|
|
|
![]() |
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 17 >>
I have not had a physical in five years. This is not something I am proud of. It is just the truth. I don't get sick very often. Which is good. But the downside is that I haven't been able to find a good general physician.
I think it is because I was spoiled living Fort Wayne, IN. I had the greatest doctor from the moment I was born. Dr. Muhler was awesome. Graduated from Notre Dame. Very knowledgeable. Voted by doctors in his community as the doctor they would most like to be treated by. Heck, his father invented fluoride toothpaste for Proctor & Gamble.
Realizing I was coming to Fort Wayne at the end of this month, I figured I would try to schedule a physical with Dr. Muhler, but alas, the next physical appointment available is in November. Ohh well.
But this got me thinking, it wasn't just Dr. Muhler. Fort Wayne, as a whole, has an awesome healthcare community. It is a community that no where else I have lived or been to has been able to compete with.
If my gallbladder needs to say goodbye to my kidney, I want Dr. Justice yanking that sucker out.
If I inadvertently knock somebody up, the first face I want my first child to see is Dr. Alexander.
If I get cancer, the person making my body feel on fire due to the chemo had better be Dr. Rhinehart.
But this post isn't about all the doctors I psuedo-know. It's about Universal Healthcare. Because it hit me how important having a doctor who is knowledgeable and trustworthy is to your overall health.
When we don't feel comfortable with a situation, we are inclined to neglect it. Be it a relationship, or a job, or our healthcare. This would be Universal Healthcare's impact on the American medical community.
People are given less options. They feel less in control. And they ultimately become distrustful of the whole process.
We then would seek out medical care where we can get control. Just like how I was attempting to get a physical close to 600 miles from my home, so will millions of Americans if Universal Healthcare becomes a reality. But instead of 600 miles, it will be 6,000 miles as we leave the country to find our best options.
It's called medical tourism, and it would be an inevitable consequence of Universal Healthcare.1
Two years ago, I called it. Two years ago, everyone called me insane. Two years ago, everyone just told me to shut up. But I called it! And it ain't stopping anytime soon.
I have made it no secret on this blog and on air that I vehemently appose the seat belt law. I will even go as far as saying that I think it is the largest domestic affront that I am concerned about in this country. More than wiretapping. More than drug use. More than abortion. More than anything.
And the reason this simple, "well-meaning" law is such an afront is that it is the first example of the government saying "we are here to protect you from yourself."
It's a fundamental shift in our understanding of the role of Government in our life. It transcends into every other issue this country faces because we have conceded by silence that we agree the government is better at taking care of us than ourselves.
Every other law on our books is designed to protect us from others, not ourselves. And while the Soccer-moms and AAA-organizations and the Police-organizations of this world cheered the governments attempt to make our society safer, I lamented.
And my reason for this was because it doesn't stop with the seat belt law.
I said back in 2006 one of the next steps was legislating our health, and then today I get a Press Release from a publicist in my inbox confirming it has begun. The basic gist: the US1 government is starting to take obese kids away from parents.
They justify that it is unhealthy for the child and costing the public billions of dollars.2 Seat belt laws started off this way too. Only kids had to be buckled up. Now it is everyone.3
So again I ask, where does it stop? What's next? Why do we applaud this kind of action by an increasingly too-powerful government? The seat belt was just the beginning...
We have been on the radio for three years now. I have decided that unlike men, all opinions are not created equal which means not everyone deserves to have an opinion. For now on, I am going to require a simple, but apparently difficult, logic test for all people before they share an opinion.
Ready...
True or false:
If A implies B.
Then B implies A.
Simple enough right? Think you know the answer? Read on...
The inspiration behind this post is an email we received last night from Lucida on our topic "Man's Best Friend Has Become Man's God". She writes: "From a factual standpoint: It has been well studied and documented that animal cruelty is associated with crimes against human beings." The implication. Those that are cruel to animals are just destined to become murders.
Now the study she is referring to is true. It has been proven that those who have committed serious crimes had shown a propensity towards animal cruelty before acting out on humans. But does the inverse ring true as well?1
Another classic statement I hear is that studies have shown that serial rapists were also pornography users.
Well duh! Of course those who are rapists are going to have an abnormal view of sexuality. But does the inverse run true? Are those who struggle with porn one image away from becoming a rapist?
When I was in high school, I took an Introduction to Philosophy class at Huntington University. As I later realized, it was less a class on classic philosophy and more a class on logic. The above test was essentially day one of the class.
Let's take the murders and rapists and alphabet letters2 out of the equation and put it in more simple terms.
If it is raining the streets are wet. The streets are wet, therefore it must be raining. Wait a minute, something isn't right about that statement.
And now we are back to my test. Why doesn't that sound right? Because logic that assumes since a implies b, therefore b implies a is false. The streets could be wet because of a fire hydrant or because a dam break or thousands of other reasons.
