Anyone remember this street?

I don't believe in Karma

Some few weeks ago I was talking to ------- (to protect the reputation of this person they shall remain nameless, however, I went to HS with him and he married my sister) about my recent talk that I gave in Stake Priesthood meeting.  This recalled to mind an incident that occurred in our youth.

It seems that once upon a time I was asked to speak in Stake Priesthood meeting when I was 17 or close there to. Being me, I put off doing any real work on this talk until the last minute.
Now my ride to this event was to be my a fore mentioned unnamed friend. (who by the way was my ride to most events during HS it seems) Being some miles away from the stake center and having time to mull over the many reasons (here read "unprepared") that we shouldn't actually go to this meeting and fulfill this obligation. We managed to convince ourselves that it would be in everyone's best interest if we simply did not show up.
So we didn't.

We had some other interesting adventures that night but that can be for someone else to tell at a later date.

Now I don't believe in public confessions and I don't relate this little incident for any other reason than to illustrate the context of this conversation that this person and I were having.

So I tell him that I had just spoke again in Stake Priesthood meeting, and I say " Do you know that I can't honestly remember how many times I have spoken in Stake Priesthood meeting in the last 15 years?  It has been quite a few to say the least.  And do you remember that time when we were teenagers and we ditched that meeting?"
He remembered.

Now I am 47 years old, it has been a lot of years since I was 17.
However I truly believe that Heavenly Father has a sense of humor due to the callings that I have had that have placed me in the position to be "invited" to speak in a number of Stake Priesthood meetings.

I don't believe in Karma, but the getaway driver in that little incident is now a Bishop.
I'm just sayin'.

This Memorial Day, We Remember...

Lt Cmdr Fredrick J. Fortner

An American Hero,

A man who gave all for his country.

We salute you Uncle Freddy!

How My Day Went

Last Saturday I was once again trying to get on that Family History horse that I had fallen off of some time ago. I spent part of the evening updating and responding to Pratt family requests for updates on Irintha's descendents.
I then turned to some of my Fortner family ancestors and attempted some searches on that side. For some reason I started looking for my gr-gr-grandfather Norbert Banks and found some info as to where he had died. I searched the county in Arizona and sent their records dept an email asking if they were the correct people to contact if I was looking for a Death Certificate info.

Today I got a reply, I copy it here along with my response:

Dear Scott: 
We are not agency that maintains birth death certificates.  Vital Records at State Dept. of Health Services will have info:  602-364-1300, www.hs.state.az.us.  If you have problems I have a friend, Wes Patience, who has experience in locating older death certificates.  His number is 520-432-4343.  Out of curiosity, who is your great-great grandfather?  
Sincerely, Christine

Christine,

Thank you so much for answering. You are more than generous with the info you gave me.

My great great grandfather Norbert Banks passed and is buried in Wilcox, Cochise co. AZ.  This is what online documents and family history indicates. I am trying to track down a cemetery and a death certificate.

Thanks again for you help!

Have a great day!

Scott Fortner

She replied:

Thanks.  You won't believe this.  In an amazing coincidence when searching for another name this morning I opened a probate book that contained Norbert's Probate Document.  At the time I did not even know the name Norbert Banks as I had not seen your e-mail.  I only noted the name as I know a Banks family here in Bisbee. As far as I recall I had never used that particular book before, and we have hundreds of thousands of pages of records here and at our archives.  Would you like a copy of the document?  Willcox historian and author Kathy Klump may have information on Norbert Banks.  Her address and phone # are 175 S. Railroad Ave. , Willcox 85643 and (520)384-3397.  

 

I read this as I was sitting in the DMV waiting to renew my medical cert. I thought, am I reading the Church News? This is right off the pages of it!  But it happened to me.

President Eyring says to look for the hand of the Lord in our daily lives. 

I testify that sometimes it is rather obvious!

