I've been told that my recent referrals to the "Blabberer-In Chief" and other such tags aren't befitting of my entries and beneath my usual commentary standards, and it's suggested I do a more dignified job of making my point. So, I'll try my best in the future vocabulary-wise, although I really do think that "blabber" in all its various forms accurately describes the only ability possessed by the present principal occupant of the White House.
Aside from that, it seems the debt crisis soap opera is almost over and everyone who was actually worried can now breathe a bit more freely. And it looks like the only point that really concerned the Democrats has been resolved. Because from the start, despite all their bluster and senseless noise, all they really cared about was not having to face the debt issue again right before the upcoming presidential election. So, in exchange for extending the time-frame beyond that date they'd likely agree to anything.
I also think that behind closed doors other important, but quite private, Democrat issues were discussed, agreed to and assumedly resolved. For example, in most of the legislation rammed through in the last four years by their party, regarding such issues as health care, education, restructure of the NLRB, border defense, immigration and other major headings, virtually none of the party leaders ever read any of the documentation before passage. Nonetheless, folks like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer assured the public that all was fine in the bills despite never having seen them.
So, this time around, and considering that the language of the new law is critically important to them, it's likely that the Democrat leadership is insisting that the verbiage be drafted in crayon, using only small words and block printing on very large sheets of Kraft paper as used in first grade. Because if it isn't done that way, none of the Dem's at the top will be able to read it. And, even worse beyond that, it's still highly unlikely that any of them will be able to understand it.
That's it for today folks
Adios
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Saturday, July 30, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/30/2011
If you want to get a handle on how things are really going in high-profile situations, it often helps to look for clues outside the mainstream flow of information. And that seems to be true right now in the debt extension stand-off.
Because, apparently the Blabberer-in-Chief and his campaign staff came up with a brilliant idea to put pressure on the GOP by sending out tweets showing the Twitter handles of Congressional Republicans. The goal was to pressure the opposing politicians to give in on the debt crisis. The tweets said things for example like: "If you live in Missouri, ask@RoyBlunt to support a bipartisan compromise to the debt crisis."
However, the ploy seems to have backfired a bit. Because as of this morning approximately 37,000 O'bama supporters cancelled their O'bama Twitter account, most of them saying they were tired of being pestered, and fed up with the handling of the entire issue. Beyond that, 6,500 or so moved over to the Republican side of the issue altogether.
Aside from that, in the last two weeks or so the Blabberer's approval rating has dropped like a rock and at the moment, according to Gallup, stands at 40%, an all-time low.
As far as I'm concerned, though, what all of this illustrates is the fact that the voting public is completely fed up with how the nation's issues and problems have been politicized by the current administration. At the same time, they've now all seen the disastrous affects of socialism and have had enough. Which all leads to the fact that almost any opposition would likely win the next election in a monumental landslide.
So, it's really pretty tragic that Republicans can't come up with anything more than recycled losers and newbies who know absolutely nothing about real national governance, because the doors wide open for them. However, it's highly likely that their current crew of potential candidates is going to slam it on their hapless selves.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Because, apparently the Blabberer-in-Chief and his campaign staff came up with a brilliant idea to put pressure on the GOP by sending out tweets showing the Twitter handles of Congressional Republicans. The goal was to pressure the opposing politicians to give in on the debt crisis. The tweets said things for example like: "If you live in Missouri, ask@RoyBlunt to support a bipartisan compromise to the debt crisis."
However, the ploy seems to have backfired a bit. Because as of this morning approximately 37,000 O'bama supporters cancelled their O'bama Twitter account, most of them saying they were tired of being pestered, and fed up with the handling of the entire issue. Beyond that, 6,500 or so moved over to the Republican side of the issue altogether.
Aside from that, in the last two weeks or so the Blabberer's approval rating has dropped like a rock and at the moment, according to Gallup, stands at 40%, an all-time low.
As far as I'm concerned, though, what all of this illustrates is the fact that the voting public is completely fed up with how the nation's issues and problems have been politicized by the current administration. At the same time, they've now all seen the disastrous affects of socialism and have had enough. Which all leads to the fact that almost any opposition would likely win the next election in a monumental landslide.
So, it's really pretty tragic that Republicans can't come up with anything more than recycled losers and newbies who know absolutely nothing about real national governance, because the doors wide open for them. However, it's highly likely that their current crew of potential candidates is going to slam it on their hapless selves.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, July 29, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/29/2011
I sat down to type today's entry because in about two minutes Captain Blabbermouth's going back on the air to deliver one of today's meaningless ramblings and I simply prefer to be in another room when he's on. However, I'm sure he'll drone on about how the debt crisis we're in was caused by George Bush and that he himself couldn't possibly be at fault because he's done nothing wrong at all. And, that statement would actually be true because as far as the debt issue goes, he's done absolutely zip one way or the other. He just hides in his room.
But aside from the fact that the nation presently has no leader, there's something else I don't understand at the moment, and that's this whole Tea Party backlash where pundits are claiming that they're the stumbling block that's stymieing negotiations. The critics consensus seems to be that by forcing a Congressional stand-off, Tea Partiers have already made their point and now they ought to back off and let a workable compromise happen.
However, I believe that the Tea Party representatives are doing what they were elected to accomplish, whether or not their premise is correct in anyone else's opinion. And that means they're supposed to stand their ground to the end because that's what their supporters desire. So, to that extent, the debt issue has nothing to with business as it's usually done in DC, it's much more about bucking the system.
And in the end, regardless of how much impact these renegades have already had, and no matter that they've gotten everyone's attention, if they back down now before they've taken every step they can to put a cap on the nation's debt, they've failed on the mission for which they were elected to begin with by their constituents.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
But aside from the fact that the nation presently has no leader, there's something else I don't understand at the moment, and that's this whole Tea Party backlash where pundits are claiming that they're the stumbling block that's stymieing negotiations. The critics consensus seems to be that by forcing a Congressional stand-off, Tea Partiers have already made their point and now they ought to back off and let a workable compromise happen.
However, I believe that the Tea Party representatives are doing what they were elected to accomplish, whether or not their premise is correct in anyone else's opinion. And that means they're supposed to stand their ground to the end because that's what their supporters desire. So, to that extent, the debt issue has nothing to with business as it's usually done in DC, it's much more about bucking the system.
