It's halftime at the Jets Game, and frankly, probably not worth going back for the rest. The only thing on the field worse than Gang Green is the officiating. I've seen better referees at Pop Warner games.
In the meantime, this is the last pre-election weekend and the politicos are still hammering away, talking to die-hards I guess. Because, who else would waste their time listening to the endless drivel? On Saturday in Philadelphia, the president said, "There's no doubt this is a tough election, because we have been through an incredibly difficult time as a nation."
And for once, he's absolutely right about something. Because the second half of that sentence is certainly true. We have undoubtedly been through incredibly difficult times as a nation. And the downhill slide started in the second half of the last administration's term, when Democrats took over Congress. So, altogether its taken them four years to bring this nation to the condition it's in now, and now there seems to be some hope. Because, if the pollsters are anywhere near being right, the balance will swing in Congress.
But the thought that really struck me about the president's recent campaigning is not so much about what he says, but more about what he really believes. Because anyone with an iota of sense can clearly see how much damage has been done by the mindless frittering away of the nation's wealth via attempts at social restructuring through redistribution of capital. Yet he says that this approach must continue, for the betterment of the nation, and moreso for it's people.
So, I have to sit and consider two fundamental aspects of his preaching. Is it possible he truly believes the current economic course is correct and that there will be anything left of this country's wealth if he continues to pursue that objective? Because if he does really believe that, his level of economic acumen is so low, there's simply no hope of his righting the ship.
On the other hand, if he does realize the harm that's been done and the probability of continued failure lest another tack be taken, but still tries to enlist others in his disastrous cause, what does that say about his values? Because that approach would put him right alongside the Donald Trumps of the world who don't give a damn about how much they steal from whom, so long as they themselves make out and can keep projecting their phony image.
I guess what it all really all boils down to is that it desn't really matter what the presidents motives are at all. Because either way, whatever it is that drives him, if the Democrats win again this coming Tuesday, the entire nation loses.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/30/2010
We're finally coming down to the wire as election day looms next Tuesday. So, politicos are barnstorming all over the place. And while I still can't believe anyone who's actually going to vote hasn't long ago made up his or her mind, the last minute gasps of candidates and their backers continues.
In Arizona on Friday, Sen. John McCain gave a rousing endorsement of Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle. He urged cheering supporters to make her part of a "historic turnaround in Washington power." She's confident in her tight race with Majority Leader Harry Reid, predicting "shock and awe in Washington" on Nov. 3.
The high stake race is important nationally, because Reid, in his 5th term, is the face of Democratic power is Washington. And I thought that that ought to be a key point for Arizonans. Because while their Senator is making big waves for himself in D.C., Nevada's economy is devastated, and the state leads the nation in unemployment, foreclosures and bankruptcies. So, why I wonder would any rational Nevadan vote for this useless, self-serving, empty suit?
As far as Washington goes, the White House is afraid that Congress won't approve a plan to hike taxes on the nation's wealthiest families if Republicans win an expected House majority, according to the Washington Post. So, the administration's mulling a strategy that would break apart the Bush tax cuts, by calling for a permanent extension of cuts for families earning less than $250,000 a year, and a temporary extension of cuts on income above that level.
"Decoupling" the tax provisions would delay a decision on cuts for the so-called "rich" until next year or the year after, the sources said. Conversely, Republican leaders have pushed to extend the cuts expiring in December, for all income brackets, while the president insists the country cannot afford to keep tax breaks on income over $250,000 a year for families, or $200,000 for individuals.
What I thought most interesting throughout this argument on taxes is that nowhere does anyone say, let's cut spending. And here's the president once gain, right before election day having meetings about how to further tax a population that he's practically devastated financially, and considering how to skin them again to push a program that's been vividly proven not to work. Frankly, I wonder just how dumb you have to be to let this financial fiasco continue.
What I've written here for the past few weeks leading to this election is that the whole situation seems upside down to me. And even the most liberal Hollywood types who have the financial acumen of gnats ought to be able to see that everyone around them's going broke. So when do they wake up and smell the aroma of economic disaster and realize that, perhaps, their social agenda ought to wait a while.
Because if things keeps on going the way they are, one of every three folks they meet is going to be unemployed, or otherwise insolvent, all because of misguided, irrational economic theory. And, even their science fiction movie writers couldn't come up with a plot as horrendous to the population as their electoral choices have proven.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
In Arizona on Friday, Sen. John McCain gave a rousing endorsement of Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle. He urged cheering supporters to make her part of a "historic turnaround in Washington power." She's confident in her tight race with Majority Leader Harry Reid, predicting "shock and awe in Washington" on Nov. 3.
The high stake race is important nationally, because Reid, in his 5th term, is the face of Democratic power is Washington. And I thought that that ought to be a key point for Arizonans. Because while their Senator is making big waves for himself in D.C., Nevada's economy is devastated, and the state leads the nation in unemployment, foreclosures and bankruptcies. So, why I wonder would any rational Nevadan vote for this useless, self-serving, empty suit?
As far as Washington goes, the White House is afraid that Congress won't approve a plan to hike taxes on the nation's wealthiest families if Republicans win an expected House majority, according to the Washington Post. So, the administration's mulling a strategy that would break apart the Bush tax cuts, by calling for a permanent extension of cuts for families earning less than $250,000 a year, and a temporary extension of cuts on income above that level.
"Decoupling" the tax provisions would delay a decision on cuts for the so-called "rich" until next year or the year after, the sources said. Conversely, Republican leaders have pushed to extend the cuts expiring in December, for all income brackets, while the president insists the country cannot afford to keep tax breaks on income over $250,000 a year for families, or $200,000 for individuals.
What I thought most interesting throughout this argument on taxes is that nowhere does anyone say, let's cut spending. And here's the president once gain, right before election day having meetings about how to further tax a population that he's practically devastated financially, and considering how to skin them again to push a program that's been vividly proven not to work. Frankly, I wonder just how dumb you have to be to let this financial fiasco continue.
What I've written here for the past few weeks leading to this election is that the whole situation seems upside down to me. And even the most liberal Hollywood types who have the financial acumen of gnats ought to be able to see that everyone around them's going broke. So when do they wake up and smell the aroma of economic disaster and realize that, perhaps, their social agenda ought to wait a while.
Because if things keeps on going the way they are, one of every three folks they meet is going to be unemployed, or otherwise insolvent, all because of misguided, irrational economic theory. And, even their science fiction movie writers couldn't come up with a plot as horrendous to the population as their electoral choices have proven.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, October 29, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/29/2010
The following news item got me to thinking about how our whole political system works. Because I've always thought that the founding fathers wanted a government that reflected what the "people" wanted from their governmental representatives and that election outcomes reflected those desires. But, obviously, politicians themselves either don't believe that, or don't care what our founders intended for us.
Bill Clinton's been a staunch public supporter of Florida Senate candidate Rep. Kendrick Meek. Yet, last week he apparently tried persuading Meek to drop out of the race. According to Politico, "Meek agreed twice to drop out and endorse independent candidate Gov. Charlie Crist, a former Republican, after Clinton said it was the best way to beat rising Republican star, Marco Rubio, who's leading the 3-way race. Each time, Meek changed his mind." Crist spokesman Danny Kanner, immediately put out a statement saying the story was "accurate."
With Greta Van Susteren last night, Crist said the reports were accurate and that he'd talked to "somebody at the White House" and "Mr. Band." Doug Band, is one of President Clinton's closest advisors. Crist, also told Van Susteren he'd spoken to Meek about the issue, because "what's right for Florida and trying to do what's right for America is stopping Marco Rubio from being U.S. Senator for Florida."
The Meek campaign immediately issued a statement bluntly describing the story as "Not true. Kendrick Meek was never dropping out of this race, is never dropping out of this race, and will never drop out of this race," his Campaign Manager, Abe Dyk, said in a release. "Meek will always stand up for the middle class and will not leave Floridians a choice between two lifelong conservative Republicans who only stand with the special interests. Kendrick is the Democratic nominee so if anyone should drop out, it's Charlie Crist."
The point is, that right in the middle of the home of the free and the brave, conniving, deal-making politicians strive to make back room deals that have not an iota of relevance to what's good for constituents. If Republicans are leading in the Florida polls, or anywhere else, its because the population is evidently quite tired of whatever it is that Democrats have been doing.
And if Bill Clinton's really trying to shoot down a rising political star, instead of back-room manipulation, maybe he ought to pay some attention to what that star's talking about and why he's evidently becoming so powerful. But, old worn out phonies like Clinton never cared about actual issues. Their game was to gain power, influence, and most of all, cash for their favors. By now, folks have probably bought ten million copies of his book,as agreed beforehand as a way to launder money back for whatever he delivered to them. But I doubt a page has ever been cracked in any of them.
So, the beat goes on. A political party's in trouble because it's done huge harm to almost everyone while in power. And now, when people look for relief by voting for something else, that party's leaders continue to manipulate and finagle, because the havoc they've wrought doesn't faze them. Elections, it seems are about keeping folks in power, regardless of what happens to constituents. Yet, this time around, it seems the population just might wake up.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Bill Clinton's been a staunch public supporter of Florida Senate candidate Rep. Kendrick Meek. Yet, last week he apparently tried persuading Meek to drop out of the race. According to Politico, "Meek agreed twice to drop out and endorse independent candidate Gov. Charlie Crist, a former Republican, after Clinton said it was the best way to beat rising Republican star, Marco Rubio, who's leading the 3-way race. Each time, Meek changed his mind." Crist spokesman Danny Kanner, immediately put out a statement saying the story was "accurate."
With Greta Van Susteren last night, Crist said the reports were accurate and that he'd talked to "somebody at the White House" and "Mr. Band." Doug Band, is one of President Clinton's closest advisors. Crist, also told Van Susteren he'd spoken to Meek about the issue, because "what's right for Florida and trying to do what's right for America is stopping Marco Rubio from being U.S. Senator for Florida."
The Meek campaign immediately issued a statement bluntly describing the story as "Not true. Kendrick Meek was never dropping out of this race, is never dropping out of this race, and will never drop out of this race," his Campaign Manager, Abe Dyk, said in a release. "Meek will always stand up for the middle class and will not leave Floridians a choice between two lifelong conservative Republicans who only stand with the special interests. Kendrick is the Democratic nominee so if anyone should drop out, it's Charlie Crist."
The point is, that right in the middle of the home of the free and the brave, conniving, deal-making politicians strive to make back room deals that have not an iota of relevance to what's good for constituents. If Republicans are leading in the Florida polls, or anywhere else, its because the population is evidently quite tired of whatever it is that Democrats have been doing.
And if Bill Clinton's really trying to shoot down a rising political star, instead of back-room manipulation, maybe he ought to pay some attention to what that star's talking about and why he's evidently becoming so powerful. But, old worn out phonies like Clinton never cared about actual issues. Their game was to gain power, influence, and most of all, cash for their favors. By now, folks have probably bought ten million copies of his book,as agreed beforehand as a way to launder money back for whatever he delivered to them. But I doubt a page has ever been cracked in any of them.
So, the beat goes on. A political party's in trouble because it's done huge harm to almost everyone while in power. And now, when people look for relief by voting for something else, that party's leaders continue to manipulate and finagle, because the havoc they've wrought doesn't faze them. Elections, it seems are about keeping folks in power, regardless of what happens to constituents. Yet, this time around, it seems the population just might wake up.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, October 28, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/28/2010
Sooner or later, most, if not all, elections come down to issues that have divided voters for years on end now, that may or may not have anything to do with the general welfare of the country and its people as far as then current conditions were concerned. And this year, may be no different.
While polls show that men lean heavily Republican this year, Democrats and their backers are spending the campaign's last days spurring left-leaning and independent women to vote, by emphasizing abortion and other social issues.
The campaigns remain focused on the economy as dominant for both men and women, with Democrats losing support from many groups that strongly backed the party in 2008 and 2006. Nonetheless, although it's unclear if a push toward social issues can make up the Republicans advantage, Democratic campaigns are bombarding female voters with messages about social issues on the stump, in debates, television ads, targeted phone calls and direct mail.
In California, Senator Barbara Boxer says Republican Carly Fiorina's opposition to abortion would turn women into criminals, a contention the Fiorina campaign calls "outlandish." In Colorado, Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet accuses his GOP opponent, Ken Buck, of wanting to ban common forms of birth control. Mr. Buck says he has changed his position.
Boxer is leading among women by 17 percentage points, up from a three-point lead in May, according to a recent Los Angeles Times survey. Internal Democratic polling shows Bennet rising among women as well since August. And a Democratic-leaning group, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund is sending mail to more than 1.4 million independent women voters charging that Republicans oppose contraceptive coverage, women's health funding and abortion rights, among other things.