If you answered true to the test above, you would be wrong, and no longer deserve to have an opinion as there is something fundamentally wrong at the core of your logic.
If you have an opinion, be sure to leave it in the comment box below.3
I can't stand Nancy Grace. I am sure she is a fine person in real life, but there are at least 4 things that bother me: 
The interesting part about all this: Allen has been good friend's with Nancy Grace's husband for over 20 years. Which is ok. I am sure Allen can't stand some of my friends.2 But it leads to some hilarious conversations between the two of us...
Here's the background. Nancy is having a party, so Allen got an evite from her. And by her, I mean Nancy's assistant. But the funny thing about the evite is that she spelled "Grace" - "Gace." I saw this and was found it slightly humorous.
Now please remember that Allen makes fun of me for not being a good speller, and, lets be honest, if Allen ever needed an evite sent out, I would be the one to do it.
And here is our e-mail back-and-forth....
Andy
Is this Nancy Grace's party and her assistant just doesn't know how to spell her name ;-)
Say what you will about my spelling, but if I ever fill out an evite for you, I'll spell your name right.
Allen
That right there is why you do not work for Nancy Gace but rather for Allen Hurnt
Andy
Ohh I thought it was because she was a disgrace excuse of an attorney...but no, no, you're right...it's the spelling thing.
Allen
Did you mean undefeated?3 I thought so
Andy
The Patriots were undefeated, it didn't mean they didn't cheat....
Allen
Did they win the trophy or not? I thought so
Andy
Did Nancy finish her career as an attorney or not? Oh that's right, she's on network TV right behind Showbiz Tonight. No totally, I understand. That's totally like winning the SuperBowl.
Showbiz Tonight Anchor: "...Well that was our story on Paris Hilton not wearing panties at Club Pear in Beverly Hills. Now continuing with Headline News true journalism and commentary, let's kick it over to Nancy Grace..."
Nancy Grace: "...Thanks. I have so won the SuperBowl being on this Network. My only regret is that E! didn't pick me up first and then I could be with that dream boat Joel McHale."
Allen
And I was a megachurch pastor who now follows RERUNS of XXXXXXXXXXXX4
Andy
And I followed you. Hmmm.....
What can I say. Allen's a good friend and defends her well. And I freaking love my job!
I went to Hilton Head again this weekend. It was wonderful. I relaxed and did absolutely nothing on Friday but sit on the beach and listen to music. Had good discussion with Charlie. Watched baseball with Nick. Julia studied her Bar Review materials. Great time. But on the drive down, I paid over $4.00 per gallon for fuel for the first time. In doing so, I think I am the only American that doesn't mind it a bit.
Fuel is in theory at "record highs" right now, but my question is "record highs" compared to what? The 1990s? The 1970s? Let's put this in perspective.
When adjusted for inflation, fuel prices are just $.25 more per gallon than they were in 1979. While this still constitutes a "record high" label, it isn't quite the burdening number most of us think it is.
The chart below shows fuel prices from 1979 to 2008. Look how the red line (actual price paid) jumps significantly higher, but when adjusted for inflation, it stays relatively the same.
Think about the price you paid for your house in 1982. Doesn't your current house look ridiculously expense when in comparison to your 1982 house? It's the same with fuel.

The problem lies in perception. For some reason we bought the idea that the fuel prices of the late 90s were somehow the norm, instead of an anomaly. I remember one time filling up at a Speedway station in Fort Wayne, IN for $.76 in the summer of 1999.
But these fuel prices were largely due the Asian market crash of the 90s (as well as the tech burst) and should never have been thought of as normal. In fact, they were further from normal on the low-side, as fuel prices are now on the high-side.
Now we all know I am super anal retentive. So I went through my records and pulled up every1 fuel purchase I made from 2002 to 2008. When adjusted for state differential and inflation, I am paying approximately $2.00 more a gallon now when compared to 2002. So it is easy to see why it "feels" bad. But in 2002 we were still $.25 below the adjusted norm of 1979.

So does this mean fuel prices are where they should be? No. I am not going to say that. It is slightly high. But these things will correct themselves over time. What I am saying is that for most of us out there, the pain at the pump is more a mental problem than it is an actual budget problem.
And heck, at least we aren't in Europe paying over $9.00 per gallon for fuel. We have much to be grateful for.
P.S. For those who want the charts of date you can find them here: Fuel Prices Workbook. And if you really want to see an example of my anal retentiveness, you can see my Fuel Mileage Worksheet for my Honda Civic.
Did you see the most recent attempt of James Dobson trying to prove his political prowess? In a 27 minute segment, Dobson accused Obama of "deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view, his own confused theology." Jon Stewart put it a bit more comedically.