And in the end, regardless of how much impact these renegades have already had, and no matter that they've gotten everyone's attention, if they back down now before they've taken every step they can to put a cap on the nation's debt, they've failed on the mission for which they were elected to begin with by their constituents.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, July 28, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/28/2011
Having spent most of my career in the commercial financing business, the things I see going on in the debt situation drive me bats. Because we have all these politicos chasing themselves in circles, while almost none seriously face the issues. And whether their reasons for failing to solve the problems are due to ignorance, self-serviance or pure politics itself doesn't really matter, because the public's paying dearly for their miserable performance which will likely get even worse.
From my perspective, I don't think you have to know very much about how financing really works to grasp almost any debt situation, because no matter how sophisticated loans and borrowings seem to be, they're all actually pretty simple. Because, as far as lenders go the only thing they really need to know about borrowers is: How are they going to get paid back?
Consequently, before any knowledgeable lender ever lends a dime, they'll require enough information that proves the borrower can repay the loan. And ordinarily, the repayment funds should be readily and regularly attainable from the borrower's funds when they're due in the future.
Since that's generally the case, new businesses, young enterprises and most operations not earning profits have a very difficult time borrowing money, because they can't always prove that they can readily handle loan obligations. And as far as most lenders go, all they want is to collect what they're owed in a timely and orderly fashion, without having to go through the pains, trials and tribulations of problem collections.
Beyond that, knowledgeable lenders understand that loan payment funds should derive from a businesses' day to day operation, not from equity, investment or other types of assets. Because sooner or later just about any entity living on the liquidation or sale of assets will eventually exhaust them all and likely have no way to replace them. Consequently, the key to healthy businesses regarding solid lending arrangements is the businesses' ability to consistently run profitably.
And that's where the government's present situation seems directly comparable to commercial business loans. Because the current administration cannot demonstrate an ability to pay back its exiting obligations from income received, and cannot demonstrate valid expectation of improvement any time soon, if at all, because its strangled businesses to the extent that they can't, or won't, contribute. Therefore, with nowhere else to turn, government now seeks to take more from those who produce wealth and borrow the rest.
But, let's say government actually achieves a higher debt limit and squeezes more funds from the "rich." At best, that's only a temporary solution. Because as they continue to borrow, while the economy stagnates even further, lessening government's income even more, what will they do next time around?
So, since government currently looks and performs like a failing business and has no plan to correct the problem at all, what lender in their right mind would lend it another quarter? The answer is: none.
Consequently, the nation doesn't need another nickel in debt at all to fix the current fiscal problem. Instead what's required is a management that knows what its doing, a viable business plan, and a reduction of existing debt until the country pays out less in borrowing costs than the amount it takes in.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
From my perspective, I don't think you have to know very much about how financing really works to grasp almost any debt situation, because no matter how sophisticated loans and borrowings seem to be, they're all actually pretty simple. Because, as far as lenders go the only thing they really need to know about borrowers is: How are they going to get paid back?
Consequently, before any knowledgeable lender ever lends a dime, they'll require enough information that proves the borrower can repay the loan. And ordinarily, the repayment funds should be readily and regularly attainable from the borrower's funds when they're due in the future.
Since that's generally the case, new businesses, young enterprises and most operations not earning profits have a very difficult time borrowing money, because they can't always prove that they can readily handle loan obligations. And as far as most lenders go, all they want is to collect what they're owed in a timely and orderly fashion, without having to go through the pains, trials and tribulations of problem collections.
Beyond that, knowledgeable lenders understand that loan payment funds should derive from a businesses' day to day operation, not from equity, investment or other types of assets. Because sooner or later just about any entity living on the liquidation or sale of assets will eventually exhaust them all and likely have no way to replace them. Consequently, the key to healthy businesses regarding solid lending arrangements is the businesses' ability to consistently run profitably.
And that's where the government's present situation seems directly comparable to commercial business loans. Because the current administration cannot demonstrate an ability to pay back its exiting obligations from income received, and cannot demonstrate valid expectation of improvement any time soon, if at all, because its strangled businesses to the extent that they can't, or won't, contribute. Therefore, with nowhere else to turn, government now seeks to take more from those who produce wealth and borrow the rest.
But, let's say government actually achieves a higher debt limit and squeezes more funds from the "rich." At best, that's only a temporary solution. Because as they continue to borrow, while the economy stagnates even further, lessening government's income even more, what will they do next time around?
So, since government currently looks and performs like a failing business and has no plan to correct the problem at all, what lender in their right mind would lend it another quarter? The answer is: none.
Consequently, the nation doesn't need another nickel in debt at all to fix the current fiscal problem. Instead what's required is a management that knows what its doing, a viable business plan, and a reduction of existing debt until the country pays out less in borrowing costs than the amount it takes in.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
bloggeRhythms 7/27/2011
In any strategic battle, it's critically important to understand what an opponent's goal is. Because, unless, and until, you understand what your enemy's trying to accomplish, you can't properly defend yourself, and worse...you can't figure out how to win. And that may be precisely why Republicans are having such a hard time in reaching an agreement on the debt limit.
Because it may be that the Republicans are focusing themselves solely on seeking a middle-ground in negotiations with the president, wherein each side may not get exactly what it wants but both can live with the solution. However, the debt ceiling itself may not be the president's only goal.
For example, it's taken a while for the markets to react to the fact that negotiations keep breaking down. To now, they've taken all that in stride simply because some sort of problems are expected along the way. But since in the end, they expect a satisfactory solution, business goes on as usual.
However, in this case rational conclusions aren't being reached. And each time a "deal" gets close, the president changes the rules. And that's why it occurred to me that these "negotiations" likely aren't negotiations at all but simply a front. Because, the closer we get to the deadline of August 2nd without a solution, whether that date is valid or not, the more likely it becomes that the nation will default on its debt.
And if a default occurs, the stock markets will likely take a huge negative hit, the nation's credit rating will downgrade and the economy will strangle considerably more. All of those occurrences will further weaken the nation, financially harm the "rich" and bring the "haves" considerably closer to the have not's.
