Tim's Blog (Original, No?)

Monday, September 19, 2005

Random Writing of the Day

Physorg.com

US to send four astronauts to moon in 2018

September 19, 2005
The United States will send four astronauts to the moon in 2018 in a return to its pioneering manned mission into space, NASA administrator Michael Griffin announced Monday.

NASA is to design a new rocket based on the technology from its ageing shuttles that are to be retired in 2010, Griffin said. The new rocket could be orbiting in space by 2014.

The last manned mission to the moon was the Apollo 17 rocket in 1972. But the new mission will enable preparations to set up a permanent base on the moon, Griffin said.

The NASA chief estimated the cost of the moon programme at 104 billion dollars.

He said the new rocket would be "very Apollo-like, with updated technology. Think of it as Apollo on steroids."

© 2005 AFP

Monday, September 12, 2005

Responsibility Is a Two-Way Street

This Saturday, after performing many and varied tasks and accomplishing my goals for the day, I decided that I would treat myself to a simple, but tasty, meal from Chili’s. Not wanting to shower and attire myself as would befit a diner at this restaurant, my fingers made their way to my keyboard and quickly located online my local Chili’s menu and phone number.

Being a man given to finding a good menu item and sticking to it, I soon settled upon my regular Chili’s order, the grilled chicken sandwich and french fries (every proper meal includes a vegetable). Having thus prepared myself for the task at hand, I picked up my cell phone and called Chili’s.

Chili’s is setup like most restaurants, primarily catering to eat-in diners. However, Chili’s also has a carry-out food service that, at least at my local Chili’s restaurant, is quite popular and does a very steady business. Therefore, ordinarily there is nothing special about placing a "to go" order at Chili’s, and a member of the public should have no difficulty in having his order taken. Regrettably, on this occasion the "ordinary" course of events did not go as planned.

I pulled out my trusty cell phone and dialed my local Chili’s restaurant. A man (we’ll call him Paul) answered the phone and asked how he could assist me. As I have done in the past, I stated my intention to place an order "to go." Paul asked me to "please hold," which I did. However, after about ninety seconds on hold, my call was disconnected. My reaction was one of mild annoyance, but with the thought that when I called back, I would get immediate service rather than continuing to wait on hold. So I called back.

Paul answered the phone again. I restated my desire to place a "to go" order. This time Paul invited me to place my order. Happily I began to do so, indicating my preference for cheddar cheese instead of Swiss, and a request to hold the tomato. To my increased annoyance, Paul cut me off mid-way through my order and again placed me on hold for no stated reason. I held the line for five minutes without hearing back from Paul or anyone else, at which time I disconnected the call.

For the third time I called Chili’s, wondering what was so difficult about placing a "to go" order at a restaurant that featured a "to go" food service. Again, Paul answered the phone.

With my frustration level mounting, I calmly told Paul that I was endeavoring to place an order to go. For the third time in as many calls, Paul just as calmly placed me on hold (for the record, I did not reference my previous order attempts in either my second or third phone calls). Four minutes of on hold time later I determined to drive to the restaurant and speak to the manager in person, purposing to wait on hold until either my call was taken or I arrived at the restaurant.
Locating my wallet and keys, I quickly got in my car and headed for Chili’s (approximately a twelve-minute drive). Just before my phone call reached the thirteen-minute mark, someone at Chili’s disconnected the call. Suffice it to say, I was literally not a happy customer when I pulled up in front of the restaurant.

Walking inside, I was greeted by the capper to my evening, Chili’s host. Perhaps hostess would be a more appropriate term. In my opinion, blatantly effeminate is a very charitable description of this person, as opposed to another word I could legitimately employ. Already in an unhappy frame of mind, I tersely informed the "host" that I wanted to see the manager. Rather surprised by my request, as I had just stepped into the restaurant, the "host" nonetheless walked to the back of the building and procured the manger per my request.

Stepping off to the side of the waiting area with the manager, I briefly acquainted him with the disturbing lack of service I had received in my repeated endeavors to place a "to go" order with his establishment. Informing him that I had placed three separate phone calls to his restaurant, had been disconnected on two of those phone calls, and had waited on hold a combined total of almost twenty minutes, I also gave him the name of the man to whom I had spoken during each call. I finished my comments by stating the obvious fact that the events of the evening were "unacceptable." Fortunately for him, he quickly agreed. Additionally, he promised to speak to the employee in question about the matter.

At this point the tables turned and Chili’s redeemed itself in my book by providing me with a "to go" meal for free: my grilled chicken sandwich, french fries, and an added chocolate shake for good measure. While waiting for my food, the manager brought me a complimentary lemonade to enjoy as I watched the Longhorn’s en route to a 25-22 victory over Ohio State. Fifteen minutes later I was back in my car, free food in hand, ready to enjoy the fruits of my labor.

I suppose that the moral to the story is two-fold (I know that there are more than two, but that is how many stand out to me at the moment). One, expect promised service to be delivered as promised. Be understanding, be ready to make exceptions when appropriate, but also be prepared to enforce promises made. Otherwise, at least in a restaurant scenario, you will allow poor service to continue without consequence to the offender, thereby permitting the potential for a bad reputation to fall upon the remainder of the restaurant staff, most of whom are probably very competent and professional about their work (the "host" excluded in my personal situation).