So, what all this indicates is that despite the horrendous condition the country is in, with almost $14 trillion dollars amassed in national debt, a health care program that's doomed to failure, no end to massive unemployment in sight, the government inching it's way into ownership of scores of private businesses via bailouts, taxes likely to skyrocket, and the middle class about to disappear economically, people will vote for Democrat incumbents simply because abortion's okay with them.
Maybe its me, but I just don't understand that. I thought that child-bearing, contraception, abortion and such, along with a host of other personal preferences were individual matters for people, and at most, included the additional guidance of their religious beliefs, leaders and advisors. But, apparently, a whole country can go up in economic smoke because some political turkeys think they have the right to determine how others deal with the most personal issues in life.
The United States likely has the most diversified population in the world. And within it are a myriad of cultures, sub-cultures, faiths, ideologies and beliefs. So, who is to say which of these is right or wrong, or which of their tenets prevails for all in the population? But, somehow or other it's come about that issues having nothing to do with the nation's condition in whole and individual's financial futures in particular may continue to devastate the entire nation, and perhaps might cripple its future irrevocably.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
While polls show that men lean heavily Republican this year, Democrats and their backers are spending the campaign's last days spurring left-leaning and independent women to vote, by emphasizing abortion and other social issues.
The campaigns remain focused on the economy as dominant for both men and women, with Democrats losing support from many groups that strongly backed the party in 2008 and 2006. Nonetheless, although it's unclear if a push toward social issues can make up the Republicans advantage, Democratic campaigns are bombarding female voters with messages about social issues on the stump, in debates, television ads, targeted phone calls and direct mail.
In California, Senator Barbara Boxer says Republican Carly Fiorina's opposition to abortion would turn women into criminals, a contention the Fiorina campaign calls "outlandish." In Colorado, Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet accuses his GOP opponent, Ken Buck, of wanting to ban common forms of birth control. Mr. Buck says he has changed his position.
Boxer is leading among women by 17 percentage points, up from a three-point lead in May, according to a recent Los Angeles Times survey. Internal Democratic polling shows Bennet rising among women as well since August. And a Democratic-leaning group, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund is sending mail to more than 1.4 million independent women voters charging that Republicans oppose contraceptive coverage, women's health funding and abortion rights, among other things.
So, what all this indicates is that despite the horrendous condition the country is in, with almost $14 trillion dollars amassed in national debt, a health care program that's doomed to failure, no end to massive unemployment in sight, the government inching it's way into ownership of scores of private businesses via bailouts, taxes likely to skyrocket, and the middle class about to disappear economically, people will vote for Democrat incumbents simply because abortion's okay with them.
Maybe its me, but I just don't understand that. I thought that child-bearing, contraception, abortion and such, along with a host of other personal preferences were individual matters for people, and at most, included the additional guidance of their religious beliefs, leaders and advisors. But, apparently, a whole country can go up in economic smoke because some political turkeys think they have the right to determine how others deal with the most personal issues in life.
The United States likely has the most diversified population in the world. And within it are a myriad of cultures, sub-cultures, faiths, ideologies and beliefs. So, who is to say which of these is right or wrong, or which of their tenets prevails for all in the population? But, somehow or other it's come about that issues having nothing to do with the nation's condition in whole and individual's financial futures in particular may continue to devastate the entire nation, and perhaps might cripple its future irrevocably.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/27/2010
A news item caught my eye this afternoon which confounds me somewhat.
According to the New York Times, The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees boss, Gerald McEntee, announced the million-member union's latest batch of political ads will take the group's spending on the midterm elections to $91 million, far and away the most spending by any group this cycle.
Additionally, an analysis from the Center for Responsive Politics revealed that taken as a whole, Democrats and Democratic allied groups have raised and spent far more than their Republican counterparts -$856 million to $677 million.
The same day, the AFL-CIO, a labor group that includes AFSCME and other public-employee groups like the American Federation of Teachers, was in Nevada rallying for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. They said that Reid's victory would be key to labor's agenda. Unions are spending millions to defeat Republican Sharron Angle, more than in any race except perhaps for the Colorado Senate contest.
Then, last night, President Obama hosted a conference call for thousands of union supporters from the White House, cheering on their efforts to defeat Republicans.
Having read all that, I still come back to a fundamental question. Regardless of how much is spent on advertising, who on earth watches the ads? While I can certainly understand unions, which have been the backbone of the Democrat party for what seems like ever pouring money into the party, who else cares?
It just seems to me that folks who can't find employment, or have seen their health care plans shot to pieces, have children going to schools to be taught nothing by droves of dead-heading, union protected teachers, seeing the value of their homes deflate like a rock while the national debt climbed to more than $13 trillion dollars aren't likely to be influenced by Democrat advertising.
And what do these ads suggest? That things like stopping the administration's plan in the middle would be unconscionable because there's still more to do. But, what does that exactly mean?
It would seem, judging by performance so far, that there's still some cash and other marketable assets in the hands of the public that have yet to be taxed, fined, or otherwise glommed by the feds, and that falls short of the goal.
What's more, if the majority's lost in Congress, there's a chance that the general population might even get some money back. And, that means the redistribution of assets back to the public might even lead to government weakening in power, and we certainly don't want to see that.
So, I'll go back to my original question. Who in the world would watch any of these ads? And if they actually did, I don't think that'll help much, because anyone really listening to this drivel is too dumb to vote.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
According to the New York Times, The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees boss, Gerald McEntee, announced the million-member union's latest batch of political ads will take the group's spending on the midterm elections to $91 million, far and away the most spending by any group this cycle.
Additionally, an analysis from the Center for Responsive Politics revealed that taken as a whole, Democrats and Democratic allied groups have raised and spent far more than their Republican counterparts -$856 million to $677 million.
The same day, the AFL-CIO, a labor group that includes AFSCME and other public-employee groups like the American Federation of Teachers, was in Nevada rallying for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. They said that Reid's victory would be key to labor's agenda. Unions are spending millions to defeat Republican Sharron Angle, more than in any race except perhaps for the Colorado Senate contest.
Then, last night, President Obama hosted a conference call for thousands of union supporters from the White House, cheering on their efforts to defeat Republicans.
Having read all that, I still come back to a fundamental question. Regardless of how much is spent on advertising, who on earth watches the ads? While I can certainly understand unions, which have been the backbone of the Democrat party for what seems like ever pouring money into the party, who else cares?
It just seems to me that folks who can't find employment, or have seen their health care plans shot to pieces, have children going to schools to be taught nothing by droves of dead-heading, union protected teachers, seeing the value of their homes deflate like a rock while the national debt climbed to more than $13 trillion dollars aren't likely to be influenced by Democrat advertising.
And what do these ads suggest? That things like stopping the administration's plan in the middle would be unconscionable because there's still more to do. But, what does that exactly mean?
It would seem, judging by performance so far, that there's still some cash and other marketable assets in the hands of the public that have yet to be taxed, fined, or otherwise glommed by the feds, and that falls short of the goal.
What's more, if the majority's lost in Congress, there's a chance that the general population might even get some money back. And, that means the redistribution of assets back to the public might even lead to government weakening in power, and we certainly don't want to see that.
So, I'll go back to my original question. Who in the world would watch any of these ads? And if they actually did, I don't think that'll help much, because anyone really listening to this drivel is too dumb to vote.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/26/2010
With election day right around the corner, candidates are spending their waning days of campaigning in typical fashion. None have much to say about what they'd do if elected, preferring to sling mud or disparage their competition. And it seems that it always comes down to the same things. Candidate "A" digging up whatever's possible to prove that although he/she may be incompetent, corrupt or worthless, "B" on the other side's surely worse.
As usual, the polls seem to show a narrowing of leads in most races toward the end, causing candidates to try to invigorate their constituents, and insure that they all cast a vote.
In that regard, I read something this afternoon that indicated that Harry Reid evidently wanted to be certain that voters had no problem in his case, because voters in Boulder City, Nevada complained about trying to cast their ballots in early voting Monday. And it seems the one's trying to vote for Republican Sharron Angle found Reid's name already checked when they got to the electronic voting machines.
Elsewhere, Ford Motor Co.'s third-quarter net income rose 68 percent due to a bigger share of the U.S. auto market and buyers paying more for its highly-rated cars and trucks. It was the company's sixth straight quarterly profit and best third-quarter performance since at least 1990.
There's a lot of information about the company's performance, and certainly too much to list here. But what interested me was that the company's doing quite well. And, it's just like the one kid in class who got a hundred percent on a test so difficult that the teacher had to mark on the curve. Because, if not, many "star" pupils would have flunked miserably.
So, while incompetent overblown competitors were whining, moaning, complaining and lining up for government handouts, lest they be driven (no pun intended) out of business by ineptitude, Ford went along on its own, fixed problems itself, and is doing quite well in the market. I'd also think that with foreign automakers recalling vehicles more and more often, in larger amounts, Ford may continue to do quite well.
And, I'm pleased to see that, because I seem to remember this war that went on in the mid 1900's and to my recollection a lot of international car manufacturers were on the other side.
That's it for today folks
Adios.
As usual, the polls seem to show a narrowing of leads in most races toward the end, causing candidates to try to invigorate their constituents, and insure that they all cast a vote.
In that regard, I read something this afternoon that indicated that Harry Reid evidently wanted to be certain that voters had no problem in his case, because voters in Boulder City, Nevada complained about trying to cast their ballots in early voting Monday. And it seems the one's trying to vote for Republican Sharron Angle found Reid's name already checked when they got to the electronic voting machines.
Elsewhere, Ford Motor Co.'s third-quarter net income rose 68 percent due to a bigger share of the U.S. auto market and buyers paying more for its highly-rated cars and trucks. It was the company's sixth straight quarterly profit and best third-quarter performance since at least 1990.
There's a lot of information about the company's performance, and certainly too much to list here. But what interested me was that the company's doing quite well. And, it's just like the one kid in class who got a hundred percent on a test so difficult that the teacher had to mark on the curve. Because, if not, many "star" pupils would have flunked miserably.
So, while incompetent overblown competitors were whining, moaning, complaining and lining up for government handouts, lest they be driven (no pun intended) out of business by ineptitude, Ford went along on its own, fixed problems itself, and is doing quite well in the market. I'd also think that with foreign automakers recalling vehicles more and more often, in larger amounts, Ford may continue to do quite well.
And, I'm pleased to see that, because I seem to remember this war that went on in the mid 1900's and to my recollection a lot of international car manufacturers were on the other side.
That's it for today folks
Adios.
Monday, October 25, 2010
BloggeRhythms10/25/2010
According to the Wall Street Journal, "Mortgage-interest deduction and other sacrosanct tax breaks are on the deficit commission's table as it works toward its deadline of providing a set of recommendations on balancing the budget by 2015."
The paper also said Monday, that "hugely popular tax breaks are part of the commission's consideration since they add up to about $1 trillion in potential government revenue. Besides the mortgage-interest deductions, child tax credits and pre-tax spending by employers for health insurance could also be killed."
So, what is it about Liberals and their agendas that they always wind up spending money they don't have on unaffordable things that help a continually shrinking part of the population (non-producers), then going to the despised folks who actually earn a living and looking for ways to fleece them for the shortfall? And, it never fails to happen. Beyond that, they always present their beliefs as if it's un-American, illegal, politically incorrect or downright inhumane to disagree.
Now, don't get me wrong here, because Conservatives have all sorts of things tied to their agenda that likely aren't even government issues either, and push them continually. Yet, when it comes to the budget, military, taxes and education their approach tends to make more economic, political and even international sense. Nonetheless, in recent years when in power, they've spent frivolously too.
So, it seems to me what we're coming down to is additional proof that government in general is being scrutinized much more finely by the public, and regardless of political rhetoric either way, if governmental financial bleeding isn't sutured, their (pardon the pun) party is over. Because, except to perhaps the hardest core leftists, it's become all too obvious that this country can't afford the trip it's being taken on now.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
The paper also said Monday, that "hugely popular tax breaks are part of the commission's consideration since they add up to about $1 trillion in potential government revenue. Besides the mortgage-interest deductions, child tax credits and pre-tax spending by employers for health insurance could also be killed."
So, what is it about Liberals and their agendas that they always wind up spending money they don't have on unaffordable things that help a continually shrinking part of the population (non-producers), then going to the despised folks who actually earn a living and looking for ways to fleece them for the shortfall? And, it never fails to happen. Beyond that, they always present their beliefs as if it's un-American, illegal, politically incorrect or downright inhumane to disagree.
Now, don't get me wrong here, because Conservatives have all sorts of things tied to their agenda that likely aren't even government issues either, and push them continually. Yet, when it comes to the budget, military, taxes and education their approach tends to make more economic, political and even international sense. Nonetheless, in recent years when in power, they've spent frivolously too.