So, this all may simply be a presidential ploy to further socialize the country and satisfy his hard-core base who want to see the nation's economy totally destroyed. However, the plot may go even go deeper than that because, when countless American assets devalue even further, some oil rich pal of the president in Brazil may be able to buy lot's of them up on the cheap which is probably why Soros bought the last election in the first place.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Because it may be that the Republicans are focusing themselves solely on seeking a middle-ground in negotiations with the president, wherein each side may not get exactly what it wants but both can live with the solution. However, the debt ceiling itself may not be the president's only goal.
For example, it's taken a while for the markets to react to the fact that negotiations keep breaking down. To now, they've taken all that in stride simply because some sort of problems are expected along the way. But since in the end, they expect a satisfactory solution, business goes on as usual.
However, in this case rational conclusions aren't being reached. And each time a "deal" gets close, the president changes the rules. And that's why it occurred to me that these "negotiations" likely aren't negotiations at all but simply a front. Because, the closer we get to the deadline of August 2nd without a solution, whether that date is valid or not, the more likely it becomes that the nation will default on its debt.
And if a default occurs, the stock markets will likely take a huge negative hit, the nation's credit rating will downgrade and the economy will strangle considerably more. All of those occurrences will further weaken the nation, financially harm the "rich" and bring the "haves" considerably closer to the have not's.
So, this all may simply be a presidential ploy to further socialize the country and satisfy his hard-core base who want to see the nation's economy totally destroyed. However, the plot may go even go deeper than that because, when countless American assets devalue even further, some oil rich pal of the president in Brazil may be able to buy lot's of them up on the cheap which is probably why Soros bought the last election in the first place.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/26/2011
With each passing day, I become more convinced that the voting public is much more tuned in and aware of what DC does than ever before. I'm also very much more certain that, for whatever reason, Republicans and Independents are less likely to blindly follow political leaders than Democrats. And that's why I think that most of the time when making his hourly speeches, the president's talking to a group of hard-core, already sold, constituents and may as well blabber to himself, because nobody else is listening.
But since I have to keep up with this stuff to draft my daily entries, although I don't actually listen to politicos, I do read their words in the press. And today's item refers back to something I've mentioned before, but it keeps coming up so I'll say it again.
I've noted often lately that those far to the left have a seeming financial death-wish for their own nation. And they don't appear willing to relent at all, regardless of the huge damage already done by their leader, especially regarding their desire for increases in taxes on the so-called "rich."
To that extent, the president said again yesterday that the rich would have to pay more as their "fair share," and that's where I get confused. Because as I mentioned a week or two ago, "As of right now, the top 1% of taxpayers earn 19% of all income, but pay 37% of federal income taxes and the top 10% pay 68% of those taxes as a group. At the other extreme, the bottom 50% of the spectrum earn below the median income level, amounting to 13% of total income while paying only 3% of the tax."
So, my question for today about the "rich" is: When you're already paying almost all the taxes now, and half the nation pays virtually nothing at all, how much more is needed from you to be fair?
Fortunately for the "rich", the one's responsible for paying the nation's bills, the clock continues to click and November '12's getting closer every day. And the way things are likely to shape up then, they'll finally get some help from voters, especially the ones who understand how economic survival works.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
But since I have to keep up with this stuff to draft my daily entries, although I don't actually listen to politicos, I do read their words in the press. And today's item refers back to something I've mentioned before, but it keeps coming up so I'll say it again.
I've noted often lately that those far to the left have a seeming financial death-wish for their own nation. And they don't appear willing to relent at all, regardless of the huge damage already done by their leader, especially regarding their desire for increases in taxes on the so-called "rich."
To that extent, the president said again yesterday that the rich would have to pay more as their "fair share," and that's where I get confused. Because as I mentioned a week or two ago, "As of right now, the top 1% of taxpayers earn 19% of all income, but pay 37% of federal income taxes and the top 10% pay 68% of those taxes as a group. At the other extreme, the bottom 50% of the spectrum earn below the median income level, amounting to 13% of total income while paying only 3% of the tax."
So, my question for today about the "rich" is: When you're already paying almost all the taxes now, and half the nation pays virtually nothing at all, how much more is needed from you to be fair?
Fortunately for the "rich", the one's responsible for paying the nation's bills, the clock continues to click and November '12's getting closer every day. And the way things are likely to shape up then, they'll finally get some help from voters, especially the ones who understand how economic survival works.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, July 25, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/25/2011
I ran across a blurb in the news I had to read several times before I believed what I'd seen, but it turned out that I'd indeed seen an accurate quote from a Democrat politician.
The Fox News blurb said, "Vermont Senator, Bernie Sanders, said in a radio interview that he's thinking about trying to encourage somebody to run against President Obama in a primary election, claiming the president has drifted toward Republican positions because "no one will stand up to him."
Now, I've got to believe that someone who thinks that the president's absolute refusal to consider any deal that doesn't include tax hikes on the rich, doesn't specify cuts to spending programs and his reneging on adjustments to social security and medicare is moving to the right needs to be committed to some kind of institution for the terminally stupid.
This guy, whoever he is, has also seen the president break the economy's back, kill the job market and do horrendous economic damage to anyone who's successful. Beyond that, he's driven fuel costs on a continuing upward spiral by shutting off new drilling, made us dependent on foreign oil, ruined the best health care system in the world, and forced most major corporations to invest overseas for growth and caused them to refuse to spend any more than they must into the economy here.
What's more, thanks to presidential pressure, the combined un and under employment presently totals about twenty percent of the workforce and almost no economists expect that number to greatly reduce anytime soon.
So, what is it exactly that this evidently deranged Senator wants? Are we supposed to deteriorate further until we become a third world nation? Should we make prosperity a criminal offense? And who is it that gets anything good when a nation fails economically? I just don't understand the goal. Because I simply can't figure out why anyone would worship failure.
But, back to the point. If this guy's seriously looking for someone who's to the left of the president, I think he'll have a pretty tough time in his search. Because I just looked up Karl Marx, who's the only one I can think of who meets the standard, but I found out he's been dead since 1883.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
The Fox News blurb said, "Vermont Senator, Bernie Sanders, said in a radio interview that he's thinking about trying to encourage somebody to run against President Obama in a primary election, claiming the president has drifted toward Republican positions because "no one will stand up to him."
Now, I've got to believe that someone who thinks that the president's absolute refusal to consider any deal that doesn't include tax hikes on the rich, doesn't specify cuts to spending programs and his reneging on adjustments to social security and medicare is moving to the right needs to be committed to some kind of institution for the terminally stupid.