Now I am not a blind follower of Jon Stewart theology. The truth is, the Old Testament and New Testament talk about homosexuality, so the issue can't simply be written off as if Leviticus is the only place this is discussed. And I did listen to Barack's whole speech back in January and it was brilliant.
But I am not here to discuss political speeches or debate Jewish comedian exegesis. What I think needs to be addressed is what I think Dobson's legacy will be: dividing our culture to the point where sincere and loving relationships are impossible except in cases where you agree with every opinion.
This past week I met someone who I thought might be a new friend here in Atlanta. We both shared a huge interest in aviation. So I was excited since most of my friends make fun of my aviation curiosity. I could tell from his Facebook page that he was gay. But didn't think anything of it.
So we started talking online and he instantly wants to know about the radio show I produce. He asks are we right wing. I say nope. We are moderate. Next question, "so do you think all homosexuals are going to hell?" Thank you James Dobson.
I, of course, try and explain my thoughts on the issue; probably not very eloquently. But I could tell, it was a loss cause.
Nevermind that last weekend I said on the air one of the three celebrities I'd like to have coffee with is Ellen DeGeneres.
Nevermind that I have defended gay marriage from a legal perspective in other blogs.
Nevermind that I have had lunch with a porn producer.
Nevermind that I sincerely consider Erik of AllenHuntShowSucks.com a friend and genuinely care for the dude.
Thanks to the Dobsonion worldview, a Bible-believing Christian and a homosexual just can't be friends.
It brings me back a little to high school. There was a gay boy at my high school named Jason (not real name). Jason was a year younger than me, and while I am sure there were other gay individuals at Homestead, he was the only one who was "out." I primarily met Jason because he was good friends with my girlfriend Theresa.
I liked Jason. He was a good guy. I can remember one specific night when I was at the school after 10pm working on the yearbook by myself in the pub room. Jason was there for something related to show choir. I don't know what brought him to the pub room that night, but we had a great conversation. Towards the end, I remember saying, "you know Jason, we aren't very different." To which he replied, "No Andy, I don't think that is the case."
The truth is, most of us aren't very different from one another. We just choose to allow the few differences to get in the way. Thanks James.
I came across an article where Russian President Dmitri Medvedev was blaming the US for the global economic crisis. My first thought was, "ok, so let me get this straight international community: when the economy is good around the world, the US is a greedy, selfish nation, but when the economy is bad, it is America's fault?" We just can't win, huh? I'll leave that at that for now. My second thought was, "being a father is a lot like being America," sometimes, you just can't win.
This drew my thoughts to a conversation we had during production planning a couple of weeks ago. We were talking about doing a show around Father's day, and it instantly turned negative. I piped in and said, "why is it when we do a show on Mother's day, it is about how great moms are. But when we do shows about dads, it's always about their short comings." Let's just do a positive show about dads for once.
It reminds me of this Jeff Foxworthy bit:
I gotta admit, I am a little guilty of that. I might not have been on Oprah (yet), but it doesn't change that I have been disrespectful in the past. This is all the more damning after reading a book by Shaunti Feldhan called For Women Only, where she details that 74% of all men would rather feel alone and unloved than disrespected and inadequate. As a man, it is a sentiment that I would agree with, and a sentiment I realized that many times I have failed to show towards my dad.
I was touched by something Tim Russert said about his dad that I came across this week. Take a listen:
My dad has sacrificed a lot for me to have the life I have. But that isn't what I respect him the most for. So at the risk of getting too long, I am going to list the seven things I respect my dad for the most:
Thank you dad. I love and respect you very much. I hope you have a great Father's day.
I have a huge dilemma on my hand. This dilemma is so large, I think I am going to lose some sleep over it tonight. It just hit me tonight, when watching the Cubs game, that I haven't been to a Cubs game at Wrigley Field in like 10 years (I think it was Sophomore year of high school). So I hit the web to find out a day I could fly up to Chicago to visit my brother and go to a Cubs game. But then it hit me...this is the last time I will ever have the chance to watch at game at Yankee Stadium. Oh boy...I am not really sure how I am going to sleep tonight.
To be fair, I hate the Yankees. I don't care who they are playing, I will be rooting for the other team. But there was so much history at Yankee Stadium. Babe Ruth. Willy Mays. Lou Gerhig. Hosting 37 of the total 84 World Series. Not to mention all the non-Baseball history. Pelé played Soccer there. Boxers have boxed there. Heck, Popes have spoken there.
So here's what I found out. I can fly up to New York on the morning of July 27th at 6:00 am, go to the 1:05 pm game against the Orioles, and then fly back to Atlanta at 7:00 pm. Baseball Tickets: $20.00 Plane Tickets: $219.00 Watching a game in Yankee Stadium: priceless?!?