Two, as a manager be prepared to take responsibility for a problem, seeking for ways to alleviate the offense, and assuaging the piqued customer by whatever reasonable means are available. This will likely engender good will in the customer and encourage him to continue to frequent the establishment in question, or at least give him cause to refrain from telling all of his friends about what a terrible business the manager oversees.

Both morals require the exercise of personal responsibility, whether it be in the offendee or in the one ultimately responsible for the actions of the offender. My reward for demonstrating responsibility was a free dinner. The manager’s reward was a customer who will return to his restaurant and who will not take the matter to a corporate level.

There are additional avenues down which I could take this post, such as the question of yielding rights, but I’m going to let all reading this account exercise a little personal responsibility and answer that questions themselves, if they have it. Perhaps I will speak to that matter in the future.

Just a night in the life of yours truly!

Sunday, September 11, 2005


Random Pic of the Day - "How time flies. . . "

Saturday, September 03, 2005

Chief Justice Rehnquist Passes Away






Chief Justice Rehnquist has died
Saturday, September 3, 2005; Posted: 11:29 p.m. EDT (03:29 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who helped shift the U.S. Supreme Court toward a more conservative ideology and strongly supported states' rights during his three decades on the bench, has died.

Rehnquist, who presided over the court for nearly 19 years, was 80.

Rehnquist, who had been receiving chemotherapy and radiation for thyroid cancer, died at an Arlington, Virginia, hospital surrounded by his three children, a court spokeswoman said.

He was working in his office until a few weeks ago," CNN Producer Bill Mears said.
"He loved his job and continued to work until the very end," he added.

The chief justice was diagnosed with thyroid cancer in October 2004, not long after the 2004-2005 court session began, and received outpatient radiation and chemotherapy treatments.

Rehnquist adjourned the court in late June amid speculation that he would resign before justices reconvened in October for the new term. He quashed that idea in July, hours after he left a hospital where he was treated for a fever.

"I want to put to rest the speculation and unfounded rumors of my imminent retirement," he said in a written statement. "I am not about to announce my retirement. I will continue to perform my duties as chief justice as long as my health permits." He returned to work the following day.

Rehnquist's announcement followed the surprise retirement of 75-year-old Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on July 1.

After Rehnquist began his cancer treatments, he worked at home until March 21, causing him to miss oral arguments in a number of cases. He attended President Bush's inauguration January 20 to administer the oath of office, but stayed on the platform for less than 15 minutes.

On his first day back at work in March with the other justices, Rehnquist showed no emotion, paid sharp attention to the argument presented in the first case and asked eight or nine technical questions. His voice was fairly strong; he had a tracheotomy tube in his throat to assist his breathing.

Rehnquist was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1972 by President Nixon and was elevated to chief justice in 1986 by President Reagan, replacing Warren Burger.

In that role, he led the closed-door conferences where justices discuss and vote on cases; assigned who wrote the majority rulings; managed the docket; controlled open court arguments; and supervised the 300 or so court employees, including clerks, secretaries, police and support staff.

Rehnquist, who belonged to a loose, 5-4 conservative majority, was the second-oldest man to preside over the nation's highest court.

Early in his tenure, he often was the lone dissenter, despite the presence of two other Republican appointees. He served on the bench under seven presidents.

David Yalof, a constitutional law professor at the University of Connecticut, credited Rehnquist with moving the court in a consistent, conservative direction.

"He was able over time to gather colleagues together cordially, manage tension, build a majority and turn them over to his point of view," Yalof said.

Rehnquist followed the legal philosophy of judicial restraint, which interprets the U.S. Constitution narrowly.

He believed the only rights protected by the Constitution are those specifically named, and that justices should consider the framers' original intent when making rulings.

Shortly after Nixon named him as an associate justice, Rehnquist and Justice Byron White were the only dissenters in the landmark Roe v. Wade case (1973), which established that a woman's right to an abortion was protected under a woman's right to privacy.

"To reach its result, the court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the 14th Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the amendment," Rehnquist wrote in his dissent.

The chief justice strongly supported states' rights, and usually took a state's side when it was sued over violating federal law on issues such as age discrimination or the Americans with Disabilities Act.

He supported the death penalty, homosexual rights and free speech.

In 2003, Rehnquist broke ranks with fellow conservatives by offering a rare rebuke against states' rights.

In the Hibbs case, a state worker was given the right to sue Nevada officials under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act for denying him time to care for his ailing wife. Rehnquist contended Congress had the right to address a record of sex discrimination against women and men in the workplace.

"He showed real diplomacy in moderating his viewpoint to satisfy the larger concerns of the court, to put his stamp on a ruling with wide impact," said Yalof.

In 1999, Rehnquist became the second chief justice in U.S. history to preside over a presidential impeachment -- that of President Bill Clinton, who was acquitted.

Rehnquist was a student of the court when he wasn't there.

