Two Recommendations

Here are two articles I recommend reading. Good stuff here.

"Health Care - If Government Doesn't Do It, Who Will?"

"In Obama We Trust?"

Digital Photo Tip: Renaming Files

If you take a lot of digital photos, you probably are familiar with seeing file names that start with "img" or "dsc" or some other 3 letter code followed by some kind of number. This is what your particular camera names each file. The problem is a file name of "img_00003245" does not really tell us much of anything about the image. Wouldn't it be better if the file was named "beach2009_012"? We would then know just by looking at the file name that the image was taken while on a beach trip in 2009. With that in mind, let me offer a couple recommendations about renaming your digital photos.

Many cameras have the ability to change the default 3 letter code given to each image. You'll have to check your menu (or even better your manual) to see if your camera has this feature. I changed mine to my initials (RAU). By just doing that I am tagging the images coming from my camera with a file name associated with me. If my images were mixed in with other people's images from an event, the file name "RAU_006765" would indicate that image came from me. This is certainly better than having my images tagged with the generic "img_".

Even better though is to rename your image files with a name that corresponds with the event where the images were taken, like my "beach2009_012" example above. Here is my own workflow: I usually shoot with two cameras so I can always have lenses with two different focal lengths. I have the internal clocks of both cameras in sync. When I import onto my computer the images from the two memory cards, all those images are loaded into one folder. My desire is to rename all the images, and at the same time put them into the order in which they were taken. Because the two cameras' clocks are in sync, and because the time each image was taken is imbedded into each image, it is possible to put them in chronological order. I use a program called "A Better Rename Finder", a Mac only shareware program, that allows me to batch rename thousands of images automatically, all at one time. There are several renaming freeware and shareware programs out there that you could try. Because it can be done as a batch, and because it makes renaming files so easy, there really is no reason not to rename your digital photos. I highly recommend doing so. Let me know if you have any questions about this.

Health Care, Housing, & Food

If health care is a constitutional right, then so is housing and food. All three are fundamental needs every person has (arguably housing and food more so), all are substantial pieces of our nation's GDP, all can be expensive for individual consumers. In that light, why shouldn't government be involved in fundamentally changing and reforming how we eat and where we sleep? Here is my modest proposal:

Let's start with food. There is no need for anyone to consume more than 2000 calories each day, and yet some people are wastefully doing that in one meal. Consider the amount of money saved if every person was limited to a daily diet of 2000 calories. Also consider how this program will turn fat and unhealthy people into thin and healthy people. A huge windfall for our health care system. I am proposing a Food Czar who will take care of administering this program. Anyone caught consuming more than their alloted 2000 calories will incur a 2.5% tax. The government will distribute coupons (to be known as Food Stamps) which will be the only accepted form of payment in purchasing food. Grocery stores found to not comply by also accepting dollar bills will incur a 7.5% tax.

Now to housing. It is fundamentally unfair that 50% of the people in the United States do not own their home. To rectify this, the federal government will buy all housing. People who currently do not own their home will have to rent from one of the government approved (owned) rental properties. People who currently own their home can keep it, for now. If they should move, they will have to turn their current home over to the government and rent from one of the government approved (owned) rental properties. If they still live in their home 5 years after this bill is passed, they will at that point have to turn their home over to the government and rent from one of the government approved (owned) rental properties. It should be noted here that the government really does not want to be in the housing business, and anyone who says otherwise is misled, lying, and un-American.

Whole Foods

Sometimes I wonder if by writing about things political, it has any affect on whether people would select me as their photographer for their wedding. After watching the response by ultra liberals to John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods, and his opinions about health care, I have to imagine that yes it might affect the decision of some people. But to be honest, I don't really care. People can be petty and intolerant of other people and their opinions. I'm not quite sure why it should affect their decision though. My doctor had an Obama campaign poster hanging in his office the day Obama declared he was running for president. I did not change doctors. I go to him for medical advice and care, and I trust him. Period. I would hope people would treat me with that same kind of regard.

I do find it disgusting though what has been written about Mackey, as well as the boycotts these people are organizing against Whole Foods. I have no particular affection for Whole Foods. They are listed as one of the top 25 companies to work for though. They apparently offer great benefits, treat their employees very well, and generally line up with the liberal line of thinking on how to run a responsible company. They are non-union, so they have the union thugs to contend with, and undoubtedly the unions have seized on this moment to disgrace Mackey and Whole Foods. The flyer here (click on to enlarge) was being passed out by union members outside Whole Foods the other day. Pretty over the top in its wording. The UFCW website calls Mackey a "radical" for his stance against Obama's health care reform. Liberals seemed to love Mackey and Whole Foods, until Mackey took a stand against a policy pushed by their messiah. The nerve of this man.

