Trying to avoid tedious paperwork, I've been daydreaming about what I'd do if a pile of money dropped out of the sky. To make the dream worthwhile, I'm thinking the pile should be around $2 Mil.
I wonder what others would do with such a windfall, but I'm pretty sure how I'd allocate it.
The first 10 percent would go to charity. Since the missus and I wouldn't agree on what charities to support, I'm thinking I'd let her give away half of the 10 percent and I'd take care of the other half. My approach would be to identify specific projects to underwrite, definitely for my home church and possibly for my family's churches. I'd invest in remodeling projects or a new organ or generally the music program. I'd help out the priests/pastors, maybe with a vehicle or vacation or something like that. Generally, I'd just look around and see what was needed, then fill the need.
I'd throw a party for family and friends. What might be fun is to book a bunch of rooms at some resort and pay for everybody to get there for a week. I'd have to limit it somewhat, because it would be easy to go overboard with too large a guest list and/or too fancy a resort. But it's a particular priority of mine that I've always hoped to pull off.
Spending on personal stuff would not start with a car. I like my Volvo, and would not be in a hurry to go trade it for something hot and fancy. I would fix the cracked bumper and get it detailed, though.
Instead I'd focus on the home. A decision would need to be made whether to remodel the current homestead or sell it and buy something I like better. I'd have to check out the market to see if there might be my dream house already out there somewhere that would be a better option than the expense of turning my own cracker box into the dream. Again it would have to fit the budget, because I can't let it eat too much of the cash.
The rest gets invested. It could be fun to make it my full time job to find the best possible investments that will earn my living from then on. I'm thinking difersification, everything from real estate to other tangible assets to business ventures, stocks, bonds, etc.
OK. Time to wake up now and get back to real life.
Friday, February 06, 2009
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Thoughts on Management and Labor
Of the many pendulums (pendula?) about to swing the opposite direction is the balance of power between Management and Labor.
Many of those who voted Democrat in the most recent election did so primarily out of a belief that big corporations have become too powerful, to the point of abusing their workers in the name of free-market capitalism.
Fundamentally a conservative, I've paid close attention to this particular issue over the years. And the conclusions I've reached don't toe the party line for either side. Actually, I find myself agreeing with each side about 50 percent. If that makes me an economic moderate, maybe so.
Business executives are driven by the bottom line. They are mostly compensated on their ability to grow their companies and maximize profit. Therefore, if they can get the job done by implementing lower cost alternatives to the means of production, they will do so. Concern for individual worker welfare has no seat in today's board room.
In the 80's and 90's I was personally involved in displacing perhaps hundreds of clerical and data processing workers through installation of new systems that improved efficiency overnight. I remember one particular project I led in the 80's that replaced the old "batch" system for Accounts Payable with an efficient new interactive solution. Less than a week after the new system went "live", 80 percent of the Accounts Payable department were laid off.
I felt badly, as if I was personally responsible for each of those people losing their livelihood. But after awhile, I realized it was the price of progress. If the company failed to implement these new systems, they would fall behind the competition and eventually be forced out of business because they could no longer produce their products profitably.
The next stage happened in manufacturing, where US plants closed and relocated in third-world companies across the globe. Plants relocated to places like Mexico failed due to massive corruption that made it impossible to do business, and now the vast majority of manufactured products seem to come from the Far East. Especially Communist China.
These days the technology advances have slowed somewhat, with technological efficiencies less dramatic than in the 80's and 90's. But what we have seen in this decade is a move to replace the high-tech workers like myself with cheaper alternatives. India has become the new center for technology workers, as corporate America has dumped their high-salaried U.S. techs for Indians, saving as much as 70 or 75 percent.
The Bush Administration famously told us for the past 8 years that all this progress was good for us. Globalization and free trade ultimately lifts all boats.
I'm not sold. If China, which is an adversary of the United States politically, has succeeded in replacing the manufacturing sector of this country with their own, then what happens if we suddenly find our relations deteriorating? All of a sudden, we can't produce our own manufactured products or war materiel that might be needed to protect ourselves.
There's Free Trade and there's Fair Trade. Free Trade has meant unfettered trade, with little regard for the fact that China steals trade secrets, software, entertainment, and intellectual property from America with impunity. The Bush government cared not at all that China manipulated their currency to make sure nobody could compete with them on the price for their goods.
Many suspect that NAFTA is designed more for the benefit of Mexico and Canada than for the U.S. To the extent that may be true or not, I can't say. I do think the silliness of the hassles I get at the border when entering Canada to do my software consulting are sort of ridiculous - If I was entering Canada for a job, then absolutely I should be scrutinized. But entering for a few days to teach people how to use software developed in the US should not be at issue.
I could go on, but want to get down to the real issue of Management versus Labor.
The "Card Check" legislation being pushed in Washington on behalf of the Labor Unions is designed to tilt the balance of power away from corporate management toward labor unions in a return to the 70's. I remember those days, with the bad economy made worse by incessant union strikes. So many companies had to close simply because their Unions demanded too high a price to keep the companies solvent.
I worked in a Union shop in the 80's and was stunned at the gross inefficiencies embedded into the daily activities at the company because of union work rules. I have a funny story about getting the florescent light bulbs changed in my office (it took over a week), but will get to that later.
Don't get me wrong, I fundamentally have no issue with the idea that employees can form a union for the purpose of negotiating fair pay, benefits, and working conditions with their employer.
But I do object to the business-killing effect of unions that become so powerful that they can practically dictate those terms to the employer. And I object to the pervasive corruption inherent in the Union bosses. Want to put yourself in danger of physical violence? As a member of a union, just ask the union boss for a financial statement showing how the members' dues are spent.
Management hates unions, understandably. I've been in the room to hear executives proclaim that they will close the company before they will allow a union to get in. I've been privy to unceremonious firing of employees based on no more than a rumor that they might have been overheard discussing unionization with a co-worker in the break room.
I had a friend back in the 70's and early 80's who told me that if he could just get into a certain Union, he could land a job that would pay double his current rate and be secure for life (that turned out to be wrong). But to get into the union, he had to know the right people. Because, to get on that gravy train, you had to be brought in by a friend or relative. The union was the gatekeeper to those high-paying jobs with amazing benefits.
There's the problem. Give either side too much power, and they're probably going to abuse it. If Management and Labor were both always fair-minded, honest, and ethical, there would be no problem.
Hmm, back to that morality theme again. What was that about all our societal problems sharing the same root?
Many of those who voted Democrat in the most recent election did so primarily out of a belief that big corporations have become too powerful, to the point of abusing their workers in the name of free-market capitalism.
Fundamentally a conservative, I've paid close attention to this particular issue over the years. And the conclusions I've reached don't toe the party line for either side. Actually, I find myself agreeing with each side about 50 percent. If that makes me an economic moderate, maybe so.
Business executives are driven by the bottom line. They are mostly compensated on their ability to grow their companies and maximize profit. Therefore, if they can get the job done by implementing lower cost alternatives to the means of production, they will do so. Concern for individual worker welfare has no seat in today's board room.
In the 80's and 90's I was personally involved in displacing perhaps hundreds of clerical and data processing workers through installation of new systems that improved efficiency overnight. I remember one particular project I led in the 80's that replaced the old "batch" system for Accounts Payable with an efficient new interactive solution. Less than a week after the new system went "live", 80 percent of the Accounts Payable department were laid off.
I felt badly, as if I was personally responsible for each of those people losing their livelihood. But after awhile, I realized it was the price of progress. If the company failed to implement these new systems, they would fall behind the competition and eventually be forced out of business because they could no longer produce their products profitably.
The next stage happened in manufacturing, where US plants closed and relocated in third-world companies across the globe. Plants relocated to places like Mexico failed due to massive corruption that made it impossible to do business, and now the vast majority of manufactured products seem to come from the Far East. Especially Communist China.
These days the technology advances have slowed somewhat, with technological efficiencies less dramatic than in the 80's and 90's. But what we have seen in this decade is a move to replace the high-tech workers like myself with cheaper alternatives. India has become the new center for technology workers, as corporate America has dumped their high-salaried U.S. techs for Indians, saving as much as 70 or 75 percent.
The Bush Administration famously told us for the past 8 years that all this progress was good for us. Globalization and free trade ultimately lifts all boats.
I'm not sold. If China, which is an adversary of the United States politically, has succeeded in replacing the manufacturing sector of this country with their own, then what happens if we suddenly find our relations deteriorating? All of a sudden, we can't produce our own manufactured products or war materiel that might be needed to protect ourselves.
There's Free Trade and there's Fair Trade. Free Trade has meant unfettered trade, with little regard for the fact that China steals trade secrets, software, entertainment, and intellectual property from America with impunity. The Bush government cared not at all that China manipulated their currency to make sure nobody could compete with them on the price for their goods.
Many suspect that NAFTA is designed more for the benefit of Mexico and Canada than for the U.S. To the extent that may be true or not, I can't say. I do think the silliness of the hassles I get at the border when entering Canada to do my software consulting are sort of ridiculous - If I was entering Canada for a job, then absolutely I should be scrutinized. But entering for a few days to teach people how to use software developed in the US should not be at issue.
I could go on, but want to get down to the real issue of Management versus Labor.
The "Card Check" legislation being pushed in Washington on behalf of the Labor Unions is designed to tilt the balance of power away from corporate management toward labor unions in a return to the 70's. I remember those days, with the bad economy made worse by incessant union strikes. So many companies had to close simply because their Unions demanded too high a price to keep the companies solvent.
I worked in a Union shop in the 80's and was stunned at the gross inefficiencies embedded into the daily activities at the company because of union work rules. I have a funny story about getting the florescent light bulbs changed in my office (it took over a week), but will get to that later.
Don't get me wrong, I fundamentally have no issue with the idea that employees can form a union for the purpose of negotiating fair pay, benefits, and working conditions with their employer.
But I do object to the business-killing effect of unions that become so powerful that they can practically dictate those terms to the employer. And I object to the pervasive corruption inherent in the Union bosses. Want to put yourself in danger of physical violence? As a member of a union, just ask the union boss for a financial statement showing how the members' dues are spent.
Management hates unions, understandably. I've been in the room to hear executives proclaim that they will close the company before they will allow a union to get in. I've been privy to unceremonious firing of employees based on no more than a rumor that they might have been overheard discussing unionization with a co-worker in the break room.
I had a friend back in the 70's and early 80's who told me that if he could just get into a certain Union, he could land a job that would pay double his current rate and be secure for life (that turned out to be wrong). But to get into the union, he had to know the right people. Because, to get on that gravy train, you had to be brought in by a friend or relative. The union was the gatekeeper to those high-paying jobs with amazing benefits.
There's the problem. Give either side too much power, and they're probably going to abuse it. If Management and Labor were both always fair-minded, honest, and ethical, there would be no problem.
Hmm, back to that morality theme again. What was that about all our societal problems sharing the same root?
Friday, January 30, 2009
Who Said,
Insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again expecting a different result?
If only I could ignore the insanity of our government and join the masses of blissful ignorance. At least that might let me keep more hair and lower my blood pressure.
Last year we all got our little bonus check from the Federal government, ostensibly to help stimulate the economy. It didn't work. So the House, supported by the Great and Powerful OB, passed a bill to do it again.
The government decided to give 700 billion dollars to big banks and brokerage houses and insurance companies, no strings attached. The idea was that would loosen up credit to stimulate the economy. But the recipients gratefully accepted the money, salted it away in their vaults, paid out fat bonuses, took elaborate vacations, and/or bought other banks. It didn't work. So again, the Great and Powerful OB and his minions are continuing to dole out money by the billions to the same people with no change in the result.
So we move on with a trillion dollars the citizens don't have slated to satisfy a liberal Christmas wish list. Oh wait, they don't believe in Christmas; so let's just call it a general wish list. Eugenics, ACORN, Illegal Immigration, Fraudulent Global Warming pseudo scientists, windmill and solar panel boondoggles and political payback.
It takes some gall to introduce an openly fraudulent trillion dollar spending proposal labeled as an emergency plan to save the failing economy. And there seems to be nothing that can be done by the minority of the population that see what's happening but are ignored by the leftist government that ascended to power by fooling enough people.
The beginning of the 21st century dark ages is upon us.
If only I could ignore the insanity of our government and join the masses of blissful ignorance. At least that might let me keep more hair and lower my blood pressure.
Last year we all got our little bonus check from the Federal government, ostensibly to help stimulate the economy. It didn't work. So the House, supported by the Great and Powerful OB, passed a bill to do it again.
The government decided to give 700 billion dollars to big banks and brokerage houses and insurance companies, no strings attached. The idea was that would loosen up credit to stimulate the economy. But the recipients gratefully accepted the money, salted it away in their vaults, paid out fat bonuses, took elaborate vacations, and/or bought other banks. It didn't work. So again, the Great and Powerful OB and his minions are continuing to dole out money by the billions to the same people with no change in the result.
So we move on with a trillion dollars the citizens don't have slated to satisfy a liberal Christmas wish list. Oh wait, they don't believe in Christmas; so let's just call it a general wish list. Eugenics, ACORN, Illegal Immigration, Fraudulent Global Warming pseudo scientists, windmill and solar panel boondoggles and political payback.
It takes some gall to introduce an openly fraudulent trillion dollar spending proposal labeled as an emergency plan to save the failing economy. And there seems to be nothing that can be done by the minority of the population that see what's happening but are ignored by the leftist government that ascended to power by fooling enough people.
The beginning of the 21st century dark ages is upon us.
Monday, January 26, 2009
The Only Hope
for Republicans to slow down the Democrat juggernaut is to become the source of common-sense alternatives.
It's a faint hope at best. On the whole, Americans have proven themselves shallow, ignorant, and self-absorbed. Facts are easily obscured by emotional appeal with empty nonspecific promises of "change" to bring about "hope".
Then there is the media, which will continue to wield its overwhelming power to filter information to cast everything the Dems push through in the best possible light while ignoring any and all contrary facts and positions.
The last and only hope, then, is the strongest possibly Public Relations Campaign from the GOP and their supporters to counter the Obama juggernaut with a positive alternative.
Instead of saying "no" to the radical plans being railroaded through Congress under the guise of "economic stimulus", an alternative stimulus plan must be detailed and rolled out to the public with an advertising blitz.
Instead of saying "no" to government control of healthcare, develop and present details of the GOP's preferred "market-based" approach. Stop just saying "market-based", but present exactly how the GOP's plan would keep medical decisions between the patient and doctor while making access to care affordable for all.
Bypass the media in this PR blitz to point out the moral hazards already evident in the power-drunk party in power. Let the public know about radical policies being entrenched by the majority such as overturning bans on infanticide (aka late-term or partial-birth abortions), parental consent for minors seeking abortion, and eliminating all education and waiting periods imposed by states.
Unless the GOP can regain a moral high ground and demonstrate to Americans that they can introduce common-sense policies that solve problems without massive government bureaucracies, they will be irrelevant as a party for at least a generation.