He wrote books on its history and on the impeachments of Justice Samuel Chase and President Andrew Johnson.

Jay Jorgensen, a 1999 judicial clerk for Rehnquist, said Rehnquist was a gifted administrator.

"You have to give credit to his unbelievable success moving the justices to where he always believed they should go," said Thomas Goldstein, a leading Supreme Court litigator.

Having already sat on the court for 14 years, Rehnquist quickly matured in the role of chief justice. He cut the number of cases the court agreed to hear, streamlined conferences and sought clearer, strongly reasoned opinions.

Jay Jorgensen, a former clerk for the chief justice, said it was the little things Rehnquist did that built personal trust, loyalty and respect among justices who were often sharply divided ideologically.

"He set up a system during conferences where every justice, one by one, in order of seniority, is allowed to weigh in on a case," Jorgensen said. "There is no free-for-all debate, the chief justice does not allow bickering."

Still, legal scholars agree Rehnquist's legacy has some holes.

Despite the court chipping away slightly at the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, the right to an abortion remains the law of the land.

"On affirmative action and Miranda rights, among other things, Rehnquist hasn't gotten everything he wanted," said Tom Goldstein, a partner in a Washington, D.C.-based law firm that handles only Supreme Court cases.

"Across the board there are disappointments. The stakes remain high, there are still many 5-4 votes, but he has been successful keeping the individual battles from turning into larger wars."

William Hubbs Rehnquist was born in Shorewood, a suburb of Milwaukee, on October 1, 1924. His father was a paper salesman. Rehnquist married Natalie Cornell of San Diego, and they had a son and two daughters.

After serving in the Air Force in World War II, Rehnquist attended Stanford University, where he earned a bachelor's degree, followed by a master's in political science in 1948. He received another master's in government at Harvard in 1950, before returning to Stanford for a law degree. He graduated first in his class in 1952.

His friends described Rehnquist as warm and witty, with a love for poker.

Jorgensen recalled a small party Rehnquist hosted at his home with former clerks.

"We were playing charades, and he was very good at it -- funny, animated and enormously sharp," he said, "but also a stickler we play by the rules, and ensuring the fairness of the game. That sums up what kind of person he is, inside and outside the court."

Thursday, September 01, 2005


Random Pic of the Day - "Surfacing of the one-eyed man."

Random Writing of the Day







Project 50

This is a follow-up blog on Mission Katrina primarily aimed at residents of San Antonio and its vicinity.

Vision Forum is currently working with Christian leaders in Louisiana to identify families in special need of housing assistance, and to provide them with shelter for one week to two months with Christian families (and in some cases, local hotels) in the San Antonio vicinity. Our goal is to be available to provide fifty families with food, water, clothing, supplies and shelter. We are hoping to have these items available for the families when and if they arrive here. Those who want to contribute canned food (nothing perishable please), clothing and supplies for distribution to these families, may bring them to our national headquarters on Blanco Road where the goods will be stockpiled for distribution purposes to these families. For more information about dropping off supplies, please contact pcoghlan@visionforum.com.

Mission Katrina

It is simply a microscopically small effort in the grand scheme of what is being done, and what must be done, but today Vision Forum begins our mission to offer some relief and assistance to those friends of our ministry who have been devastated by the fury of Katrina.

Gathering until well after midnight last night, the men of Vision Forum strategized about the most effective means for getting thousands of dollars in supplies to friends in the body of Christ desperately in need of help. Our task included numerous calls (for information gathering purposes) to friends and family of those in Louisiana without food, water and supplies.

In the providence of God, Vision Forum has been blessed with a number of friends in the aviation business including military chopper pilots and airline pilots. During the course of the evening we talked with some of them inquiring for information on how we could get clearance to fly a chopper into the disaster zone where our friends live. We discovered that, given the martial law status and national guard presence, we would have to wade through a great deal of red tape to get clearance for a chopper flight, so we abandoned that plan in favor of a caravan of four-wheel drive diesels trucks. After getting official reports and eye witness testimonies about some of the major road routes, we determined that it will be possible to reach our destinations. Next it was determined that one of the diesel trucks would simply be a fuel car. (We need to carry at least 750 gallons between us to get down, help the people and get back.)

The team leaves today. Please pray for them. Vision Forum’s Mission Katrina involves the following:

1. An initial search, reconnaissance and supply delivery trip into parts of the disaster zone where there are identified Christian families in need of help. The information gathered on this trip will help us in preparing follow-up supply caravans to be sent into the zone in the days to come.

2. Support for sister ministries which are on location and ministering to those in need of help. Specifically, I want to encourage you to support, for example, the work of Operation Save America, which is trucking in shipments to more than 300 indigent families at a Christian conference retreat center. Here is the link. http://www.operationsaveamerica.org/

3. Help place indigent families in need in temporary housing arrangements with other families in San Antonio.

4. Special resource allocation from Vision Forum Ministries’ Life and Liberty Relief Fund.

Please pray for the first wave of efforts which begin today. Pray for the safety and success of our team of men. Please pray also for the safety and blessing of God on the “household of faith” suffering with everyone else in the wake of the worst physical disaster in our country in a century.