I just read that Andrea Yates was found not guilty by reason of insanity. Really??!!
Fo those of you that do not know, she is the woman in Houston, TX that drown her 5 children. I am just shooting from the hip here, but wasn't it a given that the woman was not all there? That still doesn't give her the right to kill 5 children! These kids never had a chance. Their lives were ENDED by their own mother!
Short and to the point, she should be killed. I think that I could find a few people that would do it, too! Now, she will live in a psychiatric hospital and has the very good possibility of being released when the counselors there feel she has returned to sanity. Not good enough. If she was able to commit the crime deliberately, she should be punished. If she is not able to be held accountable due to mental illness, wait until she is no longer ill, then kill her.
In the meantime, we, the taxpayers, are footing the bill to keep her alive. She confessed to intentionally killing her own children. I do not want to pay for her to live. It is not my wishes that my tax money goes to keeping her alive. Killing or hurting children in any way is the worst kind of crime.
Just my 2 cents...
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Humans vs. Automation
I work (half of the time) in a "customer service" environment. I like it because I do get the opportunity to help resolve problems. It gives me a feeling of satisfaction. I miss the days of REAL customer service.
I get it at my bank, because I go to the same branch every time. I know them and they know me. I would not get the same level of service at another branch unless I cultivated it myself, by going repeatedly to the new branch.
I get it at my grocery store. Same reason.
That's about as far as it goes.
I try and do all of my business face-to-face. Obviously, there are certain instances where this is just not possible. Sometimes I have to use the phone. I hate that because I always get that automated service that tries to be helpful, but in reality, it is not. The automated service for, just as an example, say, my power company will ask for my account number. What does the operator ask for right off when s/he FINALLY gets on the line? Yup! My account number.
WHY?
All the automated service really does is give the impression that you are getting somewhere or accomplishing something until an operator can assist you. You remain on hold until they are able (or decide they are ready) to deal with you.
I've worked in an incoming call center before. They have the ability to sign off of the phone system and do whatever needs doing (from finishing comments on the previous caller's account to having an unofficial smoke break). Don't be fooled by the "helpful computer voice".
I've seen it done. Honestly, I've DONE it!
Having said that, I will say that I have used the automated operator to pay my bill over the phone and not really need to speak to a real operator. All I would like to see is the option right up front offering either one. It would go something like this:
"Thank you for calling Gexa Energy. If you would like to use the automated system, press 1. If you would like to speak to a customer service representative, press 2."
Easy, right? Did you also notice that you did not get the option of speaking another language? See my previous posts on that subject. After pressing 2, you could be told that you approximate wait time is however many minutes, then be offered the automated system again. Kinda like this:
"Your approximate wait time is 12 minutes. If you would prefer to use the automated system at any time, press 9."
That way, you can wait for a while, get good and mad, and when you can take it no longer, you can do your business with a machine.
I like it.
Businesses, take note of this. You will keep more customers if you provide better customer service. Here is one suggestion.
I get it at my bank, because I go to the same branch every time. I know them and they know me. I would not get the same level of service at another branch unless I cultivated it myself, by going repeatedly to the new branch.
I get it at my grocery store. Same reason.
That's about as far as it goes.
I try and do all of my business face-to-face. Obviously, there are certain instances where this is just not possible. Sometimes I have to use the phone. I hate that because I always get that automated service that tries to be helpful, but in reality, it is not. The automated service for, just as an example, say, my power company will ask for my account number. What does the operator ask for right off when s/he FINALLY gets on the line? Yup! My account number.
WHY?
All the automated service really does is give the impression that you are getting somewhere or accomplishing something until an operator can assist you. You remain on hold until they are able (or decide they are ready) to deal with you.
I've worked in an incoming call center before. They have the ability to sign off of the phone system and do whatever needs doing (from finishing comments on the previous caller's account to having an unofficial smoke break). Don't be fooled by the "helpful computer voice".
I've seen it done. Honestly, I've DONE it!
Having said that, I will say that I have used the automated operator to pay my bill over the phone and not really need to speak to a real operator. All I would like to see is the option right up front offering either one. It would go something like this:
"Thank you for calling Gexa Energy. If you would like to use the automated system, press 1. If you would like to speak to a customer service representative, press 2."