It is no secret that I have sort of bucket-list already for my life, and I am not waiting until retirement to complete it. Why? Who knows if I'll make it to retirement! I think the mindset is a healthy one.
I have bought a home.
I have received a college degree.
I have watched a NASCAR Race from the Pits.
I have snorkeled in the Great Barrier Reef.
I have visited 47 states (almost my goal of all 50).
I have been to the Dome of Rock.
I have been at Times Square for New Years.
I have slept the night on the street in Pasadena to watch the Rose Bowl Parade.
I have kissed a girlfriend on the Eiffel Tower.
I have chased the pigeons in San Marco Square in Venice.
I have floated on the Dead Sea.
I have worshiped on Waikiki Beach at an Easter Sunrise service.
I have planted gardens in poverty stricken regions of South Africa.
I have built homes in Mexico and gymnasiums for orphanages in Honduras.
But should watching a game at Yankee stadium be on the list and is it worth $239.00.
I have to admit. If it weren't for the fact that I just spent way too much money earlier this month due to the unexpected vacation surprise, I would be a lot more willing to do it.
I guess I'll just sleep on it and hopefully not die in my sleep. Anyone want to join me?
So Allen comes to me this past week and says, "I think I want to do a show on online dating. Did you know there are over 1,300 online dating sites? What are you thoughts about online dating?" Before he even uttered all that, I knew this was going to be a topic where I was thrown under the bus. Sure enough, the topic title: "Is It Time For Andy to Use Online Dating."
If you have the time, listen to the whole show (30 minutes long). We had a good time. We had Les Parrott on there. Les is the founder of eHarmony marriage, and a very good friend of Dr. Neil Warren (the guy in the eHarmony commercials). Plus I got to play P!nk's U + Ur Hand and Avril Lavinge's Girlfriend as rejoins - and we all know I am weird and for some reason like chick rock.
But for those who don't have 30-minutes. Here are two clips.
Allen's Monologue
Andy's Questioning & Response
The best part was when Mike South, a porn producer here in Atlanta and friend of our show, e-mailed this:
I gotta tell ya, I had the pleasure of a lunch with Andy a while back and I think, that if a young lady is looking for a Good Christian man who isn't judgmental, who is smart and modestly decent looking. She couldn't go wrong with Andy...I know lots of girls would date Andy but It might not be a "good fit"
Is he saying I have a small penis? Seriously. I am calling you out Mike South. Although, you did say that I am modestly decent looking, so I'll call it even ![]()
Here are my problems with dating in general:
Here are my problems with traditional dating:
Here is my problem with online dating:
So what's a boy to do? Seriously. I know I get about 300 visitors per post, so I want to hear from all you. Have you used online dating? Was it a good or bad experience? Would you ever use it or do you think it is an awful cop out?
I had to wake up at the ungodly hour of 7:45 am to take a friend to meet another friend to drive to a wedding in South Carolina. Of course, at that hour, I didn't want to talk, I just wanted to listen to the radio. So I turned to News/Talk 750 WSB and sure enough, Boortz was just starting his day.
What did he decide to open his rant about? The catcher who ducked and allowed the pitch to jack the ump in the facemask. Take a look.
Now, what you might not know is that this catcher lost his scholarship to the college he was planning on attending and his high school was fined $1,000 for the incident - which I don't particularly have a problem with. Scholarships are like the free-market: schools don't have any obligation to give them out.
But, of course, old-man Boortz1 was going on and on about how he agreed with this and how people need to understand there are consequences for their actions. But it is precisely this reason why I think what this catcher did was brilliant.
The motivation for the incident was because they were unhappy with poor calls from the homeplate umpire. Now I was not at the game, so I do not know if this were true or not. But nevertheless, the pitcher & catcher perceived it to be the case, so they took the perceived poor actions of the ump and put some physical consequences to it: they jacked him in the face. Message received.
Now I know I am not the norm. I actually have no problem with Tony Stewart or Danica Patrick getting into a fight with a fellow auto racer who just put them into a wall. Or a bench clearing brawl when some pitcher jacked a batter in the head. Or two hockey players going at it because one hockey player told another hockey player his toothless smile was ugly. But this goes beyond sports...
We are a wussified country (yes I know I just made up a word). The same mentality that doesn't understand the importance of the Iraq War, or why the coddled generation is now in the workforce but thinks they are lazy, or that allows the seatbelt law to be in effect, is the same mentality that says "safety at all costs." We are trying to remove all consequence from actions. We want to be a white, vanilla, bland culture that's greatest virtue is safety and cordiality. We are a nations of pansies.
Not I though. I will take pride in the American history of sometimes saying, enough is enough, and because of your actions, there will now be physical consequences. Now, where's the nearest umpire...
| "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage - with great patience and careful instruction." -2Timothy 4:2 |
| You are page view number: |