleeve. She has to be educated, but still have one ear to the plight of the people. She has to be reserved, but with an inner energy that drives her actions. She must be different in spirit and attitude from her peers, but able to relate at some level with everyone she meets.
Bottom line: Sometimes I wonder if I'm just too weird, different, eccentric, intelligent, for the majority of women out there. Or maybe the problem isn't with me, maybe it's that the majority of women out there are no longer the kind of women I want as a life partner and a soulmate. (Is soulmate an overused word?)
Things I dream about
I just woke up from a dream in which I saw a Volvo television commercial intended for the Swedish market. The commercial was in English.
Some Swedish people were in a new Volvo driving in some desolate county in west Texas on a lonely two-lane country road, and Texas has a LOT of those roads. They happened upon a (I guess) 3rd generation Swedish American Texan, and this guy served his Swedish visitors his family version of some kind of traditional Swedish food. "It might not be what you guys are used to back home," the man said. "Oh, this is better than some of the stuff we get in a restaurant," they said as they were happily eating.
The commercial ended with the tagline:
Volvo
Kicking butt
and making friends.
No, I have NO idea what Volvo they were driving. I didn't pay attention to that. The point was these people were having an adventure in this Volvo and making a personal connection with their fellow man.
You know I've been in this business too long when I'm coming up with branding slogans in my SLEEP!!!! rofl
I've been thinking a lot about the great nation of Sweden lately. Maybe because my political views favor some kind of American version of the Nordic model, which conservative politicians here absolutely abhor.
But still I dream. And a lot of my dreams come true.
Some Swedish people were in a new Volvo driving in some desolate county in west Texas on a lonely two-lane country road, and Texas has a LOT of those roads. They happened upon a (I guess) 3rd generation Swedish American Texan, and this guy served his Swedish visitors his family version of some kind of traditional Swedish food. "It might not be what you guys are used to back home," the man said. "Oh, this is better than some of the stuff we get in a restaurant," they said as they were happily eating.
The commercial ended with the tagline:
Volvo
Kicking butt
and making friends.
No, I have NO idea what Volvo they were driving. I didn't pay attention to that. The point was these people were having an adventure in this Volvo and making a personal connection with their fellow man.
You know I've been in this business too long when I'm coming up with branding slogans in my SLEEP!!!! rofl
I've been thinking a lot about the great nation of Sweden lately. Maybe because my political views favor some kind of American version of the Nordic model, which conservative politicians here absolutely abhor.
But still I dream. And a lot of my dreams come true.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
New website about to come online and other musings
I am in the process of having a new website created. It will be a portfolio website with a contact form. Hopefully I will garner enough interest in my graphic design work to get clients in 2012.
I really think this is my year to get at least five or six graphic design clients.
The kind of work I want to do: branding for small and/or emerging businesses. If you want to see my current online portfolio, go to: www.coroflot.com/micmac99
Latest thoughts on stuff: With this post I am embarking on a campaign to write something on this blog at least once every day. Even if it's just one or two sentences. I have usually been posting on twitter, and I think my twitter feed is visible on this blog (if not I'll have to make sure it is). I will usually talk about personal and political stuff and steer clear of anything related to my current place of employment (unless it's related to my independent design work).
Design...speaking of which... A couple of books I'd like to get as I move into a more serious phase of graphic design/branding work are The Peaceable Kingdom by Stan Richards, and BrandSimple: How the Best Brands Keep it Simple and Succeed by Allen Adamson. I really liked both of those books and I want them to be somewhat of a cornerstone for how I think about branding and design.
What I think about Houston so far: Houston seems to be a town that is adequate for what I need in life right now. The economy is fairly strong and it's in close driving distance to Austin. Parts of this city seem a little dangerous and run-down, and the population, especially a lot of the Black people, seem to be way to stuck in blue-collar professions. I see far more Black delivery drivers and warehouse workers than I see Black executives in this town, and that bothers me as a Black man. I am glad I moved here, though.
How long I will stay? I'd like to stay a long, long time, but that depends on three factors:
1. Whether or not I find my second wife here
2. How successful I am with my graphic design career here
3. Where my son decides to attend college (he just turned 16)
That's all I have for now. As I think of things to say, I will post them in this space. Feel free to comment. Also, look back at my previous posts m- you'll see how far I have come in a year or two. I'm in a better spot now than I was in the summer of 2010, but still looking for even better things to come.
The kind of work I want to do: branding for small and/or emerging businesses. If you want to see my current online portfolio, go to: www.coroflot.com/micmac99
Latest thoughts on stuff: With this post I am embarking on a campaign to write something on this blog at least once every day. Even if it's just one or two sentences. I have usually been posting on twitter, and I think my twitter feed is visible on this blog (if not I'll have to make sure it is). I will usually talk about personal and political stuff and steer clear of anything related to my current place of employment (unless it's related to my independent design work).
Design...speaking of which... A couple of books I'd like to get as I move into a more serious phase of graphic design/branding work are The Peaceable Kingdom by Stan Richards, and BrandSimple: How the Best Brands Keep it Simple and Succeed by Allen Adamson. I really liked both of those books and I want them to be somewhat of a cornerstone for how I think about branding and design.
What I think about Houston so far: Houston seems to be a town that is adequate for what I need in life right now. The economy is fairly strong and it's in close driving distance to Austin. Parts of this city seem a little dangerous and run-down, and the population, especially a lot of the Black people, seem to be way to stuck in blue-collar professions. I see far more Black delivery drivers and warehouse workers than I see Black executives in this town, and that bothers me as a Black man. I am glad I moved here, though.
How long I will stay? I'd like to stay a long, long time, but that depends on three factors:
1. Whether or not I find my second wife here
2. How successful I am with my graphic design career here
3. Where my son decides to attend college (he just turned 16)
That's all I have for now. As I think of things to say, I will post them in this space. Feel free to comment. Also, look back at my previous posts m- you'll see how far I have come in a year or two. I'm in a better spot now than I was in the summer of 2010, but still looking for even better things to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)