Scott R. Sullivan

June 29th, 2008 by Scott

Angie and I spent the weekend visiting friends and going to see Les Miserables since it was playing in Philly. Not only is Les Miserables a wonderful production, but it is also nice to see that a production that makes a big deal about doing what is right (instead of what is easy) and listening to God is still popular in this day.

The next day (after spending the night at Loews Hotel in Center City) we strolled down to a coffee shop for breakfast and hung out at Independence Hall.

I’m always in awe when I’m at Independence Hall. After all, we used to be the nation’s capitol for a short time and this city was where our great country was born. It seemed appropriate that on Friday, when the Supreme Court ruled against a gun ban and re-affirmed an individual’s right to bear arms, we were right down the street from the building that drafted the original document.

We can’t forget our Constitution, the Bill of Right and the history that has given us the freedom that so many today take for granted.

June 1st, 2008 by Scott

I was getting another cup of coffee this morning while waiting for an animation to render. Since my studio is downstairs, I had a chance to view the morning traffic outside the house.

May 25th, 2008 by Scott

I took a few quick pictures this weekend. On Saturday night, we were both working at a gig in Harrisburg. She was doing Digital Caricatures and I was in Harrisburg for magic for most of the day.

When she finished, we stopped by Perkins on the way home for breakfast at around 1 a.m.! While sitting there, I snapped a quick picture of my wife, Angie. Just thought I’d share.

I have been playing around with the 50mm prime lens I have. The 50mm is a great lens since it restricts your field of view. With a standard zoom lens, we too often just zoom in. With a 50mm, your stuck at, well, 50mm. So you’ve got to think about your shots a little more.

This picture of Angie was taken with the 50mm, then I desaturated it in Photoshop to give it a more artistic look. Portraits just look cool when done in Black and White. *grin*

This picture was taken at the front entrance of the Luxor Casino in Las Vegas. While out there two weeks ago, I took this picture with the same 50mm lens. Another great feature with the 50mm is that its a fast lens. This one is f1.8 and so I can get some great depth of field shots.

April 16th, 2008 by Scott

So, according to Obama, all us Pennsylvania’uns is nuthin’ but a bunch o’ gun totin’, bible thumpin’ bigots who haven’t had a job fur 25 years.

He must have got that from his pastor.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, here in Philadelphia, a few days ago, Democratic Mayor Nutter (his REAL name!!!) signed several laws restricting the Right to Bear Arms, against the will of our capitol, Harrisburg (Source: KYW Radio)

Of course, without us redneck, Gun Totin’ folk, we’d all still be RedCoats paying taxes on our tea.

I’ve got to say that these Dems keep this election interesting. Keep it up guys!

March 11th, 2008 by Scott

The word is spreading about Romney’s interview with Sean Hannity that is going to air tonight. Indications are Romney could be selected to run with MCain as Vice President.

I think this is the thing that is needed to kick start McCain’s campaign. I was never a huge fan of McCain and wrote about how a govorner would beat a senator in the election. Plus Romney has the core conservative values that are needed on the Republican ticket.

As for the timing? As Obama and Mrs. Bill Clinton slug it out, McCain is forgotten. This is just the thing to take back the momentum. I wouldn’t even doubt if this had Rove’s fingerprints on it. Rove’s got the track record for running a winning campaign, after all.

And if this does happen, then I my prediction about Romney in the White House would be right on. After all, in four years who will know if McCain will run for re-election with his age being a factor already.

Romney in ‘12? Giddy up!

February 25th, 2008 by Scott

According to The Financial Times article published today, anti-depressants are just as effective as, well, sugar cubes. They wrote today:

Almost 50 clinical trials were reviewed by psychologists from the University of Hull who found that new-generation anti-depressants worked no better than a placebo – a dummy pill – for mildly depressed patients.

Even the trials that suggested some clinical benefit for the most severely depressed patients did not produce convincing evidence. Professor Irving Kirsch from the university’s pyschology department said: “The difference in improvement between patients taking placebos and patients taking anti-depressants is not very great.

The Financial Times, February 25, 2008

Who’d a thought?

Depressed? Here’s a solution. Stop hiding in a cubicle or inside watching television and get out of the house. There’s something about being out in the sun and enjoying life.

Could it be the sun’s Beta-Carotene? Did you know that the sun actually helps prevent cancer when you grow up with normal sun exposure? That’s according to The New York Times health guide.

Could it be the fresh air? Its natures way of saying get out and have a life.

I have been telling people for ages that the answer to “depression” is the same as it has been for thousands of years. Stop complaining about your life and seeing the glass as half empty.

Go out and play.

March 30th, 2007 by Scott

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,262685,00.html

A jury has found that a Louisiana School (including the principal, school board and superintendent) had harassed and violated First Amendment rights, plus retailiated against high school teacher Paula Payne.