It's a faint hope at best. On the whole, Americans have proven themselves shallow, ignorant, and self-absorbed. Facts are easily obscured by emotional appeal with empty nonspecific promises of "change" to bring about "hope".
Then there is the media, which will continue to wield its overwhelming power to filter information to cast everything the Dems push through in the best possible light while ignoring any and all contrary facts and positions.
The last and only hope, then, is the strongest possibly Public Relations Campaign from the GOP and their supporters to counter the Obama juggernaut with a positive alternative.
Instead of saying "no" to the radical plans being railroaded through Congress under the guise of "economic stimulus", an alternative stimulus plan must be detailed and rolled out to the public with an advertising blitz.
Instead of saying "no" to government control of healthcare, develop and present details of the GOP's preferred "market-based" approach. Stop just saying "market-based", but present exactly how the GOP's plan would keep medical decisions between the patient and doctor while making access to care affordable for all.
Bypass the media in this PR blitz to point out the moral hazards already evident in the power-drunk party in power. Let the public know about radical policies being entrenched by the majority such as overturning bans on infanticide (aka late-term or partial-birth abortions), parental consent for minors seeking abortion, and eliminating all education and waiting periods imposed by states.
Unless the GOP can regain a moral high ground and demonstrate to Americans that they can introduce common-sense policies that solve problems without massive government bureaucracies, they will be irrelevant as a party for at least a generation.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Three at a Time
The magic number 3 strikes again. 3 vehicles in the family need repair at the same time.
On the bright side, theoretically other things should improve after we get past these 3 bad ones.
We're overdue for a break, I think.
On the bright side, theoretically other things should improve after we get past these 3 bad ones.
We're overdue for a break, I think.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
How Bad?
My consulting trip this week was a shocking example of how bad the economy has tanked. Although I certainly have seen a frightening slowdown in my business and have heard and read the bad economic news every day, my trip this week provided tangible proof.
It started with my Sunday departure from Indy. Parking in the "Economy" lot at the airport, there seemed to be a relatively small number of vehicles parked. But it's a new airport where I haven't had a chance to compare, plus this is traditionally a slow travel period, so I didn't think much of it.
I have settled on my new habit of parking close to the last bus stop in the lot, which I've decided is the best strategy for getting to the terminal fastest. Of course, it takes the longest to get back to my car when I return, but that's less important. I was the only person on the bus to the terminal, which was surprising.
Then I walked to the check-in counter and found myself the only passenger there. It was eerie, almost as if I was the only customer at Northwest this particular Sunday afternoon. The agents were hanging out, talking with each other or looking bored.
Walking through the main terminal to the security checkpoint, there was a noticeably small number of people waiting for arriving passengers or sitting at the tables fiddling with their laptops. The stores and restaurants were empty aside from the workers.
Once again, I was the only person present at the security checkpoint. TSA agents were also just hanging out, shooting the breeze or looking bored. The guy checking my ticket and drivers license seemed happy to have something to do.
Walking to my gate, all the stores and restaurants were empty except for the clerks. Even Starbucks, which has had a line a the counter every time I've walked by in the past, was empty of coffee connoisseurs.
As I waited to board my flight, I noticed other flights departing with unusually small passenger loads. Strangely, my flight turned out to be the only full flight in the concourse. I'm not sure why the only full flight of the afternoon was to Minneapolis, although I overheard the people around me talking about their final destinations, which were California and Florida.
I picked up my rental car in the Avis area of the garage, seeing my name on the renter's directory list that was smaller than I'd ever seen it. There were no empty parking spaces, and I was again the only traveler driving out of the garage with my rental. I grumbled a bit to myself that with all the cars they had available, they gave me a Kia. Oh well.
I arrived at the hotel, where it seemed the only people there were the desk clerk and me. The next morning I was the only guest in the breakfast room. Nobody else came in the 30 minutes I was there.
The second night and following morning I did notice a few guests had arrived, and there were maybe a dozen guests at breakfast Tuesday morning. Which was still a small group for the size of the hotel and its dining room.
The client's office showed a continuation of the trend. About half the offices and cubicles were empty. The people I worked with were a bit demoralized, mentioning they had just done a big layoff right before I arrived. It was their second round of layoffs in 3 months.
My trip home was perhaps the most shocking. Of course, checking in my rental car at MSP took place in record time. I was the only customer returning at the time, so the Avis agent was at my door ready to check me in the minute I shifted the car into Park.
The convenient check-in on the lower level at MSP was closed for the first time in years of so many trips I've lost count. I had to go upstairs to the main check-in counter. Where I was the only passenger checking in.
Again I was the only passenger walking through security, the shops and restaurants were mostly empty, and the concourse had fewer people than I have ever seen. The flight back to Indy had a light load as well.
I know that January and February are the slowest travel months of the year. But to see the airports practically ghost towns is frightening.
Everyone I talk to recently is saying the same things. Business everywhere is in the tank. Nobody's spending money, therefore nobody's hiring or starting any new projects or investing in anything. Everyone is keeping their head down and hoping things turn around before they lose everything.
And the first substantive act of the messiah President is overturning the restrictions placed by Bush on Federal support to UN organizations providing abortions to women around the world.
That's change. But hope?
It started with my Sunday departure from Indy. Parking in the "Economy" lot at the airport, there seemed to be a relatively small number of vehicles parked. But it's a new airport where I haven't had a chance to compare, plus this is traditionally a slow travel period, so I didn't think much of it.
I have settled on my new habit of parking close to the last bus stop in the lot, which I've decided is the best strategy for getting to the terminal fastest. Of course, it takes the longest to get back to my car when I return, but that's less important. I was the only person on the bus to the terminal, which was surprising.
Then I walked to the check-in counter and found myself the only passenger there. It was eerie, almost as if I was the only customer at Northwest this particular Sunday afternoon. The agents were hanging out, talking with each other or looking bored.
Walking through the main terminal to the security checkpoint, there was a noticeably small number of people waiting for arriving passengers or sitting at the tables fiddling with their laptops. The stores and restaurants were empty aside from the workers.
Once again, I was the only person present at the security checkpoint. TSA agents were also just hanging out, shooting the breeze or looking bored. The guy checking my ticket and drivers license seemed happy to have something to do.
Walking to my gate, all the stores and restaurants were empty except for the clerks. Even Starbucks, which has had a line a the counter every time I've walked by in the past, was empty of coffee connoisseurs.
As I waited to board my flight, I noticed other flights departing with unusually small passenger loads. Strangely, my flight turned out to be the only full flight in the concourse. I'm not sure why the only full flight of the afternoon was to Minneapolis, although I overheard the people around me talking about their final destinations, which were California and Florida.
I picked up my rental car in the Avis area of the garage, seeing my name on the renter's directory list that was smaller than I'd ever seen it. There were no empty parking spaces, and I was again the only traveler driving out of the garage with my rental. I grumbled a bit to myself that with all the cars they had available, they gave me a Kia. Oh well.
I arrived at the hotel, where it seemed the only people there were the desk clerk and me. The next morning I was the only guest in the breakfast room. Nobody else came in the 30 minutes I was there.
The second night and following morning I did notice a few guests had arrived, and there were maybe a dozen guests at breakfast Tuesday morning. Which was still a small group for the size of the hotel and its dining room.
The client's office showed a continuation of the trend. About half the offices and cubicles were empty. The people I worked with were a bit demoralized, mentioning they had just done a big layoff right before I arrived. It was their second round of layoffs in 3 months.
My trip home was perhaps the most shocking. Of course, checking in my rental car at MSP took place in record time. I was the only customer returning at the time, so the Avis agent was at my door ready to check me in the minute I shifted the car into Park.
The convenient check-in on the lower level at MSP was closed for the first time in years of so many trips I've lost count. I had to go upstairs to the main check-in counter. Where I was the only passenger checking in.
Again I was the only passenger walking through security, the shops and restaurants were mostly empty, and the concourse had fewer people than I have ever seen. The flight back to Indy had a light load as well.
I know that January and February are the slowest travel months of the year. But to see the airports practically ghost towns is frightening.
Everyone I talk to recently is saying the same things. Business everywhere is in the tank. Nobody's spending money, therefore nobody's hiring or starting any new projects or investing in anything. Everyone is keeping their head down and hoping things turn around before they lose everything.
And the first substantive act of the messiah President is overturning the restrictions placed by Bush on Federal support to UN organizations providing abortions to women around the world.
That's change. But hope?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Stark Contrast
It's a lonely feeling I was expecting, which is why I did my best to avoid the news yesterday. But there is no avoiding the over-the-top giddiness of the media over the inauguration. The messiah is King, and anyone not celebrating the fact should be ashamed.
The things I noticed were the stark contrasts between previous presidential transitions and this one.
Even the leftist media have acknowledged that the efforts made by the outgoing Bush administration to transfer information and assist the incoming Obama administration in every possible way were admirable. President Bush was gracious and open, wished Obama well, and smoothed the way. George and Laura Bush exemplified class in their gracious exit into a private life. The Senate Republicans are offering little to no resistance in confirmations of Obama's cabinet, despite publicly aired ethical, legal, and competence issues with key appointees.
Contrast this with the transition of Bush into the White House replacing Bill Clinton. The Clintons reportedly were not only cool to the Republican president, but did very little to assist in the transition. Their staff famously looted the White House on their way out, stealing everything that wasn't nailed down. The Democrat Senate blocked and delayed and fought nearly every Bush appointment for apparently no reason other than spite. Appointees with the most minor past issues had to withdraw and be replaced.
Bush left with a relatively small number of pardons and clemencies, none that can be seriously challenged as self-serving or ethically questionable. The Clintons left office with a record number of pardons, with some shamelessly self-serving and quid-pro-quo (Marc Rich and FALN).
Most telling was the disrespectful behavior of the partying crowds as they mocked, booed, and chanted obscenities at the departing Bush family. Was there a single conservative singing "Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey, Hey, Goodbye" at Clinton during Bush's inauguration? And that was one of the milder classless offenses by the Obama crowds.
Bush took office with hordes of Democrats hating him. Personally. Hear any hatred of Obama from the right?
Finally, a group of congresspeople including the Speaker of the House are determined to hound the Bushes and members of their administration for the foreseeable future in an endless series of investigations designed to make their lives miserable and hoped to uncover some justification for jailing them. Simply out of spite.
When called on by some conservatives to investigate the many obvious legal and ethical lapses by the Clintons, Bush declined. There was nothing to be gained, in his opinion, by investigating past corruption.
I don't hate the new president. I simply disagree with nearly every policy he has promised to implement. Even if I'm the only person left who hasn't succumbed to the national infection that is Obamamania. It's easier to understand how someone like Hitler could ascend to power in Germany. Not that Obama is another Hitler. Vladimir Lenin or Hugo Chavez maybe, but not Hitler.
The things I noticed were the stark contrasts between previous presidential transitions and this one.
Even the leftist media have acknowledged that the efforts made by the outgoing Bush administration to transfer information and assist the incoming Obama administration in every possible way were admirable. President Bush was gracious and open, wished Obama well, and smoothed the way. George and Laura Bush exemplified class in their gracious exit into a private life. The Senate Republicans are offering little to no resistance in confirmations of Obama's cabinet, despite publicly aired ethical, legal, and competence issues with key appointees.
Contrast this with the transition of Bush into the White House replacing Bill Clinton. The Clintons reportedly were not only cool to the Republican president, but did very little to assist in the transition. Their staff famously looted the White House on their way out, stealing everything that wasn't nailed down. The Democrat Senate blocked and delayed and fought nearly every Bush appointment for apparently no reason other than spite. Appointees with the most minor past issues had to withdraw and be replaced.
Bush left with a relatively small number of pardons and clemencies, none that can be seriously challenged as self-serving or ethically questionable. The Clintons left office with a record number of pardons, with some shamelessly self-serving and quid-pro-quo (Marc Rich and FALN).
Most telling was the disrespectful behavior of the partying crowds as they mocked, booed, and chanted obscenities at the departing Bush family. Was there a single conservative singing "Na Na Na Na, Hey, Hey, Hey, Goodbye" at Clinton during Bush's inauguration? And that was one of the milder classless offenses by the Obama crowds.
Bush took office with hordes of Democrats hating him. Personally. Hear any hatred of Obama from the right?
Finally, a group of congresspeople including the Speaker of the House are determined to hound the Bushes and members of their administration for the foreseeable future in an endless series of investigations designed to make their lives miserable and hoped to uncover some justification for jailing them. Simply out of spite.
When called on by some conservatives to investigate the many obvious legal and ethical lapses by the Clintons, Bush declined. There was nothing to be gained, in his opinion, by investigating past corruption.
I don't hate the new president. I simply disagree with nearly every policy he has promised to implement. Even if I'm the only person left who hasn't succumbed to the national infection that is Obamamania. It's easier to understand how someone like Hitler could ascend to power in Germany. Not that Obama is another Hitler. Vladimir Lenin or Hugo Chavez maybe, but not Hitler.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Post-Racial?
A side discussion that seems to be happening out there with the Obama inauguration is concerned with whether or not America has moved on from racism, or if in large part we have become a "Post-Racial" society.
So it seemed the best place to start in thinking about the whole idea was to grab the definition of racism. Here's the definition from Dictionary.com
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races
So has our society largely moved on in terms of the above definition?
Well, nobody that's taken seriously believes the first point. In fact, the level of political correctness we find ourselves in today would cause anyone expressing racial superiority for any race to be ostracized or possibly even jailed.
I'm aware of no government policy based on the first idea. In fact, there's plenty of accepted discrimination in government and big business. When it's racial it's discrimination that hires and promotes based on race where the "majority" race is the one discriminated against. Other types of discrimination happen every day against people of all races, except perhaps those given favoritism: it's considered perfectly acceptable to discriminate against smokers, overweight, unattractive, uneducated or undereducated, speech impaired, etc. But none dares discriminate against black or mixed-race individuals, at least not where such discrimination can be detected.
Hatred and intolerance is the most interesting part of the definition for me. Does anyone actually "hate" an entire race? None but perhaps the most extreme paranoids.
So, based on the above definition, I'd say we have been "post-racial" for a very long time.
I hear some continue to suggest that the mere fact that black people are statistically more likely to be poor, unemployed, and/or incarcerated is enough to prove that an invisible institutional racism is still in play.
Any reasonable analysis of the root causes of these problems in the black community would have to assume that the blame is misdirected. Although it can be said that government policies beginning with LBJ's "Great Society" either caused or exacerbated the problems in the black community just as it caused today's ongoing problems in all communities, the problem is mainly cultural.
The "Great Society" led to welfare programs that rewarded single mothers, with greater benefits based on the number of children in the home. Husbands were a detriment to getting so many benefits, including housing, food stamps, medical care, free education, and even a paycheck. So women of all races abandoned marriage and the nuclear family to get the government free ride. This devastated both black and white communities, but especially the black community.
Asians, Hispanics, Carribean Islanders, and even African immigrants arrived by the millions and found great success. People from places like Korea and India opened businesses in the black neighborhoods and found success, albeit sometimes angering some in those communities who somehow felt victimized by those entrepreneurs.