So, it seems to me what we're coming down to is additional proof that government in general is being scrutinized much more finely by the public, and regardless of political rhetoric either way, if governmental financial bleeding isn't sutured, their (pardon the pun) party is over. Because, except to perhaps the hardest core leftists, it's become all too obvious that this country can't afford the trip it's being taken on now.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, October 24, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/24/2010
It seems that the uproar NPR created by axing Juan Williams won't die down and just go away. And the more the issue gets discussed, the more folks are learning about how the station works. I don't know specifics about their listenership's size, but do know they gear their programming to an audience that leans quite a bit left.
As I wrote here the other day, I don't think there's anything wrong with their catering to a particular market segment, and believe that for folks who have different views, they can always change the station or turn the radio off if they dislike what's being broadcast.
But, what this current situation is illustrating for people unfamiliar with how extremists try to mold whomever they can, is that many partisan entities have difficulty in dealing with non-supportive facts. So you get distortions, adaptations, or perhaps complete avoidance of truths, if they don't fit the mold that's been chosen.
And, that's what sunk Juan Wiiliams, because he simply told the truth as he sees it regarding scary looking folks on airlines.
We live in a country that readily permits people to live and do well, no matter where they come from, when they got here, or whatever their personal beliefs may be. So long as they play by rather simple rules, and ideally, make something of themselves. So folks have been coming here and homogenizing for quite a long time now. But, no matter what the majority might think, there are others who wish to be different. And, even then, nobody really stops them if they're reasonable.
Yet, I don't know a lot of folks who'd readily approach a gang of guys dressed liked Hell's Angels, simply to start up a chat. Because there's something about the way that those bikers choose to dress, act, walk and talk, that sort of sets them apart. And, they have a particular reputation, wear it proudly and generally don't really bother too many folks who don't bother them.
I suppose you could say the same thing about skinheads, or neo-Nazi groups too, that use garb and tattoos to set themselves apart. And I truly think many average Americans would go out of their way to avoid confrontation, because that would likely just be looking for trouble. Thus, avoidance here seems appropriate.
So, as you go down the line, I'm sure you can think of all kinds of attire, mannerisms, behaviors and actions that stir up a sense of wariness in people.
Nonetheless, it seems that for a station like NPR, common sense and good judgement are out of line when not politically correct. And regardless of the fact that particular types of folks have reputations for blowing up airplanes, the fact shouldn't be mentioned because it's not the type of subject to discuss amongst civilized people.
And with that being the case, I think that the lady who's president of NPR should make a strong point of her open mind and absolute political correctness by bringing it closer to the public. And the best place to start would be by her personally visiting the nearest biker bar to her radio station to state her case.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
As I wrote here the other day, I don't think there's anything wrong with their catering to a particular market segment, and believe that for folks who have different views, they can always change the station or turn the radio off if they dislike what's being broadcast.
But, what this current situation is illustrating for people unfamiliar with how extremists try to mold whomever they can, is that many partisan entities have difficulty in dealing with non-supportive facts. So you get distortions, adaptations, or perhaps complete avoidance of truths, if they don't fit the mold that's been chosen.
And, that's what sunk Juan Wiiliams, because he simply told the truth as he sees it regarding scary looking folks on airlines.
We live in a country that readily permits people to live and do well, no matter where they come from, when they got here, or whatever their personal beliefs may be. So long as they play by rather simple rules, and ideally, make something of themselves. So folks have been coming here and homogenizing for quite a long time now. But, no matter what the majority might think, there are others who wish to be different. And, even then, nobody really stops them if they're reasonable.
Yet, I don't know a lot of folks who'd readily approach a gang of guys dressed liked Hell's Angels, simply to start up a chat. Because there's something about the way that those bikers choose to dress, act, walk and talk, that sort of sets them apart. And, they have a particular reputation, wear it proudly and generally don't really bother too many folks who don't bother them.
I suppose you could say the same thing about skinheads, or neo-Nazi groups too, that use garb and tattoos to set themselves apart. And I truly think many average Americans would go out of their way to avoid confrontation, because that would likely just be looking for trouble. Thus, avoidance here seems appropriate.
So, as you go down the line, I'm sure you can think of all kinds of attire, mannerisms, behaviors and actions that stir up a sense of wariness in people.
Nonetheless, it seems that for a station like NPR, common sense and good judgement are out of line when not politically correct. And regardless of the fact that particular types of folks have reputations for blowing up airplanes, the fact shouldn't be mentioned because it's not the type of subject to discuss amongst civilized people.
And with that being the case, I think that the lady who's president of NPR should make a strong point of her open mind and absolute political correctness by bringing it closer to the public. And the best place to start would be by her personally visiting the nearest biker bar to her radio station to state her case.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, October 23, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/23/2010
I came across some stuff today that's a microcosm of why this country is in such miserable condition. South Dakota Senator, John Thune, compared the current administration to a "science project gone wrong" during the Republican weekly radio address.
He went on to say "One of the Democrats' main responsibilities over the past two years was to improve the economy. Instead, they decided to try an experiment to grow government, raise taxes, and take over health care," ending up "openly hostile" toward business, and contributing to the weak economic recovery.
Now, without any political aspect to my thoughts at all, I have to agree with Thune's comments, because the administration in fact, whether it's an experiment or not, has grown the government, raised taxes, taken over health care and is very openly hostile toward business. And, this isn't my conjecture...as Casey Stengel the Ol' Perfesser said (Yogi said it too, and so did James Thurber...but he never made the majors,) "you could look it up."
But, what was most interesting to me was the president's response. He said "Top Republicans in Congress are now beating the drum to repeal all of these reforms and consumer protections. I think that would be a terrible mistake. Our economy depends on a financial system in which everyone competes on a level playing field, and everyone is held to the same rules, whether you're a big bank, a small business owner, or a family looking to buy a house or open a credit card. This is only one more piece of evidence as to why Wall Street Reform is so necessary." He also cited the recent housing mess in which banks are being investigated for using "flawed paperwork to process foreclosures."
And there's the rub. Because going back however many years ago to "Project Acorn" and the beginning of almost a complete disregard for the creditworthiness of borrowers, whereby anybody could get a mortgage in a heartbeat, that's where the financial downward cycle began. And today, those open door lending policies are affecting the entire civilized world.
So, just what is it about business, and finance in particular, that this administration doesn't understand? Because lending isn't a social "issue" at all. Lending requires that lenders be absolutely certain that borrowers can, and will, pay them back. Maybe in Socialism 101 some professor can make a case for a perfect financial world, where everyone is entitled to equal credit, regardless. But, in the real world, all you need to do is look at the pending defaulted mortgage rolls now to see that we're on the verge of another disaster, perhaps worldwide real estate collapse.
And, if nothing else, financial markets are not now, never were, and hopefully never will be level playing fields. For economies and the players within them to remain solvent, borrowers have to establish their creditworthiness. And, if they don't, the lenders, and as everyone can plainly see now, everyone else in the population is at risk. Because financial entities can't function when they're all broke. And, when they fail en masse, they take everybody with them.
But, maybe that's been the administration's plan along. To quietly socialize the population by taking over each business segment incrementally, banking, mortgages, health care, auto manufacturing, perhaps even expanding public radio by giving them unneeded funding. And then, one day, have everyone wake up to find that "big brother" has actually arrived.
Gee, an eventuality like that might even bring Soros back from Brazil.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
He went on to say "One of the Democrats' main responsibilities over the past two years was to improve the economy. Instead, they decided to try an experiment to grow government, raise taxes, and take over health care," ending up "openly hostile" toward business, and contributing to the weak economic recovery.
Now, without any political aspect to my thoughts at all, I have to agree with Thune's comments, because the administration in fact, whether it's an experiment or not, has grown the government, raised taxes, taken over health care and is very openly hostile toward business. And, this isn't my conjecture...as Casey Stengel the Ol' Perfesser said (Yogi said it too, and so did James Thurber...but he never made the majors,) "you could look it up."
But, what was most interesting to me was the president's response. He said "Top Republicans in Congress are now beating the drum to repeal all of these reforms and consumer protections. I think that would be a terrible mistake. Our economy depends on a financial system in which everyone competes on a level playing field, and everyone is held to the same rules, whether you're a big bank, a small business owner, or a family looking to buy a house or open a credit card. This is only one more piece of evidence as to why Wall Street Reform is so necessary." He also cited the recent housing mess in which banks are being investigated for using "flawed paperwork to process foreclosures."
And there's the rub. Because going back however many years ago to "Project Acorn" and the beginning of almost a complete disregard for the creditworthiness of borrowers, whereby anybody could get a mortgage in a heartbeat, that's where the financial downward cycle began. And today, those open door lending policies are affecting the entire civilized world.
So, just what is it about business, and finance in particular, that this administration doesn't understand? Because lending isn't a social "issue" at all. Lending requires that lenders be absolutely certain that borrowers can, and will, pay them back. Maybe in Socialism 101 some professor can make a case for a perfect financial world, where everyone is entitled to equal credit, regardless. But, in the real world, all you need to do is look at the pending defaulted mortgage rolls now to see that we're on the verge of another disaster, perhaps worldwide real estate collapse.
And, if nothing else, financial markets are not now, never were, and hopefully never will be level playing fields. For economies and the players within them to remain solvent, borrowers have to establish their creditworthiness. And, if they don't, the lenders, and as everyone can plainly see now, everyone else in the population is at risk. Because financial entities can't function when they're all broke. And, when they fail en masse, they take everybody with them.
But, maybe that's been the administration's plan along. To quietly socialize the population by taking over each business segment incrementally, banking, mortgages, health care, auto manufacturing, perhaps even expanding public radio by giving them unneeded funding. And then, one day, have everyone wake up to find that "big brother" has actually arrived.
Gee, an eventuality like that might even bring Soros back from Brazil.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, October 22, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/22/2010
Years ago, I listened to NPR radio broadcasts fairly often. They had interesting commentators, good program formats and best of all, the primary attraction to me, virtually no commercial messages at all.
As far as content went, the station had a profoundly liberal agenda, slanted all it's programming, and shaped and molded its offerings to meet and support its positions. However, they did no more in their efforts to present only their side of the picture than stations and networks on the other side of the political coin. So, in any case, whatever the particular bias of the broadcaster, all a listener has to do is realize the bias exists and sort out the truth from the pap and propaganda.
In my case, not having commercial interruptions was well worth having to listen to some rhetoric I didn't always agree with. And, in fact, bias and manipulation of information occurs due to virtually all broadcaster's particular persuasions. Consequently, so as long as there were no breaks for hammering, valueless commercials, I really didn't care.
As for today, it's been a long time since I listened to talk radio of any kind. In truth, I find all of it extremely repetitive and boring, but I do stay current by reading news on the web. Which brings me to today's subject.
Juan Williams, a commentator who's been affiliated with NPR for ten, or so, years was fired yesterday for comments he made about being nervous when he flies alongside devout Muslims. Now, whether the comments merited his termination or not is another subject, but what interested me most was NPR's remarks afterward.
It seems that The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, parent company of PBS and NPR, received $420 million in taxpayer funds in 2010. They've requested $608 million for the next funding cycle that begins in 2013. And, according to NPR, government funding makes up less than 2 percent of it budget. They say the rest comes from station fees, sponsorships and grants. In fact, this week, they received $1.8 million from George Soros, to hire journalists to cover legislatures in all 50 states.
The item that really struck me in all the discourse was that, apparently, $420 million accounts for only 2% of the budget. If my math's correct, that means CPR raised $21 billion this year. That's about the same as McDonald's earned worldwide, operating 31,000 locations and having 400,000 or so employees. So, my question is, what does CPR do with all that money?
It seems to me that this organization is doing quite well on it's own to clearly promote a political agenda, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But, taking an additional $420 million dollars out of taxpayers pockets to help their cause is not only wrong, it's theft.
That's it for today folks,
Adios
As far as content went, the station had a profoundly liberal agenda, slanted all it's programming, and shaped and molded its offerings to meet and support its positions. However, they did no more in their efforts to present only their side of the picture than stations and networks on the other side of the political coin. So, in any case, whatever the particular bias of the broadcaster, all a listener has to do is realize the bias exists and sort out the truth from the pap and propaganda.
In my case, not having commercial interruptions was well worth having to listen to some rhetoric I didn't always agree with. And, in fact, bias and manipulation of information occurs due to virtually all broadcaster's particular persuasions. Consequently, so as long as there were no breaks for hammering, valueless commercials, I really didn't care.
As for today, it's been a long time since I listened to talk radio of any kind. In truth, I find all of it extremely repetitive and boring, but I do stay current by reading news on the web. Which brings me to today's subject.