Nikon D'Town

It's been a rainy day today, and fortunately no wedding to shoot in the rain, so I caught up on some old podcasts I've been meaning to watch. For those of you who shoot with Nikon cameras, you might enjoy watching the Nikon D'Town video podcasts. These 30 minute shows are hosted by Scott Kelby and Matt Kloskowski, two guys best known for their Photoshop/Lightroom expertise. It's easy enough to skip through the podcast, just watching what you want. Probably not everything they talk about is relevant to your photography, but there are some good tips and explanations on camera and menu features. Good way to spend a rainy day. By the way, I subscribe to the podcasts through iTunes.

A Reasonable Health Care Reform Proposal

I've been on this health care reform debate for some time now. Sorry about that, but this is important stuff for our country. A lot has been written denouncing the Obama plan for being a back door way for the federal government to take a fuller and deeper control over our lives; less has been written about what real reform should look like. A couple months ago I used an analogy about building motels and the need for choice. To take that analogy further, imagine the federal government mandated what every motel has to offer. Let's say that mandate includes everything from free internet to room service to ballrooms. Now, to be sure, motels already must conform to building and health codes, but after that motels are free to be different. It's those differences that make one motel cost $39 a night while the one next door is $139 a night. I'm usually fine with the $39 one. I don't need the ballroom or room service or the fancy bed sheets. If motels were mandated to offer not only everything, but the same things, chances are I would never have the $39 choice.

So what should real health care reform look like? How about the following:

1. Less regulation and fewer mandates laid on insurance companies by the federal government. Let insurance companies develop plans that don't cover every illness or disease represented by some lobbyist. If I am single with little chance of getting pregnant, why do I need pre-natal coverage?

2. Let insurance companies compete nationwide. I heard one senator mention that one of the problems with this is that coverage in northern Virginia costs more than in the midwest, so people in northern Virginia would be wanting to buy coverage from a midwest insurance company. Certainly companies can set a price structure depending on location, much like auto insurance companies do. Bottom line is competition and the inevitable result of lower prices.

3. Tort reform. This is the big elephant in the room that Democrats refuse to acknowledge. Reform the role lawyers play in jacking up costs in health care, and you could probably pay for all of those who are currently uninsured from that.

4. Reform Medicare. I don't have any proposals here, but this has been the government's attempt at federalized health care, and even while doctors continue to be underpaid through Medicare, it is still running a huge deficit. If Medicare was a stellar example of being a winner for everyone involved, perhaps a socialized style of health care would enjoy a better sell. On the contrary Medicare is in trouble and the government has been slow and ineffective in fixing it. That should be all the warning we need to have about the federal government's attempted takeover of health care.

Politicians make promises during election campaigns. While their numbers never add up and their promises seem empty, we let them slide because it is all part of the campaign. Health care promises are no longer part of an election campaign. Now the numbers need to add up, and the promises need to have substance and foundation to be believed. Obama is offering neither. His numbers don't make sense, his promises are not trustworthy. More and more people are realizing this, and consequently more and more people are unwilling to buy into the health care reform proposed by Obama and the democrats. For the sake of our country, this is a good thing.

My Town Hall Question

Mr. President: When it comes to health care reform, the only bill we have available to look at is the 1000 page bill in the House (H.R. 3200). When you tell the American people that detractors of health care reform are either misinformed or outright lying about the proposed legislation, by default you must be referring to this particular bill. Now, people smarter than me have read the entire bill, and they have in a very reasoned manner listed by section and page(s) aspects of the bill that they believe are troubling. Indeed, they have used the actual wording in the actual bill to make many of their points, points that you now describe as being false and/or misleading. For someone like me I have to ask myself, do I trust these people who have read the bill? Do I trust their assessment of the language, the intentions, the loopholes, and the ultimate consequences of this bill, or do I trust you?