Affirmative Action and the simple attitudes of people trying to help the black community escape poverty led to companies scouring the country for qualified black candidates. But qualified candidates were hard to find, because so much of the black community rejected American Public Education as white institutions. Somehow excelling in school became akin to playing "Uncle Tom", knuckling under to some sort of oppressive system set up by some invisible white conspiracy.
Forced busing was tried, and didn't work. Now Charter Schools and Magnet Schools are popping up everywhere, but the jury's still out on their long-term prospects.
Truly there is a much greater number of successful people from the black community today than ever before. It just seems that the message hasn't fully reached the multi-generational welfare classes. Want to escape from the ghettos? Go to school, study hard, and get into college. It probably requires the strongest of wills and courage to buck the attitudes of others, but absolutely can be achieved by those willing to put forth the effort.
Unfortunately for many the "hope" and "change" promised by the new president isn't about equality, but socialism. The victimized underclass are poor not because of anything they did or failed to do, but because of some sort of national conspiracy designed to keep them poor and in the inner cities. So the answers they seek seem to revolve around new government "programs" that will simply re-emphasize the welfare state. The "change" many seem to "hope" for is ever expanding welfare checks that allow the poor oppressed to live a middle-class lifestyle without having to go to work every day.
And I promise I'm not being racist by suggesting that these may be underlying goals of many of those celebrating tomorrow's inauguration. Because those goals belong to millions of people of all races, who somehow think they will soon get free healthcare, higher wages, a nicer car, a better home, or low energy bills just because the almighty Obama will somehow make the evil capitalists stop gouging and exploiting everyone.
Such a letdown for all of those masses who believe the Obama fairy tales.
So it seemed the best place to start in thinking about the whole idea was to grab the definition of racism. Here's the definition from Dictionary.com
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races
So has our society largely moved on in terms of the above definition?
Well, nobody that's taken seriously believes the first point. In fact, the level of political correctness we find ourselves in today would cause anyone expressing racial superiority for any race to be ostracized or possibly even jailed.
I'm aware of no government policy based on the first idea. In fact, there's plenty of accepted discrimination in government and big business. When it's racial it's discrimination that hires and promotes based on race where the "majority" race is the one discriminated against. Other types of discrimination happen every day against people of all races, except perhaps those given favoritism: it's considered perfectly acceptable to discriminate against smokers, overweight, unattractive, uneducated or undereducated, speech impaired, etc. But none dares discriminate against black or mixed-race individuals, at least not where such discrimination can be detected.
Hatred and intolerance is the most interesting part of the definition for me. Does anyone actually "hate" an entire race? None but perhaps the most extreme paranoids.
So, based on the above definition, I'd say we have been "post-racial" for a very long time.
I hear some continue to suggest that the mere fact that black people are statistically more likely to be poor, unemployed, and/or incarcerated is enough to prove that an invisible institutional racism is still in play.
Any reasonable analysis of the root causes of these problems in the black community would have to assume that the blame is misdirected. Although it can be said that government policies beginning with LBJ's "Great Society" either caused or exacerbated the problems in the black community just as it caused today's ongoing problems in all communities, the problem is mainly cultural.
The "Great Society" led to welfare programs that rewarded single mothers, with greater benefits based on the number of children in the home. Husbands were a detriment to getting so many benefits, including housing, food stamps, medical care, free education, and even a paycheck. So women of all races abandoned marriage and the nuclear family to get the government free ride. This devastated both black and white communities, but especially the black community.
Asians, Hispanics, Carribean Islanders, and even African immigrants arrived by the millions and found great success. People from places like Korea and India opened businesses in the black neighborhoods and found success, albeit sometimes angering some in those communities who somehow felt victimized by those entrepreneurs.
Affirmative Action and the simple attitudes of people trying to help the black community escape poverty led to companies scouring the country for qualified black candidates. But qualified candidates were hard to find, because so much of the black community rejected American Public Education as white institutions. Somehow excelling in school became akin to playing "Uncle Tom", knuckling under to some sort of oppressive system set up by some invisible white conspiracy.
Forced busing was tried, and didn't work. Now Charter Schools and Magnet Schools are popping up everywhere, but the jury's still out on their long-term prospects.
Truly there is a much greater number of successful people from the black community today than ever before. It just seems that the message hasn't fully reached the multi-generational welfare classes. Want to escape from the ghettos? Go to school, study hard, and get into college. It probably requires the strongest of wills and courage to buck the attitudes of others, but absolutely can be achieved by those willing to put forth the effort.
Unfortunately for many the "hope" and "change" promised by the new president isn't about equality, but socialism. The victimized underclass are poor not because of anything they did or failed to do, but because of some sort of national conspiracy designed to keep them poor and in the inner cities. So the answers they seek seem to revolve around new government "programs" that will simply re-emphasize the welfare state. The "change" many seem to "hope" for is ever expanding welfare checks that allow the poor oppressed to live a middle-class lifestyle without having to go to work every day.
And I promise I'm not being racist by suggesting that these may be underlying goals of many of those celebrating tomorrow's inauguration. Because those goals belong to millions of people of all races, who somehow think they will soon get free healthcare, higher wages, a nicer car, a better home, or low energy bills just because the almighty Obama will somehow make the evil capitalists stop gouging and exploiting everyone.
Such a letdown for all of those masses who believe the Obama fairy tales.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Columbus Christian School Basketball
Today's Columbus Republic did a mid-season review of the local public high school basketball teams. Since there is no press given to the Columbus Christian School program, I thought it might be interesting to post my own mid-season review for the Crusaders.
First, the varsity roster. Pardon me if I made any errors - I'm creating this from memory.
The Crusaders are one game under .500 at mid-season, at 9 and 10. They use a small, quick lineup with a 3-guard and 2-forward offense. There are 7 players in the rotation, including starters Derek and Kyle Roth, Luke Mathis, Gavin Harvey, and Baxter Binnion. Coming off the bench are Nolan Andes and Alex Morrison. Among the rest of the roster, Tyler Schaub and Jacob Harvey see limited playing time, with the rest of the bench used rarely.
Luke Mathis is a quick, energetic player that is fun to watch and is the team's second leading scorer behind Derek Roth. Luke is often able to use his speed to create layup opportunities, force turnovers, and is the team's most prolific 3-point shooter.
Derek Roth is a powerful force in the post. When the team is able to feed him in the paint, Derek is able to score consistently, even against taller defenders.
Baxter Binnion and Kyle Roth are both quick ball-handling specialists who can both run the offense in a point guard role.
Gavin Harvey is energetic and enthusiastic, and is capable of hitting mid-range jump shots.
Alex Morrison and Nolan Andes both can provide a spark off the bench when needed. Alex has good defensive skills and can create shots in the paint, while Nolan is capable of disrupting the opponent on defense and can hit the occasional 3 point basket.
The team is close-knit and enthusiastic. They have a chance to improve their competitiveness, especially within their private school league, if they can develop some of these potentials:
Best of luck to the CCS Crusaders for the rest of the season!
First, the varsity roster. Pardon me if I made any errors - I'm creating this from memory.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Luke Mathis is a quick, energetic player that is fun to watch and is the team's second leading scorer behind Derek Roth. Luke is often able to use his speed to create layup opportunities, force turnovers, and is the team's most prolific 3-point shooter.
Derek Roth is a powerful force in the post. When the team is able to feed him in the paint, Derek is able to score consistently, even against taller defenders.
Baxter Binnion and Kyle Roth are both quick ball-handling specialists who can both run the offense in a point guard role.
Gavin Harvey is energetic and enthusiastic, and is capable of hitting mid-range jump shots.
Alex Morrison and Nolan Andes both can provide a spark off the bench when needed. Alex has good defensive skills and can create shots in the paint, while Nolan is capable of disrupting the opponent on defense and can hit the occasional 3 point basket.
The team is close-knit and enthusiastic. They have a chance to improve their competitiveness, especially within their private school league, if they can develop some of these potentials:
- Outside Shooting: Luke has been the most consistent, and Jacob Harvey is reputed to be the best outside shooter in practice, but the emergence of a consistent shooter would be a great complement to Derek's inside offense.
- Defense: The team's defense is inconsistent. Good teams are able to dribble-penetrate, draw the defense, then find an open man for an easy score a bit too often. Work on defensive fundamentals, help defense, and improved defensive schemes could improve the win/loss percentage.
- Matchups: The player rotation could be changed to better fit the lineup of the other team. Rather than always using the same rotation regardless of the opponent, a big lineup could be used against bigger teams and the smaller lineup against smaller teams. Size and talent among younger albeit less experienced players on the bench is ignored at times when some of those players could make a positive impact in certain game situations.
- Mental Attitude: There have been some close games that were lost because the Crusaders lost focus or became discouraged. Sometimes the response to such challenges is overcompensation or individuals trying to carry the team by themselves; other times the energy level is deflated when the opponent makes a run to pull ahead. The entire team must ignore real or perceived bad calls or mistakes and keep playing their game to the best of their ability. It's the coach's job to make any adjustments to the game strategy, and players should focus their energy on playing hard and avoiding mistakes rather than trying to be the hero of the game.
Best of luck to the CCS Crusaders for the rest of the season!
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Interconnectedness
There is an unquestionable relationship between the health and prosperity of a society and its moral compass. It seems to be evident in the events of the past few months.
American traditional morality has been defined in lifelong committed marriages, the nuclear family, hard work, self-reliance, charity, temperance, and responsibility.
If applied within the mainstream of America, these values lead to low crime, high productivity, less poverty, and technological progress.
But a prosperous nation seems inevitably to abandon those principles, leading to America's current state.
In place of committed marriage, couples seem to treat marriage like teens treat "going steady", divorcing the moment things get rocky or a seemingly better partner appears on the scene. Extramarital sex cheapens the marital relationship and produces a whole new class of single-parent households, which are mostly stuck in permanent poverty without the benefit of the marital partnership. Then sex becomes an end unto itself, as those who sadly find their identity in their homosexual behavior.
All that has led to a quiet epidemic of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and the scourge of the "gay disease" of AIDS. Rather than promoting the traditional marriage model which practically guarantees the solution to the problems of disease and illegitimate children, the society promotes gay marriage, abortion, and tax-supported research seeking to cure these behavior-driven diseases. Anyone trying to suggest the simpler traditional cure for these ills is vilified as a bigot, homophobe, or right-wing fundamentalist extremist.
Productive people see their earnings increasingly confiscated in a direct transfer to those who are not productive. After a featherbed bureaucracy takes their very large cut, of course. The unproductive, nonworking recipients of the transfer payments feel no shame in making a living on the back of another; instead, they actually feel entitled to the meager income. Certain political officeholders delight in continuing these transfers of income, as it builds their constituencies into a dependent class that will guarantee they remain in power indefinitely.
Business owners and managers abandoned any sense of responsibility to their workforces and communities, laying off longtime employees the moment it becomes profitable to do so. Importing workers from other countries to replace American workers at a lower rate, and exporting plants and operations to poorer countries to save costs has enriched the corporate elites at the expense of the rest of America, combining with the increasing high taxes to lower the standard of living for everyone but themselves.
Wealthy trial lawyers invest in keeping friendly politicians in office who continue to expand their opportunities to sue anybody anywhere, so even the innocent find themselves paying off their legal extortionists because it costs less than dragging the case through the inefficent and increasingly unjust judicial system.
Now an incoming president promises to confiscate unprecedented amounts of money from the approximate 60 percent of citizens that actually have some to give away to the other 40 percent in the name of "economic stimulus". Instead of solving the problems of runaway medical cost, even more income will be confiscated to establish a government-controlled insurance system that addresses none of the underlying causes of the problem.
Thus the greatest country in the history of the world is destroyed.
American traditional morality has been defined in lifelong committed marriages, the nuclear family, hard work, self-reliance, charity, temperance, and responsibility.
If applied within the mainstream of America, these values lead to low crime, high productivity, less poverty, and technological progress.
But a prosperous nation seems inevitably to abandon those principles, leading to America's current state.
In place of committed marriage, couples seem to treat marriage like teens treat "going steady", divorcing the moment things get rocky or a seemingly better partner appears on the scene. Extramarital sex cheapens the marital relationship and produces a whole new class of single-parent households, which are mostly stuck in permanent poverty without the benefit of the marital partnership. Then sex becomes an end unto itself, as those who sadly find their identity in their homosexual behavior.
All that has led to a quiet epidemic of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and the scourge of the "gay disease" of AIDS. Rather than promoting the traditional marriage model which practically guarantees the solution to the problems of disease and illegitimate children, the society promotes gay marriage, abortion, and tax-supported research seeking to cure these behavior-driven diseases. Anyone trying to suggest the simpler traditional cure for these ills is vilified as a bigot, homophobe, or right-wing fundamentalist extremist.
Productive people see their earnings increasingly confiscated in a direct transfer to those who are not productive. After a featherbed bureaucracy takes their very large cut, of course. The unproductive, nonworking recipients of the transfer payments feel no shame in making a living on the back of another; instead, they actually feel entitled to the meager income. Certain political officeholders delight in continuing these transfers of income, as it builds their constituencies into a dependent class that will guarantee they remain in power indefinitely.
Business owners and managers abandoned any sense of responsibility to their workforces and communities, laying off longtime employees the moment it becomes profitable to do so. Importing workers from other countries to replace American workers at a lower rate, and exporting plants and operations to poorer countries to save costs has enriched the corporate elites at the expense of the rest of America, combining with the increasing high taxes to lower the standard of living for everyone but themselves.
Wealthy trial lawyers invest in keeping friendly politicians in office who continue to expand their opportunities to sue anybody anywhere, so even the innocent find themselves paying off their legal extortionists because it costs less than dragging the case through the inefficent and increasingly unjust judicial system.
Now an incoming president promises to confiscate unprecedented amounts of money from the approximate 60 percent of citizens that actually have some to give away to the other 40 percent in the name of "economic stimulus". Instead of solving the problems of runaway medical cost, even more income will be confiscated to establish a government-controlled insurance system that addresses none of the underlying causes of the problem.
Thus the greatest country in the history of the world is destroyed.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Holiday Hangover
The time off was very nice, making it all that more difficult to return to the real world.
Apparently the real world is now suffering mass hysteria. The insanity has gained momentum to the point I can't even begin to describe its many manifestations.
The national intelligence has apparently dropped to an all-time low. Nobody, as represented by our own congress and incoming President, seems to have the slightest clue about basic history, economics, or common sense.
Thus I watch helplessly as the inmates run the asylum. Fears of the Great Depression may be realized because of the very policies being implemented by the all-powerful Left.
I only wish I had the answer to my basic question: Are they really so insanely ignorant, or are they acting on this opportunity to destroy America as we know it so they can build their own Marxist society out of the ashes?
I can't help but suspect the latter.
Apparently the real world is now suffering mass hysteria. The insanity has gained momentum to the point I can't even begin to describe its many manifestations.