Juan Williams, a commentator who's been affiliated with NPR for ten, or so, years was fired yesterday for comments he made about being nervous when he flies alongside devout Muslims. Now, whether the comments merited his termination or not is another subject, but what interested me most was NPR's remarks afterward.
It seems that The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, parent company of PBS and NPR, received $420 million in taxpayer funds in 2010. They've requested $608 million for the next funding cycle that begins in 2013. And, according to NPR, government funding makes up less than 2 percent of it budget. They say the rest comes from station fees, sponsorships and grants. In fact, this week, they received $1.8 million from George Soros, to hire journalists to cover legislatures in all 50 states.
The item that really struck me in all the discourse was that, apparently, $420 million accounts for only 2% of the budget. If my math's correct, that means CPR raised $21 billion this year. That's about the same as McDonald's earned worldwide, operating 31,000 locations and having 400,000 or so employees. So, my question is, what does CPR do with all that money?
It seems to me that this organization is doing quite well on it's own to clearly promote a political agenda, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But, taking an additional $420 million dollars out of taxpayers pockets to help their cause is not only wrong, it's theft.
That's it for today folks,
Adios
Thursday, October 21, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/21/2010
For whatever polling data is worth, latest information indicates that today, more women are voting, but they're not slam-dunk Democrats like they once were.
I didn't see any information beyond the overall statistic that more women now vote, yet it seems to me that the reasons for the Dem party losing it's grip on this population segment is that more women are now in the work force, have significant financial responsibility, have more economic and fiscal information specifically targeted to them as an audience and more frequently involve themselves in public issues at all levels. Beyond that, the divorce rate is about 50%, so many women are likely sole breadwinners for themselves and their kids.
Consequently,things like taxes, health care, risk of unemployment, unbridled government spending and budget deficits now effect them more directly, especially in their pocketbooks. And despite that they likely have significant, deeply felt interest in many social issues, they realize that when it's their own paychecks that are being eaten away to pay for these projects, it's wiser to wait until the economy improves to where they can afford them than to break the bank now.
A step beyond that is that although it makes sense for women to prefer other women in office because of a more common perspective, it's likely that self-supporting or simply well-informed women realize that gender alone isn't enough reason to earn a vote. Therefore, empty suits like Boxer, Pelosi and whatever the current senator's name is from New York (has anyone ever seen her?) are no longer guaranteed women's votes. I guess you can include Sarah Palin in that group too, because aside from being loud, pushy and boring, I don't think she's a slam dunk shoo-in for intelligent women (or male) voters either.
All in all, the changing makeup of many once guaranteed groups are no longer the strongholds they were for either party. There's simply too much information available to the voting public via media outlets and the Internet. And that access to input will continue to increase significantly. Consequently, politicians of every stripe are now faced with a horrible dilemma. Folks now actually know instantaneously what these politicos have said and promised, and unfortunately for the pol's, as every day goes by, they'll be expected to deliver. Gender alone just won't make it any more.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I didn't see any information beyond the overall statistic that more women now vote, yet it seems to me that the reasons for the Dem party losing it's grip on this population segment is that more women are now in the work force, have significant financial responsibility, have more economic and fiscal information specifically targeted to them as an audience and more frequently involve themselves in public issues at all levels. Beyond that, the divorce rate is about 50%, so many women are likely sole breadwinners for themselves and their kids.
Consequently,things like taxes, health care, risk of unemployment, unbridled government spending and budget deficits now effect them more directly, especially in their pocketbooks. And despite that they likely have significant, deeply felt interest in many social issues, they realize that when it's their own paychecks that are being eaten away to pay for these projects, it's wiser to wait until the economy improves to where they can afford them than to break the bank now.
A step beyond that is that although it makes sense for women to prefer other women in office because of a more common perspective, it's likely that self-supporting or simply well-informed women realize that gender alone isn't enough reason to earn a vote. Therefore, empty suits like Boxer, Pelosi and whatever the current senator's name is from New York (has anyone ever seen her?) are no longer guaranteed women's votes. I guess you can include Sarah Palin in that group too, because aside from being loud, pushy and boring, I don't think she's a slam dunk shoo-in for intelligent women (or male) voters either.
All in all, the changing makeup of many once guaranteed groups are no longer the strongholds they were for either party. There's simply too much information available to the voting public via media outlets and the Internet. And that access to input will continue to increase significantly. Consequently, politicians of every stripe are now faced with a horrible dilemma. Folks now actually know instantaneously what these politicos have said and promised, and unfortunately for the pol's, as every day goes by, they'll be expected to deliver. Gender alone just won't make it any more.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/21/2010
Lucky for me that there's nothing of interest going on anywhere, because today my time's really stretched. Because like Ludwig Mies van der Rohe the architect said, "the Devil's in the details" and to paraphrase Thomas Edison, although I'm certainly not talking about "genius" here, but creating something worthwhile is certainly one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration.
I've mentioned earlier that the off-the-shelf programming available today is incredible, simply because so many functions have been formulated and structured to where folks can do all kinds of tasks themselves. But, that's the "big" picture. Because, although you might now have the capability to program all kinds of necessary and valuable tasks down to simple keystrokes, what do you do with the system you've built?
For example, I might be able to send an email to a thousand folks in a heartbeat, by touching a couple of keys on my keyboard. But, who are the recipients, and are they of any value, and how do you identify them? And that, my friends, is where the devil is, because loading, reviewing and organizing that data is a job right from his home office.
So, while the president treks of to California to help Barabara Boxer, then goes to see if he can salvage Harry Reid's job for him, and then visits a few more electoral districts, I'm going to be sitting here, keystroke by keystroke building a program that might well revolutionize some marketing techniques. Provided I have fingers left after I've finished the process.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I've mentioned earlier that the off-the-shelf programming available today is incredible, simply because so many functions have been formulated and structured to where folks can do all kinds of tasks themselves. But, that's the "big" picture. Because, although you might now have the capability to program all kinds of necessary and valuable tasks down to simple keystrokes, what do you do with the system you've built?
For example, I might be able to send an email to a thousand folks in a heartbeat, by touching a couple of keys on my keyboard. But, who are the recipients, and are they of any value, and how do you identify them? And that, my friends, is where the devil is, because loading, reviewing and organizing that data is a job right from his home office.
So, while the president treks of to California to help Barabara Boxer, then goes to see if he can salvage Harry Reid's job for him, and then visits a few more electoral districts, I'm going to be sitting here, keystroke by keystroke building a program that might well revolutionize some marketing techniques. Provided I have fingers left after I've finished the process.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/19/2010
I noticed a new tracking tool for the blog this afternoon, and answered a lingering question of mine. Because, since I don't understand how the quite complicated Google traffic formulae work (I think they're trying to sell consulting services..to help folks figure that out,) I didn't really know precisely how many views my entries get each day. Although I certainly get feedback, and know people read the blog, I never saw the actual numbers.
Nonetheless, I've kept on typing, knowing that readers are out there. But, I was really surprised to learn that not only are there readers, the number keeps increasing, and there are even hits from around the world.
For example, among others to date, there have been 35 views from Canada, 32 from Japan, 19 from Mexico, 6 from Russia and 5 from Denmark. But the ones that really took me aback are 17 from Brazil and 13 from the United Emirates.
Looking at those last two countries, I can only assume that some folks are interested in my notes on George Soros, and on the oil business in general. So, I guess I'm glad to see my work's having some kind of impact, and maybe that's why we haven't heard from Mr. Soros in a long time. I've thought, until today, he was avoiding the president. But as it turns out, it's been he's been ducking me all along.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Nonetheless, I've kept on typing, knowing that readers are out there. But, I was really surprised to learn that not only are there readers, the number keeps increasing, and there are even hits from around the world.
For example, among others to date, there have been 35 views from Canada, 32 from Japan, 19 from Mexico, 6 from Russia and 5 from Denmark. But the ones that really took me aback are 17 from Brazil and 13 from the United Emirates.
Looking at those last two countries, I can only assume that some folks are interested in my notes on George Soros, and on the oil business in general. So, I guess I'm glad to see my work's having some kind of impact, and maybe that's why we haven't heard from Mr. Soros in a long time. I've thought, until today, he was avoiding the president. But as it turns out, it's been he's been ducking me all along.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, October 18, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/18/2010
At least next week's a bye week, so I can give my arteries a rest. Because Gang Green did it again yesterday, but with a twist. Usually, they give the opposition a chance to come back in the last few minutes and lose at the end. But, yesterday they reversed their approach and came back like gangbusters to win. Although I'd much prefer nice, quiet, do it by the numbers football where they build up a lead during the game and shut opponents out, you have to admit it's exciting.
As far as the rest of the world goes, I'm really looking forward to the end of the political campaigns. Because, none of the candidates are saying anything new or interesting, and frankly, are really boring.
And, I don't want to go it into it here because it involves too much long, dull, typing, but if you want to read some incredible stuff, search for the Sunday interviews with Wolf Blitzer and Harry Reid, and the one with Barbara Boxer.
Blitzer almost had a coronary trying to help these two morons, by giving them facts and data from their own parties rhetoric, and even tried to remind them of words they'd spoken themselves. But, this pair is so thick and out of touch, they couldn't speak coherently, even with his help. Now, I don't know of either if them will be re-elected, but if they are, it really doesn't say much about voters intelligence.
And, if that's the case..uh oh! We might all wind up with Donald Trump.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
As far as the rest of the world goes, I'm really looking forward to the end of the political campaigns. Because, none of the candidates are saying anything new or interesting, and frankly, are really boring.
And, I don't want to go it into it here because it involves too much long, dull, typing, but if you want to read some incredible stuff, search for the Sunday interviews with Wolf Blitzer and Harry Reid, and the one with Barbara Boxer.
Blitzer almost had a coronary trying to help these two morons, by giving them facts and data from their own parties rhetoric, and even tried to remind them of words they'd spoken themselves. But, this pair is so thick and out of touch, they couldn't speak coherently, even with his help. Now, I don't know of either if them will be re-elected, but if they are, it really doesn't say much about voters intelligence.
And, if that's the case..uh oh! We might all wind up with Donald Trump.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, October 17, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/17/2010
Maybe I'm missing something here, regarding the upcoming mid-term elections. But I saw this headline this morning "Democrats Bring Out the Big Guns, Hope to Defy Odds in Midterm Elections," and I don't understand it.
It sees to me, as I've been blogging the past few days, that Dem candidates are rebelling all over the country and using last ditch appeals to their constituents by separating themselves from the leaders who are taking their party (and the country) down the chute.
However, the leaders seem to be too dumb, arrogant, misguided, deaf, blind, or otherwise unable to get the message that nobody wants them around, because they're political pariahs. Yet, they keep showing up to attend rallies and blow out blimp-loads of worthless hot air.
And, as for myself, I still think that just about anyone who has an iota of intelligence has to sit back and either take offense or be shocked that folks who claim to be "leaders" don't have a clue as to what their constituents need or want. Apparently all these politico's think or believe that their jobs are all about words, not actions, and by simply changing their rhetoric they'll recapture votes.
Well, evidence seems to be pointing in another direction today, indicating that the public expects more from their elected officials than talk, and the days of hype, smoke, and fluff are over. So that while the poltico's are using tactics that have worked since the inception of campaigning, the real world has evolved into something else.
Today, just about every voter has access to immediate information twenty-four, seven, three sixty five. That means the days of perpetual political smoke and mirrors are over, because it's not so easy for incumbents to hide while in office when they're ideas and philosophies don't work.
So, since elected officials can no longer easily duck their failures, use speeches to cover their tracks or otherwise evade the public's wrath for ineptitude, I guess we should all expect less "political" and more productive type folks elected to office. And, in the long run I think the odds are that that will happen.
However, while today's technology and equipment now allows immediate dissemination of information that keeps the voting public informed instantaneously, politicians haven't yet really realized how the game has changed. Thus, although it's likely that there'll be a significant turnover in leadership in Novemeber, the folks coming in will simply be the same old politicos of a different stripe.
But, the handwriting on the walls predicts that very soon -since the public's now plugged in full time- if folks expect to stay in office in the future, they're actually going to have to produce instead of simply being worthless bags of hot air.
That's it for today folks.
Adios.
It sees to me, as I've been blogging the past few days, that Dem candidates are rebelling all over the country and using last ditch appeals to their constituents by separating themselves from the leaders who are taking their party (and the country) down the chute.
However, the leaders seem to be too dumb, arrogant, misguided, deaf, blind, or otherwise unable to get the message that nobody wants them around, because they're political pariahs. Yet, they keep showing up to attend rallies and blow out blimp-loads of worthless hot air.