The fact is that all of this is very confusing. You tell us that these people have it all wrong, and that the bill does not say what these people say it says; but I have yet to hear you point to any of the sections or any of the pages of the bill to make your point. In other words, you are asking us to simply trust you when you say that you don't want the federal government to take over health care, that we get to keep our own private health insurance, our own doctors, that all of this will cost us less and give us more, even though the bill seems to be saying the exact opposite. My question: would you provide the sections and the pages of the bill that support what you are telling us? As a follow up, if only one aspect of this bill were to survive, would you tell us the section and page(s) of the bill that you believe is the most important?

UPDATE: This following video is indicative of what I am referring to above. This video is on the White House Reality Check website. Everything that this doctor says, and everything that Obama says, is said without any reference to the actual bill. They make these promises and they tell us what they think we want to hear, but that doesn't matter if the bill says otherwise. Show me in the actual bill that congress might be voting on where it supports what you are promising.

David & Jane

Just a quick set of images from Dave and Jane's wedding on August 15 at Our Lady Of Hope and Belmont C.C. It was a great crowd, lots of action on the dance floor, and late night sliders (how great is that!). Anyhow, check out the Wedding Sample Gallery 2009 Part 2 later in the week for more images. Click on images to enlarge.

Sheila Jackson Lee is Full Of It

Flipping through channels tonight, I caught Sheila Jackson Lee (SJL), Democratic Representative from Texas, being interviewed by Greta van Susteren. She was being asked about her behavior at this week's town hall in Texas. If you have not seen the video, while a woman was asking a question during the town hall, SJL pulled out her cellphone to talk with someone. This would be considered rude in just about everyone's book, but apparently not in hers. She did not think anything of it until called on it. But what is fishy to me is her explanation. She tells us that she was on a health hotline getting information about the health bill, which she claims she has read. I don't believe her excuse, and I don't believe her when she says she read the bill. Okay, maybe she read bits and pieces, let's say maybe 15-20 pages of the 1000. That way she can say in passing that she read the bill (just not all of it). I find the hotline excuse though highly questionable. I don't have a good explanation for why she would lie about that, other than talking with the health hotline sounds better than talking with someone about a dinner order. Thing is, who is going to fact check that? No one is going to make a request for phone records, although I wonder if those kind of records can be made public through the Freedom of Information Act. The woman asking the question said afterward that she was under the impression that SJL was talking with one of her aides in regards to recognizing dignitaries who were in attendance. This woman said this even after apparently having an extended conversation (according to SJL) with SJL after the town hall. In her interview tonight, SJL talked like this woman is her new best friend, and that she cares very much about her. Yeah, right. She also said she was all about listening to her constituents, but then proceeded to say that she was intent on convincing them that she is right about this health care bill, and that they are wrong. So much for listening.

If you are interested in reading someone else's thoughts on the health care bill, someone who has actually read it, my old college buddy Mark Hamilton has written a nice analysis of the bill.

He writes: "This bill is lengthy and boring with technical language making it extremely difficult to follow especially if one is not versed in the legal nuances of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. I’m a professional philosopher with the skill to decipher challenging reading, but this bill makes Aristotle and Kant look like a piece of cake. It will take bureaucrats years to explain and apply the intricacies of this bill and I doubt if more than a few Congressmen could even follow the train of thought.

The bill causes one to realize that we already have a large government controlled health care program called Medicare. The majority of this new bill is amendments to Medicare leading to a major expansion and overhaul of its system."

Health Care . . The Gateway Drug

On one hand we have health insurance companies who, as publicly held private enterprises, have managed to make pretty good profits. And while people have antidotal experiences when their insurance company let them down, by and large insurance companies come through for us when we file a claim. Now contrast that with government run programs, such as Medicare, or Obama's example . . the U.S. Postal Service. Both of these have been running at huge deficits. If they were private companies they would have gone out of business years ago. Instead, despite corruption and excessive waste, they are allowed to live on at our expense. We cover the difference through taxes and higher fees. If you were building a case for which system seems to work best, and which system we should be building upon, it seems obvious that private enterprise best serves our country and our needs. But if you owned a company, especially a struggling business trying to stay afloat, would you encourage people to use your competitors over you? No. You want their business. You need their business. And if you were in a position to legally put your competitors out of business, while you would think it wrong to do so, you would still entertain doing it.