 

As if that had not been enough, this week I encountered a high school friend that had just joined FB and had found our "gathering" of high school friends so I sent him a quick note:

D Scott Fortner 

Darin, ironic that I was just looking at our 81 yearbook, saw your pic and thought "i wonder where Darin is?" Then last night I see Mark and Stephanie messaging you! Hope life is treating you well!

 

Darin Boyd Hey Scott, or I guess I should say Brother Fortner now, yep believe it or not, I joined the Church in 91 after being married to my wonderful LDS wife for about 5 years. We were sealed in 92 and been very active ever since. Anyway, I will let you get up off the floor now and talk to you again soon. :)

Yes, it was a very good day.

They got Bin Laden

Nine and a half years it took.
You can run but you'll just die tired.

Tax money heading down the drain.

Stephen Moore in the Wall Street Journal, this was on April 1st. 

"If you want to understand better why so many states -- from New York to Wisconsin to California -- are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government. It gets worse. More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers. Nearly half of the $2.2 trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1 trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?

Every state in America today except for two -- Indiana and Wisconsin -- has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods. Consider California, which has the highest budget deficit in the history of the states. The not-so Golden State now has an incredible 2.4 million government employees -- twice as many as people at work in manufacturing. New Jersey has just under two-and-a-half as many government employees as manufacturers. Florida's ratio is more than 3 to 1. So is New York's. Even Michigan, at one time the auto capital of the world, and Pennsylvania, once the steel capital, have more government bureaucrats than people making things. The leaders in government hiring are Wyoming and New Mexico, which have hired more than six government workers for every manufacturing worker." 

And now a short story to illustrate:

Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert. 

Congress said, "Someone may steal from it at night."  

So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job.

Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?"

So they created a planning department and hired two people, one person to write the instructions, and one person to do time studies.

Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?"

So they created a Quality Control department and hired two people. One was to do the studies and one was to write the reports.

Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?"

So they created two positions: a time keeper and a payroll officer then hired two people.

Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?"

So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a Legal Secretary.

Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one Year and we are $918,000 over budget, we must cut back."

So they laid-off the night watchman.


NOW slowly, let it sink in.


Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter.
Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY..... during the  Carter Administration? 

Anybody?

Anything?

No?

Didn't think so!


Bottom line is, we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency....the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember!


Ready?? 

It was very simple... and at the time, everybody thought it very appropriate.

The Department of Energy was instituted on 8/04/1977, TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. 

Hey, pretty efficient, huh???

AND NOW IT'S 2011 -- 34 YEARS LATER -- AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS "NECESSARY" DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR. IT HAS 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES; AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!

(THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, 
 
"WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?")

33 years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports.  Today 70% of our oil consumption is foreign imports.

Ah, yes -- good old Federal bureaucracy.

NOW, WE HAVE TURNED OVER THE BANKING SYSTEM,  HEALTH CARE, AND THE AUTO INDUSTRY TO THE SAME  GOVERNMENT?

Yes this last part was a pass along E-mail but I thought it illustrated the point well.

"[D]emocracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few."
John Adams.

3 Nephi 6:
15Now the cause of this iniquity of the people was this—^aSatan had great ^bpower, unto the stirring up of the people to do all manner of iniquity, and to the puffing them up with pride, tempting them to seek for power, and authority, and ^criches, and the vain things of the world.

 16And thus Satan did lead away the hearts of the people to do all manner of iniquity; therefore they had enjoyed peace but a few years.

Making Charlie Sheen Seem Rational

The Difference

 Unions in the private sector are a way of organizing private interests, those of employees, against other private interests, those of a company's owners, for economic gain and for protection against unfairness.
 In government, workers are already protected against unfairness by civil service laws.

 Economically, government unions pit a private interest, that of employees, against the public's interest, that of taxpayers and voters.

And that is why I am a Trade Unionist and not a public sector union supporter.

Get rid of the Red Tape (you have to start somewhere!)

Part of an article by Diane Katz.

