The World According to Oatney
Friday, July 29, 2005
Family and BB&TNicole and I really enjoy doing our financial business through the Branch Banking and Trust Company. BB&T is a Southern bank, based in nearby North Carolina, and was founded specifically to help the South rebuild after the Late Unpleasantness between North and South. The people there are incredibly friendly and the bank is happy to give regular, ordinary, Joe Six-Pack customers a range of services that normally cost extra at other banks unless you have a "premium" account. For example, I can walk in and ask for a Cashier's Cheque drawn on my account and I will get one, no questions asked (with the proper ID) and no extra charge. Most banks don't give those kinds of services free, and if they do, they put a limit on them-but not BB&T.
We were so impressed with how BB&T has treated us that Nicole decided to put in an application to work as a teller at a nearby branch of the bank. On the application, it asked if you had any relatives who work for BB&T. As it turns out, Nicole has an uncle (by marriage) in Bristol who is a bank manager...for BB&T. Being the honest sort, Nicole admitted this on her application. The thought of her uncle working for the bank never occurred to Nicole when she decided to apply for a job there. Besides, she thought, he's all the way up in Bristol, 80 miles away, and what she does in Knoxville has little bearing on her uncle's job in Bristol at all.
Today we got a call from BB&T. They were "very impressed" with Nicole's resume and her qualifications. They would be interested in hiring her, they said, but they regretted that they cannot. The reason? She has a relative who works for BB&T. Apparently, the bank's policy against hiring relatives of employees is so strict that it even applies to those who would work in different towns in different parts of the state! Needless to say, Nicole was more than a little disappointed. I understand the reason for the policy and it is a logical one, but I fail to see what harm it could have done to hire her. It wasn't like she would have gotten special treatment or been a security risk.
Nonetheless, despite the experience, we aren't turned off of BB&T. We are still happy to bank there...I suppose I have the confidence of knowing my money is really safe.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
The horse in the SouthHorses are a part of the landscape of Southern culture largely because Southerners brought love of and attachment to the horse from Ireland and Scotland from whence most Southern ancestors came. While the rest of the country abandoned their equine companions with the advent of the automobile, many in the South have sought a way to coexist with the horse and give that animal a new purpose. There is probably little coincidence in the facts that two of the three Triple Crown races take place south of the Mason-Dixon Line, and the majority of the native American horse breeds originated in the South, many along the crest of the Appalachians.
Nicole is a fine horsewoman, although I doubt she would admit to her own skill. This Saturday she will compete in a benefit horse show with her mount, Earlmont Coup D'etat, a decendant of Wing Commander, one of the great American Saddlebred showhorses of all time. In many parts of the country, such a show would be a minor event, an afterthought, and few would know or care about the equine competitors. In the South, however, such a show will be reasonably well-attended and have many competators. This is the place where the horse is still respected and still used, and that fact still shows how Celtic the South still is.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
The Borking of John RobertsI realize it has been a couple of days since my last regular post. The business of life these days doesn’t always allow me to be online long enough to post to the World every day, but hopefully in the coming days I will be able to post either in audio or written format with greater frequency. I ask the continued prayers of all those readers and listeners who truly believe in prayer.
The Borking of John Roberts continues. Now, as informed visitors to this web log are likely aware, Democrats are attempting to force the White House to turn over documents that pertain to Roberts’ days as White House Counsel. These sorts of documents normally fall under attorney-client privilege, and the Bush Administration is rightly claiming such a privilege. The Democrats are so bent on finding something wrong with Roberts, they are crying foul over the failure of the White House to release information that is privileged between the President’s lawyer and the Commander-in-Chief.
We have come to a sad day in American jurisprudence when a minority party can use obstructionist tactics to stop the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice with a perfectly good record by trying to obtain private communications between a previous administration and its attorney. This behavior is dirty, foul, and low-minded. The reason for such a stoop to the political gutter boils down to one issue alone: Abortion.
Liberal Democrats hate the idea of pro-life judges. They do not believe that pro-lifers can decide cases fairly, and the original intent of the Constitution is irrelevant to those who do not believe in the Constitution. Therefore, the opposition is looking for any reason to vote Judge Roberts down, as they see the opinion polls (by which they govern everything they do) which say that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe Roberts should be confirmed. The Democrats know that if they are seen to obstruct the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice that the public believes is a perfectly good candidate for the job, their true motive of viewpoint-based discrimination and anti-Christian bigotry will become apparent, and political suicide will be the end result. Therefore, in order to get what they want, Democrats must dig up dirt on Judge Roberts, even if it is false and politically motivated. If Judge Roberts goes down, perhaps he will take the Democrats down with him.
Monday, July 25, 2005
Create your own visitor map