No one knows what this health care reform bill will look like when congress votes on it, or what it will look like once it finally hits the president's desk, but even if it gets severely watered down, any doors left open for the federal government to exploit will eventually come back to bite us. Health care is a gateway drug for these politicians wanting a federalized, socialistic health care system in America. Once they get something passed that opens doors for more control, they will never be satisfied until they have full control. So far they have showed us their hand, much like Hilary showed her hand back in 1993. Back then there was no doubt that her plan (and her husband's) for health care was a greatly enlarged presence by the government. You would think in a capitalistic country that leaders would first try to solve problems within the context of capitalism, not socialism; and yet both the Clintons and Obama went right for the centralized government system as their solution.

Much of the fallback being heard at these town hall meetings is resistance toward socialist looking solutions, along with the accompanying spending, excessive taxation, and loss of personal responsibility and freedom. You could make the claim that, because of Obama's health care reform, our country has not been this divided in a long time. So much for the great uniter. I really have to wonder though if Obama really knows anything about what he is talking about. He publicly makes claims that are patently untrue: how doctors make decisions, how much doctors charge for amputating a leg, his own stance on single payer insurance, AARP's endorsement for his plan, This is important stuff, and since Obama is the face and voice for this reform, he needs to be accountable for what is in the bill. It would be good for him to have a 2 hour town hall with detractors to go in depth over significant aspects of the bill as it stands. By detractors I am not referring to a shouting match, but instead a reasoned back and forth. If he is going to make the claim that people will not lose their private insurance, then he needs to walk through those parts of the bill that put severe restrictions on private health insurers, explaining why those provisions are there, and what their ramifications will be on both the companies and on private citizens. Right now he gets away with just saying people will be able to keep their private insurance, and we're supposed to trust him on that, even through the bill seems to indicate something different.

Right now there is a lot of confusion over what the bill says and what people say is in the bill. 1000 pages of confusion. A 5th grader could read and understand our Constitution . . no confusion there. Right now we need some clarity.

Health Care . . Again

With all the town hall protests and unrest making the news, I'm kind of feeling like people are getting lost in the weeds over the issue of health care. Seems to me that the health care bill people are dissecting and arguing about is not really a bill yet. There are a lot of loose ends in it, so people are rightfully asking questions about what certain parts of it mean, but ultimately what a senator or congressman or the president says really doesn't matter, mostly because they really don't know what it says now or what it will say if and when it gets passed. There is absolutely no reason to believe politicians though when they claim that their reform will result in lower prices and better care. In fact I don't hear any Democratic politician telling us what the downside to this reform will be. Something has to give, either it will cost us personally or our economy in general a huge amount of dollars, and/or we will have to get by with fewer doctors, less care, and longer waits. If you believe what they are telling us, this reform will mean the best of everything for everyone. Yeah, right. No wonder we cannot trust them.

I said earlier that I thought people were getting lost in the weeds. By that I mean what I believe is really bothering people is that health care is just one more thing this administration wants to take over in our lives, regardless of the price. Add to it the billions spent on stimulus, bailing out banks and auto makers, cap and trade, energy, and on and on. Add all of these up, add up all of the money involved, add all of the government control, and you get one big, very obvious neon sign with lots of noise screaming "Our government is completely out of control!". I think what people are really saying is this: stop the spending . . stop the meddling . . stop the nonsense, before it destroys our country. Unfortunately, I don't get the impression that these politicians are listening. They know what is best for us. Yeah, right.

Drew & Caitlin

Drew graduated from Park View . . Caitlin graduated from Loudoun Valley. Their wedding took place August 8 at the Briar Patch. More photos to come. Click image to enlarge.

Something Doesn't Add Up

We keep hearing that there are approximately 45 million people in America without health care. That number has always been in dispute due to the amount of illegal aliens included, as well as the number of people who choose not to buy insurance (usually youth people) or people in between jobs. But get this: according to the 2006 census, the total population of the US is 297 million. The census reports that 202 million are covered by private insurance and that 80 million are covered by government health programs. 202 plus 80 equals 282. 297 minus 282 equals 15. So according to the 206 census, approximately 15 million people are without health insurance. 15 million is 15 million, a large number; but it is not 45 million. Do we really need to change the health care of 282 million in order to add on the other 15 million? Do we really need to turn over the entire health care system to the federal government? It would be like tearing down your entire house in order to remodel your half bath. Of course in the land of $5000 toilets, where Congress spends half a billion dollars to buy airplanes for their own use, you would expect this kind of nonsense.