And, as for myself, I still think that just about anyone who has an iota of intelligence has to sit back and either take offense or be shocked that folks who claim to be "leaders" don't have a clue as to what their constituents need or want. Apparently all these politico's think or believe that their jobs are all about words, not actions, and by simply changing their rhetoric they'll recapture votes.
Well, evidence seems to be pointing in another direction today, indicating that the public expects more from their elected officials than talk, and the days of hype, smoke, and fluff are over. So that while the poltico's are using tactics that have worked since the inception of campaigning, the real world has evolved into something else.
Today, just about every voter has access to immediate information twenty-four, seven, three sixty five. That means the days of perpetual political smoke and mirrors are over, because it's not so easy for incumbents to hide while in office when they're ideas and philosophies don't work.
So, since elected officials can no longer easily duck their failures, use speeches to cover their tracks or otherwise evade the public's wrath for ineptitude, I guess we should all expect less "political" and more productive type folks elected to office. And, in the long run I think the odds are that that will happen.
However, while today's technology and equipment now allows immediate dissemination of information that keeps the voting public informed instantaneously, politicians haven't yet really realized how the game has changed. Thus, although it's likely that there'll be a significant turnover in leadership in Novemeber, the folks coming in will simply be the same old politicos of a different stripe.
But, the handwriting on the walls predicts that very soon -since the public's now plugged in full time- if folks expect to stay in office in the future, they're actually going to have to produce instead of simply being worthless bags of hot air.
That's it for today folks.
Adios.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/16/2010
I came across this blurb in the news today. "Several endangered House Democrats think they may have found a way to escape voters' wrath in next month's midterm elections: Run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi."
I thought it interesting because I've been questioning Ms Peolosi's performance in this blog for months. And now, it seems, some folks have woken up and realize what an embarrassment this woman is, and evidently their constituents must be giving them huge heat about her.
But where have these clowns been for the last four years? She ranted and raved about health care, demanding every house member vote yes, yet when she was asked about the bill's contents, she said she hadn't read it, but was sure it was a terrific piece of legislation.
She's been hugely against immigration reform and sealing of the borders, likely because her husband's vineyard employees are mostly illegal's themselves.
As you go down the list of her record, you realize she hasn't a clue about governance, the economy, foreign affairs, the military or anything else related to the welfare of the nation. But, she's only one person, and consequently her constituents have to decide whether to keep her in office or not. But what about all these other ciphers, who're now waking up. Where have they been for the last four years while Ms Pelosi was hammering for the legislation that's now going to get all of them the boot?
And, supposing they do "divorce" themselves from her coat strings for the purpose of attempting to get re-elected. Who in their right mind would vote for these dunces who are now compromising themselves because they've sunk their constituents in Ms Pelosi's mire.
What's more, by trying to con their constituents with some kind of story about how they've now seen the light, these folks are insulting the intelligence of everyone they try to sell that to. So, I hope what this election proves is that Pol's can't get away with that anymore, and will blow them all out. And if that's truly what happens, the Pol's have made a huge mistake. Because when they lose, and go looking for real work, the only real thing they're qualified for is something like picking grapes. And since they've now walked away from Ms Pelosi, her husband won't hire them either.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I thought it interesting because I've been questioning Ms Peolosi's performance in this blog for months. And now, it seems, some folks have woken up and realize what an embarrassment this woman is, and evidently their constituents must be giving them huge heat about her.
But where have these clowns been for the last four years? She ranted and raved about health care, demanding every house member vote yes, yet when she was asked about the bill's contents, she said she hadn't read it, but was sure it was a terrific piece of legislation.
She's been hugely against immigration reform and sealing of the borders, likely because her husband's vineyard employees are mostly illegal's themselves.
As you go down the list of her record, you realize she hasn't a clue about governance, the economy, foreign affairs, the military or anything else related to the welfare of the nation. But, she's only one person, and consequently her constituents have to decide whether to keep her in office or not. But what about all these other ciphers, who're now waking up. Where have they been for the last four years while Ms Pelosi was hammering for the legislation that's now going to get all of them the boot?
And, supposing they do "divorce" themselves from her coat strings for the purpose of attempting to get re-elected. Who in their right mind would vote for these dunces who are now compromising themselves because they've sunk their constituents in Ms Pelosi's mire.
What's more, by trying to con their constituents with some kind of story about how they've now seen the light, these folks are insulting the intelligence of everyone they try to sell that to. So, I hope what this election proves is that Pol's can't get away with that anymore, and will blow them all out. And if that's truly what happens, the Pol's have made a huge mistake. Because when they lose, and go looking for real work, the only real thing they're qualified for is something like picking grapes. And since they've now walked away from Ms Pelosi, her husband won't hire them either.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, October 15, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/15/2010
I usually wait til later in the day to update, to get the latest news. But I doubt anything earthshaking's going to come up today, so I'll keep typing now.
I noticed that the Dem in Connecticut -Blumenthal I think is his name- is rapidly outpacing rival, Linda McMahon, in the race for Chris Dodd's vacant seat. But, what struck me was why. Because according to a Quinnipiac poll, he's gaining ground because McMahon ran barrages of attack ads and folks are now tired of the subject, so she's burnt out her advantage too soon, giving him time to come back.
But, my question is, and has been for a long, long time -who in the world is influenced by any "ad" about anything in today's day and age, regardless of the subject? Whether it's advertising for politicians, beer, cars, dishwashing detergent or anything else you can think of, who cares about the ads? I think TV remotes blew advertising out of the water many years ago. And I also truly believe that when ads come on most people hit an alternative channel button, or mute the sound as second nature. I know I haven't heard a TV ad in more than ten years, regardless of what's being hawked, because I don't even think about what an ad might be for, I automatically click off to something else.
But, let's say that there are some folks, who for whatever reason, sit there and actually listen to what politicos say in their ads. From what I read, almost every radio and TV ad is geared to smear opponents. Guy "A" says Guy "B" is a crook and he can prove it. Then Guy "B" says, "Oh Yeah. Well Guy "A's" second cousin twice removed is an axe murderer." So, Guy "A" says, "There's no proof of the axe murders at all. Every word's unfounded conjecture. But, Guy "B's" been diverting funds from his daughters Girl Scout cookie sales and using the money to support his gay lover." And the beat goes on and on.
Beyond the baseless drivel in the ads themselves however, common sense indicates that they have no real impact on voters. Because if they did, how did Ted Kennedy ever get elected in the first place and then spend the rest of his life-long stupor in the Senate? And what about Chris Dodd? He'd probably get re-elected now, despite his multitudinous scams, frauds and backroom deals. But if he runs again, his collegues will toss him in jail, so he threw in the towel instead of hearing someone read him his rights.
Then, of course there's Hillary and the president himself. And for all of these folks the smear ads against them generally contain considerable aspects of truth. But do the negative truths affect them at the polls? It seems to me that they do not. In fact, I think if you add up the accusations, and could actually enforce them, against both Bush's, Cheney and Rove they'd all be in adjoining cells in Leavenworth right now.
So, in the end, I know that the pollsters will keep on churning out data and tell listeners that this guy or that is ahead by however much, and yada-yada-yada all season long. As for me, I think the whole thing comes down to counting the actual vote after the election. Because pundits of any kind aren't right all that often, and I'm old enough to remember the famously inaccurate banner headline on the front page of the Chicago Tribune no less, on November 3, 1948, "Dewey Defeats Truman." It made a very good story...except for the fact that Dewey lost.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I noticed that the Dem in Connecticut -Blumenthal I think is his name- is rapidly outpacing rival, Linda McMahon, in the race for Chris Dodd's vacant seat. But, what struck me was why. Because according to a Quinnipiac poll, he's gaining ground because McMahon ran barrages of attack ads and folks are now tired of the subject, so she's burnt out her advantage too soon, giving him time to come back.
But, my question is, and has been for a long, long time -who in the world is influenced by any "ad" about anything in today's day and age, regardless of the subject? Whether it's advertising for politicians, beer, cars, dishwashing detergent or anything else you can think of, who cares about the ads? I think TV remotes blew advertising out of the water many years ago. And I also truly believe that when ads come on most people hit an alternative channel button, or mute the sound as second nature. I know I haven't heard a TV ad in more than ten years, regardless of what's being hawked, because I don't even think about what an ad might be for, I automatically click off to something else.
But, let's say that there are some folks, who for whatever reason, sit there and actually listen to what politicos say in their ads. From what I read, almost every radio and TV ad is geared to smear opponents. Guy "A" says Guy "B" is a crook and he can prove it. Then Guy "B" says, "Oh Yeah. Well Guy "A's" second cousin twice removed is an axe murderer." So, Guy "A" says, "There's no proof of the axe murders at all. Every word's unfounded conjecture. But, Guy "B's" been diverting funds from his daughters Girl Scout cookie sales and using the money to support his gay lover." And the beat goes on and on.
Beyond the baseless drivel in the ads themselves however, common sense indicates that they have no real impact on voters. Because if they did, how did Ted Kennedy ever get elected in the first place and then spend the rest of his life-long stupor in the Senate? And what about Chris Dodd? He'd probably get re-elected now, despite his multitudinous scams, frauds and backroom deals. But if he runs again, his collegues will toss him in jail, so he threw in the towel instead of hearing someone read him his rights.
Then, of course there's Hillary and the president himself. And for all of these folks the smear ads against them generally contain considerable aspects of truth. But do the negative truths affect them at the polls? It seems to me that they do not. In fact, I think if you add up the accusations, and could actually enforce them, against both Bush's, Cheney and Rove they'd all be in adjoining cells in Leavenworth right now.
So, in the end, I know that the pollsters will keep on churning out data and tell listeners that this guy or that is ahead by however much, and yada-yada-yada all season long. As for me, I think the whole thing comes down to counting the actual vote after the election. Because pundits of any kind aren't right all that often, and I'm old enough to remember the famously inaccurate banner headline on the front page of the Chicago Tribune no less, on November 3, 1948, "Dewey Defeats Truman." It made a very good story...except for the fact that Dewey lost.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, October 14, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/14/2010
Nothin' blogworthy today. Guess the pol's are all talked out, which makes sense because they didn't have too much to say to begin with.
I'm still working out kinks in a new business venture, so I don't have lots of free time. Started at five after four this am, it's now 5:12 pm and it ain't finished yet. But, I'm still having fun.
The only news item I saw worth a small mention was a comment from the Vikings that Nanette Favre may sit out a game or two due to "tendinitis." Now, I could be wrong, but I'm ninety-eight percent sure I saw the particular play that he got his "tendinitis" on. And it looked to me like some three hundred pound Jet lineman landed on Nanette's forearm. When Favre got up, he was holding his arm as if he was in real pain, and my comment at home was, "look at that, they broke his arm."
Now you have to give Farve credit I guess because he likes to tough it out. So a broken arm won't keep him on the bench. And it doesn't bother him at all that when he plays at less than peak, he usually costs his team big time. In fact, that's why the Jets blew him out two years ago, after he tanked the last five games he played, after he was injured. This time he cost his new team a win, because they were on a huge spurt before his "tendinitis" suddenly set in. But, as far as Favre's concerned, so what if they lost, because it's all only about him.
Then again, if his arm really is broken and he's finally forced to step down, this might be the perfect time for him to join the Dem Party. It seems they love to support arrogant losers.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I'm still working out kinks in a new business venture, so I don't have lots of free time. Started at five after four this am, it's now 5:12 pm and it ain't finished yet. But, I'm still having fun.
The only news item I saw worth a small mention was a comment from the Vikings that Nanette Favre may sit out a game or two due to "tendinitis." Now, I could be wrong, but I'm ninety-eight percent sure I saw the particular play that he got his "tendinitis" on. And it looked to me like some three hundred pound Jet lineman landed on Nanette's forearm. When Favre got up, he was holding his arm as if he was in real pain, and my comment at home was, "look at that, they broke his arm."
Now you have to give Farve credit I guess because he likes to tough it out. So a broken arm won't keep him on the bench. And it doesn't bother him at all that when he plays at less than peak, he usually costs his team big time. In fact, that's why the Jets blew him out two years ago, after he tanked the last five games he played, after he was injured. This time he cost his new team a win, because they were on a huge spurt before his "tendinitis" suddenly set in. But, as far as Favre's concerned, so what if they lost, because it's all only about him.
Then again, if his arm really is broken and he's finally forced to step down, this might be the perfect time for him to join the Dem Party. It seems they love to support arrogant losers.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/13/2010
The way that the president's accusation of Republican's receiving funds from "foreign" donors was stated is apparently in a gray area from a legal point of view.
Some think the allegations have been made strongly enough to merit a lawsuit for slander, others believe the comments fall in the same category as baseless pap aimed at celebrities which goes unchallenged because the target's public persona is such a lure. But, whatever the legal outcome, there seems to be a general consensus that the Dem party is in so much peril, election-wise, that the president has reached a new low for campaign hogwash.