This guy, whoever he is, has also seen the president break the economy's back, kill the job market and do horrendous economic damage to anyone who's successful. Beyond that, he's driven fuel costs on a continuing upward spiral by shutting off new drilling, made us dependent on foreign oil, ruined the best health care system in the world, and forced most major corporations to invest overseas for growth and caused them to refuse to spend any more than they must into the economy here.
What's more, thanks to presidential pressure, the combined un and under employment presently totals about twenty percent of the workforce and almost no economists expect that number to greatly reduce anytime soon.
So, what is it exactly that this evidently deranged Senator wants? Are we supposed to deteriorate further until we become a third world nation? Should we make prosperity a criminal offense? And who is it that gets anything good when a nation fails economically? I just don't understand the goal. Because I simply can't figure out why anyone would worship failure.
But, back to the point. If this guy's seriously looking for someone who's to the left of the president, I think he'll have a pretty tough time in his search. Because I just looked up Karl Marx, who's the only one I can think of who meets the standard, but I found out he's been dead since 1883.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, July 24, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/24/2011
Like most folks for the past few weeks, I've been watching this debt ceiling situation play out. And I simply don't see how a mutually satisfactory solution can be reached. Because both sides have mandates from their constituents, and those mandates are diametrically opposed.
One side says cap government borrowing, cut spending, and don't add a dime in taxes while the opposition says borrow as much as possible and take more funds from the "rich."
Now, my point for today is, it doesn't matter which side is right or wrong as far as the debate goes, the only thing that counts is...the issue remains unresolved because there's no room for negotiation. And that's exactly how it should be.
Voters who sent representatives into government on their behalf have a right to expect that those elected stand firm behind their principles and not give in. And since that's the case, the facts should speak for themselves. That's why there should be no negotiation and no compromise. Then, when everyone sees the results we'll all know who was right or wrong without doubt.
That's why the best resolution for the ongoing argument is to simply stop and let the clock run out on August 2nd. That's what the majority of incumbents want, and that's what they should get. And then, on August 3rd, we can start to figure out what to do with whatever's left of the nation.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
One side says cap government borrowing, cut spending, and don't add a dime in taxes while the opposition says borrow as much as possible and take more funds from the "rich."
Now, my point for today is, it doesn't matter which side is right or wrong as far as the debate goes, the only thing that counts is...the issue remains unresolved because there's no room for negotiation. And that's exactly how it should be.
Voters who sent representatives into government on their behalf have a right to expect that those elected stand firm behind their principles and not give in. And since that's the case, the facts should speak for themselves. That's why there should be no negotiation and no compromise. Then, when everyone sees the results we'll all know who was right or wrong without doubt.
That's why the best resolution for the ongoing argument is to simply stop and let the clock run out on August 2nd. That's what the majority of incumbents want, and that's what they should get. And then, on August 3rd, we can start to figure out what to do with whatever's left of the nation.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, July 23, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/23/2011
Thanks to the president's disdain for average Americans, whom he believes aren't very bright, along with his continued practice of never looking beyond the Beltway when making decisions, Republicans are finding themselves quickly gaining strength among the voting public whether they know it or not.
As of now, the best thing that could happen to the Republican party would be a stalemate regarding the budget standoff. Because if there's no agreement, and the clock actually runs out, there are very few folks who won't believe it was unilaterally the president's fault. Consequently, the general conclusion will have to be that the president preferred to stand for political posturing than seeking a solution benefiting the nation and its population.
And the icing on the Republican cake would be if the deadline for a debt level increase actually did run out and the president was forced to delay payment on some of the nation's obligations. Especially those regarding social security or health care. Because those losing out would be older members of the population who are also the most likely to keep abreast of the news and also the most likely to vote. But next time around, it wouldn't be for O'bama if he hung them out to financially dry.
Therefore, the one's the president will hurt the most are the very same ones most responsible for putting him in office to begin with. And that makes for a humongous Catch-22. So, it seems to me the president's painted himself into a corner where all his alternatives are bad ones. But at this point, however, though it's likely the Republicans can't lose no matter, having watched them so far my gut feel is they'll still find a way to shoot themselves in the foot.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
As of now, the best thing that could happen to the Republican party would be a stalemate regarding the budget standoff. Because if there's no agreement, and the clock actually runs out, there are very few folks who won't believe it was unilaterally the president's fault. Consequently, the general conclusion will have to be that the president preferred to stand for political posturing than seeking a solution benefiting the nation and its population.
And the icing on the Republican cake would be if the deadline for a debt level increase actually did run out and the president was forced to delay payment on some of the nation's obligations. Especially those regarding social security or health care. Because those losing out would be older members of the population who are also the most likely to keep abreast of the news and also the most likely to vote. But next time around, it wouldn't be for O'bama if he hung them out to financially dry.
Therefore, the one's the president will hurt the most are the very same ones most responsible for putting him in office to begin with. And that makes for a humongous Catch-22. So, it seems to me the president's painted himself into a corner where all his alternatives are bad ones. But at this point, however, though it's likely the Republicans can't lose no matter, having watched them so far my gut feel is they'll still find a way to shoot themselves in the foot.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, July 22, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/22/2011
I've mentioned several times before that although attending some of the finest schools in Manhattan, I wasn't the best of students by far. Consequently, much of what was taught me, I either forgot, slept through, or otherwise ignored. And that's why I could be totally wrong regarding today's subject, but nonetheless, I'm not really sure I am.
It seems that the president addressed another crowd today, this time at the University of Maryland, where he blathered on as he usually does to whoever managed to stay awake among the audience likely paid to attend by his party. But, in a quick highlight recap of his droning that flashed by on the tube, one comment caught my eye.
Apparently the president said that by cutting the budget but not raising taxes on the rich and on successful businesses, many citizens would suffer from the loss of funds. And that's when I realized I may have missed, or completely misunderstood, the basic fundamentals of the economy of the United States when the subject was taught to me. Because I always thought that a key to the nation's huge financial success was due to the fact that individuals looked out for themselves, competed freely and government stayed out of their way. And as far as supporting the weak, tired and hungry went, that was what charities were for.