Health Care Prediction

After being inspired by a comment made by Charles Krauthammer, I have a prediction on what will happen with Obama's health care reform. Krauthammer believes that ultimately what will pass this year will be some kind of health insurance reform legislation. If that ends up being true, my impression is that this will not involve any funds from the fed and will basically include any or all of the following: require insurance companies to cover people who in the past could not get insurance, require insurance companies to ignore pre-existing conditions, regulate how much insurance companies can charge for premiums, and regulate how much an insurance company can profit and/or earn. It would be a heavy handed way for the federal government to control the insurance industry, and ultimately health care, without the federal government having to outlay any funds . . for now.

If this scenario ends up coming true, health care will end up in the same position that the housing market found itself. In the housing industry, banks and mortgage companies were forced by the government to create mortgage vehicles and approve loans for people who otherwise could not afford to purchase a home. Traditional norms and standards that made sense for approving loans were abandoned. People on both sides of the aisle were excited to see home ownership numbers growing, but those numbers were built on unstable ground. As conditions changed and house values decreased, people who could not afford to pay their mortgage. So the government intervened, bailing out banks and taking greater control over how those banks operated.

Project out about five years from now. Health insurance companies, forced to take on clients who are wiping them out financially, forced to not be able to raise premiums without federal approval . . these companies will go under . . one by one. There to take over will be the federal government with its own insurance system . . and Obama's health care reform will finally take place. That is unless we can change the tide. It's time for a different kind of hope and change.

Fixing A Bad External Hard Drive

I wrote about this before, but had to go through the experience again and thought I would share my results once again. I have a 500 gb Western Digital My Book external hard drive. For the past two days I have tried probably a dozen times without success to mount the drive on my computer. I used different cables, both firewire and usb . . I tried it on my Mac Pro desktop computer and on my MacBook Pro laptop . . I tried different power cords. Nothing. So I went back to my secret formula: put the hard drive in the freezer for a couple days, take it out and let it assume room temperature, plug it in to the computer, and there it was . . mounted. This is not a guarantee, but it sure is worth giving a try if you have a hard drive that appears to be dead.

A World View

Everyone has a world view. We each have a way that we see things, how things work, the nature of man, the nature of God, how to treat people, what is important. Built on the foundations laid by our families, our schooling, our religious upbringing, the media, our friends; we take all of that and mold it into what we, or I, believe. In the end it really is a personal decision: our world view becomes who we are, and who we are becomes our world view. Once we know what that world view is, assuming it is coherent and consistent, we can apply it to things like politics, personal values, community values, and business values.

For me, my world view is pretty simple: I believe we are created by God in His image. We are fallen creatures, separated from God but designed to be in relationship with Him. Until we re-establish that relationship, we are lost and unfulfilled in life. Jesus came to make that relationship possible. All of this is important and lends to my world view, but what is present throughout this (although not said) is that there is value and purpose in each person. There is something magically important about the individual. To that end the individual should be protected and valued at all cost. Our forefathers understood this by declaring that the individual has the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". This is an individual's right, not a group right.

So much today in the legislative world revolves around establishing group rights. Perhaps the most current example is health care. The federal government in its current form believes that all Americans have a right to health care. To try and make that happen, they will ultimately be willing to strip or restrict the individual of their own personal choices. They won't admit to that because they know if people knew that was the ultimate outcome, this whole federal health care reform would have died months ago. What they are after is uniformity. Everyone carries the same coverage, everyone falls under the same guidelines, everyone is subject to the same rationing, the same lines, the same treatment. While this might sound great to the uninsured person who relies on overcrowded clinics for their health care needs, believing that they will now receive the same world class treatment given to a wealthier or insured person; in reality this sameness will result in lowering the standards. Profit, and the opportunity to turn years of training and sacrifice into an attractive income, will be less attractive to doctors and medical professionals. Research companies will go out of business if there is no profit left in doing research. Fewer doctors treating 45 million additional patients will naturally result in longer lines, lower quality, frustration, and higher costs. Which of these sounds appealing to you?

Big government, and giving government more and more power in our lives, ultimately means the death of the individual. The government cannot handle the individual. Walk into a DMV, pick a number, and breathe in your personal worth. Read 1000 pages of health care reform and celebrate the personal freedoms spread throughout it. They just don't exist. Politicians will tell us that it is all about providing health care to each person. They have to tell us that to sell it. If the Obama inspired health care bill is passed, kiss your freedom goodbye. You will no longer be an individual.