In any case, Karl Rove is still livid over the issue and seems ready to take his case to another level, whatever that may turn out to be, because the president's remarks are tantamount to a personal attack. However, to prove his innocence, Rove has to produce enough evidence that will substantiate his claim of innocence. And that's why combatants use these sleazy kinds of tactics...because of the difficulty in establishing the proof.
To that end, since when one is smeared by another for any reason, proving the truth isn't always easy, that's why so many issues are gotten away with by the smearers. Because it's too much trouble for smearees to defend themselves. In this particular case, the president and the Dem's are relying on the odds that say, in time, Rove's issue and threats will will simply disappear by themselves.
Along those lines, I came across a video clip on the web where a celebrated talk show host suggested that since the president has taken a much more friendly stance toward China than his predecessors, it's likely he's taking funds from them to promote their cause in the U.S. The host's argument is, the way the issue of proof works, if Rove, or anyone else, suggests that the president's guilty of taking Chinese payoffs, it's up to him to prove that he's not.
So, I guess what we have here is the core of American politics. The real issues like unemployment, health care, taxes and immigration get ignored, because no pol's have solutions, and instead they point fingers at each other about things that hardly matter at all.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Some think the allegations have been made strongly enough to merit a lawsuit for slander, others believe the comments fall in the same category as baseless pap aimed at celebrities which goes unchallenged because the target's public persona is such a lure. But, whatever the legal outcome, there seems to be a general consensus that the Dem party is in so much peril, election-wise, that the president has reached a new low for campaign hogwash.
In any case, Karl Rove is still livid over the issue and seems ready to take his case to another level, whatever that may turn out to be, because the president's remarks are tantamount to a personal attack. However, to prove his innocence, Rove has to produce enough evidence that will substantiate his claim of innocence. And that's why combatants use these sleazy kinds of tactics...because of the difficulty in establishing the proof.
To that end, since when one is smeared by another for any reason, proving the truth isn't always easy, that's why so many issues are gotten away with by the smearers. Because it's too much trouble for smearees to defend themselves. In this particular case, the president and the Dem's are relying on the odds that say, in time, Rove's issue and threats will will simply disappear by themselves.
Along those lines, I came across a video clip on the web where a celebrated talk show host suggested that since the president has taken a much more friendly stance toward China than his predecessors, it's likely he's taking funds from them to promote their cause in the U.S. The host's argument is, the way the issue of proof works, if Rove, or anyone else, suggests that the president's guilty of taking Chinese payoffs, it's up to him to prove that he's not.
So, I guess what we have here is the core of American politics. The real issues like unemployment, health care, taxes and immigration get ignored, because no pol's have solutions, and instead they point fingers at each other about things that hardly matter at all.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/12/2010
With the rain delay and late start, I fell asleep before the first snap last night. But I awoke in the middle of the third quarter and saw what was, I guess, the best part of the game.
And, as usual, Gang Green gave their opponents a chance to win right down to the last couple of minutes. But then, they did something unusual for a Jet team. They hung in, played tough, and slammed the door for a win.
Now, not having the sound on and being somewhere between sleep and awake, I'm not sure I actually saw what I think happened. But, it looked to me like this team didn't need Revis the holdout, because he's nowhere up to speed, and that's really good for me. Because he doesn't give a damn about this team, and I sure as hell don't give a damn about him.
I also think I saw Nannette Favre nursing his arm toward the end. So, maybe he's got some kind of boo-boo. But, it really doesn't matter if that was why they picked him off, for a score no less, and shut that self-serving narcissist down. All that counts is that his team lost and he can keep all the excuses to himself.
Aside from that, I'm buried in business stuff that seems to take on a mind of its own as we progress. And since progress is the key word here, I'm going back to the stuff on my desk.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
And, as usual, Gang Green gave their opponents a chance to win right down to the last couple of minutes. But then, they did something unusual for a Jet team. They hung in, played tough, and slammed the door for a win.
Now, not having the sound on and being somewhere between sleep and awake, I'm not sure I actually saw what I think happened. But, it looked to me like this team didn't need Revis the holdout, because he's nowhere up to speed, and that's really good for me. Because he doesn't give a damn about this team, and I sure as hell don't give a damn about him.
I also think I saw Nannette Favre nursing his arm toward the end. So, maybe he's got some kind of boo-boo. But, it really doesn't matter if that was why they picked him off, for a score no less, and shut that self-serving narcissist down. All that counts is that his team lost and he can keep all the excuses to himself.
Aside from that, I'm buried in business stuff that seems to take on a mind of its own as we progress. And since progress is the key word here, I'm going back to the stuff on my desk.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, October 11, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/11/2010
Flipping channels this morning, I noticed the president apparently ranting and raving again about something or other, and it occurred to me once again that all that this gas-bag does is talk. I'm actually getting curious about who'd listen to him and why. But, not curious enough to turn the sound on.
Along the same lines, I wrote yesterday about his tirade regarding what he called "foreign" money fueling Republican campaigns. Of course, he had no documentable basis for his babble, he just screamed accusations. Now today it seems he's softened his point a little by saying "There's no question the other side sees a chance to get back in the driver's seat, they are being helped along this year by special interest groups that are spending unlimited amounts of money on attack ads...just attacking people without ever disclosing who's behind all these attack ads. You don't know. It could be the oil industry. It could be the insurance industry. It could even be foreign-owned corporations. You don't know because they don't have to disclose."
The key words here, I think, are "you don't know, because they don't have to disclose." So that means it could be donations from squads of little old ladies on social security and thousands of unemployed folks and short-changed stock-market investors, and every-day people who fear their health care's in danger and scads of others who are quickly going broke. As a matter of fact, it could be anyone who has an iota of sense and is tired of watching their country turn into a third-world nation at the hands of a mis-guided dolt.
It's also possible that some folks are just plain tired of the double talk and mis-guidance. Because on one hand the president's yapping about rebuilding the infrastructure and making a $50 billion investment in bridges, tunnels and roads which, he says, will create huge numbers of jobs. But, at the same time, two former transportation secretaries recently co-chaired a panel with him that proposes gas tax hikes and user fees to pay for these government transportation projects. So, who does he think he's fooling?
I guess the bottom line is, regardless of all the president's tirades, the public's tired of the noise and hot air and needs to see some positive results. And since this administration's absolutely proven they can't do the job, it's time for somebody else to give it a shot. So I guess what really drives me to keep typing about his babble is the guy's constant, arrogant, untruthful insults to our collective intelligence.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Along the same lines, I wrote yesterday about his tirade regarding what he called "foreign" money fueling Republican campaigns. Of course, he had no documentable basis for his babble, he just screamed accusations. Now today it seems he's softened his point a little by saying "There's no question the other side sees a chance to get back in the driver's seat, they are being helped along this year by special interest groups that are spending unlimited amounts of money on attack ads...just attacking people without ever disclosing who's behind all these attack ads. You don't know. It could be the oil industry. It could be the insurance industry. It could even be foreign-owned corporations. You don't know because they don't have to disclose."
The key words here, I think, are "you don't know, because they don't have to disclose." So that means it could be donations from squads of little old ladies on social security and thousands of unemployed folks and short-changed stock-market investors, and every-day people who fear their health care's in danger and scads of others who are quickly going broke. As a matter of fact, it could be anyone who has an iota of sense and is tired of watching their country turn into a third-world nation at the hands of a mis-guided dolt.
It's also possible that some folks are just plain tired of the double talk and mis-guidance. Because on one hand the president's yapping about rebuilding the infrastructure and making a $50 billion investment in bridges, tunnels and roads which, he says, will create huge numbers of jobs. But, at the same time, two former transportation secretaries recently co-chaired a panel with him that proposes gas tax hikes and user fees to pay for these government transportation projects. So, who does he think he's fooling?
I guess the bottom line is, regardless of all the president's tirades, the public's tired of the noise and hot air and needs to see some positive results. And since this administration's absolutely proven they can't do the job, it's time for somebody else to give it a shot. So I guess what really drives me to keep typing about his babble is the guy's constant, arrogant, untruthful insults to our collective intelligence.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, October 10, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/10/2010
Trolling through news items looking for something blogworthy often proves to be a very boring waste of time. Especially at present, when both major political parties are absorbed in pointing fingers, slinging mud and generally behaving like the mind-numb boobs that they are.
However, an item caught my eye this morning about a brouhaha between Karl Rove and the president. It seems that Rove is involved with an organization, American Crossroads, that helps fund political campaigns along with the Chamber of Commerce and these organizations also receive contributions from foreign sources to be used for other purposes. The president, though, has been bad-mouthing both the organization and Rove in particular for using "foreign" funds in supporting U.S. electoral candidates. Rove says that's absolutely not true.
Now, the part that interested me is that it's the president who's ranting and raving about the involvement of foreigners whom he's yet to name, saying "So groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections, and they won't tell you where the money for their ads come from," yet, he's not displayed any proof in the matter to date while to this day nobody knows where he himself was actually born. Beyond that he also let his boss Soros wangle a $2 billion U.S. guaranteed loan to explore for oil exclusively to be used in Brazil. The hypocrisy's incredible.
It seems what this election's boiling down to is a revolt against what Democrats always do, tax and spend while growing the bureaucracy. The challengers are doing what Republicans always do, rebelling vigorously against the incumbent Dem's because of the way they blindly tax and spend and let government get out of hand. Yet, after the last Republican administration was elected they taxed and spent, let the government grow and let it get out of hand. So, now we have the Tea-Party folks who tell you that neither major party is any good, because they both tax and spend and let government get out of hand.
I think what this is all boiling down to has become painfully clear. The particular party doesn't really matter at all, because it isn't about political persuasion. The simple fact of the matter is all politicians tax and spend regardless of affiliation. So, the only answer is to do what our founding fathers did, pick some really nice place to move to, start the whole thing over again, and govern ourselves.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
However, an item caught my eye this morning about a brouhaha between Karl Rove and the president. It seems that Rove is involved with an organization, American Crossroads, that helps fund political campaigns along with the Chamber of Commerce and these organizations also receive contributions from foreign sources to be used for other purposes. The president, though, has been bad-mouthing both the organization and Rove in particular for using "foreign" funds in supporting U.S. electoral candidates. Rove says that's absolutely not true.
Now, the part that interested me is that it's the president who's ranting and raving about the involvement of foreigners whom he's yet to name, saying "So groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections, and they won't tell you where the money for their ads come from," yet, he's not displayed any proof in the matter to date while to this day nobody knows where he himself was actually born. Beyond that he also let his boss Soros wangle a $2 billion U.S. guaranteed loan to explore for oil exclusively to be used in Brazil. The hypocrisy's incredible.
It seems what this election's boiling down to is a revolt against what Democrats always do, tax and spend while growing the bureaucracy. The challengers are doing what Republicans always do, rebelling vigorously against the incumbent Dem's because of the way they blindly tax and spend and let government get out of hand. Yet, after the last Republican administration was elected they taxed and spent, let the government grow and let it get out of hand. So, now we have the Tea-Party folks who tell you that neither major party is any good, because they both tax and spend and let government get out of hand.
I think what this is all boiling down to has become painfully clear. The particular party doesn't really matter at all, because it isn't about political persuasion. The simple fact of the matter is all politicians tax and spend regardless of affiliation. So, the only answer is to do what our founding fathers did, pick some really nice place to move to, start the whole thing over again, and govern ourselves.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, October 9, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/9/2010
Spent another day organizing and implementing some marketing approaches for a new business. And while I was working (actually it's fun) and taking advantage of lot's of really simple technology, I thought about how all this stuff came to be.
Now, I know people will argue, sometimes really heatedly, as to who's built the better mousetrap, Bill Gates or the folks over at Apple. But, my issue for today isn't about which platforms are better, Microsoft, Apple or whoever else, I'm only addressing what can be done simply because the platforms exists.
In my simple task for today I first worked with some graphics to create an eye-catching ad that can be printed on postcards or sent via email. It wasn't that long ago I'd have either needed to find an ad agency, graphic designer or maybe just someone who could print legibly. Today that's not needed at all.
Then I needed to have a high-quality mailer to send out. Well, simply by using a quality graphics program, top-line printer, quality stock and a paper cutter, I did all that work myself.
Now, who do you send the information too? Of course the hard part here is to access a database that's proven of value in the target market. And, in this case that already exists. But, even so, how do you compile, sort and select your specific targets. The answer is, by using particular criteria, then extracting what you want from the mass. Today, that can be accomplished in a few keystrokes (if you know which keys to stroke) instead of weeks of manual sorts, charts, graphs and meetings with specialists in focused marketing techniques. The point is, software exists that permits you to store, search, and apply data in almost any model, fashion or structure you want, and you can do it by yourself.