But, now I find out after all these years that according to our president, that's not how it works at all. It seems that it's the government's job to strip the successful of however much possible, wherever they can, and then redistribute what they've ripped off after they take their share off the top.
Now, having seen what the president had to say I realize why some of my grades in economics, political science and government studies were so poor. Because, I truly misunderstood what was taught to me. I always thought that the tenets of the president's beliefs were the cornerstones of socialism and communism. And I obviously didn't grasp the point at all that they actually applied to the United States.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
It seems that the president addressed another crowd today, this time at the University of Maryland, where he blathered on as he usually does to whoever managed to stay awake among the audience likely paid to attend by his party. But, in a quick highlight recap of his droning that flashed by on the tube, one comment caught my eye.
Apparently the president said that by cutting the budget but not raising taxes on the rich and on successful businesses, many citizens would suffer from the loss of funds. And that's when I realized I may have missed, or completely misunderstood, the basic fundamentals of the economy of the United States when the subject was taught to me. Because I always thought that a key to the nation's huge financial success was due to the fact that individuals looked out for themselves, competed freely and government stayed out of their way. And as far as supporting the weak, tired and hungry went, that was what charities were for.
But, now I find out after all these years that according to our president, that's not how it works at all. It seems that it's the government's job to strip the successful of however much possible, wherever they can, and then redistribute what they've ripped off after they take their share off the top.
Now, having seen what the president had to say I realize why some of my grades in economics, political science and government studies were so poor. Because, I truly misunderstood what was taught to me. I always thought that the tenets of the president's beliefs were the cornerstones of socialism and communism. And I obviously didn't grasp the point at all that they actually applied to the United States.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, July 21, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/21/2011
I watch the unemployment weekly status report every Thursday at 8:30 AM, because it provides a very good indication of current economic conditions. But, this morning I was tied up doing something else, so I missed it. Sometime later, I clicked on my TV and noticed that all three stock markets were rising rapidly by significant amounts, and naturally assumed that employment must have risen sharply.
A little while later, I finally saw the actual data and was surprised to see that not only had the number of unemployed actually gone up, the rolling average for the past period was higher, as well. In all, exactly the opposite of what I'd expected.
Somewhat confused, I tuned in to a business station and listened to several experts opinions on the market rise. The consensus of these pundits was that high unemployment was not only not a disappointment, it was very much expected. It was also assumed by them that the debt debate would continue and that there was no way, except by some mistake, that Congress and the White House would ever correct the situation intelligently. That's because they believe most, if not all, politicians are truly stupid.
Consequently, major investors and business operators will continue to horde cash, refuse to expand in the United States, and do everything they can to prevent government from ripping them off any further than absolutely necessary. Aside from that, however, they are buying stock at the moment because they believe many securities are under-priced, particularly those of entities who do significant business overseas, especially in China.
In conclusion, the consensus was that businesses and markets will continue to correct themselves, despite government's continual intervention and that, in time, all will work out well for commercial enterprises. So, I guess what it all boils down to is something I keep writing about. As every day goes by, government means less and less to those who produce, and the times getting ever closer to when politicos will wind up broke and talking only to themselves.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
A little while later, I finally saw the actual data and was surprised to see that not only had the number of unemployed actually gone up, the rolling average for the past period was higher, as well. In all, exactly the opposite of what I'd expected.
Somewhat confused, I tuned in to a business station and listened to several experts opinions on the market rise. The consensus of these pundits was that high unemployment was not only not a disappointment, it was very much expected. It was also assumed by them that the debt debate would continue and that there was no way, except by some mistake, that Congress and the White House would ever correct the situation intelligently. That's because they believe most, if not all, politicians are truly stupid.
Consequently, major investors and business operators will continue to horde cash, refuse to expand in the United States, and do everything they can to prevent government from ripping them off any further than absolutely necessary. Aside from that, however, they are buying stock at the moment because they believe many securities are under-priced, particularly those of entities who do significant business overseas, especially in China.
In conclusion, the consensus was that businesses and markets will continue to correct themselves, despite government's continual intervention and that, in time, all will work out well for commercial enterprises. So, I guess what it all boils down to is something I keep writing about. As every day goes by, government means less and less to those who produce, and the times getting ever closer to when politicos will wind up broke and talking only to themselves.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/20/2011
Recent polls show Michelle Bachmann's doing very well, running in second place to Romney with about 20% of Republican voters as a presidential candidate. And that means, the party better begin figuring out how to control her very soon. Because the worst thing that could happen to them right now is to actually have her become the candidate for either slot at the top.
And the problem isn't that she's a woman, or her alleged personal issues recently being mentioned by the press, or anything else that might be dug up. The simple fact of the matter is, she's absolutely unqualified for the job. Her experience amounts to three terms as a congresswoman and that's basically it.
Much like Sarah Palin, who at least was a governor which gave her some executive power, the closer it got to election day the more she was shredded by the press. And eventually, I think she was the reason McCain lost in his run.
As far as Bachmann's recent popularity goes, there are many reasons for that. She's bright, articulate and aggressive which registers well with crowds. But, we're nowhere near the election as far as typical voters are concerned, so hype and smoke and noise still resonate well. But when things get more serious and more folks start paying attention I think they're going to be very concerned about any candidates real credentials.
The public's already seen, quite vividly in fact, what horrendous damage an inexperienced idealist can do in a very short time in office. And by the time election day rolls around, the odds are the nation's woes will be worse.
So, what's critically needed now is someone with real governing experience, which can happen if someone like Romney, or any of a number of other former state leaders wins the nomination. But, if the Republican slot boils down to a popularity contest, engineered by the hard core right and their blind-eyed idealism, the party hasn't got a prayer in the coming election.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
And the problem isn't that she's a woman, or her alleged personal issues recently being mentioned by the press, or anything else that might be dug up. The simple fact of the matter is, she's absolutely unqualified for the job. Her experience amounts to three terms as a congresswoman and that's basically it.
Much like Sarah Palin, who at least was a governor which gave her some executive power, the closer it got to election day the more she was shredded by the press. And eventually, I think she was the reason McCain lost in his run.
As far as Bachmann's recent popularity goes, there are many reasons for that. She's bright, articulate and aggressive which registers well with crowds. But, we're nowhere near the election as far as typical voters are concerned, so hype and smoke and noise still resonate well. But when things get more serious and more folks start paying attention I think they're going to be very concerned about any candidates real credentials.
