Get married without leaving your car

KRQE-TV.com - Kim Vallez - ALBUQUERQUE - It's a first for New Mexico: a drive-through wedding chapel. This is the story of a businesswoman who wanted to bring joy in a way no one else could. "I've officiated over 555 weddings and counting," Pearl Gabaldón told KRQE News 13. She just loves weddings. Now she's taken her love one step further. A few months ago she decided to open her A Celebration of Love Wedding Chapel on Wellesley Avenue SE. "Here we needed a small wedding chapel and needing something that was cute and with shiny walls," Gabaldón said. Inside is a quaint setting for small weddings. Outside something for the more adventurous. Gabaldón has done only one drive-through wedding so far but looks forward to many more. Why a drive-through? "For fun," she said. "People who use a drive-up window are fun people. "If I was inside I would say, 'Welcome everyone. Please turn off your cell phones.' In the car I say, 'Please turn your radio down." No matter how bad the economy, people still get married, and this is a less-expensive alternative, she added. Read more

Get married without leaving your car

Two kinds of people

Two kinds of people

Clovis Commission denies zoning change request

Many protesters were just following the herd

From the Clovis News Journal - Following a lengthy discussion on development versus wishes of the residents next to those developments, the Clovis City Commission denied a request to change 17 lots at the Horse Run Subdivision into 31 lots for townhouses. Commissioners, in a 7-1 vote, gave concerns of a heavy protest rate from residents in the subdivision, and the fact that the Planning and Zoning Commission declined to act on the request. Kenneth Jones outlined to commissioners a plan to convert the 17 lots at the subdivision into 31 lots for townhomes with a value of around $160,000. It required a zone change from multi-family residential to planned unit development. “This is not a low-income project,” Jones said, noting that the townhouses would be sales and not rentals. The request had a 45 percent protest from property owners within 100 feet of the lots, but two of the 16 residents who came to the meeting noted they signed a petition against the subdivision after the item had gone through the Planning and Zoning Commission. Greg Haverkorn, who has lived in the subdivision for less than a year and was speaking on behalf of protesting residents in the subdivision, said the requested change in zoning would lower the personal value of the neighborhood, even as Jones contended the appraised values would rise. Haverkorn noted that when he purchased his home, he was under the impression townhouses would not come in and, “hands down,” he would not have purchased the house if he knew it would become a “hodgepodge” of single-family homes and townhouses. Read more

Clovis Commission denies zoning change request

Swickard: A nation of criminals made by millions of laws

Commentary by Michael Swickard, Ph.D. - "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." Robert Heinlein  It is thought that what makes America great is that we are a nation of laws. Having laws that are written down allows each of us to know what is expected of us and what we can expect of our government and fellow citizens. That is the good part. The bad part is we have millions upon millions of laws, rules and regulations. Why do we have so many laws, rules and regulations? Because we do not always do what our fellow citizens think we should do. Consider this: if we would act in a certain way without being forced there would be no reason whatsoever for the government to get involved. And there is the rub with our freedom. Every day in every way some busy-body thinks of a new constraint on our actions.  Some rules and some laws make good sense while others seem a giant leap from our senses. Example: I firmly believe that seat belts and air bags have made our lives much safer. And, they would not have been adopted if our government had not lead the charge.  On the other side of smart is the never-ending need of some people to make rules and regulation to keep us safe from ourselves. That is always a journey in the valley of stupid. Recently the New York City government put a ban on sugary drinks that exceed 16 ounces. You can have as many drinks as you want, but only in a 16 ounce cup. So that rule asks: why not buy two drinks if I want 32 ounces of sugar poison? Why indeed.  This imposition of a size of drink is just the nose of the camel under the tent flap. Today the focus is on 16 ounces or less for drinks. Tomorrow, I suspect that sugar drinks will be deader than Elvis. I can see in the coming ages the adage, if it tastes good spit it out because it cannot be good for you.  Read column

Swickard: A nation of criminals made by millions of laws

The "Middle Class" and "Safety Net"

Jim Spence (left)