As the new Congress assembles, many legislators are considering how to lessen the regulatory burden on Americans. President Obama, too, now says that he wants to root out unnecessary government rules. With regulatory costs at record levels, relief is sorely needed. But it is not enough to talk about fewer regulations. Policymakers must critically review specific rules and identify those that should be abolished. This paper details 20 unnecessary and harmful regulations that should be eliminated now.

Americans are besieged by regulations. At every level, government intrudes into citizens’ lives with a torrent of do’s and don’ts that place an unsustainable burden on the economy and erode Americans’ most fundamental freedoms. In fiscal year (FY) 2010 alone, the Obama Administration unleashed regulations that will cost more than $26.5 billion annually,1 and many more are on the way. These rules cover a broad swath of American life: Fifteen of the 43 major rules issued during the fiscal year arose from the regulatory crackdown on the finance sector in the Wall Street Reform and Protection Act (Dodd–Frank) and similar lawmaking.  Another five stemmed from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) adopted by Congress in early 2010. Ten others came from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including the first mandatory reporting of “greenhouse gas” emissions and $10.8 billion in new automotive fuel economy standards.

In total, regulations now extract some $1.75 trillion a year from the economy, according to a recent report from the federal government’s own Small Business Administration.2 Little different from taxes, regulations raise the price of almost every product and service, while also inhibiting the capital investment and job creation needed to keep the nation’s economy strong.12 This regulatory tide must be reversed. Policymakers should not just prevent harmful new regulations, but must repeal costly and unnecessary rules already on the books. Such action can be undertaken by the new Congress, or by regulators themselves. In fact, President Obama recently pledged a government-wide review of rules to determine which should be “modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed.”

·        Regulatory burdens are hindering job growth, investment, and innovation, while eroding fundamental freedoms in America.

·        Policymakers in Congress and the executive branch must do more than prevent harmful new regulations from taking effect. They must also eliminate unnecessary rules already on the books.

·        It is easy to talk about abolishing harmful rules, but success requires identifying specific rules to abolish.

8.     Phase-Out of Incandescent Light Bulbs

Discussion. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 imposed stringent efficiency requirements that effectively phase out the incandescent bulbs14 on which the world has relied for more than a century.

Proponents of the phase-out tout the supposed energy-saving attributes of costly compact fluorescent bulbs. LED lighting is also gaining favor. But rather than eliminate incandescent bulbs, consumers ought to have a choice among all types of lighting the market has to offer. Consumer choice and competition will ultimately determine the type of bulbs best suited for various applications and family budgets.

The light bulb regulation is also a job-killer, leading to the closure of the last American light bulb factory.

15 (The vast majority of fluorescent bulbs are

manufactured in China.)

Recommended Action. Repeal. Light bulb regulation is an unnecessary dictate that raises lighting costs and limits consumer choice.

Relevant Reading.

·        Nicolas D. Loris, “Government’s Light Bulb Ban

Is Just Plain Destructive,” Heritage Foundation

WebMemo No. 3024, September 23, 2010, at

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/09/ Governments-Light-Bulb-Ban-Is-Just-Plain-Destructive.

·        Deroy Murdock, “The All-American Light Bulb

Dims as Freedom Flickers,” National Review

Online, July 2, 2010, at http://www.nationalreview.

com/articles/243383/all-american-light-bulbdims-

freedom-flickers-deroy-murdock (January

19, 2011).

9.     Appliance Energy Standards

Discussion. During the past three decades, Congress has imposed a multitude of energy efficiency standards16 for a host of appliances, including:

·        Battery chargers and external power supplies

·        Ceiling fans and ceiling-fan light kits

·        Central air conditioners and heat pumps

·        Clothes washers and dryers

·        Cooking products

·        Dehumidifiers

·        Direct heating equipment

·        Dishwashers

·        Furnace fans

·        Furnaces and boilers

·        Fluorescent and incandescent lamps

·        Fluorescent lamp ballasts

·        Plumbing products

·        Pool heaters

·        Refrigerators and freezers

·        Air conditioners

·        Torchieres

·        Water heaters

In effect, efficiency standards allow the government to control how Americans clean their clothes, cook their food, wash their dishes, and light, heat, and cool their homes. No longer do consumers exercise the freedom to balance appliance performance against cost. In many cases, the efficiency standards increase the price of appliances by more than consumers will recoup from energy savings.17 Taxpayers also pay heavily through tax credits provided to manufacturers for producing energyefficient appliances. Depending on the efficiency of the model and the date of manufacture, dishwasher manufacturers can claim a tax credit of $45 to $75 for every new unit.18 The credit for residential or commercial clothes washers ranges from $75 to $250 per unit, and for refrigerators from $50 to $200 per unit.