Thus, as I went through all the steps sitting alone at my desk, I got to thinking not only of the marvels of very basic software and applications, but, even for this fledgling enterprise how many folks I didn't need to hire or use at all. So, if you multiply this operation by however other businesses function the same way, due to technology, I'd not be surprised if the unemployment rolls stayed where they are even if the economy recovers.
I guess in the end, as far as the administration's concerned they'd better be planning to build lot's more bridges and roads, because even at Microsoft or Apple, I doubt they're looking for ways to replace sledgehammers, picks and shovels.
That's it for today folks
Adios
Now, I know people will argue, sometimes really heatedly, as to who's built the better mousetrap, Bill Gates or the folks over at Apple. But, my issue for today isn't about which platforms are better, Microsoft, Apple or whoever else, I'm only addressing what can be done simply because the platforms exists.
In my simple task for today I first worked with some graphics to create an eye-catching ad that can be printed on postcards or sent via email. It wasn't that long ago I'd have either needed to find an ad agency, graphic designer or maybe just someone who could print legibly. Today that's not needed at all.
Then I needed to have a high-quality mailer to send out. Well, simply by using a quality graphics program, top-line printer, quality stock and a paper cutter, I did all that work myself.
Now, who do you send the information too? Of course the hard part here is to access a database that's proven of value in the target market. And, in this case that already exists. But, even so, how do you compile, sort and select your specific targets. The answer is, by using particular criteria, then extracting what you want from the mass. Today, that can be accomplished in a few keystrokes (if you know which keys to stroke) instead of weeks of manual sorts, charts, graphs and meetings with specialists in focused marketing techniques. The point is, software exists that permits you to store, search, and apply data in almost any model, fashion or structure you want, and you can do it by yourself.
Thus, as I went through all the steps sitting alone at my desk, I got to thinking not only of the marvels of very basic software and applications, but, even for this fledgling enterprise how many folks I didn't need to hire or use at all. So, if you multiply this operation by however other businesses function the same way, due to technology, I'd not be surprised if the unemployment rolls stayed where they are even if the economy recovers.
I guess in the end, as far as the administration's concerned they'd better be planning to build lot's more bridges and roads, because even at Microsoft or Apple, I doubt they're looking for ways to replace sledgehammers, picks and shovels.
That's it for today folks
Adios
Friday, October 8, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/8/2010
The following blurb appeared in an article buried in today's news. "McDonalds got a break Thursday, as did the 351,000 members of the United Federation of Teachers, when the federal government gave waivers to high-profile companies and organizations letting them opt out of a key mandate in the new health care law."
The one-year waiver to 30 employers, insurers and union plans, covers about 1 million people, allowing the groups to maintain minimal coverage below the new law's standards. Administration officials say it's a means to protect lower wage workers wanting coverage and makes sure a new class of uninsured isn't created before other options are available.
But, this is just the tip of the iceberg. As Stuart Varney said the other day, as soon as any issue in the new law is challenged, others immediately become vulnerable leading to the whole ball of yarn eventually unravelling. So, now we have the first instance where the government's backed off and the floodgates have begun to crack. That means perhaps, the new congress won't have to tackle revising the health care fiasco, it might simply blow up by itself.
That's it for today folks
Adios
The one-year waiver to 30 employers, insurers and union plans, covers about 1 million people, allowing the groups to maintain minimal coverage below the new law's standards. Administration officials say it's a means to protect lower wage workers wanting coverage and makes sure a new class of uninsured isn't created before other options are available.
But, this is just the tip of the iceberg. As Stuart Varney said the other day, as soon as any issue in the new law is challenged, others immediately become vulnerable leading to the whole ball of yarn eventually unravelling. So, now we have the first instance where the government's backed off and the floodgates have begun to crack. That means perhaps, the new congress won't have to tackle revising the health care fiasco, it might simply blow up by itself.
That's it for today folks
Adios
Thursday, October 7, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/7/2010
There seems to be some kind of synergy with happenings in the world and my latest project. Because I've been buried trying to work out some kinks in a new marketing campaign that's eating up lots of time, but after checking my news sources, there's nothing worth blogging about. So, I haven't really missed anything at all.
I guess I could go on and type a few pages about how Trump would perform as president, but I don't think it's worth the keystrokes. Except, I do wonder about how the armed services will feel about wearing designer outfits, after their equipment's been plated in gold. And, I know that it's never been done before, but maybe the U.S. will be better off if the government simply defaults on all its debt and walks away just like he does, without a care or glance back. Beyond that, he'll have whole battalions of troops to hold the creditors off. Then again, he did have an air force of his own once, but that too, as they say...hit the silk.
Yet, if nothing else, there's still a consistency to those who run for office. Because it seems that politics lures all the losers, as our government continually proves. But, then again, most successful folks are too busy and pleased with their own productivity to run for office, so we always wind up with the dregs. Nonetheless, marines with long dyed-red hairdo's and new face-jobs might actually scare our enemies into submission.
That's it for today folks
Adios
I guess I could go on and type a few pages about how Trump would perform as president, but I don't think it's worth the keystrokes. Except, I do wonder about how the armed services will feel about wearing designer outfits, after their equipment's been plated in gold. And, I know that it's never been done before, but maybe the U.S. will be better off if the government simply defaults on all its debt and walks away just like he does, without a care or glance back. Beyond that, he'll have whole battalions of troops to hold the creditors off. Then again, he did have an air force of his own once, but that too, as they say...hit the silk.
Yet, if nothing else, there's still a consistency to those who run for office. Because it seems that politics lures all the losers, as our government continually proves. But, then again, most successful folks are too busy and pleased with their own productivity to run for office, so we always wind up with the dregs. Nonetheless, marines with long dyed-red hairdo's and new face-jobs might actually scare our enemies into submission.
That's it for today folks
Adios
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
BloggerRhythms 10/6/2010
I just went past a blurb headline saying something about candidates "blasting" each other in the various political campaigns. And that got me to thinking about why. Because, in today's day and age, who's watching or interested in anything any politicians saying, especially in a paid advertising spot?
I guess the real question is why do they advertise or campaign at all, because except for some number of hard core supporters or paid flacks, who'd listen to any politician? In all probability these clowns are either yelling down a well or talking to themselves.
Beyond the question of why do they bother advertising at all, I wonder whom they're aiming their propaganda at. I would think that it's highly likely that at this stage of the game and point in time, any serious voter has already made up their mind. And for those still open to persuasion, they must be living in some kind of plastic bubble or under a rock.
Aside from that, what negative things could be said about folks who are the dregs of the earth to begin with? And as far as campaign promises go, they've generally proven to be worth less than the hot air it takes to speak them, with the possible exception of the present incumbent. Because he's actually managed to enact a lot of the things he promised while campaigning and our ruined health care system and dramatic fall from worldwide economic superiority are just two evidences of his success. With any luck, he'll soon completely eliminate the middle class while driving the poor totally out of existence. That should happen just about the time our unemployment rate hits twenty percent.
I guess the bottom line is, as I've been suggesting for a while now, to have the best chance of winning in November pol's would be better off saying nothing at all. Because you can't break a promise you haven't made, you can't lie when you don't speak and you can't put your foot your mouth if it isn't open.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I guess the real question is why do they advertise or campaign at all, because except for some number of hard core supporters or paid flacks, who'd listen to any politician? In all probability these clowns are either yelling down a well or talking to themselves.
Beyond the question of why do they bother advertising at all, I wonder whom they're aiming their propaganda at. I would think that it's highly likely that at this stage of the game and point in time, any serious voter has already made up their mind. And for those still open to persuasion, they must be living in some kind of plastic bubble or under a rock.
Aside from that, what negative things could be said about folks who are the dregs of the earth to begin with? And as far as campaign promises go, they've generally proven to be worth less than the hot air it takes to speak them, with the possible exception of the present incumbent. Because he's actually managed to enact a lot of the things he promised while campaigning and our ruined health care system and dramatic fall from worldwide economic superiority are just two evidences of his success. With any luck, he'll soon completely eliminate the middle class while driving the poor totally out of existence. That should happen just about the time our unemployment rate hits twenty percent.
I guess the bottom line is, as I've been suggesting for a while now, to have the best chance of winning in November pol's would be better off saying nothing at all. Because you can't break a promise you haven't made, you can't lie when you don't speak and you can't put your foot your mouth if it isn't open.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/5/2010
When you look at the condition investors and businesses are in now, you have to think they'd do almost anything to see that the current administration is devoided of power, because if not, there's a reasonable chance they'll go broke altogether.
Then you look at the polls and they all indicate a huge swing away from incumbents, suggesting that after November 4th there'll likely be a move toward recovery.
So, what do these rocket scientists in business do when on the brink of actually seeing an economic turnaround and a chance to recapture some bucks? They start investing now, to get an edge on the curve. And by greedily grasping now, to perhaps make some dollars ahead of the crowd, they're driving the stock markets up. And because the election isn't to come for a few more weeks, who'll get credit for the uptick and spurt? Why, the incumbents of course. That means these turkeys in business have not only gone out and loaded their guns in hope of big game, they've stupidly aimed them right at themselves.
And speaking of stupid, I can't believe a blurb I just read. But it seems Donald Trump is mumbling about running for president. He claims he's a Republican, and said "I'm totally being serious because I can't stand what's happening to the country. First time I am being serious about it. I've been asked for years to do it. And I had no interest. This is the first time I am -- at least I'm considering it. That doesn't say I'm going to do it ... but I am seriously considering it."
Now, of course, this is Trump himself who delivered the news, so you just have to wonder why he'd propose an idea as far fetched as that. And, since it's him, there must be an angle and some kind of hook here that will help him get out of debt. Because when you've failed as many times as he has, and in so many different businesses he can't possibly have a quarter that isn't encumbered. It's also likely the banks own every asset he's ever touched, up to and including his jockey shorts.
But, this is still America, the home of the free and the brave. So that means that if Trump's brave enough to run he can mount a campaign. What's more he can probably advertise too, as long as it's free...because otherwise how else can he afford it?
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Then you look at the polls and they all indicate a huge swing away from incumbents, suggesting that after November 4th there'll likely be a move toward recovery.
So, what do these rocket scientists in business do when on the brink of actually seeing an economic turnaround and a chance to recapture some bucks? They start investing now, to get an edge on the curve. And by greedily grasping now, to perhaps make some dollars ahead of the crowd, they're driving the stock markets up. And because the election isn't to come for a few more weeks, who'll get credit for the uptick and spurt? Why, the incumbents of course. That means these turkeys in business have not only gone out and loaded their guns in hope of big game, they've stupidly aimed them right at themselves.
And speaking of stupid, I can't believe a blurb I just read. But it seems Donald Trump is mumbling about running for president. He claims he's a Republican, and said "I'm totally being serious because I can't stand what's happening to the country. First time I am being serious about it. I've been asked for years to do it. And I had no interest. This is the first time I am -- at least I'm considering it. That doesn't say I'm going to do it ... but I am seriously considering it."
Now, of course, this is Trump himself who delivered the news, so you just have to wonder why he'd propose an idea as far fetched as that. And, since it's him, there must be an angle and some kind of hook here that will help him get out of debt. Because when you've failed as many times as he has, and in so many different businesses he can't possibly have a quarter that isn't encumbered. It's also likely the banks own every asset he's ever touched, up to and including his jockey shorts.
But, this is still America, the home of the free and the brave. So that means that if Trump's brave enough to run he can mount a campaign. What's more he can probably advertise too, as long as it's free...because otherwise how else can he afford it?
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, October 4, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/4/2010
Ho-hum, the Ryder Cup's over and Europe won. So what? I've never understood the purpose of the event, and still don't. Especially from a fan's perspective, and especially at this time in golf. TV and a fifty-two week year roster of tournaments give all top golfers huge exposure, and it seems to me that they pick up fans regardless of the player's nationality.
I also realize that team golf is played in schools, and that many top players learned the game and about competition while in college, but the PGA isn't about team golf and the pro tour certainly isn't either. Pro competition is stroke play and every one of those guys plays only for themselves every week. So, you put them in a team tournament like the Ryder Cup and they're not only playing in a foreign country, they're playing a game that's foreign to them too.
In terms of the players themselves, I'm a big fan of Lee Westwood's. He's English, but that doesn't matter to me, except when he played Steve Stricker a real favorite of mine. Thus, I was happy that Westwood did so well, regardless of nationality. I'm also a fan of Padraig Harrington, so I root for him too, no matter he's from the other side.