According to Fox News, the “jurors awarded her $1.2 million for mental anguish and $200,000 in punitive damages.”

I am in complete disagreement regarding the amount handed out to the teacher. I just don’t see $1.2 million dollars worth of “anguish.” I’m also afraid this will be on what everyone will focus.

However, the verdict in favor of the teacher is the important aspect of the story. This teacher had high standards in and English II class, raising the bar. As a result, she was giving out a larger percentage of D’s and F’s to students. According to the Fox News story, the students even called her class the “House of Payne.”

What baffle’s me is the attitude of many school officials and administrators. In this specific case, they alleged to have harrased Payne in an attempt to have her raise the students’ grades. Payne allegedly refused to do so, and kept her dignity.

This is a recurring theme I’m seeing among the left leaning education system.

The bar is being lowered. Instead of pushing students to strive to better themselves, instead of pushing students to try harder, the converse is true.

We are telling students that all they don’t have to get A’s.

Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. It is occurring more frequently and in multiple arenas.

Why must we lower the bar? Why can’t we raise standards in our education system and push our students to be better?

March 28th, 2007 by Scott

Our Constitution is the foundation of our country’s existence. The powers of our government were broken up into three branches, the Executive, Judicial and Legislative. The famous “checks and balances” comes from the ability for each branch to keep an eye on the other.

It was not designed to implant the entire Senate and House into the leather chair behind the desk of the Oval Office.

The military is designed, by necessity, to be run as a direct chain from the top. This prevented endless debate in conference rooms attempting to decide which method of attack on the enemy might be better for the environment or the spotted frog. It prevented endless debate on micromanagement that is so common in every larger private corporation today. If you want to make sure nothing happens, bring it up at a board meeting and let it be killed by the bureaucracy.

Instead, when a commanding officer gives an order, it is followed, not debated. Wars cannot be won if they are micromanaged.

At the top of the chain is one of the three branches of the government. I’ll let you guess which one is the Command in Chief. It’s not the mass of politicians at Capitol Hill and it’s not the lawyers at the Supreme Court. The Commander in Chief is the President.

His duties and powers in this regard? In 1850, Chief Justice Taney (in Fleming v. Page, 50 U.S. (9 How.) 603, 615, 618 (1850)), said the following:

His duty and his power are purely military. As commander-in- chief, he is authorized to direct the movements of the naval and military forces placed by law at his command, and to employ them in the manner he may deem most effectual to harass and conquer and subdue the enemy. He may invade the hostile country, and subject it to the sovereignty and authority of the United States.

This authority was given to him by the Senate (77-23) on October 11, 2002, and the Congress (296-133) hours earlier. Back then, the idea of going to war was popular.

Fast forward a few years. The number of soldiers killed in Iraq is broadcast daily by those on the left like a billboard for the Daily Lotto. Support for the war is no longer “popular.” And those politicians who feel they must pander to the daily whims of an American culture feel that if the war isn’t popular, they must come out swinging against the war.

And this is exactly what we have been seeing. The left, funded greatly by the anti-war lobby, feels they must now publicly denounce and undermine the war.

If the military does poorly, if the terrorists gain the upper hand, if more soldiers die, then the left gains support.

How sad, that anyone in America would end up in a position where losing a war, and having more Americans die, will help them and bring them back to power. How said that they have positioned themselves such that the only way they can win is by America losing.

Which brings up the question: on who’s side is the left? It seems they are rallied by the terrorists winning and us losing.

With this as a backdrop, consider the recent votes in the House and Senate. The Democrats yesterday voted to micromanage the war. The Democrats on Capitol Hill in their stretch limos feel they know better than the commanders on the ground in Iraq. The Democrats feel they know better.

Let’s not forget that the Democratics voted for the war before they voted against it. Is this how you win a war against an ideology that would attack us again if they could. Is this how you win a war that was brought to our feet on September 11, 2001?

The Democrats want us to lose by cutting and running. The bill that the Democratics voted for calls for the withdraw of our troops by March (the Senate date for cutting and running) or September (the House’s date) of next year. So all the terrorists have to do now is wait 12 months and they can have Iraq.

If the Democrats really wanted us out of Iraq, they could do it today. All they have to do is not pass any budget. The well would dry up and we’d have no money and no choice, but to pull out this year.

But then there would be no political issue for next year’s election. No, the Dems know they must keep the troops over there until the elections.

So do they really care about our troops lives or do they just care about winning an election.

We cannot allow the Left to micromanage the war. They know we’ll lose if you fight a war in the committee room. They feel they should be in the Oval Office running this war, not the President.

Let’s remember this embarrassing move by the Democratics next November.

Fighting an ideological war isn’t about doing what’s popular. It’s about doing what’s right.