My wife Becky was having a rough week followed by a hard weekend at work. So, i took it upon myself to give her something fun to look forward to!
    She often makes the meals at home for us, and i'm very appreciative about it, and try to do the dishes and help when i can. But, sometimes a man needs to do a little something extra so she doesn't feel so robotic. I decided a 3 course meal was perfect!
    In all it took me about 4 1/2 hours (including researching meals, shopping, prepping, and waiting for somethings to soak and chill).
    Part of the making the meal special was presentation. I made a center piece with 3 candles around our goldfish, Marlin, in a vase. (the 3rd candle is on the otherside of the fish)
    I started her off with a salad, complete with carrots and croutons.

    After the salads I brought out the dinner of champions: Broiled Steak--Shoulder Tenders smothered in Chicago Style Marinade, and pan fried Jumbo Shrimp. Both parts of the main dish soaked in the fridge for 2 hours in the appropriate substances -- steak in olive oil and marinade; jumbo shrimp in butter, oil, and black pepper.

    After the Surf and Turf i had brought out my secret weapon. This was what took most of my prep time (20 min. before having to chill it in the fridge for 2 hours) and it was far worth it! A White Chocolate Mousse topped with heavy whip cream (i whipped in the mixer) and a smidgen of Hersey Cacao. I had the spoons and the glasses in the freezer during dinner so they would be nice and cold for the Mousse when i served them up!....OH MAN IT WAS GOOD!

If you're wondering, the neon spoons are from Peach Wave. I didn't feel the need to just throw away such cool spoons after using them once. And the glasses i served the Mousse in are a wedding gift from our friends Andrew and Jess. They say Mr. and Mrs.

Choosing a presidential candidate to vote for is a very big stand both for you and for the country we live in. This is a freedom that should never be taken lightly, and you better believe that the millions that don’t vote every year would become activists pretty quickly if voting were ever taken from the general public.

            Now, I’m going to share with you the simple steps I take when deciding on who I vote for during the presidential elections. Granted, this 2012 election will only be my 3rd, but I started this simple effective system on my very first, and will continue to do so through my very last.

            First, I see who is actually going to be running on the ballot. It may surprise you to find out it’s usually 5 main runners or more, not 2. So I draw a table (or if you’re lazy like me you can make one on a word or excel document on the computer!!!). In this table I make several columns that cover the 5 main issues I feel are most important to me. For instance, many people feel Foreign Policy is very important (especially if they or their loved one has a military based career), whereas I feel it’s a good one but not on my top 5. If you WANT to write down 25 main issues and compare all 10+ candidates in your state, be my guest. But I found taking the top 5 runners, and my top 5 issues can give me a large incite on my choices, and I’m comfortable with that.

            Secondly, I make 5 rows with those 5 main candidates in them. Then I make 5 columns with the 5 main issues I want to compare with. Now, you can see where this is going; I look at each candidate and the opinions they have on each issue, and I also look at what they have actually done involving those issues. For instance, Mitt Romney is not for gay marriage, but did you know he has signed legislation to actively ban anti-gay discrimination in the work place? Also, did you know Barrack Obama reformed the no child left behind act, which many didn’t like, but many DID like that he also reformed the Pell Grant for college  and increased it from $4,050 to $5,100?

            Lastly, and most obvious, I look to see who I fall into agreement with the most. I was very surprised this year how often I fell on neutral or positive ground with both Obama and Mitt Romney, and was equally surprised how much negative ground I fell on with Ron Paul.

            In order to stay on point and not raise any bad feelings within you, I’m going to only tell you the 7 main issues I used this year, and not go into detail on where I personally stand on the issues. Now I say “this year is 7”, because it use to be 5, but as I’ve gotten older the Economy and Military have become much bigger deals to me. And I’ll tell you how I matched up with the candidates on some pros and cons, instead of going into detail; again to not start any unneeded feelings in this simple blog.

            The 5 candidates I marked down to look into are as follows:

Gary Johnson, Barrack Obama, Mitt Romney, Jill Stein, and Ron Paul

            The 7 Issues I looked for pros, cons, and medium ground, where as follows:

Abortion, Crime, Environment, Economy, Education, Gay Rights, and Military

Now I’ll give you a personal Pro and Con from each of the candidates. NOW YOU MUST NOTE these are my personal pros and cons.hahaha, they are not yours, or anyone elses. Perhaps we agree and perhaps we don’t, but we are not here running against each other, I’m simply showing you how you can reasonably decide who you are voting for, and at the same time you can learn about other people!! It may surprise you know that republicans and democrats agree a lot more often than the media leads you to believe, and that libertarians and socialists can provide a lot of good ideas too!

Gary Johnson: Pro – Cut Military Expense; Con – Eliminate Corporate Income tax

Barrack Obama: Pro – Tighten restrictions on Death Penalty; Con – Limit the purchasing of guns to 1 gun a month

Mitt Romney: Pro – No tuition break for Illegal Immigrants, Con – Increase defense spending

Jill Stein: Pro – Tax cut on lower incomes, Con – Fully Opposes the Death Penalty

Ron Paul: Pro – Reduce Congress Salary, Con – No tax incentives for renewable energies

            So I hope you understand what I’m trying to do here. I’m telling you 2 things: First that you should vote. Not because I’m saying it’s a good idea, or because it will get retards off your back. You should vote because it’s both the best way to Rebel and the best way to stand up for your Freedoms and truly have a say in the country’s decisions! You don’t even have to vote for one of the main candidates! There is a Communist Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, Constitutional Party, Labor Party, and there is even a United States Marijuana Party! AND DOZENS MORE!