Easy, right? Did you also notice that you did not get the option of speaking another language? See my previous posts on that subject. After pressing 2, you could be told that you approximate wait time is however many minutes, then be offered the automated system again. Kinda like this:
"Your approximate wait time is 12 minutes. If you would prefer to use the automated system at any time, press 9."
That way, you can wait for a while, get good and mad, and when you can take it no longer, you can do your business with a machine.
I like it.
Businesses, take note of this. You will keep more customers if you provide better customer service. Here is one suggestion.
Sunday, July 02, 2006
This is rich!
The following is going to be my (hopefully) last post on immigration reform. I say this because I am just tired of it. I wasn't going to any more after my last oone until the government passed something - ANYTHING - but I stumbled across the following. It is from a speech by Jesse Jackson.
Yup. You guessed it. It's a doosie!
On a day of sharp opposition to a House bill aimed at immigration reform, the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson energized hundreds at the Midwest Airlines Center on Friday by calling on Latinos and other immigrants "to keep marching" against deportations, exploitation of undocumented workers and attempts to weaken the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
(read the 1965 act, you boob!)
"Don't take Bush's agenda lightly," he said. "The Confederates have risen again."
(it was only a matter of time)
Like other speakers Friday, Jackson framed the debate as one to define the nation.
"Is this the nation of 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses who yearn to breathe free?' " he asked, "or a nation that rejects all except those who have money? Is this about a nation of, for and by the few? Or is it the hands that sweat and toil and make us strong . . .
"Are we the nation that builds bridges, or the nation that builds walls?"
That was an excerpt from an article by Mark Johnson markjohnson@journalsentinel.com and it just set me off!
First, let me say that the "undocumented workers" (henceforth referred to as illegal immigrants) have absolutely NO bearing on the Voting Rights Act as they are not allowed to vote due to them not being American Citizens!
Second, the "exploitation" he mentions would not be an issue except those who knowingly employ illegal immigrants are fully aware that they can pay as little as they want. Who are the illegals going to complain to? It's not like they would win a lawsuit for unfair wages. They are here ILLEGALLY!
Third, when you sneak into a nightclub without paying the cover, what do they do? Throw you out! It's kinda the same thing with a national border. Deportation is the only fair thing to do! That way, I do not have to have my tax dollars go to supporting an illegal immigrant as he lives in our jail... FOR FREE! See? Send them back home.
Fourth, playing the race card is only serving to incite other minorities with inflammatory mental images. Equating the government's view of illegal immigrants today with the DEFEATED Confederacy of 1865 is an excuse to use (and hence, keep alive) racism. That sore has festered for so long already. People like Jackson continue to use it, pick at it, and propogate the infection. And the worst part of that? They are doing it for their own gain! Jackson yells racism and he is still commanding audiences as a figurehead for the "cause". He keeps it alive so that he may continue to make the money that allows him to live in his big house and drive his big car.
Sorry, I digress.
Fifth, I have never heard of anyone being turned away from our customs desks because they had no cash. We, as a country, are NOT saying that you have to be rich to be here, just that you have to sign in before going up to your room. It is not a nation of, by and for the few, as he so eloquently states, but rather the majority. The few would be the illegal immigrants. Think about it. Are there really more illegal immigrants in this country than actual citizens?
Didn't think so.
Sixth, and last, We are a nation of bridges. I agree with that. Again, my problem is with the ILLEGAL immigrants. To shore up our borders, we should be building a few more walls. You know, like the one Jackson has around his home.
In parting, allow me to give you the last line of the column:
"We're not going to go away," he (Jaime Contreras, an El Salvadoran immigrant who leads the Service Employees International Union Local 82) vowed. "If they deport us, who's going to build the wall at the border?"
This man has been watching - and plagiarizing - Carlos Mencia. If he truly feels that way, he is propogating the "exploitation" and setting his cause back years. If not, perhaps he should fire his speech writer, or send a Thank You check to Mencia.
Yup. You guessed it. It's a doosie!
On a day of sharp opposition to a House bill aimed at immigration reform, the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson energized hundreds at the Midwest Airlines Center on Friday by calling on Latinos and other immigrants "to keep marching" against deportations, exploitation of undocumented workers and attempts to weaken the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
(read the 1965 act, you boob!)