The public's already seen, quite vividly in fact, what horrendous damage an inexperienced idealist can do in a very short time in office. And by the time election day rolls around, the odds are the nation's woes will be worse.
So, what's critically needed now is someone with real governing experience, which can happen if someone like Romney, or any of a number of other former state leaders wins the nomination. But, if the Republican slot boils down to a popularity contest, engineered by the hard core right and their blind-eyed idealism, the party hasn't got a prayer in the coming election.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/19/2011
Watched part of the Parliamentary inquiry into Rupert Murdoch's involvement in the scandal that closed his paper, News of The World. Murdoch testified alongside his son, James, both fielding questions about what, when, or if they knew about newspaper personnel hiring private investigators to tap individual's phones.
Most interesting to me about the whole thing was that the inquirers asked countless specific questions about particular incidents spanning several years, and it seemed both Murdoch's tried to give accurate answers. Yet, neither, especially Rupert himself, was directly involved, although both are ultimately responsible as top management of the newspaper's operation. The newspaper itself has been closed.
As a practical matter the newspaper amounts to less than 1% of Murdoch's holdings, and isn't even a blip in an entity having 52,000 employees in other businesses worldwide. Nonetheless, I think the bottom line is that the situation is seen as a way to do major harm to a thorn in politico's sides and an attempt to disparage Rupert himself. And that just might happen, depending on how stockholder's react.
In other events, about two dozen of the 46 states that just ended their fiscal year are on track to record surpluses, according to an analyst with the National Association of State Budget Officers. The rest of the states are expected to at least balance their books.
I mention it because it goes a long way to show what can be accomplished by people who try to do what they were elected to do, instead of grandstanding for moronic idealism. It also illustrates that there are 46 governors out there who can get their jobs done the way they're supposed to, and any one of them has to be a whole lot better than the guy who's supposed to be running our country now.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Most interesting to me about the whole thing was that the inquirers asked countless specific questions about particular incidents spanning several years, and it seemed both Murdoch's tried to give accurate answers. Yet, neither, especially Rupert himself, was directly involved, although both are ultimately responsible as top management of the newspaper's operation. The newspaper itself has been closed.
As a practical matter the newspaper amounts to less than 1% of Murdoch's holdings, and isn't even a blip in an entity having 52,000 employees in other businesses worldwide. Nonetheless, I think the bottom line is that the situation is seen as a way to do major harm to a thorn in politico's sides and an attempt to disparage Rupert himself. And that just might happen, depending on how stockholder's react.
In other events, about two dozen of the 46 states that just ended their fiscal year are on track to record surpluses, according to an analyst with the National Association of State Budget Officers. The rest of the states are expected to at least balance their books.
I mention it because it goes a long way to show what can be accomplished by people who try to do what they were elected to do, instead of grandstanding for moronic idealism. It also illustrates that there are 46 governors out there who can get their jobs done the way they're supposed to, and any one of them has to be a whole lot better than the guy who's supposed to be running our country now.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, July 18, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/18/2011
Came across an article this morning by Iain Murray, who heads the Center for Economic Freedom at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He's also author of a new book “Stealing You Blind: How Government Fat Cats Are Getting Rich Off of You”
Murray quotes Britain's "Iron Lady," Margaret Thatcher, who said that any housewife could manage the British economy. And, I think that makes absolute sense. Because anyone responsible for a budget knows it's foolhardy and risky to spend more than you take in.
The author also states that when it comes to justification for tax increases, our president’s ignorance of basic economics shows through even more. Because O'bama's said that tax increases would stop him personally from keeping hundreds of thousands of dollars that he doesn’t need. Which leads the author to conclude that "now we know what the president does with his book money – he throws it on a pile, like Tolkien’s dragon Smaug."
However, the author says, that’s not what wealth creators do. They either spend that “excess” money, providing jobs for people who make or import the things they spend it on, or invest it, thereby creating more jobs and more wealth which they can reinvest.
And so, the beat goes on. Where with each passing day the proofs pile higher and higher that we're foundering in a situation caused by governmental inexperience, misguided beliefs and huge fundamental flaws. However, as I keep saying in my writings lately, more and more of the population's waking up which means new folks elected to office while some of the nation's wealth's still left.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Murray quotes Britain's "Iron Lady," Margaret Thatcher, who said that any housewife could manage the British economy. And, I think that makes absolute sense. Because anyone responsible for a budget knows it's foolhardy and risky to spend more than you take in.
The author also states that when it comes to justification for tax increases, our president’s ignorance of basic economics shows through even more. Because O'bama's said that tax increases would stop him personally from keeping hundreds of thousands of dollars that he doesn’t need. Which leads the author to conclude that "now we know what the president does with his book money – he throws it on a pile, like Tolkien’s dragon Smaug."
However, the author says, that’s not what wealth creators do. They either spend that “excess” money, providing jobs for people who make or import the things they spend it on, or invest it, thereby creating more jobs and more wealth which they can reinvest.
And so, the beat goes on. Where with each passing day the proofs pile higher and higher that we're foundering in a situation caused by governmental inexperience, misguided beliefs and huge fundamental flaws. However, as I keep saying in my writings lately, more and more of the population's waking up which means new folks elected to office while some of the nation's wealth's still left.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, July 17, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/17/2011
I don't know about you, but I'm really very, very tired of the debt talk farce and wish that all the political phonies would just stop the posturing and move on.
In reality, there's only way that the debt will start to get paid down and that will be when the economy really improves. And the economy can't and won't improve so long as this president's in office. What's more, if any kind of taxes are raised, on the so-called rich or anywhere else, that will make things far worse.
Thus, all the talk, threats and hourly speeches by our so-called leader are a waste of time and breath,and I doubt anyone pays much attention anyhow. But, as I keep suggesting, there are two simple words he can say that will turn the economy around in almost an instant and help the nation in many other ways as well. All he really to announce is: I resign.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
In reality, there's only way that the debt will start to get paid down and that will be when the economy really improves. And the economy can't and won't improve so long as this president's in office. What's more, if any kind of taxes are raised, on the so-called rich or anywhere else, that will make things far worse.