            Give voting a chance and have your opinion etched in history, even if it’s not important to you, It’s important to all the freedoms we enjoy, and the ones we still want. In 2008 Mickey Mouse received 11 votes. Talk about rebellion, and so many people were too lazy or self centered to even do that. Not voting isn’t making a statement, when you literally have the right to vote for any Natural Born American Citizen, the statement is only made when you actually VOTE!

First I'm going to give you what you came for, and then feel free
to read on if you would like to see how the 15 strongest was
determined.

To go into some detail on how I decided what countries to place in the Top 15,
and why they are placed in this particular order.
                 
I first had to decide what makes a military so great. In the general
sense of things, there are hundreds if not thousands, of small factors that must
be powering the machine at any given time. Taking this into consideration, I have
made a valid attempt to group these factors into major categories.
For instance, the amount of healthy young men, birthrates, amount of people in the working class,
amount of people suited for military but not in military, so on and so forth;
all have to do with a country's military capabilities, but instead of spending
forever trying to determine what those numbers are for each country on the
planet, i just used one major category called "Country's Total Population".
Given the total population of a country you can determine that those with a much
  higher amount of citizens will generally have more in those smaller
  categories. 
                 
Now that you understand why i chose these certain categories, i'll tell
you those categories and why they are a very good indicator of a countries
military strength.

 - Total Population        
The resource of humans is unmatched in a military, because without them
you have none.


- Total Population in Active Military              
Clear indicator of how sturdy a country's immediate offensive and
defensive military capability adds up.


- Amount of Operational Tanks
 Since WWI tanks have been major deciders on every battle
front.


- Amount of Armored Personnel Carriers (APC) and
    Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV)
 The purpose of these are not direct battles, but for enforcing the army as
whole. These vehicles are perfect for what they do: Safely move the troops. The more
of these you have, the better guarantee you have getting your troops to and from
the battle.


- Amount of Operational Logistical Vehicles
 The major support system to any military are the "miscellaneous" vehicles
  that carry all the supplies. No fuel tankers, and your tanks loose incredible
  capabilities; no food or water, and you lose your men... lose your men and lose
  the war.


- Amount Total of Military Grade Air Craft 
While the Air Force doesn't win wars all on its own... Take away those
fighter jets, bombers, and helicopters then you'll see just how vulnerable those
countries become.


- Amount Total of Military Grade Navy Ships
 History has shown us that a country's coastal boarder is a very good
indicator of military strength, because it provides an easier defense against
invading enemies, and allows for the development of a Navy. With that in mind,
having a Navy alone gives a country a higher rating, but we must also look at
the actual numbers of the many different types of ships that make it both tactical
and over all powerful. For instance, submarines and carriers are so tactful
 that they can can make or break a Navy in a very short period of time.


- Countries Total Land Mass
 The sheer size of a country and the layout can mean the difference between
fighting off an invasion and falling to the enemy. Ask any American
Soldier that has fought in the Middle East; ask Russia about WWII,
Napoleon about Egypt, or the British about the Revolutionary War in America. The
pros far outweigh the cons in a country's total size; both due to the available
resources, and the tactics involved with so much geography.


- Oil Production (barrels per day)
 The Amount of Oil a country can produce on its own could mean everything to
military abilities. This is taken on the basis that if a country was all on its
own, and by being on its own would it be able to fuel all those tanks, ships,
and planes without the oil from other countries? Most countries are an easy No.
So the more oil a country can produce in a day, the higher its military strength becomes. 
                  
To put into perspective, Kuwait is clearly weaker than Greece when looking at man power
the amount of people, air craft, navy units, and sheer size of the countries, but if the
countries had all outside help and resources cut off, we would see them become
far more equal. Kuwait could easily be self sufficient in fueling its number of vehicles
while Greece would come to a halt.


- Total Spending on Defense Budget
 It's not how much you spend, it's how you spend it. That's true, but if
you are spending billions of dollars more than the competitor, it's very
likely that you have certain capabilities he doesn't. Tanks don't run for free, and
special forces don't do so well with $10 gadgets.


- Weapons of Mass Destruction Capabilities
 It is exactly as it reads. A countries ability to apply massive damage
with few bombs. This includes not just "does a country have nuclear weapons" and
"if so how many" but also major ballistics that do a certain amount of damage.
Then if they have them, how big of a reach does this country have with
those weapons, because if you have 10,000 short range ballistic missiles, you're
not much of a threat to anyone 2 or 3 countries over. 
500 mile missiles are frightening when you're 499 miles away.... not so
much at 5,000 miles away.
                 
That being said, only 9 countries have a confirmed nuclear arsenal of
some size, 1 has capabilities, and after that only 5 other countries have short
to long range Ballistics. Which means only 15 countries can fight a battle more
than 100 miles away, without having to move.
  


                 
     Now that you have all this information; there are a few countries i feel
deserve an honorable mention. This is because these countries don't really excel
to the very top in any of these areas, but overall they have a very well rounded
and established military, and do frequent the top of the charts. For example
Italy doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, or large land mass; but they do however
have a major influence in population size, and military expenditures.


My 5 Honorable mentions: 
- Israel , South Korea,  Italy, Syria, and Japan