"Don't take Bush's agenda lightly," he said. "The Confederates have risen again."
(it was only a matter of time)
Like other speakers Friday, Jackson framed the debate as one to define the nation.
"Is this the nation of 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses who yearn to breathe free?' " he asked, "or a nation that rejects all except those who have money? Is this about a nation of, for and by the few? Or is it the hands that sweat and toil and make us strong . . .
"Are we the nation that builds bridges, or the nation that builds walls?"
That was an excerpt from an article by Mark Johnson markjohnson@journalsentinel.com and it just set me off!
First, let me say that the "undocumented workers" (henceforth referred to as illegal immigrants) have absolutely NO bearing on the Voting Rights Act as they are not allowed to vote due to them not being American Citizens!
Second, the "exploitation" he mentions would not be an issue except those who knowingly employ illegal immigrants are fully aware that they can pay as little as they want. Who are the illegals going to complain to? It's not like they would win a lawsuit for unfair wages. They are here ILLEGALLY!
Third, when you sneak into a nightclub without paying the cover, what do they do? Throw you out! It's kinda the same thing with a national border. Deportation is the only fair thing to do! That way, I do not have to have my tax dollars go to supporting an illegal immigrant as he lives in our jail... FOR FREE! See? Send them back home.
Fourth, playing the race card is only serving to incite other minorities with inflammatory mental images. Equating the government's view of illegal immigrants today with the DEFEATED Confederacy of 1865 is an excuse to use (and hence, keep alive) racism. That sore has festered for so long already. People like Jackson continue to use it, pick at it, and propogate the infection. And the worst part of that? They are doing it for their own gain! Jackson yells racism and he is still commanding audiences as a figurehead for the "cause". He keeps it alive so that he may continue to make the money that allows him to live in his big house and drive his big car.
Sorry, I digress.
Fifth, I have never heard of anyone being turned away from our customs desks because they had no cash. We, as a country, are NOT saying that you have to be rich to be here, just that you have to sign in before going up to your room. It is not a nation of, by and for the few, as he so eloquently states, but rather the majority. The few would be the illegal immigrants. Think about it. Are there really more illegal immigrants in this country than actual citizens?
Didn't think so.
Sixth, and last, We are a nation of bridges. I agree with that. Again, my problem is with the ILLEGAL immigrants. To shore up our borders, we should be building a few more walls. You know, like the one Jackson has around his home.
In parting, allow me to give you the last line of the column:
"We're not going to go away," he (Jaime Contreras, an El Salvadoran immigrant who leads the Service Employees International Union Local 82) vowed. "If they deport us, who's going to build the wall at the border?"
This man has been watching - and plagiarizing - Carlos Mencia. If he truly feels that way, he is propogating the "exploitation" and setting his cause back years. If not, perhaps he should fire his speech writer, or send a Thank You check to Mencia.
Walking and chewing gum
I was on my way to work yesterday when I realized that I was only driving 20 miles per hour. The speed limit was 45. Frustrated, I looked for the cause of the slow pace. The car two ahead of me was setting this lightning velocity. I moved into the left hand lane... only to be cut off by the same car. Thankfully, the driver, an attractive blonde, continued into the left turn lane and I past her.
This was when I noticed it... not that she was an attractive blonde, but that she was going so slowly because she was on the phone!
I realize that I could take many different paths here. Such as:
1. Female drivers. I have found, however, that most female drivers are better than most male drivers.
2. Blondes. I have yet to meet a majority that make the stereotype true. I have met some that fit it, though.
3. The ability to multi-task. This one I will take.
I you cannot do several things at once, don't try. Practice where you won't impede or endanger other people until you can do the several things at once that you want to do. In this case, I doubt she even knew how slow she was going. She had been driving at that speed for quite a distance before I tried to get around her, so it's not like I'm jumping to any conclusion out of hand, here. Her action (her speed) was a sign that she was not paying attention. I am thankful that the result of this is only my frustration with her and not something more serious... or even fatal. Was her phone call THAT important? I honestly don't know. In all probability, it was not.
But what I DO know is that it endangered everyone on that road. She should be paying attention to what she is doing, as she is driving around in a 2 ton death machine if mistakes are made.