Similarly, there are players like Jim Furyk who plays painstakingly slow, has no personality and likely needs a mirror under his nose to prove he's still breathing, I was never a fan of his, don't care who beats him at all, just hope they play fast. Then there's Phil Mickelson who'd win every tournament he enters if he could learn how to putt consistently under pressure, especially from two or three feet. But, if he can't even putt for himself, who'd expect him to help a team just because it's the Ryder Cup? Pressure putting doesn't work like that.
I really don't want to mention Ian Poulter because he's a loudmouthed legend in his own mind who, if he lived to be two thousand, would never become the player he thinks and claims he is. In his case he could play for the U.S. instead of Europe and I'd still root for his opponent to win. Of course, I'm really not sure what shape his game's in because when the camera's on him I flip to an alternate channel.
Lastly, there's Luke Donald, originally from England. He won a golf scholarship at Northwestern University in 1997, studied art theory and practice, and became a member of the Sigma Chi fraternity. In 1999 he won the individual NCAA Division I Men's Golf Championships title, beating the scoring record formerly held by Tiger Woods. He has homes in Northfield, Illinois and Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. So, although he now plays all over the globe as most pro's do, he really lives here in the U.S., yet he plays Ryder Cup golf for Europe. Well, if Europe's that important to him, I think he should move back. In fact, he wouldn't even have to say "please," and I'd help him pack.
In closing, I can't say I ignored the matches because I did watch here and there when I wasn't involved in football games, or awoke in the early hours. But having played the game fervently for many, many years and seen countless numbers of tournaments to boot, maybe it's me, but I just don't understand what all the Ryder Cup hype and smoke is about.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
I also realize that team golf is played in schools, and that many top players learned the game and about competition while in college, but the PGA isn't about team golf and the pro tour certainly isn't either. Pro competition is stroke play and every one of those guys plays only for themselves every week. So, you put them in a team tournament like the Ryder Cup and they're not only playing in a foreign country, they're playing a game that's foreign to them too.
In terms of the players themselves, I'm a big fan of Lee Westwood's. He's English, but that doesn't matter to me, except when he played Steve Stricker a real favorite of mine. Thus, I was happy that Westwood did so well, regardless of nationality. I'm also a fan of Padraig Harrington, so I root for him too, no matter he's from the other side.
Similarly, there are players like Jim Furyk who plays painstakingly slow, has no personality and likely needs a mirror under his nose to prove he's still breathing, I was never a fan of his, don't care who beats him at all, just hope they play fast. Then there's Phil Mickelson who'd win every tournament he enters if he could learn how to putt consistently under pressure, especially from two or three feet. But, if he can't even putt for himself, who'd expect him to help a team just because it's the Ryder Cup? Pressure putting doesn't work like that.
I really don't want to mention Ian Poulter because he's a loudmouthed legend in his own mind who, if he lived to be two thousand, would never become the player he thinks and claims he is. In his case he could play for the U.S. instead of Europe and I'd still root for his opponent to win. Of course, I'm really not sure what shape his game's in because when the camera's on him I flip to an alternate channel.
Lastly, there's Luke Donald, originally from England. He won a golf scholarship at Northwestern University in 1997, studied art theory and practice, and became a member of the Sigma Chi fraternity. In 1999 he won the individual NCAA Division I Men's Golf Championships title, beating the scoring record formerly held by Tiger Woods. He has homes in Northfield, Illinois and Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. So, although he now plays all over the globe as most pro's do, he really lives here in the U.S., yet he plays Ryder Cup golf for Europe. Well, if Europe's that important to him, I think he should move back. In fact, he wouldn't even have to say "please," and I'd help him pack.
In closing, I can't say I ignored the matches because I did watch here and there when I wasn't involved in football games, or awoke in the early hours. But having played the game fervently for many, many years and seen countless numbers of tournaments to boot, maybe it's me, but I just don't understand what all the Ryder Cup hype and smoke is about.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, October 3, 2010
BloggeRhythms 10/3/2010
Big win for Gang Green. But it was against the Bills which is like topping a high school practice squad, so let's forget about it and move on. Because if Marv Levy and Jim Kelly were still around, the score would have been reversed. Then next week they face Nanette Favre at home at night. Let's hope Nanette's night vision suffers due to old age, or else the Jetski's might have some problems.
Everything else on the newsfront is more boring than watching a Volkswagen rust, so there's nothing to comment on. Except that Rahm Emanuel confirmed that he'll run for the mayoralty of Chicago. That must really be a great place to live. Al Capone, Sam Giancana, the Daley's and now Rahm Emanuel. Oops, I almost forgot...the Right Reverend Right and his protege who never listened in church.
When younger, I spent considerable time working on the New Jersey waterfront and then in and around Newark. Back then, I thought the stories I heard about how corrupt their political systems were, were almost beyond belief. Yet, I clearly remember the local policicos walking along the truck loading docks and deep water piers handing out envelopes of cash to the union employees, buying votes. And I also remember Jersey City's mayor being re-elected while behind bars serving time.
Today though, politicians make those Jersey guys look like amateurs and minor leaguers when it comes to worthlessness, deception, fraud and lies. And if today's sleazy slime buckets work just a bit harder, they might even reach the levels of despicability set by the Kennedy's and Clinton's.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Everything else on the newsfront is more boring than watching a Volkswagen rust, so there's nothing to comment on. Except that Rahm Emanuel confirmed that he'll run for the mayoralty of Chicago. That must really be a great place to live. Al Capone, Sam Giancana, the Daley's and now Rahm Emanuel. Oops, I almost forgot...the Right Reverend Right and his protege who never listened in church.
When younger, I spent considerable time working on the New Jersey waterfront and then in and around Newark. Back then, I thought the stories I heard about how corrupt their political systems were, were almost beyond belief. Yet, I clearly remember the local policicos walking along the truck loading docks and deep water piers handing out envelopes of cash to the union employees, buying votes. And I also remember Jersey City's mayor being re-elected while behind bars serving time.
Today though, politicians make those Jersey guys look like amateurs and minor leaguers when it comes to worthlessness, deception, fraud and lies. And if today's sleazy slime buckets work just a bit harder, they might even reach the levels of despicability set by the Kennedy's and Clinton's.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, October 2, 2010
BloggeRhythms 9/2/2010
There's some seemingly good news for Democrats. I didn't know a thing about Rahm Emanuel, now former White House Chief of Staff, so when I heard he was resigning, I looked him up. And, from what I can gather, this guy was a know-nothing power behind the throne and gave the president direction. Consequently, we wound up with the worst administration since Jimmy Carter.
So, since Emanuels on his way out to try to screw up Chicago by running for mayor, the president has a chance to bring in someone with some idea of how this country really works, what it needs to get back on track and isn't another mis-guided clown.
A good start might be to listen to Jack Welch, former chairman of GE who said this morning that the administration came in with a shopping list of social issues to focus upon, and ignored business issues completely, except for tax increases, penalties and assorted stumbling blocks that have stalled the economy completely and driven the unemployment rate to almost 10 percent.
I mention this because it's been my belief that there's no one in the administration that knows anything about business at all, and if they do, they keep still because they'd be unemployed in a heartbeat should they bring it up. And because of that mentality, or lack thereof, we're in the quagmire we're in.
Basically, these administration folks have the picture upside down. Their primary focus is to spend and spend on non-productive, costly projects while simultaneously penalizing or obstructing the sources of funds. They've done this to the point where the largest businesses continue to horde cash because they fear losing any new investment to taxation or other non-productive drains.
Worse yet, businesses are so fearful of hiring people they're not sure they can afford under present conditions, they've upgraded and increased automation to a point where they may never have to hire those folks again.
Thus, in a nutshell, the administrations lost or given away every golden egg the country possessed, borrowed trillions more and is still trying its hardest to not only kill the goose, but make absolutely sure it will never quack again.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
So, since Emanuels on his way out to try to screw up Chicago by running for mayor, the president has a chance to bring in someone with some idea of how this country really works, what it needs to get back on track and isn't another mis-guided clown.
A good start might be to listen to Jack Welch, former chairman of GE who said this morning that the administration came in with a shopping list of social issues to focus upon, and ignored business issues completely, except for tax increases, penalties and assorted stumbling blocks that have stalled the economy completely and driven the unemployment rate to almost 10 percent.
I mention this because it's been my belief that there's no one in the administration that knows anything about business at all, and if they do, they keep still because they'd be unemployed in a heartbeat should they bring it up. And because of that mentality, or lack thereof, we're in the quagmire we're in.
Basically, these administration folks have the picture upside down. Their primary focus is to spend and spend on non-productive, costly projects while simultaneously penalizing or obstructing the sources of funds. They've done this to the point where the largest businesses continue to horde cash because they fear losing any new investment to taxation or other non-productive drains.
Worse yet, businesses are so fearful of hiring people they're not sure they can afford under present conditions, they've upgraded and increased automation to a point where they may never have to hire those folks again.
Thus, in a nutshell, the administrations lost or given away every golden egg the country possessed, borrowed trillions more and is still trying its hardest to not only kill the goose, but make absolutely sure it will never quack again.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, October 1, 2010
BloggerRhythms 10/1/2010
Yesterday I mentioned that McDonalds Corporation was likely to cancel its health care plan for employees because the new law made it too expensive and unwieldy to keep. Then, this morning, I see that the regulatory powers are now willing to permit a change that would allow McDonalds and many similar employers to prevent 1.4 million employees from losing all of their coverage. I also couldn't help but notice the strong physical resemblance between Ronald McDonald and most of the members of Congress.
But, as Stuart Varney pointed out today, it really doesn't matter which parts of this ridiculous new legislation are amended at present, the important point is that the legislators quickly acquiesced when challenged. That means, point by point, issue by issue, the whole ridiculous health care revision will certainly unravel, today's surrender merely the first string yanked from the ball of yarn.
This means that maybe the Republicans, or whoever prevails after the nuclear conflagration in Congress from November's elections, can go back to the health care drawing board and attack the really costly issues, such as blowing out ambulance chasing lawyers via tort reform, and eliminating any kind of medical coverage at all for illegal aliens.
And, the more I write this stuff, the more I realize how low our elected officials have sunk...readily selling out the productive folks who really make this country great in order to gain economically via lobbyists and to hope to buy votes from those who are, or support, illegals abusing our laws.
Then, of course, Nancy Pelosi came up with the reason that major corporations and anyone else being ripped off or financially harmed by the new legislation is opposed to the changes. Obviously, she says, these folks area all racists, because while never having read any of the bills or knowing what's in them at all, shes absolutely certain they're good for the country, so why else would anyone object?
In the same vein, John Kerry was heard from. He's the guy who tried to undermine the nation's military during his failed run for the presidency, has never held a real job in his life and has survived by sponging off two immensely wealthy women. So, basically all that parasite really is, is a gigolo and a half. But, anyway, his comment about why Americans are upset with Congress is because the voters are all stupid.
So, when it comes to arrogance and elitism these incumbents really take the cake. We have this bimbette who's dumber than a tree stump allied with a sleaze who lives off other's assets, calling the folks who really make the country run economically, racist morons. Thus, I guess all told, we'd all really be better off if we voted to change the calendar to include three or four Novembers a year.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
But, as Stuart Varney pointed out today, it really doesn't matter which parts of this ridiculous new legislation are amended at present, the important point is that the legislators quickly acquiesced when challenged. That means, point by point, issue by issue, the whole ridiculous health care revision will certainly unravel, today's surrender merely the first string yanked from the ball of yarn.
This means that maybe the Republicans, or whoever prevails after the nuclear conflagration in Congress from November's elections, can go back to the health care drawing board and attack the really costly issues, such as blowing out ambulance chasing lawyers via tort reform, and eliminating any kind of medical coverage at all for illegal aliens.
And, the more I write this stuff, the more I realize how low our elected officials have sunk...readily selling out the productive folks who really make this country great in order to gain economically via lobbyists and to hope to buy votes from those who are, or support, illegals abusing our laws.
Then, of course, Nancy Pelosi came up with the reason that major corporations and anyone else being ripped off or financially harmed by the new legislation is opposed to the changes. Obviously, she says, these folks area all racists, because while never having read any of the bills or knowing what's in them at all, shes absolutely certain they're good for the country, so why else would anyone object?
In the same vein, John Kerry was heard from. He's the guy who tried to undermine the nation's military during his failed run for the presidency, has never held a real job in his life and has survived by sponging off two immensely wealthy women. So, basically all that parasite really is, is a gigolo and a half. But, anyway, his comment about why Americans are upset with Congress is because the voters are all stupid.
So, when it comes to arrogance and elitism these incumbents really take the cake. We have this bimbette who's dumber than a tree stump allied with a sleaze who lives off other's assets, calling the folks who really make the country run economically, racist morons. Thus, I guess all told, we'd all really be better off if we voted to change the calendar to include three or four Novembers a year.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)