The Hoyts have provided Boston with inspiration for years. Yesterday the Hoyts were running great when the race was stopped, and spectators provided them with help and a ride…
As a tribute to those who lost their lives and as an example to those responsible for Monday’s bombing about the spirit and strength of America, the elder Hoyt says it would be an honor for them to finish the race one day.
“I think it will mean a lot to lot of people,” Dick Hoyt said by telephone Tuesday morning. “If they ask us, we are ready.”
Known as Team Hoyt, the 73-year-old father and his 51-year-old son have been running and competing in triathlons and marathons for more than three decades, inspiring people around the world with their story of perseverance.
Over the past 18 hours, Dick Hoyt said, he and Rick Hoyt have been deluged by well-wishers, supporters and members of the media clamoring for their perspective on the marathon bombing.
The Hoyts’ run on Monday was halted about a mile short of the finish line in downtown Boston, and the Hoyts were only able to make it back to their hotel thanks to a helpful bystander with an SUV who volunteered to give them a ride.
Via Rambling Web
I’m a little tired of politicians not just courting the ‘women’s vote,’ but decreeing what issues are ‘women’s issues.’ Therefore in the interest of fairness we should really clarify not just the ’women’s issues’ but also what are ‘men’s issues’.
The most commonly claimed women’s issue – reproductive health. Fine, we are the ones to get pregnant, so that one goes in our column.
Following that logic, I declare ‘beer and guns’ a men’s issue. Now I like beer, but the numbers are what they are, beer and guns go to the men.
Consequently, the environment goes to the ladies. You ever tried to get a dude with a rifle to drive a Prius? Good luck – we’re taking the environment.
So since the guys have the guns, the military goes to the men – that’s only fair.
However, that also means foreign relations goes to the women. Don’t want the cowboy with the beer and the weaponry trying to talk to the ambassadors of Israel and Saudia Arabia about ‘Peace in the Middle East.’
The economy is more challenging. Concerns about gas prices will have to go to the men since they’re driving the hummers, and the women are driving the hybrids. Jobs are tricky, the women are at home barefoot and pregnant, so they may not need the job. However, are you going to hire the guy who pulls up to work in his Hummer with a 40 in one hand and a rocket launcher in the other? I’m thinking the women are more employable, so that means men are more concerned about the lack of jobs, and the women are more concerned about favorable economic conditions for businesses. Hence cost of gasoline and unemployment concerns go to the men. Deregulation and lower taxes go to the women.
That’s fair, right? Just following the numbers and the facts to their logical conclusion.
Hopefully everyone realizes this is tongue and cheek. However, the analysis that men are all about ‘beer and guns’ is only slightly more offensive than politicians that think women are all about reproductive health. So I’m a pro-environment, small government, socially moderate (maybe even a little left-leaning depending on your POV), fiscally conservative, independent woman who is quite interested in a range of issues that may or may not be deemed ‘women’s issues.’ So good luck candidates, I’m not the only girl out there not interested in your opinion on how I should think or vote.
This, however, isn’t GoDaddy’s only public relations blunder. The president of company trumpeting his ‘big game’ hunting, and a series of tasteless and trashy commercials have left many web professionals looking for an alternative. While they are the most well know domain name registrar they are also likely the most disliked as well.
Yet my complaint about Godaddy is due to their customer service and business practices. I strongly recommend looking for another registrar like Network Solutions or NameCheap, because GoDaddy misleads its customers and bleeds money from them through their dubious practices. The most recent example I encountered is of a client who purchased a domain and email service believing they had also signed up for a hosting account. Technically they could ‘host’ their domain at GoDaddy, but it was a severely limited plan that only allowed for a canned page to be ‘hosted’ at Godaddy, which left them without the actual service they needed.
My initial problem with GoDaddy is that I placed an order using their ‘speedy checkout’ option. This wasn’t a short cut through the order process like it sounds, it was a sneaky way to get customers to sign up for auto-renewal for particular products. Obviously I hold responsibility in this mistake, I should have read over the fine print. However, Godaddy has made a lot of money by misleading people into purchasing the wrong product.
They also hold your credit card number, and you can only check out if you agree to let them hold this information on file. For most online businesses, this is a voluntary choice, not a prerequisite to ordering. GoDaddy is the last company I trust to hold my credit card information, and I highly recommend not allowing them to store your information. At one time, GoDaddy was the only real cost effective choice for domain registration. That is no longer the case, and taking your businesses elsewhere to a company that will treat you fairly is a prudent and wise decision.
I have moved my business to NameCheap.com. I have nothing against Network Solutions, but NameCheap is more affordable and has a good domain management set up. SWITCH2NC is a coupon code you can use to get a dollar off each domain name transfer (effective early March – don’t know the expiration date.) There are other domain name registrars as well, these are just two of GoDaddy’s most prominent competitors. -Katherine Morrison
So it may seem like asking a Granite Stater why New Hampshire should have the first in the nation primary is sort of like asking someone from the Windy City why they think Chicago makes the best pizza. However, the only way to really understand the benefits of New Hampshire’s first in the nation primary is if you have experienced it. I have. I supported and volunteered for Senator McCain in his presidential bid. He won me over during the NH primaries. I joke that I’m an ‘Unrepentant McCain Supporter’ because if I had it all to do over again even knowing the results I would – I don’t regret one moment of it. I still think he was worth it.