The national intelligence has apparently dropped to an all-time low. Nobody, as represented by our own congress and incoming President, seems to have the slightest clue about basic history, economics, or common sense.
Thus I watch helplessly as the inmates run the asylum. Fears of the Great Depression may be realized because of the very policies being implemented by the all-powerful Left.
I only wish I had the answer to my basic question: Are they really so insanely ignorant, or are they acting on this opportunity to destroy America as we know it so they can build their own Marxist society out of the ashes?
I can't help but suspect the latter.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Missing the Definition of Love
While channel surfing I came across an interview of Rick Warren by Ann Curry of NBC. Out of curiosity I decided to see how it went.
NBC is of course arguably the most left-wing network, pretty much undeniable in their so-called "news" programming over the last few years, and particularly obvious during the recent Presidential election. Ann Curry is one of the Today Show liberals, but I'd always thought she had been relatively pleasant and less confrontational with people she interviews who may hold more conservative views, compared to Matt and Katie.
But she really got in Warren's face about his support for Prop 8 in California. Even more than her somewhat surprising confrontational approach to him on the issue, I was surprised at the assumptions she made in attacking him.
Especially when she asked him how he could possibly deny the rights of two people to "love each other". That was the most revealing statement of where the gay marriage supporters and Ann are coming from on the issue.
Ann and her growing mob of fellow travelers have adopted the disease of narcissism that has become our national epidemic. They can't seem to separate love from sex.
For Ann and her crowd, apparently love is sex. Pastor Warren gave her a pretty good response, but it seemed to me that she didn't even process his answer, let alone understand it. The essence of his response was that mature adults must rise above their baser instincts and do what's right for themselves and each other. And the gay marriage movement he fears is more about the suppression of free speech and practice of religion than it is about same-sex couples making commitments to each other.
News flash: Love and sex are not corollary. Sex is part of the expression of married love and of course is necessary to perpetuate the species, but has never been the definition of love.
Can one love another without having sex with him or her? Absolutely.
Can one have sex with another without feeling "love"? I don't even need to answer that.
The interview included a discussion of the fact that Pastor Warren has given huge sums to the treatment of AIDS. Ann couldn't understand why he would do that and yet "hurt" gays by supporting Prop 8. I suppose she's never been to church, or she'd know the answer to that one.
Too bad shallow Ann doesn't understand those of us who belong to that strange tribe called "Christians".
NBC is of course arguably the most left-wing network, pretty much undeniable in their so-called "news" programming over the last few years, and particularly obvious during the recent Presidential election. Ann Curry is one of the Today Show liberals, but I'd always thought she had been relatively pleasant and less confrontational with people she interviews who may hold more conservative views, compared to Matt and Katie.
But she really got in Warren's face about his support for Prop 8 in California. Even more than her somewhat surprising confrontational approach to him on the issue, I was surprised at the assumptions she made in attacking him.
Especially when she asked him how he could possibly deny the rights of two people to "love each other". That was the most revealing statement of where the gay marriage supporters and Ann are coming from on the issue.
Ann and her growing mob of fellow travelers have adopted the disease of narcissism that has become our national epidemic. They can't seem to separate love from sex.
For Ann and her crowd, apparently love is sex. Pastor Warren gave her a pretty good response, but it seemed to me that she didn't even process his answer, let alone understand it. The essence of his response was that mature adults must rise above their baser instincts and do what's right for themselves and each other. And the gay marriage movement he fears is more about the suppression of free speech and practice of religion than it is about same-sex couples making commitments to each other.
News flash: Love and sex are not corollary. Sex is part of the expression of married love and of course is necessary to perpetuate the species, but has never been the definition of love.
Can one love another without having sex with him or her? Absolutely.
Can one have sex with another without feeling "love"? I don't even need to answer that.
The interview included a discussion of the fact that Pastor Warren has given huge sums to the treatment of AIDS. Ann couldn't understand why he would do that and yet "hurt" gays by supporting Prop 8. I suppose she's never been to church, or she'd know the answer to that one.
Too bad shallow Ann doesn't understand those of us who belong to that strange tribe called "Christians".
Thursday, December 18, 2008
I Can't Say it Better
Found this from somebody named Herb London of the Hudson Institute.
The America of now is one where Orwellian logic rules. Redistribution of wealth is fairness. Taxes are patriotic. The free market should be a regulated market. Big government is good for you. Politicians know what kind of health care is best for you. Choice should be limited, except when it comes to abortion. Power comes from being powerless. Progressive education is designed to promote progress toward socialism. Race doesn't count unless a person of color tells you it counts. Higher education gets lower each year. Those who create our problems should be asked to solve them. Religion should be a private matter that does not inform public morality. Liberal is radical. Free speech is selective speech. Courage is impetuousness.
Herb wrote the best paragraph I could imagine describing today's America.
The America of now is one where Orwellian logic rules. Redistribution of wealth is fairness. Taxes are patriotic. The free market should be a regulated market. Big government is good for you. Politicians know what kind of health care is best for you. Choice should be limited, except when it comes to abortion. Power comes from being powerless. Progressive education is designed to promote progress toward socialism. Race doesn't count unless a person of color tells you it counts. Higher education gets lower each year. Those who create our problems should be asked to solve them. Religion should be a private matter that does not inform public morality. Liberal is radical. Free speech is selective speech. Courage is impetuousness.
Herb wrote the best paragraph I could imagine describing today's America.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Christmas Thoughts
Hard times seem to inspire more folks to return to their Christian roots. We may still be a bit early in this current run of hard times, but I wonder if I'm not already observing some of that return.
It seems that people are divided into a few categories this Christmas.
The faithful joyfully go about the traditions of Christmas, many practicing those both sacred and secular. The faithful celebrate the birth of Christ while anticipating his triumphant return.
The nominal Christians enjoy mostly the secular traditions, perhaps considering making a rare appearance at a Christmas Mass or Service at the local church their parents took them to as children. They otherwise don't give the sacred meaning much thought.
The agnostics won't go to church unless dragged along by a friend or family member. They might enjoy participation in the secular activities, but give the sacred meaning little or no thought.
The atheists seem to spend most of the Christmas season angry. Inexplicably, as evidenced in the Washington State Capitol this year, they feel the need to insult and berate the faithful whenever possible. They try their best to remove all Christian symbols and speech from any public arena, and seem to make more progress on that agenda every year.
The Jews, excepting the atheists described above, go ahead and celebrate Hannukah, really more of a minor event for them, but it provides an opportunity for them to have their own alternative to Christmas.
The racially sensitive Black population embrace the relatively new Kwanzaa, which is a modern celebration created out of the ether by a communist college professor from California. I remain curious how many Kwanzaa celebrants truly understand how it came into existence, and how many of those also celebrate Christmas.
Islam doesn't seem to have a parallel celebration, except possibly the Islamic New Year. Other than the generally known plotting of the radical factions to exterminate Jews and enslave or convert Christians, I really don't know what the followers of Mohammed do during the Christmas season.
I've heard several times in the past few days people greeting each other with "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays". Sometimes I hear someone greet another with "Merry Christmas" and hear the other person respond with "Happy Holidays", and other times I hear the reverse. My sense is that it's a sort of subtle argument happening, but everybody's generally pleasant in the greeting.
Personally, I use "Merry Christmas". My intent isn't to engage in the argument, but to sincerely wish a merry Christmas. As much as secularists would like to change it, this remains fundamentally the Christmas holiday season. And it will always be so, at least unless the enemies succeed in exterminating us and renaming the holiday to the pagan "Winter Solstice".
My best hope is that everyone will reflect on the lessons of the birth of that Hebrew baby that would change the world for the next 2,000 years. The story of his birth, life, death, and resurrection give us our greatest hope.
I'm sorry for those who choose not to believe, as their lives must be hopeless and empty. I pray more of them at least explore the faith enough to discover it for themselves.
Merry Christmas!
It seems that people are divided into a few categories this Christmas.
The faithful joyfully go about the traditions of Christmas, many practicing those both sacred and secular. The faithful celebrate the birth of Christ while anticipating his triumphant return.
The nominal Christians enjoy mostly the secular traditions, perhaps considering making a rare appearance at a Christmas Mass or Service at the local church their parents took them to as children. They otherwise don't give the sacred meaning much thought.
The agnostics won't go to church unless dragged along by a friend or family member. They might enjoy participation in the secular activities, but give the sacred meaning little or no thought.
The atheists seem to spend most of the Christmas season angry. Inexplicably, as evidenced in the Washington State Capitol this year, they feel the need to insult and berate the faithful whenever possible. They try their best to remove all Christian symbols and speech from any public arena, and seem to make more progress on that agenda every year.
The Jews, excepting the atheists described above, go ahead and celebrate Hannukah, really more of a minor event for them, but it provides an opportunity for them to have their own alternative to Christmas.
The racially sensitive Black population embrace the relatively new Kwanzaa, which is a modern celebration created out of the ether by a communist college professor from California. I remain curious how many Kwanzaa celebrants truly understand how it came into existence, and how many of those also celebrate Christmas.
Islam doesn't seem to have a parallel celebration, except possibly the Islamic New Year. Other than the generally known plotting of the radical factions to exterminate Jews and enslave or convert Christians, I really don't know what the followers of Mohammed do during the Christmas season.
I've heard several times in the past few days people greeting each other with "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays". Sometimes I hear someone greet another with "Merry Christmas" and hear the other person respond with "Happy Holidays", and other times I hear the reverse. My sense is that it's a sort of subtle argument happening, but everybody's generally pleasant in the greeting.
Personally, I use "Merry Christmas". My intent isn't to engage in the argument, but to sincerely wish a merry Christmas. As much as secularists would like to change it, this remains fundamentally the Christmas holiday season. And it will always be so, at least unless the enemies succeed in exterminating us and renaming the holiday to the pagan "Winter Solstice".
My best hope is that everyone will reflect on the lessons of the birth of that Hebrew baby that would change the world for the next 2,000 years. The story of his birth, life, death, and resurrection give us our greatest hope.
I'm sorry for those who choose not to believe, as their lives must be hopeless and empty. I pray more of them at least explore the faith enough to discover it for themselves.
Merry Christmas!
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Why Can't We?
All the noise about bailing out the Big 3 has generated some questions in my tiny mind.
The government seemed to barely blink at overriding the overwhelming "NO!" from the public to allow Henry Paulson the 700 billion to hand out to his buddies in the financial sector, seemingly with little or no oversight. Then the Big 3 come along, hat in hand, asking for a measly 35 billion bailout, and are slapped around for it.
Why the difference?
We're hearing a lot about how the Big 3 can't be allowed to fail. They are somehow the last bastion of America's industrial power, and it's only patriotic to use tax dollars to prop them up.
But they can't seem to compete. They have monstrous overhead, paying outrageously above-market compensation to their unions and executives. And they still build an inferior product, at least as far as public perception is concerned.
So my question is, why haven't some gutsy automotive engineers gotten together and created the great new American car company? One that produces innovative new vehicles at a lower cost that Americans will line up to buy? Isn't there a great void in the market needing to be filled by a young, innovative, and aggressive new company?
I know the barriers to entry are extremely high. The amount of capital it would require to build and test the prototypes, build and staff the first production plant, contract the suppliers, create the marketing campaign, recruit a network of dealerships, etc., is staggering. Not to mention scaling all the government-imposed barriers.
But it could absolutely be done. All it takes is visionary leadership; a charismatic salesman to convince investors to take the risk.
There is where I might have stumbled on the answer. Our country is suffering from a terrible drought of leadership. In government and industry.
Will the Big 3 become the Big 2? Or 1? Or will we soon see America forever lose its industrial capabilities to the East?
The government seemed to barely blink at overriding the overwhelming "NO!" from the public to allow Henry Paulson the 700 billion to hand out to his buddies in the financial sector, seemingly with little or no oversight. Then the Big 3 come along, hat in hand, asking for a measly 35 billion bailout, and are slapped around for it.
Why the difference?
We're hearing a lot about how the Big 3 can't be allowed to fail. They are somehow the last bastion of America's industrial power, and it's only patriotic to use tax dollars to prop them up.
But they can't seem to compete. They have monstrous overhead, paying outrageously above-market compensation to their unions and executives. And they still build an inferior product, at least as far as public perception is concerned.
So my question is, why haven't some gutsy automotive engineers gotten together and created the great new American car company? One that produces innovative new vehicles at a lower cost that Americans will line up to buy? Isn't there a great void in the market needing to be filled by a young, innovative, and aggressive new company?
I know the barriers to entry are extremely high. The amount of capital it would require to build and test the prototypes, build and staff the first production plant, contract the suppliers, create the marketing campaign, recruit a network of dealerships, etc., is staggering. Not to mention scaling all the government-imposed barriers.
But it could absolutely be done. All it takes is visionary leadership; a charismatic salesman to convince investors to take the risk.
There is where I might have stumbled on the answer. Our country is suffering from a terrible drought of leadership. In government and industry.
Will the Big 3 become the Big 2? Or 1? Or will we soon see America forever lose its industrial capabilities to the East?
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Stuff I Notice
Just some stuff I tend to notice.
It seems like a disproportionate number of
television news reporters have speech impediments.
psychology professors are most in need of counseling.
professional athletes and politicians are sociopaths.
the most irritatingly opinionated people are the most ignorant.
college professors lack common sense.
celebrities think fame means intelligence.
those easily offended are themselves offensive.
Just saying ...
It seems like a disproportionate number of
television news reporters have speech impediments.
psychology professors are most in need of counseling.
professional athletes and politicians are sociopaths.
the most irritatingly opinionated people are the most ignorant.
college professors lack common sense.
celebrities think fame means intelligence.
those easily offended are themselves offensive.
Just saying ...
Monday, November 24, 2008
Looks Like MN Needs the IN Voter ID Law
From John Hinderaker:
Minnesota makes no serious effort to prevent voter fraud. It has been reported that one-quarter of all the votes cast in Hennepin County, the state's largest, were same-day registrations. In most instances, not only are voters not required to show identification, it is illegal to ask them for it. So we have no way of knowing how many non-citizens voted; or how many students from Wisconsin voted there, then crossed the border to vote again in a college town in Minnesota; or how many people voted in another state and also cast an absentee ballot in Minnesota, or vice versa; or how many felons voted; or how many fictitious people registered by ACORN, the voter fraud organization that put on a major push in Minnesota this year, ostensibly showed up to vote; or how many residents of nursing homes voted without having any idea they had done so; or how many voted in two or more Minnesota precincts; or how many people voted for themselves and also for someone who they knew had died or moved out of a precinct by election day; or how many Franken ballots were slipped into voting machines by Democratic election judges when no one was looking. There is no way, at this point, to separate the legitimate ballots from those that were cast illegally. The legal and the illegal, the real and the fake, are being counted with equal precision.