Hang up and drive. I love that bumper sticker. I will pull over to talk on the phone if I am not able to concentrate on my driving. I have done it many times.
On a slightly related topic, if you don't know how to drive an SUV, don't own one! They aren't as manuverable as little cars. You can't park in those tiny spaces and you will need more room to move than a Honda would. Learn to drive an SUV if you have one!
This was when I noticed it... not that she was an attractive blonde, but that she was going so slowly because she was on the phone!
I realize that I could take many different paths here. Such as:
1. Female drivers. I have found, however, that most female drivers are better than most male drivers.
2. Blondes. I have yet to meet a majority that make the stereotype true. I have met some that fit it, though.
3. The ability to multi-task. This one I will take.
I you cannot do several things at once, don't try. Practice where you won't impede or endanger other people until you can do the several things at once that you want to do. In this case, I doubt she even knew how slow she was going. She had been driving at that speed for quite a distance before I tried to get around her, so it's not like I'm jumping to any conclusion out of hand, here. Her action (her speed) was a sign that she was not paying attention. I am thankful that the result of this is only my frustration with her and not something more serious... or even fatal. Was her phone call THAT important? I honestly don't know. In all probability, it was not.
But what I DO know is that it endangered everyone on that road. She should be paying attention to what she is doing, as she is driving around in a 2 ton death machine if mistakes are made.
Hang up and drive. I love that bumper sticker. I will pull over to talk on the phone if I am not able to concentrate on my driving. I have done it many times.
On a slightly related topic, if you don't know how to drive an SUV, don't own one! They aren't as manuverable as little cars. You can't park in those tiny spaces and you will need more room to move than a Honda would. Learn to drive an SUV if you have one!
Saturday, July 01, 2006
I just can't get away from it!
I heard a news report that brought it all up again. It stated the plight of thousands of Undocumented Workers. Huh?? So now it's not alright to call them Illegal Immigrants? Even though they are Illegal??!! And they Immigrated to the US as Illegal Immigrants??!!
Oh, no! That classification might stigmatize them or hurt their feelings.
Tough Shit!! It is an appropriate "classification"! I work my ass off to not be classified as someone below the poverty line, but if I fall below that point, you can call me poor. Not this "nice-sugar-coated-fuzzy-sweet-emotionally-reinforcing BULLSHIT" label like, "financially challenged" or "credit hindered". I would be poor! LEGAL, but poor!
My point is this:
Pandering to groups of any kind in such an insignificant manner as what "classification" to which they are referred only serves to bring down the majority. In this case, all of the LEGAL people in this country. Is that what you want to do? Do you want to speak about or to them in a condescending tone? Do you want to continue to support the ridiculous lawsuits being filed because someone referred to someone else as "poor" instead of "financially challenged" or, to play the race card, "black" instead of "African American"?
Grow up and learn that we are all human beings! I am from Scottish heritage, but you don't see me demanding the right to be called "Scottish American". I am an American. For the minority (of ANY sort) to demand - and WIN - the rest of the world cater to them is the most UN-American thing I can think of!
My in-box is already prepared for your angry responses. And I will write back to each and every one of you that wish to disagree with me.
Oh, no! That classification might stigmatize them or hurt their feelings.
Tough Shit!! It is an appropriate "classification"! I work my ass off to not be classified as someone below the poverty line, but if I fall below that point, you can call me poor. Not this "nice-sugar-coated-fuzzy-sweet-emotionally-reinforcing BULLSHIT" label like, "financially challenged" or "credit hindered". I would be poor! LEGAL, but poor!
My point is this:
Pandering to groups of any kind in such an insignificant manner as what "classification" to which they are referred only serves to bring down the majority. In this case, all of the LEGAL people in this country. Is that what you want to do? Do you want to speak about or to them in a condescending tone? Do you want to continue to support the ridiculous lawsuits being filed because someone referred to someone else as "poor" instead of "financially challenged" or, to play the race card, "black" instead of "African American"?
Grow up and learn that we are all human beings! I am from Scottish heritage, but you don't see me demanding the right to be called "Scottish American". I am an American. For the minority (of ANY sort) to demand - and WIN - the rest of the world cater to them is the most UN-American thing I can think of!
My in-box is already prepared for your angry responses. And I will write back to each and every one of you that wish to disagree with me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)