It is also worth noting that consumers actually increase energy consumption when the cost of using electricity declines (i.e., greater efficiency).  And, by forcing R&D to focus on energy efficiency, investment in other product innovations suffers.  Recommended Action. Repeal. Energy efficiency standards increase appliance costs and reduce consumer choice.

Relevant Reading.

·        Nicolas Loris, “Today’s Calamity: Energy Efficiency is Good—Except When It’s Not,” Heritage Foundation Foundry blog, September 3, 2009, at http://blog.heritage.org/?p=14085.

·        Ben Lieberman, “An Annoying Regulation for Every

Room in the House,” OpenMarket.org, September

24, 2010, at http://www.openmarket.org/2010/

09/24/an-annoying-regulation-for-every-room-inthe-

house (January 19, 2011).

11.   The EPA Endangerment Finding

Discussion. The basis for the EPA’s regulation of carbon dioxide is the agency’s “finding”24 that so-called greenhouse gases are “air pollutants” actionable under the Clean Air Act. In the 2007 case Massachusetts v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such gases do fall under agency purview and within the scope of the act—legislative history to the contrary.

The EPA has acknowledged25 that the endangerment finding and concomitant regulations will, for the first time, impose costly requirements on millions of businesses and other “facilities,” including apartment buildings, office buildings, even churches.  Farmers also will be entangled in the costly regulations.  Overall, cumulative gross domestic product losses could reach nearly $7 trillion by 2029, and annual job losses could exceed 800,000 in several years.26 Aside from being costly, the “finding” is factually wrong. There is no scientific consensus on the theory of anthropogenic climate change, and significant evidence to the contrary exists. The agency’s endangerment “finding” is all the more suspect given evidence of alleged fraud and deception in the very source documents the agency relied upon to reach its conclusions.27 Recommended Action. Rescind. Congress should prohibit the EPA (or any other agency) from regulating carbon dioxide (or other so-called greenhouse gases). Pending that step, lawmakers should withhold any and all funding related to such regulations, and prohibit expenditures on the same.

Relevant Reading.

·        Nicolas D. Loris, “How the ‘Scientific Consensus’ on Global Warming Affects American Business—and Consumers,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder

No. 2479, October 26, 2010, at

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/10/ how-the-scientific-consensus-on-global-warmingaffects-american-business-and-consumers.

·        David W. Kreutzer and Karen A. Campbell,

“CO2-Emission Cuts: The Economic Costs of the

EPA’s ANPR Regulations.” Heritage Foundation

Center for Data Analysis Report No. CDA08-10,

October 29, 2008, at http://www.heritage.org/ Research/Reports/2008/10/CO2-Emission-Cuts-The-Economic-Costs-of-the-EPAs-ANPR-Regulations.

 

Rolling Back Red Tape:

20 Regulations to Eliminate

By Diane Katz at Heritage.org

 You can read the complete list by going to the above site.

Who can you Trust?

This is the year 2002:






This is yesterday,

from Al Gore's site:

An Answer for Bill February 1, 2011 : 11:43 AM

Last week on his show Bill O’Reilly asked, “Why has southern New York turned into the tundra?” and then said he had a call into me. I appreciate the question.
As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now and they say that increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming:
“In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.”
“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”
Al Gore.

Yes they always want to have it both ways, the spin is truly amazing.

Yet, I believe that I will stick with the answer "God is in charge of the weather".

Farah's Honor Choir photo.