The larger question for me is, how can it be possible that Minnesota would even consider electing Al Franken to the US Senate? It would seem that the cold (no global warming in those north woods, I can attest) has frozen their collective brains. Even if Norm Coleman is a jerk (and I have no information on that question one way or the other), how could anyone possibly believe Stuart Smalley is a legitimate replacement?
Then again, they did elect Jesse Ventura to be their governor once. Incomprehensible.
Minnesota makes no serious effort to prevent voter fraud. It has been reported that one-quarter of all the votes cast in Hennepin County, the state's largest, were same-day registrations. In most instances, not only are voters not required to show identification, it is illegal to ask them for it. So we have no way of knowing how many non-citizens voted; or how many students from Wisconsin voted there, then crossed the border to vote again in a college town in Minnesota; or how many people voted in another state and also cast an absentee ballot in Minnesota, or vice versa; or how many felons voted; or how many fictitious people registered by ACORN, the voter fraud organization that put on a major push in Minnesota this year, ostensibly showed up to vote; or how many residents of nursing homes voted without having any idea they had done so; or how many voted in two or more Minnesota precincts; or how many people voted for themselves and also for someone who they knew had died or moved out of a precinct by election day; or how many Franken ballots were slipped into voting machines by Democratic election judges when no one was looking. There is no way, at this point, to separate the legitimate ballots from those that were cast illegally. The legal and the illegal, the real and the fake, are being counted with equal precision.
The larger question for me is, how can it be possible that Minnesota would even consider electing Al Franken to the US Senate? It would seem that the cold (no global warming in those north woods, I can attest) has frozen their collective brains. Even if Norm Coleman is a jerk (and I have no information on that question one way or the other), how could anyone possibly believe Stuart Smalley is a legitimate replacement?
Then again, they did elect Jesse Ventura to be their governor once. Incomprehensible.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Incarcerated in the Zoo
The celebration moves into full swing, as an apparent majority of the population seem to have received their wish - full Democrat control of government.
So the celebrating individuals now feel free to examine me and the shrinking number of people like me, trying to figure out how any reasonably intelligent human being could possibly be disappointed or even frightened as the Messiah prepares to take over the government.
For what it's worth, here's the perspective of this oddity from the Zoo.
First and foremost, my objection is moral.
The "Freedom of Choice Act" is a nightmare. Fortunately I don't have any daughters, because all parental consent laws regarding abortions for minors will be wiped off the books nationwide. As will waiting periods, counseling, and any other measures passed by the states in an attempt to offer alternatives to women who think they might want to vacuum their developing baby out of their womb. My tax dollars will be used to help poor women kill their unborn babies, and quite possibly the occasional baby born alive by mistake. Any and all public expression of opposition will be harshly prosecuted.
Gay Marriage is a direct assault on Christianity. Because the movement, at it's root, isn't about marriage at all. Gays can get together right this moment with a group of friends and make any promises, personal or contractual, they want. No, it's about telling Christians that we dare not breathe a word of the most mild suggestion that the behavior is wrong. And it's about forcing all employers through the force of law to provide benefits to same-sex partners. It's fundamentally about supressing freedom of thought, expression, and the right to hire and fire people based on a moral standard.
Universal Healthcare will kill the healthcare system. I do not disagree there's a massive problem with healthcare in our country, but the problem is high cost, not the lack of government control. If the government provides my healthcare, then they also can deny me healthcare. I want the problem of cost solved so healthcare is accessible, but the voters said they want the government to confiscate money from those who have and give to those who have not. I struggle to keep up with my own crippling healthcare costs, but the last thing I want is for the government to swoop in and rescue me with their new freedom-sucking plan.
Socialism is government control over the citizens' lives. It replaces the corporate fat cats with a new group of government bureaucrat fat cats, leaving everybody else worse off than they were under free enterprise. Because, you see, socialism sucks all incentive and work ethic out of the population. Why should I work my tail off to get the exact same government check as the guy next to me who is drunk most of the time and produces practically nothing? Socialism knocks the rich down several notches, but actually knocks everybody else down a few notches as well, all in the name of "fairness". But of course, don't dare peek at the lifestyles of the political party bureaucrats, who somehow manage to maintain lavish lifestyles for themselves.
We've already lost the country envisioned by our Founders. Congress ignores the constitution with impunity. And the Messiah President will soon stack the courts with judges who will make sure that can continue through the next two generations.
So the celebrating individuals now feel free to examine me and the shrinking number of people like me, trying to figure out how any reasonably intelligent human being could possibly be disappointed or even frightened as the Messiah prepares to take over the government.
For what it's worth, here's the perspective of this oddity from the Zoo.
First and foremost, my objection is moral.
The "Freedom of Choice Act" is a nightmare. Fortunately I don't have any daughters, because all parental consent laws regarding abortions for minors will be wiped off the books nationwide. As will waiting periods, counseling, and any other measures passed by the states in an attempt to offer alternatives to women who think they might want to vacuum their developing baby out of their womb. My tax dollars will be used to help poor women kill their unborn babies, and quite possibly the occasional baby born alive by mistake. Any and all public expression of opposition will be harshly prosecuted.
Gay Marriage is a direct assault on Christianity. Because the movement, at it's root, isn't about marriage at all. Gays can get together right this moment with a group of friends and make any promises, personal or contractual, they want. No, it's about telling Christians that we dare not breathe a word of the most mild suggestion that the behavior is wrong. And it's about forcing all employers through the force of law to provide benefits to same-sex partners. It's fundamentally about supressing freedom of thought, expression, and the right to hire and fire people based on a moral standard.
Universal Healthcare will kill the healthcare system. I do not disagree there's a massive problem with healthcare in our country, but the problem is high cost, not the lack of government control. If the government provides my healthcare, then they also can deny me healthcare. I want the problem of cost solved so healthcare is accessible, but the voters said they want the government to confiscate money from those who have and give to those who have not. I struggle to keep up with my own crippling healthcare costs, but the last thing I want is for the government to swoop in and rescue me with their new freedom-sucking plan.
Socialism is government control over the citizens' lives. It replaces the corporate fat cats with a new group of government bureaucrat fat cats, leaving everybody else worse off than they were under free enterprise. Because, you see, socialism sucks all incentive and work ethic out of the population. Why should I work my tail off to get the exact same government check as the guy next to me who is drunk most of the time and produces practically nothing? Socialism knocks the rich down several notches, but actually knocks everybody else down a few notches as well, all in the name of "fairness". But of course, don't dare peek at the lifestyles of the political party bureaucrats, who somehow manage to maintain lavish lifestyles for themselves.
We've already lost the country envisioned by our Founders. Congress ignores the constitution with impunity. And the Messiah President will soon stack the courts with judges who will make sure that can continue through the next two generations.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Solving the Big 3
Evidence of the sheer stupidity of the Big 3 CEO's, riding their Gulfstreams to DC to beg for cash, is the additional fact that they didn't really have a case to make.
Unless you call "please bail us out, we're going under" a case.
Here's an idea.
Federal Government, just say no.
Big 3 shareholders, fire your boards of directors and CEO's and put actual intelligent businesspeople in charge.
Management, get in a room with the UAW and hammer out a deal. They give back on some salary and benefits in the short run in return for employee ownership in the company. If and when the company makes money again, so will the union membership.
Make more deals with the union in the areas of quality and productivity. The more productive each union member and the better quality of the product, the more they stand to make from improved sales. Actually ask the Union bosses to allow the company to cut loose the dead weight.
Not to mention cutting loose the dead weight in the executive suites and the engineering departments and the administrative departments.
That sounds to me like a company that could survive and prosper.
Instead of the company that's asking the government for billions in bailout dollars that will end up funding union pensions and management golden parachutes.
America, where have ye gone?
Unless you call "please bail us out, we're going under" a case.
Here's an idea.
Federal Government, just say no.
Big 3 shareholders, fire your boards of directors and CEO's and put actual intelligent businesspeople in charge.
Management, get in a room with the UAW and hammer out a deal. They give back on some salary and benefits in the short run in return for employee ownership in the company. If and when the company makes money again, so will the union membership.
Make more deals with the union in the areas of quality and productivity. The more productive each union member and the better quality of the product, the more they stand to make from improved sales. Actually ask the Union bosses to allow the company to cut loose the dead weight.
Not to mention cutting loose the dead weight in the executive suites and the engineering departments and the administrative departments.
That sounds to me like a company that could survive and prosper.
Instead of the company that's asking the government for billions in bailout dollars that will end up funding union pensions and management golden parachutes.
America, where have ye gone?
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Repeating History
Back to the future.
Economic troubles are so similar to the 30's it's amazing. Even more amazing is how few of our leaders in Washington seem to understand anything about our conditions. They certainly don't seem to have learned anything from the experiences of the "Great Depression". Mostly they seem be focused on making sure they and their buddies prosper, not caring much at all about the country as a whole.
And we've elected a president who fancies himself a pacifist version of FDR.
Only those able to pay off all their debt as soon as possible have a chance at survival over the next dozen years.
Personally, I have to try everything I can to keep income going. I know a regular job isn't going to happen, so I've got to find every possible way to keep the business bringing in revenue. Then make the payoff of the mortgage #1 on the agenda.
Maybe I'll have to actually start farming.
Economic troubles are so similar to the 30's it's amazing. Even more amazing is how few of our leaders in Washington seem to understand anything about our conditions. They certainly don't seem to have learned anything from the experiences of the "Great Depression". Mostly they seem be focused on making sure they and their buddies prosper, not caring much at all about the country as a whole.
And we've elected a president who fancies himself a pacifist version of FDR.
Only those able to pay off all their debt as soon as possible have a chance at survival over the next dozen years.
Personally, I have to try everything I can to keep income going. I know a regular job isn't going to happen, so I've got to find every possible way to keep the business bringing in revenue. Then make the payoff of the mortgage #1 on the agenda.
Maybe I'll have to actually start farming.
Monday, November 17, 2008
New Airport Over the Top?
I got my first look at the new Harvey Weir Cook International Airport when my flight got in late Friday night. It is certainly an impressive new facility for Indy.
I can't help but wonder just how much in tax dollars went into this new showpiece for the Indiana capitol. Was the old airport really that bad? I didn't think so.
I'm pretty happy that they named it after the old WWI Ace H. Weir Cook. It's refreshing that Indiana can actually remember their heroes from that far in the past.
They're certainly saving money on TSA employees, as I observed on Sunday as I flew out of the new airport on Sunday. The new combined security checkpoint has maybe 8 or more (I didn't count) security lines, but only had 2 open Sunday. So instead of my usual 5-10 minute trek through security at the old airport, this time it took almost 30 minutes. And I was in the new "expert traveler" line.
Woo Hoo.
I must also adjust to the fact that walking to the terminal from the parking lot is no longer an option. The new parking lots, which seem to go on for miles, are pretty much inaccessible to or from the terminal on foot. So waiting for the bus, then waiting as it stops at every shelter in the lot, is no longer optional.
Some things that made me chuckle a bit:
After only a few days, the carpet near the gates and on the jetbridges is already stained. Won't be long before it's every bit as disgusting as the carpet at the old airport.
The terminal is somewhat reminiscent of Detroit's on the inside, albeit a bit smaller and without the train. Like Detroit, there are flat-panel televisions on the walls. But unlike Detroit, they're small flat-panel televisions you can't really see unless you get very close. It's pretty clear somebody decided to save money on the TV's but might has well have saved all of it, since nobody can watch them anyway.
The bottom line for me is there's this beautiful new airport that takes longer to drive to, longer to get into from the parking lot, and longer to get through security.
They call that progress?
I can't help but wonder just how much in tax dollars went into this new showpiece for the Indiana capitol. Was the old airport really that bad? I didn't think so.
I'm pretty happy that they named it after the old WWI Ace H. Weir Cook. It's refreshing that Indiana can actually remember their heroes from that far in the past.
They're certainly saving money on TSA employees, as I observed on Sunday as I flew out of the new airport on Sunday. The new combined security checkpoint has maybe 8 or more (I didn't count) security lines, but only had 2 open Sunday. So instead of my usual 5-10 minute trek through security at the old airport, this time it took almost 30 minutes. And I was in the new "expert traveler" line.
Woo Hoo.
I must also adjust to the fact that walking to the terminal from the parking lot is no longer an option. The new parking lots, which seem to go on for miles, are pretty much inaccessible to or from the terminal on foot. So waiting for the bus, then waiting as it stops at every shelter in the lot, is no longer optional.
Some things that made me chuckle a bit:
After only a few days, the carpet near the gates and on the jetbridges is already stained. Won't be long before it's every bit as disgusting as the carpet at the old airport.
The terminal is somewhat reminiscent of Detroit's on the inside, albeit a bit smaller and without the train. Like Detroit, there are flat-panel televisions on the walls. But unlike Detroit, they're small flat-panel televisions you can't really see unless you get very close. It's pretty clear somebody decided to save money on the TV's but might has well have saved all of it, since nobody can watch them anyway.
The bottom line for me is there's this beautiful new airport that takes longer to drive to, longer to get into from the parking lot, and longer to get through security.
They call that progress?
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Like Conspiracy Theories?
Here's one that's about as plausible as any.
Just imagine that the current financial crisis was carefully planned and executed by the government, with willing accomplices among a few key CEO's from Wall Street.
Paulson, Bernanke, Cox, Reid, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Franklin Raines, and several others conspired to create a financial crisis by strong-arming major banking and investment firms into making a high number of bad loans. Included in their arm-twisting was an implied promise that when all came tumbling down, the powerful government leaders would see to it the executives involved would escape with very sweet parachutes.
Why was this crisis engineered?
Here's where the conspiracy theories really come into play.
The obvious motive: Destroying the public's confidence in capitalism to usher in a statist/socialist government controlled by the same people named above.
But how about this one: Decimating American's 401K's and Pensions to head off a Social Security crisis just when the peak of the Baby Boom generation are reaching retirement age. Millions of people who were planning to retire in the next 5-10 years have lost an average of 40% of their retirement assets, and the volatile stock market may move even lower.
So all these baby boomers are rethinking their retirement plans because they no longer have the money they counted on to see them through a comfortable retirement. Millions will have to postpone retirement, thus delaying their applications for Social Security Retirement Benefits.
There's a story running around that the new President Obama may introduce a plan that would offer Americans a sort of guaranteed defined benefit retirement pension in return for what's left of their 401K or IRA accounts, representing a massive government confiscation of the personal savings of the American population. I'm not yet sure whether it's true.
Sound plausible? I think it's frighteningly plausible.
Just imagine that the current financial crisis was carefully planned and executed by the government, with willing accomplices among a few key CEO's from Wall Street.
Paulson, Bernanke, Cox, Reid, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Franklin Raines, and several others conspired to create a financial crisis by strong-arming major banking and investment firms into making a high number of bad loans. Included in their arm-twisting was an implied promise that when all came tumbling down, the powerful government leaders would see to it the executives involved would escape with very sweet parachutes.
Why was this crisis engineered?
Here's where the conspiracy theories really come into play.
The obvious motive: Destroying the public's confidence in capitalism to usher in a statist/socialist government controlled by the same people named above.