Yet I am not compelled to participate in the same manner as last time. However, I am compelled to defend the process. This is a unique element of our political process that is worth keeping. First, let me defend a somewhat accurate criticism of the process, “It’s not fair.” Honestly, it’s not completely fair that NH gets this opportunity when other states don’t. The problem is that the fixes to make it fair don’t work. New Hampshire, Iowa, and South Carolina are the three places where candidates have to meet, talk to, and take questions from actual voters. A national primary day, often described as a fair solution, actually means that presidential contenders no longer have to meet and address voters directly. It would make the process very similar to the general election where candidates with money buy ads and saturate the airwaves with what many consider hollow self-serving sound bites. This doesn’t address fairness; it simply means candidates no longer have to deal with real voters in a meaningful way.
Which brings us to the crux of this issue, why is this part of the process needed and important. The New Hampshire primaries are an important test of the candidates. It’s a sincerity test; can this candidate look me in the eye and honestly tell me why he/she should be leader of the free world? It’s a competency test; can the candidate explain their positions competently and clearly without talking down to the voter, or over simplifying their message? Also, can the candidate deal with the crazy protester in the back that starts wildly yelling when all the protester needed to do was raise their hand and ask their question? It’s a test of empathy and compassion; when a voter who disagrees with a candidate nervously tries to get their question out, does the candidate mow them down, or do they hear them out and address the voter’s concerns? None of these things are adequately addressed via TV. Voters need to meet the candidates in person and this is the point in the process where that’s done.
So why does New Hampshire have the first primary and not other states? First, is tradition – not tradition for tradition’s sake, but tradition because of the level and sincerity of participation. Generation after generation has gone to town halls to test the candidates, and many Granite Staters accept it as a duty and responsibility. By and large, they participate in significant numbers, and they test the candidates in a sincere and responsible manner.
Many states think they want to move up in the primary process, but their citizens are not invested in the manner that Granite Staters are. Do they really want the campaign phone calls a year and a half before the general election? Do they really want to spend their Saturday driving to see a candidate at a town hall that they may find out does not actually suit them? States want the attention that could come from a jump forward in the process, but have not shown that their citizens actually want the responsibility.
Also, there’s a logistics issue when states try to move forward in the process. The more that try to move up, the earlier the vote gets, the more crowded the calendar gets, the more the primary process starts to mimic general election politics and that unique test of the candidates is either watered down or lost.
So if you want to say I am biased, you’re right. I’m a New Hampshire voter and I want to preserve our unique tradition. However, the reason I want to preserve this tradition is not so that I can say that I have something you don’t. I want to preserve this tradition because it significantly enhances the presidential political process. It does benefit New Hampshire, but more importantly it benefits the country. This is an important first hurdle that gives candidates short on money a shot, and stops candidates short on sincerity, ideas, and motivation in their tracks. Don’t let this part of the presidential process evaporate, no one benefits from that in the end.
So for a little shameless self-promotion, I have a nice clean, quiet, condo in Epping, NH up for sale. It is perfect for a political campaigner/staffer, or media member who is looking to cover the 2012 primaries. Last election I attended numerous campaign events in Exeter, Hampton, Portsmouth, Manchester, Bedford, Rochester, Keene, Concord, Claremont, and more. Okay so Claremont was a drive, but this condo is perfectly situated, just minutes from Rt 101 and Rt 125. This makes both the Seacoast and the Manchester area very accessible. It’s a town over from Exeter, 25 minutes to Manchester, 20 minutes to Hampton, 1 hour to the Lakes Region, 1.5 hours to Boston, 2 hours to the White Mountains, 15 minutes to Rt 95, and 20 minutes from Rt 93. This condo isn’t just convenient, it’s nicely situated in a quiet wooded area. It has new appliances and floors, and was hooked up to town water just last summer. It is an excellent deal, and a great opportunity for a first time home owner whether you’re into politics or not. Live in tax free New Hampshire, and take advantage of easy access to the ocean, the lakes, the mountains, and the cities, while living in Epping, a delightful small New England town.
Check out the listing for this charming Epping NH Condo.
Two of my main complaints about politics is that no one ever admits they’re wrong, and no one ever gives their political opponent any credit. So here’s my Maya culpa – last night President Obama definitively proved me wrong, and he deserves a ton of credit. As a McCain supporter, I thought President Obama would have a tiptoe-though-the-tulips style weak foreign policy. While last night wasn’t the only time instance where he proved that theory incorrect, it was the most definitive proof that I was flat out wrong. A weaker leader may have tried to capture instead of kill Bin Laden, a weaker leader may have hesitated in making the actual decision, a weaker leader may not have okayed a ‘at sea burial.’ All these decisions were not only appropriate, but needed. Kudos President Obama, you’ll always be remember as the guy who got Bin Laden.
A second big congratulations goes to the military, CIA, and all other operatives that played a role in pulling this off. Fortunately, America has learned it’s lesson from Vietnam and gives it’s service members the respect they are due. However, many of these operatives and Special Forces members can’t be fully recognized for their exceptional service, as secrecy is obviously vital in what they do. So a special thank you to those we don’t really know, whose job we often don’t fully understand, who sacrifice greatly without glory or adulations. Kudos to a job so well done.