Thus, all the talk, threats and hourly speeches by our so-called leader are a waste of time and breath,and I doubt anyone pays much attention anyhow. But, as I keep suggesting, there are two simple words he can say that will turn the economy around in almost an instant and help the nation in many other ways as well. All he really to announce is: I resign.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, July 16, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/16/2011
What I continue to find to be amazing is the constant presidential pressure to tax the "rich," and his ongoing insistence that they pay for his horrendous ineptitude, incompetence and mindless spending. And just yesterday he stated that 80% of Americans side with him in debt limit talks, regarding an increase in taxes.
The fact of the matter, however, is that he's manipulating the statistics. Because what a recent Gallup poll showed was that while only 20% were in full agreement with the current Republican plan, the remaining 80% didn't endorse his plan either, there are several other alternatives favored in the mix. But, for the sake of argument, let's say that the president's argument is true and that the vast majority agree with him.
As I mentioned a few days ago in my blogging's, per the most recent statistics: as of right now the top 1% of taxpayers earn 19% of all income, but pay 37% of federal income taxes and the top 10% pay 68% of those taxes as a group. At the other extreme, the bottom 50% of the spectrum earn below the median income level, amounting to 13% of total income while paying only 3% of the tax.
So, what these numbers show is a very small percentage of people pay almost all the taxes now, which means that the vast majority being polled don't contribute at all. Thus in effect, in polls the majority is indicating how they feel about spending high-earner's money, not their own.
Consequently, as far as I'm concerned, I think it's a shame that a party who's membership is primarily worthless leeches and dregs has a leader who's lower than they are. And , I'm reasonably sure that if any of them made a dime on their own they'd be unlikely to want to waste it on mis-spent taxes either.
And the real problem is that there are so many of these non-contributing whiners they keep voting parasites in. But that's quite understandable I guess, because if an administration got elected that expected tax payments from everyone, no matter, these worthless bums might actually have to look for jobs, go to work, and take their hands out of achiever's pockets.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
The fact of the matter, however, is that he's manipulating the statistics. Because what a recent Gallup poll showed was that while only 20% were in full agreement with the current Republican plan, the remaining 80% didn't endorse his plan either, there are several other alternatives favored in the mix. But, for the sake of argument, let's say that the president's argument is true and that the vast majority agree with him.
As I mentioned a few days ago in my blogging's, per the most recent statistics: as of right now the top 1% of taxpayers earn 19% of all income, but pay 37% of federal income taxes and the top 10% pay 68% of those taxes as a group. At the other extreme, the bottom 50% of the spectrum earn below the median income level, amounting to 13% of total income while paying only 3% of the tax.
So, what these numbers show is a very small percentage of people pay almost all the taxes now, which means that the vast majority being polled don't contribute at all. Thus in effect, in polls the majority is indicating how they feel about spending high-earner's money, not their own.
Consequently, as far as I'm concerned, I think it's a shame that a party who's membership is primarily worthless leeches and dregs has a leader who's lower than they are. And , I'm reasonably sure that if any of them made a dime on their own they'd be unlikely to want to waste it on mis-spent taxes either.
And the real problem is that there are so many of these non-contributing whiners they keep voting parasites in. But that's quite understandable I guess, because if an administration got elected that expected tax payments from everyone, no matter, these worthless bums might actually have to look for jobs, go to work, and take their hands out of achiever's pockets.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, July 15, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/15/2011
The judge presiding in former major league pitcher, Roger Clemens', case declared a mistrial Thursday, after prosecutors showed jurors evidence the judge had ruled out of bounds. Clemens is being tried for lying to Congress when testifying about using steroids during his career.
Now, I really don't care very much about the case because I gave up on baseball when two things happened that ruined the sport for me. The first was the way free agency was handled by both the major leagues and the players, because money immediately became the only thing that mattered to either side. And consequently, the fans were no longer considered, nor were the teams, because player's loyalties immediately switched to their agents who now control the game. In turn, that changed my attitude to one very similar to theirs: The players don't give a damn about me any more as a fan...so to hell with all of them in return.
Aside from that, I no longer remember the year, but I distinctly recall the Boston Red Sox showing up for the World Series looking like thugs. Their hair was longer than my daughter's, they hadn't shaved all season and looked like they were members of Hell's Angels. Now, don't get me wrong. I wasn't born under a rock and I'm not naive, in fact I've been in plenty of fights with guys a lot tougher than any of those baseball players. Nonetheless, there's something important about tradition. So, if you want to dress and act like a guy who works the docks that's okay with me, go work there. But if you want to play major league baseball do it like a pro, not some grade-B movie actor who looks and acts like a bearded wuss.
And now, back to Clemens.
In spite of my being almost totally unaware of what goes on in today's baseball, I saw a headline about the trial. And that caught my eye because I couldn't believe that Congress was trying a national figure because he supposedly lied to them. And I certainly know that when it comes to those in government, there's quite a huge double standard. But this case goes far beyond that.
Because if Clemens isn't re-tried or is otherwise found guilt free, he'll likely be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. And I think another Hall should be built for world class fabricators, which would include just about everyone who ever held political office. And even Clemens couldn't measure up to them in their game, where not one of them ever tells the truth about anything and never will.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Now, I really don't care very much about the case because I gave up on baseball when two things happened that ruined the sport for me. The first was the way free agency was handled by both the major leagues and the players, because money immediately became the only thing that mattered to either side. And consequently, the fans were no longer considered, nor were the teams, because player's loyalties immediately switched to their agents who now control the game. In turn, that changed my attitude to one very similar to theirs: The players don't give a damn about me any more as a fan...so to hell with all of them in return.
Aside from that, I no longer remember the year, but I distinctly recall the Boston Red Sox showing up for the World Series looking like thugs. Their hair was longer than my daughter's, they hadn't shaved all season and looked like they were members of Hell's Angels. Now, don't get me wrong. I wasn't born under a rock and I'm not naive, in fact I've been in plenty of fights with guys a lot tougher than any of those baseball players. Nonetheless, there's something important about tradition. So, if you want to dress and act like a guy who works the docks that's okay with me, go work there. But if you want to play major league baseball do it like a pro, not some grade-B movie actor who looks and acts like a bearded wuss.
And now, back to Clemens.