But how about this one: Decimating American's 401K's and Pensions to head off a Social Security crisis just when the peak of the Baby Boom generation are reaching retirement age. Millions of people who were planning to retire in the next 5-10 years have lost an average of 40% of their retirement assets, and the volatile stock market may move even lower.
So all these baby boomers are rethinking their retirement plans because they no longer have the money they counted on to see them through a comfortable retirement. Millions will have to postpone retirement, thus delaying their applications for Social Security Retirement Benefits.
There's a story running around that the new President Obama may introduce a plan that would offer Americans a sort of guaranteed defined benefit retirement pension in return for what's left of their 401K or IRA accounts, representing a massive government confiscation of the personal savings of the American population. I'm not yet sure whether it's true.
Sound plausible? I think it's frighteningly plausible.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
When Empires Fall
The best civilization in the history of the world may soon die.
Founded by a small group of incredibly courageous and brilliant leaders, it's been overall a great 233 years for a nation carved out of the wilderness. No society in history has seen the heights of prosperity and military might of the place known as the USA. Never has there been a place where people from all four corners of the planet yearned to emigrate for a life unimaginable in their home countries.
But democratic rule has become mob rule. Anyone feeling a slight from this open society, whether real or imagined, finds a government receptive to granting them special treatment. Instead of encouraging and helping lift those on the bottom of the economic ladder, we make sure they don't succeed by redistributing wealth to give them a meager subsistence, while keeping their government-run schools abysmal.
Now the government moves to "rescue" the nation by taking over private industry, starting with the banks. The mob installs political leaders not based on their efforts for the good of all, but for the goodies they promise to take from others and hand out.
And the once-mighty military will be decimated by naive leaders without any apparent understanding of history or of the enemies who are bent on the destruction of this country.
In the meantime the population is lulled by hedonistic entertainment, hyped sporting events, and celebrity worship.
When the safety and security of the USA is gone, it will be too late.
My concern isn't much for myself. I've lived my life in the greatest era of technological and living standards progress in the history of the world. But what will my children be left to face within their adult lives? I fear the next decade or two will not be pleasant.
But I fervently hope and pray that somehow those fears will not be realized.
Founded by a small group of incredibly courageous and brilliant leaders, it's been overall a great 233 years for a nation carved out of the wilderness. No society in history has seen the heights of prosperity and military might of the place known as the USA. Never has there been a place where people from all four corners of the planet yearned to emigrate for a life unimaginable in their home countries.
But democratic rule has become mob rule. Anyone feeling a slight from this open society, whether real or imagined, finds a government receptive to granting them special treatment. Instead of encouraging and helping lift those on the bottom of the economic ladder, we make sure they don't succeed by redistributing wealth to give them a meager subsistence, while keeping their government-run schools abysmal.
Now the government moves to "rescue" the nation by taking over private industry, starting with the banks. The mob installs political leaders not based on their efforts for the good of all, but for the goodies they promise to take from others and hand out.
And the once-mighty military will be decimated by naive leaders without any apparent understanding of history or of the enemies who are bent on the destruction of this country.
In the meantime the population is lulled by hedonistic entertainment, hyped sporting events, and celebrity worship.
When the safety and security of the USA is gone, it will be too late.
My concern isn't much for myself. I've lived my life in the greatest era of technological and living standards progress in the history of the world. But what will my children be left to face within their adult lives? I fear the next decade or two will not be pleasant.
But I fervently hope and pray that somehow those fears will not be realized.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Trying to Avoid Election News
But it's very hard. Even listening to music on the radio during my drive to Nashville did not protect me from election reporting. I got to my hotel room and decided to just watch ESPN, but even there I have to hear at least a little bit about the election.
I did a quick channel surf and noticed that CNN and MSNBC were already celebrating an Obama victory with only two states called (KY for McCain and NH for Obama). All they're missing are the party hats and streamers.
Think Happy Thoughts. Before we descend together into the new Dark Ages.
I did a quick channel surf and noticed that CNN and MSNBC were already celebrating an Obama victory with only two states called (KY for McCain and NH for Obama). All they're missing are the party hats and streamers.
Think Happy Thoughts. Before we descend together into the new Dark Ages.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Another Airline Misadventure
I'm increasingly in favor of letting these major airlines collapse under the weight of their own incompetence. Which leads me to my latest story of my own maltreatment by Continental Airlines.
We finished early on Friday. Checking online, it would cost me $400 to book an earlier flight, so I thought I'd try standby. So I headed to the George Bush International Airport, turned in my rental car and took the overcrowded rental car bus to the terminal.
Checking in, I paid the $50 fee for the priviledge of standing by for the 4:10 flight to Indy, endured the TSA shakedown, and trekked to the gate. I grabbed some lunch and settled in for the wait for my flight.
Finally the gate agent boarded the flight, but never made any announcements regarding standby passengers. So I approached her as the last few passengers boarded and showed her my standby document. She checked the computer and couldn't seem to find my record, then shrugged and told me the flight was full.
Just full. No apologies, no explanations, no eye contact. She then took off down the jetway to send the plane on its way.
So I'm used to rude gate agents, and didn't think twice about her appalling lack of customer service skills. Disappointed, I made my way to the other concourse to settle in for the 3 hour wait for my originally booked flight.
The agent working that 7:15 flight was somewhat friendlier and more helpful than the previous one. But when I gave her my documents and she looked for me on the computer, she frowned and said, "I can't seem to find you in here".
A few more keystrokes later, she found me. "This shows your standby cleared on the earlier flight. Were you late or something?".
Of course, I told her no, I wasn't late. That the agent told me the flight was full and turned me away.
She shook her head and sighed, asked me where I would like to sit, and printed me a boarding pass for an exit row aisle seat.
I got home after midnight instead of early evening because of a Continental Airlines employee who was uncaring and incompetent.
Would I care much if Continental ceases to be a viable airline?
The answer is obvious.
We finished early on Friday. Checking online, it would cost me $400 to book an earlier flight, so I thought I'd try standby. So I headed to the George Bush International Airport, turned in my rental car and took the overcrowded rental car bus to the terminal.
Checking in, I paid the $50 fee for the priviledge of standing by for the 4:10 flight to Indy, endured the TSA shakedown, and trekked to the gate. I grabbed some lunch and settled in for the wait for my flight.
Finally the gate agent boarded the flight, but never made any announcements regarding standby passengers. So I approached her as the last few passengers boarded and showed her my standby document. She checked the computer and couldn't seem to find my record, then shrugged and told me the flight was full.
Just full. No apologies, no explanations, no eye contact. She then took off down the jetway to send the plane on its way.
So I'm used to rude gate agents, and didn't think twice about her appalling lack of customer service skills. Disappointed, I made my way to the other concourse to settle in for the 3 hour wait for my originally booked flight.
The agent working that 7:15 flight was somewhat friendlier and more helpful than the previous one. But when I gave her my documents and she looked for me on the computer, she frowned and said, "I can't seem to find you in here".
A few more keystrokes later, she found me. "This shows your standby cleared on the earlier flight. Were you late or something?".
Of course, I told her no, I wasn't late. That the agent told me the flight was full and turned me away.
She shook her head and sighed, asked me where I would like to sit, and printed me a boarding pass for an exit row aisle seat.
I got home after midnight instead of early evening because of a Continental Airlines employee who was uncaring and incompetent.
Would I care much if Continental ceases to be a viable airline?
The answer is obvious.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Campaign Weariness
Just let it be over, please.
I'll go vote on Tuesday, for whatever it's worth.
It's hard to imagine anybody who really doesn't know the difference between Obama and McCain, or between their congressional Republican and Democrat candidates by now.
Does anybody really make a voting decision based on a political ad? I certainly hope not.
How many Obama voters have the slightest idea who the guy is, and what he stands for? I wonder, because I've had to really dig to just come up with the most likely profile for the guy. And I can't guarantee that profile is correct.
On the flip side, how many voters don't know all they ever wanted to know about McCain? He's been a Senator forever and might be the easiest politician in the country to research.
Yet we're told there's this huge group of voters out there who swing like an open gate in the wind. Obama today, McCain tomorrow, maybe Obama the next day - decisions, decisions. Who are these people? People lacking any personal convictions? Maybe simply ignorant and easily swayed by any persuasive influence that gets their attention? I don't think I've met any of them yet, but they must be out there.
My impression of the Obama voter comes down to this very basic theme. The typical Obama voter first and foremost hates Bush and wants the Anti-Bush. She thinks she will get goodies from Obama for free, like tax rebate checks and free heathcare. He thinks Obama will end the wars and make the world a peaceful place. They both think Obama will end the dreaded Global Warming, punish evil rich people, and get them a raise at work.
These people are going to become extremely disappointed. I'm not sure how long the Obama administration will be able to get away with, "be patient, this mess was all Bush's fault, and will take some time to turn around". I suspect they'll only get away with it for about 18 months, before people start figuring out who has really killed the economy and depressed their wages or lost them their jobs.
Obamamaniacs love Europe, even though they've never been there. Too bad they will soon find out what the average European lifestyle looks like.
I'll go vote on Tuesday, for whatever it's worth.
It's hard to imagine anybody who really doesn't know the difference between Obama and McCain, or between their congressional Republican and Democrat candidates by now.
Does anybody really make a voting decision based on a political ad? I certainly hope not.
How many Obama voters have the slightest idea who the guy is, and what he stands for? I wonder, because I've had to really dig to just come up with the most likely profile for the guy. And I can't guarantee that profile is correct.
On the flip side, how many voters don't know all they ever wanted to know about McCain? He's been a Senator forever and might be the easiest politician in the country to research.
Yet we're told there's this huge group of voters out there who swing like an open gate in the wind. Obama today, McCain tomorrow, maybe Obama the next day - decisions, decisions. Who are these people? People lacking any personal convictions? Maybe simply ignorant and easily swayed by any persuasive influence that gets their attention? I don't think I've met any of them yet, but they must be out there.
My impression of the Obama voter comes down to this very basic theme. The typical Obama voter first and foremost hates Bush and wants the Anti-Bush. She thinks she will get goodies from Obama for free, like tax rebate checks and free heathcare. He thinks Obama will end the wars and make the world a peaceful place. They both think Obama will end the dreaded Global Warming, punish evil rich people, and get them a raise at work.
These people are going to become extremely disappointed. I'm not sure how long the Obama administration will be able to get away with, "be patient, this mess was all Bush's fault, and will take some time to turn around". I suspect they'll only get away with it for about 18 months, before people start figuring out who has really killed the economy and depressed their wages or lost them their jobs.
Obamamaniacs love Europe, even though they've never been there. Too bad they will soon find out what the average European lifestyle looks like.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Lemmings
I wonder if some lemmings don't really want to jump off the cliff, but have no choice. Could it be they have to join the rest of the lemmings simply because they'll be trampled if they try to leave the mob?
The American lemmings are already jumping off the cliff. Those of us who watch it happen are powerless to stop it, so we go over the cliff with everyone else simply because we have no other choice.
The financial crash we're experiencing now has no parallel since the 1929 crash, which led to the Great Depression. The house of cards built over the past 30 years finally fell down under the weight of Fannie and Freddie.
Our two Presidential candidates presumably wish to don the mantle of FDR, who created an alphabet soup of socialist agencies and entitlement programs. Many Americans revered him for "saving" them by giving them subsistence level jobs.
There's Bad - John McCain, who is so tone-deaf that he proposed more bailouts to a nation fed up with the idea that the taxpayers have to bail out the criminals who caused the problems and got rich in the process. In the last debate, he seemed to be trying to out-Democrat the Democrat. He seemed completely out of touch with the mood of the people and completely lacking any ability to concisely define the problem or propose any innovative solutions.
Then there's Worse - Barack Obama, who offers nothing but rhetoric suggesting Bush is the Herbert Hoover of our age and McCain is simply another Bush. McCain's plan may have been a bad one, but Obama doesn't even offer one. Worst of all, this approach has worked wonders for his campaign - polls suggest he's going to win the election running away.
At such a critical time, to have Dumb and Dumber running for President and Dumber winning ..., well, back to the lemmings analogy.
The cliff we're running over is the loss of America. Obama (aka Dumber) will gladly abdicate our soverignty to the New World Order, a globalist socialist government that will make the freedoms we have long cherished in the United States of America a thing of the past.
The American lemmings are already jumping off the cliff. Those of us who watch it happen are powerless to stop it, so we go over the cliff with everyone else simply because we have no other choice.
The financial crash we're experiencing now has no parallel since the 1929 crash, which led to the Great Depression. The house of cards built over the past 30 years finally fell down under the weight of Fannie and Freddie.
Our two Presidential candidates presumably wish to don the mantle of FDR, who created an alphabet soup of socialist agencies and entitlement programs. Many Americans revered him for "saving" them by giving them subsistence level jobs.
There's Bad - John McCain, who is so tone-deaf that he proposed more bailouts to a nation fed up with the idea that the taxpayers have to bail out the criminals who caused the problems and got rich in the process. In the last debate, he seemed to be trying to out-Democrat the Democrat. He seemed completely out of touch with the mood of the people and completely lacking any ability to concisely define the problem or propose any innovative solutions.
Then there's Worse - Barack Obama, who offers nothing but rhetoric suggesting Bush is the Herbert Hoover of our age and McCain is simply another Bush. McCain's plan may have been a bad one, but Obama doesn't even offer one. Worst of all, this approach has worked wonders for his campaign - polls suggest he's going to win the election running away.
At such a critical time, to have Dumb and Dumber running for President and Dumber winning ..., well, back to the lemmings analogy.
The cliff we're running over is the loss of America. Obama (aka Dumber) will gladly abdicate our soverignty to the New World Order, a globalist socialist government that will make the freedoms we have long cherished in the United States of America a thing of the past.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
I don't fit the profile
I'm becoming somewhat surprised lately that the profile of the Obama voter doesn't fit me at all, but still it seems I'm outnumbered.
I can't vote for Obama, because I don't belong to his constituency.
I am not
Black
An angry minority
A socialist
A communist
Ignorant of American History or the Constitution
A Hollywood Celebrity
A guilty-feeling blueblood
An atheist
New-Age or Pantheist or Pagan
A vegan
A PETA member
A modern Christian who would recreate God in My image
A narcissist
A bureaucrat
A government dependent
A pacifist
A Muslim Terrorist
A Weather Underground Terrorist
An infanticide supporter
Naive
An ACLU member or supporter
Anti-American
A Bush hater
A La Raza (The Race) member or supporter
An illegal immigrant
A flag burner
Anti patriotic
Ready to see America humbled
A Trial Lawyer
A College Professor
A Teacher's Union Activist
A Union Leader
A felon
A single urban woman
A gay, lesbian, bi, trans ... or otherwise deviant
Prepared to bestow preferential rights to people based on a deviant behavior
A disciple of the Nobel winning climate scientist Al Gore
A Kos or HuffPo contributor
A megalopolis denizen
Prepared to abdicate national soveriegnty to a New World Order
A "journalist"
Influenced by Mainstream Media propagandists
from the Chinese government
Americans, meet your new ruling class.