Commentary by Jim Spence - Some of the dialogue coming out the last few days regarding the fact that 49% of all Americans pay no federal income taxes gives us a strong sense of how ridiculous it is to use the terms “middle class” and “safety net” in the 21st century. Two questions come to mind. 1) Do 49% of Americans need a safety net? 2) Are people who pay no federal income taxes part of the middle class we keep hearing we need to protect?
If the answers to these very simple questions are “yes,” then we are done. No country that wants to continue to be the most prosperous nation on earth provides a safety net for half its population. And no such nation that has a government as deeply involved in managing everyday life as Washington can legitimately count those who pay nothing to support that government as members of the esteemed middle class. The dialogue on this subject would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic. Few elected officials in either party will even dare to answer these questions regarding what percent of the population needs a safety net and roughly where are the dividing lines on the so-called middle class everyone seems so concerned about.

This week a video tape captured Mitt Romney in a rare episode of truth telling regarding how we blow money. What did he get for his honesty? He got a huge dose of cowardice from ambitious people in the Republican Party who are too gutless to tell it like it is. And he got a predictable wave of hypocrisy from everyone in the Democratic Party who thinks safety nets should be provided for half the country. Democrats also continue to refer to millions of people as belonging to the "middle class" even though they don't pay any federal income tax to support their government.

In the meantime, back in the real world, astonishing trends continue right under our noses. Tattoos sell like hotcakes to people who are not asked to pay federal income taxes. I-phones are selling faster than hotcakes to people who pay no federal income taxes. Obesity (not hunger) is the biggest health threat to people who pay no income taxes. And not just a small percentage of senior citizens in need of a safety net, but ALL seniors hand over everything but a small fraction of their healthcare bills to their children and grandchildren through their agents….. in the federal government. The federal government blindly pays claims for a non-means tested giveaway program we call: "Medicare As We Know It."

Instead of putting a stop to this nonsense with intelligent votes, too many voters including baby boomers prefer to simply pretend there is no entitlement-based debt crisis. Working age baby boomers seem to be counting the days until they can sit in the wagon along with the other 49% of America and get other citizens to pull the dead weight of half the U.S. population up the hill.

This week Mitt Romney was shouted down in many quarters for a brief moment of clarity. The media wondered what he was thinking. Not me. I was wondering what all of us Americans are thinking and how did we go so terribly wrong.

The "Middle Class" and "Safety Net"

History Flies By: The "Endeavor"

History Flies By: The "Endeavor"

Were You Better Off 6-years Ago?

Jim Harbison

Commentary by Jim Harbison - The political pundits keep asking “are you better off now than you were four years ago”. I think a more appropriate question is, are you better off now that you were SIX years ago? Why, when current administration has only been in office for four years? The answer is simple. The democrats took over the US House and Senate in 2007 and controlled the agenda, budgets and the legislation. The republicans regained control of the house in 2010 while democrats retained the Senate so the partisan gridlock continued.
Partisan politics and the resultant gridlock have contributed to ongoing high job losses with long term unemployment, lower standards of living, reduction in individual wealth, lower property values, and increased foreclosures. Unfortunately, social safety net programs have become entitlement programs that are unsustainable and are heading for financial collapse. Congress has failed to pass a budget for three consecutive years and the President’s last proposed budget didn’t get a single vote.
The unemployment numbers are horrendous and are often under reported and then quietly readjusted upward several weeks later. In nearly every case the actual number is worst than initially reported. In order to make them look more favorable this administration has readjusted the criteria to reduce their adverse political impact.
Let’s look at the real unemployment numbers. According to a 9/7/12 article by Terence Jeffrey (http://cnsnews.com ) there was a record of 88,921,000 Americans not in the labor force and 119,000 fewer people employed in August than in July. He reported that the unemployment rate dropped from 8.3% to 8.1% because 368,000 people simply dropped out of the labor force in August and are therefore not counted in unemployment statistics. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the August participation percentage (those working or looking for work) has steadily declined since 2008 and is at a 30-year low. It dropped from 63.7% in July to 63.5% in August which ties the horrible September 1981 rate established by President Carter.

Were You Better Off 6-years Ago?