I can't vote for Obama, because I don't belong to his constituency.
I am not
Black
An angry minority
A socialist
A communist
Ignorant of American History or the Constitution
A Hollywood Celebrity
A guilty-feeling blueblood
An atheist
New-Age or Pantheist or Pagan
A vegan
A PETA member
A modern Christian who would recreate God in My image
A narcissist
A bureaucrat
A government dependent
A pacifist
A Muslim Terrorist
A Weather Underground Terrorist
An infanticide supporter
Naive
An ACLU member or supporter
Anti-American
A Bush hater
A La Raza (The Race) member or supporter
An illegal immigrant
A flag burner
Anti patriotic
Ready to see America humbled
A Trial Lawyer
A College Professor
A Teacher's Union Activist
A Union Leader
A felon
A single urban woman
A gay, lesbian, bi, trans ... or otherwise deviant
Prepared to bestow preferential rights to people based on a deviant behavior
A disciple of the Nobel winning climate scientist Al Gore
A Kos or HuffPo contributor
A megalopolis denizen
Prepared to abdicate national soveriegnty to a New World Order
A "journalist"
Influenced by Mainstream Media propagandists
from the Chinese government
Americans, meet your new ruling class.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Does any of this ring a bell?
Do these sound familiar?
1. Abolition of Private Property
2. Heavy Progressive Income Tax
3. Abolition of Inheritance Rights
4. Confiscation of Property from Emigrants and Rebels
5. A Central Bank
6. Government Control of Communication and Transportation
7. Government Ownership of Factories and Farms
8. Government Control of Labor
9. Corporate Farms, Regional Planning
10. Government Control of Education
The principles from the Communist Manifesto as defined by Marx and Engels are worth another look.
Does it frighten anybody else to read these again and discover how many of these have already happened in America, and that a major political party is seeking the power to implement the rest?
1. Abolition of Private Property
2. Heavy Progressive Income Tax
3. Abolition of Inheritance Rights
4. Confiscation of Property from Emigrants and Rebels
5. A Central Bank
6. Government Control of Communication and Transportation
7. Government Ownership of Factories and Farms
8. Government Control of Labor
9. Corporate Farms, Regional Planning
10. Government Control of Education
The principles from the Communist Manifesto as defined by Marx and Engels are worth another look.
Does it frighten anybody else to read these again and discover how many of these have already happened in America, and that a major political party is seeking the power to implement the rest?
Thursday, September 18, 2008
The Death of Objectivity
The evidence is overwhelming. From Fannie and Freddie to Lehmann and AIG, no major news outlet has yet taken the time to investigate the root causes of the meltdown and report back to the American public.
Where are the multi-part investigative reports on the news that cover the history of Fannie and Freddie, the conditions that caused the mortgage mess, why they happened and who were the key players?
Has anyone answered to your or my satisfaction these basic questions? --
Why were mortgage brokers allowed to sell mortgages to unqualified borrowers?
What was the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the buying and selling of these mortgage-backed securities throughout the financial industry?
Who ran Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Since they were quasi-government institutions, who in the government was responsible for their oversight?
Was there anyone on Wall Street or in the Federal Government who saw this meltdown coming and tried to sound the alarm? If so, how did authorities respond? If not, how could that happen?
What Federal Agencies were responsible for regulating Fannie and Freddie? Did they discover the problem and try to do something about it? Or were they stopped by politicians higher up the ladder?
Instead of independent investigations giving the public facts on these and other questions, all we see is a megaphone handed to Obama with a slap on the butt and a "go get 'em tiger!".
And that's the answer to the basic question I've posed. If such an independent investigation were to take place by reporters who are willing to report the truth, no matter how it might reflect on one candidate or the other, it could kill the candidacy of their own favorite candidate.
Objective journalism appears dead, and with it American democracy. When the press becomes monolithically partisan and chooses to withhold the truth from the public if it might reflect badly on their chosen candidate, the dream that was America is lost.
Where are the multi-part investigative reports on the news that cover the history of Fannie and Freddie, the conditions that caused the mortgage mess, why they happened and who were the key players?
Has anyone answered to your or my satisfaction these basic questions? --
Why were mortgage brokers allowed to sell mortgages to unqualified borrowers?
What was the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the buying and selling of these mortgage-backed securities throughout the financial industry?
Who ran Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Since they were quasi-government institutions, who in the government was responsible for their oversight?
Was there anyone on Wall Street or in the Federal Government who saw this meltdown coming and tried to sound the alarm? If so, how did authorities respond? If not, how could that happen?
What Federal Agencies were responsible for regulating Fannie and Freddie? Did they discover the problem and try to do something about it? Or were they stopped by politicians higher up the ladder?
Instead of independent investigations giving the public facts on these and other questions, all we see is a megaphone handed to Obama with a slap on the butt and a "go get 'em tiger!".
And that's the answer to the basic question I've posed. If such an independent investigation were to take place by reporters who are willing to report the truth, no matter how it might reflect on one candidate or the other, it could kill the candidacy of their own favorite candidate.
Objective journalism appears dead, and with it American democracy. When the press becomes monolithically partisan and chooses to withhold the truth from the public if it might reflect badly on their chosen candidate, the dream that was America is lost.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Did you know?
These things about Obama -
Jeremiah Wright was his pastor until a couple of months ago?
Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers are his neighbors, political sponsors, and friends?
That he padded his resume?
That he's closely tied to a radical left voter-fraud organization known as Acorn?
Obama's stand on late-term abortions where babies are born alive?
That he interfered with negotiations to wrap up the war in Iraq?
That he got help buying his home from friend and convicted felon Tony Rezko?
Jeremiah Wright was his pastor until a couple of months ago?
Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers are his neighbors, political sponsors, and friends?
That he padded his resume?
That he's closely tied to a radical left voter-fraud organization known as Acorn?
Obama's stand on late-term abortions where babies are born alive?
That he interfered with negotiations to wrap up the war in Iraq?
That he got help buying his home from friend and convicted felon Tony Rezko?
Monday, September 15, 2008
In Search of a Clue
It's sobering.
While the stock market plunges, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are absorbed by the government, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch fold or are absorbed into other giant financial mega-corporations, the presidential candidates seem to be completely clueless.
Instead of thoughtful and substantive ideas about what can be done to clean up this mess and get the American economy back on its feet, the candidates focus on the inane.
Obama: McCain's old. He doesn't even know how to use email. Palin is, well, so many distasteful and offensive things I can't even bring myself to print them.
McCain: Obama's a lightweight. He's no reformer, he's just a puppet of the Democrat/MoveOn machine.
OK, so I tend to agree with McCain. But he still can't seem to verbalize anything that makes any sense about his ideas for reining in this financial mess, other than something like "changing the way government works".
Funny, I thought congress created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, appointed Bill Clinton pals to run them, encouraged them to fund mortgages for the less fortunate (read: bad credit risks), then pretended to be caught by surprise when it all came crashing down.
Now they seem to support nationalizing everything. Fannie and Freddie - already owned by the Feds. Bail out Lehman and Lynch? So far it looks like the answer's going to be No (thank goodness). Bail out GM/Ford/Chrysler? Please let that answer be No.
How about some fresh ideas?
Get rid of Fannie and Freddie. Lenders should make loans based on the qualifications of their customers. Period. They will be more responsible if they are actually taking the risk for borrowers with bad credit.
Increase Energy Production. I'm an all-of-the-above person. Our economy is based on energy, despite the desperate hopes and dreams of leftists everywhere. Go get all the oil, gas, shale, wind, solar, hydro, non-food organic ethanol you can find. Stop messing around and make a deal with Iraq - we get to buy as much of their oil as we want at a discount, and we'll keep them safe from their enemies. Get us into a place where we're getting all of our energy either domestically or from countries that don't hate us.
Cancel CAFE standards on the Car Manufacturers. Let them build and sell any vehicles for which public demand is high, and stop telling them what they can and can't build.
Enforce Anti-Trust Law for a change. Competition is the way to get business booming. Stop letting the mega-corporations gobble up everybody so they can own their market. Let the companies that made bad decisions go bankrupt, then open up the market to start-ups who will compete with each other to provide better services to consumers.
Congress is clueless. The presidential candidates are clueless. The voters are clueless sheep.
I need to do something tonight to get away from this and get my spirits up.
While the stock market plunges, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are absorbed by the government, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch fold or are absorbed into other giant financial mega-corporations, the presidential candidates seem to be completely clueless.
Instead of thoughtful and substantive ideas about what can be done to clean up this mess and get the American economy back on its feet, the candidates focus on the inane.
Obama: McCain's old. He doesn't even know how to use email. Palin is, well, so many distasteful and offensive things I can't even bring myself to print them.
McCain: Obama's a lightweight. He's no reformer, he's just a puppet of the Democrat/MoveOn machine.
OK, so I tend to agree with McCain. But he still can't seem to verbalize anything that makes any sense about his ideas for reining in this financial mess, other than something like "changing the way government works".
Funny, I thought congress created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, appointed Bill Clinton pals to run them, encouraged them to fund mortgages for the less fortunate (read: bad credit risks), then pretended to be caught by surprise when it all came crashing down.
Now they seem to support nationalizing everything. Fannie and Freddie - already owned by the Feds. Bail out Lehman and Lynch? So far it looks like the answer's going to be No (thank goodness). Bail out GM/Ford/Chrysler? Please let that answer be No.
How about some fresh ideas?
Get rid of Fannie and Freddie. Lenders should make loans based on the qualifications of their customers. Period. They will be more responsible if they are actually taking the risk for borrowers with bad credit.
Increase Energy Production. I'm an all-of-the-above person. Our economy is based on energy, despite the desperate hopes and dreams of leftists everywhere. Go get all the oil, gas, shale, wind, solar, hydro, non-food organic ethanol you can find. Stop messing around and make a deal with Iraq - we get to buy as much of their oil as we want at a discount, and we'll keep them safe from their enemies. Get us into a place where we're getting all of our energy either domestically or from countries that don't hate us.
Cancel CAFE standards on the Car Manufacturers. Let them build and sell any vehicles for which public demand is high, and stop telling them what they can and can't build.
Enforce Anti-Trust Law for a change. Competition is the way to get business booming. Stop letting the mega-corporations gobble up everybody so they can own their market. Let the companies that made bad decisions go bankrupt, then open up the market to start-ups who will compete with each other to provide better services to consumers.
Congress is clueless. The presidential candidates are clueless. The voters are clueless sheep.
I need to do something tonight to get away from this and get my spirits up.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Object Lesson in Propaganda
It's a very old cliche.
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
Obama used it in a speech to his adoring Democrat followers to describe John McCain's economic policies. The crowd clearly latched onto it as a backhanded slap against the GOP Veep nominee, who was famous for her joke about lipstick being the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull. Therefore the cliche drew a standing derisive ovation from the partisan audience.
The other campaign seized on this apparent slight with amazing speed and created a YouTube ad questioning the judgement and character of the Democrat candidate. Other leftist partisans managed to add fuel to the fire with overtly slanderous comments comparing Gov. Palin to Pontius Pilate against Obama's Jesus and suggesting her only qualification for VP was that she hasn't had an abortion.
So Obama decided to respond to the McCain campaign's response to his lipstick cliche with his own outrage, suggesting that they were unfairly characterizing an innocent comment. He angrily called out the opposing campaign as outright liars for making a campaign issue out of something that he claimed never happened (i.e. calling Gov. Palin a pig).
Obama's sycophants in the media immediately set out to echo his outrage, showing multiple politicians (all Republicans, of course) using the overused lipstick/pig analogy, ending with the piece de resistance, McCain himself using it.
The whole incident is rather comical, but more instructive in the fact that both parties seem to view the American public as a mass of sheep who are easily fooled. I mainly wonder how many were fooled either way.
The conclusions about the phrase itself are pretty easy for any objective person. Just take the facts:
Obama's statement clearly was referring to McCain's economic policies and never mentioned Palin, even tangentially.
The crowd obviously connected the lipstick on pig to the lipstick on pit bull, thus the derisive standing ovation.
Did Obama intend the linkage? Maybe not, but certainly he understood the audience's linkage. For him to pretend otherwise is disingenuous. The projection of outrage against the opposing campaign for feigning their own outrage is sort of an outrage itself.
The opportunistic ad run by the McCain campaign was pretty effective, if misleading. It was a great example of taking something out of context to convey a message completely different from what was actually spoken.
Guilty of propaganda? Both sides.
Did it work? Hard to say, but it might be safe to assume the true believers on each side believed their own side's version of the story. I wonder how many understand the whole story. Those who do won't find anything on either side worthy of their support.
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
Obama used it in a speech to his adoring Democrat followers to describe John McCain's economic policies. The crowd clearly latched onto it as a backhanded slap against the GOP Veep nominee, who was famous for her joke about lipstick being the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull. Therefore the cliche drew a standing derisive ovation from the partisan audience.
The other campaign seized on this apparent slight with amazing speed and created a YouTube ad questioning the judgement and character of the Democrat candidate. Other leftist partisans managed to add fuel to the fire with overtly slanderous comments comparing Gov. Palin to Pontius Pilate against Obama's Jesus and suggesting her only qualification for VP was that she hasn't had an abortion.
So Obama decided to respond to the McCain campaign's response to his lipstick cliche with his own outrage, suggesting that they were unfairly characterizing an innocent comment. He angrily called out the opposing campaign as outright liars for making a campaign issue out of something that he claimed never happened (i.e. calling Gov. Palin a pig).
Obama's sycophants in the media immediately set out to echo his outrage, showing multiple politicians (all Republicans, of course) using the overused lipstick/pig analogy, ending with the piece de resistance, McCain himself using it.
The whole incident is rather comical, but more instructive in the fact that both parties seem to view the American public as a mass of sheep who are easily fooled. I mainly wonder how many were fooled either way.
The conclusions about the phrase itself are pretty easy for any objective person. Just take the facts:
Obama's statement clearly was referring to McCain's economic policies and never mentioned Palin, even tangentially.
The crowd obviously connected the lipstick on pig to the lipstick on pit bull, thus the derisive standing ovation.
Did Obama intend the linkage? Maybe not, but certainly he understood the audience's linkage. For him to pretend otherwise is disingenuous. The projection of outrage against the opposing campaign for feigning their own outrage is sort of an outrage itself.
The opportunistic ad run by the McCain campaign was pretty effective, if misleading. It was a great example of taking something out of context to convey a message completely different from what was actually spoken.
Guilty of propaganda? Both sides.
Did it work? Hard to say, but it might be safe to assume the true believers on each side believed their own side's version of the story. I wonder how many understand the whole story. Those who do won't find anything on either side worthy of their support.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Government Mismanagement
The quasi-governmental Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the Federal Government in an attempt to stop the bleeding in this major mortgage mess.
Following congress' strong desire to make home ownership more accessible to citizens, they actually created the monster that has so damaged the financial markets through massive mortgage defaults.
In an age of 100% home loans routinely made for borrowers that clearly had no ability to pay, congress has little right to point fingers at irresponsible lenders. They and their politically-appointed cronies at those government created monsters are at least equally to blame with the lenders and borrowers that simply took advantage.
I was thinking about my grandparents' generation. They lived through the Great Depression, and their remarkable frugality was often puzzling to me. Here were people who had, at least from my young perspective, plenty of cash and no debt. Yet they drove old cars, made sure no lights were on unnecessarily, were careful with their grocery budget, and would never consider buying luxury items.
We seem to have forgotten those lessons. The people and their government spend recklessly, don't save, and borrow as much as a lender will allow. So many people, including those making decent salaries, are leveraged so badly that if there is any lapse in income, they will face immediate bankruptcy.
Working with employers and seeing data on their employee's 401K retirement funds, I've been shocked at the high number of people who raid their retirement for more spending money. Many people participate to get the employer match, then take the maximum allowable loans so they can spend the money. For those people, there's no retirement nest egg, but a debt that must be repaid or they'll be faced with penalties and interest.
The government is no different. They spend way beyond their tax collections and borrow the difference. Now we have a federal budget that has to spend a significant amount of tax collections on debt service. Republicans were supposed to be the fiscally responsible party, but when they got control of congress, they somehow forgot. Democrats make no pretense of fiscal responsibility, but promise to raise taxes to cover their planned massive spending increases.
It seems our entire country is on the verge of bankruptcy, and there's nobody even close to doing anything to stop it.
Following congress' strong desire to make home ownership more accessible to citizens, they actually created the monster that has so damaged the financial markets through massive mortgage defaults.
In an age of 100% home loans routinely made for borrowers that clearly had no ability to pay, congress has little right to point fingers at irresponsible lenders. They and their politically-appointed cronies at those government created monsters are at least equally to blame with the lenders and borrowers that simply took advantage.
I was thinking about my grandparents' generation. They lived through the Great Depression, and their remarkable frugality was often puzzling to me. Here were people who had, at least from my young perspective, plenty of cash and no debt. Yet they drove old cars, made sure no lights were on unnecessarily, were careful with their grocery budget, and would never consider buying luxury items.
We seem to have forgotten those lessons. The people and their government spend recklessly, don't save, and borrow as much as a lender will allow. So many people, including those making decent salaries, are leveraged so badly that if there is any lapse in income, they will face immediate bankruptcy.
Working with employers and seeing data on their employee's 401K retirement funds, I've been shocked at the high number of people who raid their retirement for more spending money. Many people participate to get the employer match, then take the maximum allowable loans so they can spend the money. For those people, there's no retirement nest egg, but a debt that must be repaid or they'll be faced with penalties and interest.
The government is no different. They spend way beyond their tax collections and borrow the difference. Now we have a federal budget that has to spend a significant amount of tax collections on debt service. Republicans were supposed to be the fiscally responsible party, but when they got control of congress, they somehow forgot. Democrats make no pretense of fiscal responsibility, but promise to raise taxes to cover their planned massive spending increases.
It seems our entire country is on the verge of bankruptcy, and there's nobody even close to doing anything to stop it.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Theme Songs
I just realized that the easiest way to describe the choices between our candidates is in the theme songs of each candidate and their larger party philosophies.
McCain and the Republicans: God Bless the USA (Proud to be an American) - Lee Greenwood
Obama and the Democrats: Imagine - John Lennon
Listen to the two songs and perhaps you'll agree with me. Little more needs to be said.
McCain and the Republicans: God Bless the USA (Proud to be an American) - Lee Greenwood
Obama and the Democrats: Imagine - John Lennon
Listen to the two songs and perhaps you'll agree with me. Little more needs to be said.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Olympics Observations
Watching the Olympics over the last couple of weeks has been fairly entertaining. The US has been impressive in events like basketball and volleyball, gymnastics, and track and field. It's actually been encouraging to see more overt patriotism from the American athletes than we've seen in previous games.
That patriotism seems to bug the NBC commentators. Chris Collinsworth seems to be one of them, based on his nauseating interview with Kobe Bryant. Too bad, because I've always thought Collinsworth was a pretty good NFL commentator. Maybe he fancies himself turning into the next Olbermann. Hope not.
The flap over the Chinese gymnasts, who certainly look closer to 12 than the minimum 16, is sort of interesting. Is anybody surprised that the Chinese cheat? Remember how the Soviets and East Germans were masters of cheating in the 60's and 70's? They had team scientists feeding their athletes all sorts of performance-enhancing drugs with the precision that guaranteed they wouldn't turn up positive when tested at the games. I remember the East German bearded women who were built like men taking the gold medals.
It's what communists do. They lie and cheat. Think anybody can prove those Chinese girls are under 16? Not in a society where the government can compel everyone to lie, and create all the false documents they want to "prove" whatever they need. The investigators have to find the evidence of cheating to make a charge, which won't happen.
It has been disappointing, especially in the case of Marion Jones, that US athletes have cheated from time to time. But at least that's because of their individual bad decisions, not because of a government athletic drug program.
Better than the Olympics, football is about to start.
That patriotism seems to bug the NBC commentators. Chris Collinsworth seems to be one of them, based on his nauseating interview with Kobe Bryant. Too bad, because I've always thought Collinsworth was a pretty good NFL commentator. Maybe he fancies himself turning into the next Olbermann. Hope not.
The flap over the Chinese gymnasts, who certainly look closer to 12 than the minimum 16, is sort of interesting. Is anybody surprised that the Chinese cheat? Remember how the Soviets and East Germans were masters of cheating in the 60's and 70's? They had team scientists feeding their athletes all sorts of performance-enhancing drugs with the precision that guaranteed they wouldn't turn up positive when tested at the games. I remember the East German bearded women who were built like men taking the gold medals.
It's what communists do. They lie and cheat. Think anybody can prove those Chinese girls are under 16? Not in a society where the government can compel everyone to lie, and create all the false documents they want to "prove" whatever they need. The investigators have to find the evidence of cheating to make a charge, which won't happen.
It has been disappointing, especially in the case of Marion Jones, that US athletes have cheated from time to time. But at least that's because of their individual bad decisions, not because of a government athletic drug program.
Better than the Olympics, football is about to start.
Friday, August 08, 2008
My Gas Story
The gauge on my Volvo S80 was brushing the red at the bottom eighth, so I pulled into the station on the way to the office this morning. Despite the pain of the high gas price, I was still encouraged by the fact that the posted price this morning was lower than I've paid all summer.
I followed the usual procedure and began pumping the mid-grade fuel into my nearly empty tank. Things went along normally until I glanced at the pump. The dollars and cents were rolling along very slowly, which initially made me think the pump must be extremely slow. I had a mildly irritated thought that I'd have to wait a long time for my tank to fill.
But then I looked a bit closer, and noticed that the gallon counter was moving pretty fast. I quickly discovered that instead of $3.87.9, the gas was actually pumping at $0.387. When the tank was filled, I saw that instead of costing more than $60, the tank only cost a bit more than $6.
It didn't require much thought for me to conclude that the right thing was to inform someone at the station about what was obviously a mistake. So I walked into the convenience store and handed my receipt to the clerk, saying, "Either I just won some sort of contest, or the pump price isn't set right."
The clerk's eyes opened wide, and she said, "I can't deal with this." She immediately handed the receipt to someone else behind the counter, who must have been a supervisor.
The supervisor looked at the receipt with a sigh, apparently thinking she was about to have to handle some sort of customer complaint. She asked without looking at me, "What am I looking at?"
"The price."
Suddenly her expression changed, I heard "What!?", and she quick-marched over to the machine that I presume manages the gas pumps at the other end of the counter.
While the supervisor was busy punching buttons on the machine, I stood at the other end of the counter, unsure whether I should wait for her to return. After about a minute, I picked up my receipt, which she had put down on the counter in front of me, and walked to where she was continuing to work on the machine.
I asked her, "Do you need anything else from me?".
Again without looking up, she said, "Nope. Ain't nothin I can do with yours anyhow."
I thanked her and left, wondering a bit at the bizarre experience but thankful for the 1960's gas price.
I followed the usual procedure and began pumping the mid-grade fuel into my nearly empty tank. Things went along normally until I glanced at the pump. The dollars and cents were rolling along very slowly, which initially made me think the pump must be extremely slow. I had a mildly irritated thought that I'd have to wait a long time for my tank to fill.
But then I looked a bit closer, and noticed that the gallon counter was moving pretty fast. I quickly discovered that instead of $3.87.9, the gas was actually pumping at $0.387. When the tank was filled, I saw that instead of costing more than $60, the tank only cost a bit more than $6.
It didn't require much thought for me to conclude that the right thing was to inform someone at the station about what was obviously a mistake. So I walked into the convenience store and handed my receipt to the clerk, saying, "Either I just won some sort of contest, or the pump price isn't set right."
The clerk's eyes opened wide, and she said, "I can't deal with this." She immediately handed the receipt to someone else behind the counter, who must have been a supervisor.
The supervisor looked at the receipt with a sigh, apparently thinking she was about to have to handle some sort of customer complaint. She asked without looking at me, "What am I looking at?"
"The price."
Suddenly her expression changed, I heard "What!?", and she quick-marched over to the machine that I presume manages the gas pumps at the other end of the counter.
While the supervisor was busy punching buttons on the machine, I stood at the other end of the counter, unsure whether I should wait for her to return. After about a minute, I picked up my receipt, which she had put down on the counter in front of me, and walked to where she was continuing to work on the machine.
I asked her, "Do you need anything else from me?".
Again without looking up, she said, "Nope. Ain't nothin I can do with yours anyhow."
I thanked her and left, wondering a bit at the bizarre experience but thankful for the 1960's gas price.
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Energy Truth
In the energy debate, Pelosi and Obama have both made anti-oil statements in defense of their blockade of any legislation that includes permission for domestic exploration and drilling. There are only two possible explanations for their outrageous statements; either they are astoundingly ignorant, or they are lying through their teeth.
They've been caught in some whoppers.
First, I heard Natasha spit a venomous statement about the group of GOP congressmen using the floor of the house to continue to demand a vote on their comprehensive energy bill. She called them the "handmaidens of the oil companies".
Mike Pence from Indiana is one of the leaders of the little energy revolt in the House. He's from Indiana, which is hardly an oil state. I looked up his political contributors - it's public information after all. He's taken in about a million dollars this past year, which is nothing in this age of big money politics. The top 5 industries contributing to his campaign?
Retirees
Israel Supporters
Real Estate
Investment
Lawyers
And the biggest group, retirees, barely topped $50K in contributions. So Ms. Pelosi, how again is Rep. Pence a Big Oil toady? Could it be you've told a whopper of a lie in that statement? You certainly have convinced me you're jaw-droppingly stupid, so I'll have to give you the benefit of the doubt that the statement wasn't an outright lie, just dumb.
Speaking of stupid, how about Obama's speech yesterday where he proposed a goal of eliminating oil completely in 10 years? Does he have the slightest clue how much of all our daily lives are impacted by oil, both for energy and in the products we use?
During this whole debate, Democrats across the board have been speaking loftily about eliminating fossil fuels in favor of clean, renewable energy. I've been wondering something - how many people drive cars that aren't powered by gas or diesel? Aside from an infinitesimal number using natural gas or batteries, pretty much nobody.
Do Obama and his disciples really believe we can eliminate all coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power and replace them with wind and solar? In 10 years? Hundreds of millions of Americans will have to scrap their gas-powered vehicles and buy new miracle cars within 10 years using what money? Millions will have to replace their oil and gas furnaces with new miracle solar panels that, last time I checked, didn't really work?
So Obama's either frighteningly stupid and naieve, or he's lying through his teeth. No other option is possible.
But his disciples have blind faith in The Great and Powerful OB. Will that faith continue when the country falls into a deep depression after access to energy is shut down by OB and his minions, Boris and Natasha?
They've been caught in some whoppers.
First, I heard Natasha spit a venomous statement about the group of GOP congressmen using the floor of the house to continue to demand a vote on their comprehensive energy bill. She called them the "handmaidens of the oil companies".
Mike Pence from Indiana is one of the leaders of the little energy revolt in the House. He's from Indiana, which is hardly an oil state. I looked up his political contributors - it's public information after all. He's taken in about a million dollars this past year, which is nothing in this age of big money politics. The top 5 industries contributing to his campaign?
Retirees
Israel Supporters
Real Estate
Investment
Lawyers
And the biggest group, retirees, barely topped $50K in contributions. So Ms. Pelosi, how again is Rep. Pence a Big Oil toady? Could it be you've told a whopper of a lie in that statement? You certainly have convinced me you're jaw-droppingly stupid, so I'll have to give you the benefit of the doubt that the statement wasn't an outright lie, just dumb.
Speaking of stupid, how about Obama's speech yesterday where he proposed a goal of eliminating oil completely in 10 years? Does he have the slightest clue how much of all our daily lives are impacted by oil, both for energy and in the products we use?
During this whole debate, Democrats across the board have been speaking loftily about eliminating fossil fuels in favor of clean, renewable energy. I've been wondering something - how many people drive cars that aren't powered by gas or diesel? Aside from an infinitesimal number using natural gas or batteries, pretty much nobody.
Do Obama and his disciples really believe we can eliminate all coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power and replace them with wind and solar? In 10 years? Hundreds of millions of Americans will have to scrap their gas-powered vehicles and buy new miracle cars within 10 years using what money? Millions will have to replace their oil and gas furnaces with new miracle solar panels that, last time I checked, didn't really work?
So Obama's either frighteningly stupid and naieve, or he's lying through his teeth. No other option is possible.
But his disciples have blind faith in The Great and Powerful OB. Will that faith continue when the country falls into a deep depression after access to energy is shut down by OB and his minions, Boris and Natasha?
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Boris and Natasha
I loved Rocky and Bullwinkle when I was a kid. That's why it was so easy to figure out that the Democrat dictators of the House and Senate are actually Boris (alias Harry) and Natasha (alias Nancy).
What's hilarious about Boris is that he shut down all debate over domestic oil production while pretending he was being reasonable and the other side was the one playing politics. I'm not sure that would even be believed by his own base, although I'm sure that base is happy with anything he does to stop the evil "Big Oil".
But the biggest belly laugh was provided by Natasha, who vindictively shut down the House and turned the lights, cameras, and microphones off on the Republicans.Meantime Barack has lost his lead in the Presidential race. Worthy of a chuckle is that Boris and Natasha are oblivious to the fact that their own actions blocking even debate of energy policy are responsible.
What a great corner Boris and Natasha have painted themselves into; if they allow debate and a vote on energy, they force the Great and Powerful OB to cast a vote that will be used against him in the campaign.
If they continue to block any votes, they are rightly vilified for doing so, taking the Great and Powerful OB down with them in public (dis)approval.
Just like poor Boris and Natasha, suffering defeat and humiliation every time they try to destroy that heroic little flying squirrel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)