In spite of my being almost totally unaware of what goes on in today's baseball, I saw a headline about the trial. And that caught my eye because I couldn't believe that Congress was trying a national figure because he supposedly lied to them. And I certainly know that when it comes to those in government, there's quite a huge double standard. But this case goes far beyond that.
Because if Clemens isn't re-tried or is otherwise found guilt free, he'll likely be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. And I think another Hall should be built for world class fabricators, which would include just about everyone who ever held political office. And even Clemens couldn't measure up to them in their game, where not one of them ever tells the truth about anything and never will.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, July 14, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/14/2011
At center stage in extremely serious negotiations yesterday, between top politico's regarding the nation's debt, things apparently weren't going the president's way. Consequently, while numerous citizens here and other leaders around the world likely were tuned in, because the financial condition of the U.S. affects them all in one way or another, our "leader" had a hissy fit and stormed out of the room.
Now, his tactic isn't really anything new regarding disagreements, standoffs or strongly felt opposing points of view, and just about everyone has probably done exactly the same thing at one time or another. Except, it's likely that at the time they did it, they were six or seven years old. I say that because to my recollection, that's the last time I used that ploy. And I remember the occasion clearly, because my mother immediately told me to go to my room and not come out until I'd grown up.
So, after reading about the president's immature conduct, I got to thinking about others in the public eye and about the examples they'd have set had they performed the same way. For example, what if President Washington quit while battling the British? Would we be a free nation today if he threw up his hands and said, "I can't take this anymore?" and left the battlefield like a wimp. Would Lincoln have ended slavery had his mother sent him to his room instead of hanging in until he'd gotten his way?
I doubt Reagan would have broken the back of Communism had he chickened out and left the stage squawking like a child, nor would Truman have ended World War II if he simply quit and changed his quote to "The buck stops somewhere else, I don't want to play any more."
But, I guess these are really unfair comparisons because I've been listing real, time-tested leaders and statesmen who above all else did their very best on behalf of the folks they led. And these gentlemen all grew into their jobs, seeking to insure their nation remained the best. And that's very different than a Chicago thug who's never led anything in his life, but instead just whimpers and whines because he doesn't know what else to do.
However, we're all really lucky he's in the White House and not on the front lines. Because if he was actually heading our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, and turned tail and ran...in very short order we'd all be speaking Arabic inside our enemies prisons.
That's it for today folks.
Adios.
Now, his tactic isn't really anything new regarding disagreements, standoffs or strongly felt opposing points of view, and just about everyone has probably done exactly the same thing at one time or another. Except, it's likely that at the time they did it, they were six or seven years old. I say that because to my recollection, that's the last time I used that ploy. And I remember the occasion clearly, because my mother immediately told me to go to my room and not come out until I'd grown up.
So, after reading about the president's immature conduct, I got to thinking about others in the public eye and about the examples they'd have set had they performed the same way. For example, what if President Washington quit while battling the British? Would we be a free nation today if he threw up his hands and said, "I can't take this anymore?" and left the battlefield like a wimp. Would Lincoln have ended slavery had his mother sent him to his room instead of hanging in until he'd gotten his way?
I doubt Reagan would have broken the back of Communism had he chickened out and left the stage squawking like a child, nor would Truman have ended World War II if he simply quit and changed his quote to "The buck stops somewhere else, I don't want to play any more."
But, I guess these are really unfair comparisons because I've been listing real, time-tested leaders and statesmen who above all else did their very best on behalf of the folks they led. And these gentlemen all grew into their jobs, seeking to insure their nation remained the best. And that's very different than a Chicago thug who's never led anything in his life, but instead just whimpers and whines because he doesn't know what else to do.
However, we're all really lucky he's in the White House and not on the front lines. Because if he was actually heading our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, and turned tail and ran...in very short order we'd all be speaking Arabic inside our enemies prisons.
That's it for today folks.
Adios.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/13/2011
When it comes to lying, stealing and cheating I thought the Clinton's held the world record for politician's, but the current incumbent is quickly closing the gap. Because on Tuesday, he told CBS News, referring to the political stalemate over increasing the legal borrowing limit, “I cannot guarantee that those (Social Security) checks go out on Aug. 3 if we haven’t resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it.”
Now, it seems to me that a ploy like that might have worked in earlier times, when the public had little or no access to actual or timely information. But the end has come for tactics like that. And even the most ardent Democrat supporter knows that in actuality it's the White House that's stalling budget talks, and is holding off as they try to figure out how to steal more from the so-called "rich."
But, I think there's a very good chance that even if checks to the elderly could be held up, which may be almost technologically impossible to do on short notice, those same elderly voters know the truth, that tax dollars are being mis-spent by the trillions. So, maybe the best thing for the nation would be to really have those checks shut off. Because that would be a death knell for the administration that could be heard on the moon.
In the meantime, however it's reported that the president raised more than $86 million over the past three months, much more than the $60 million goal the campaign had set and overshadowing fundraising totals on the Republican side.
So, my question is: What's he going to do with the money? Because all the cash in the world can't override the miserable job he's done in office, and I doubt there are many who don't know the facts, so millions in advertisng hogwash won't undo it. And that's why the country would likely be much better off if he contributed those bucks to reduce the national debt he's run up and finally do all of us some good for once.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Now, it seems to me that a ploy like that might have worked in earlier times, when the public had little or no access to actual or timely information. But the end has come for tactics like that. And even the most ardent Democrat supporter knows that in actuality it's the White House that's stalling budget talks, and is holding off as they try to figure out how to steal more from the so-called "rich."
But, I think there's a very good chance that even if checks to the elderly could be held up, which may be almost technologically impossible to do on short notice, those same elderly voters know the truth, that tax dollars are being mis-spent by the trillions. So, maybe the best thing for the nation would be to really have those checks shut off. Because that would be a death knell for the administration that could be heard on the moon.
In the meantime, however it's reported that the president raised more than $86 million over the past three months, much more than the $60 million goal the campaign had set and overshadowing fundraising totals on the Republican side.
So, my question is: What's he going to do with the money? Because all the cash in the world can't override the miserable job he's done in office, and I doubt there are many who don't know the facts, so millions in advertisng hogwash won't undo it. And that's why the country would likely be much better off if he contributed those bucks to reduce the national debt he's run up and finally do all of us some good for once.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/12/2011
Recaps of the ongoing budget debate at the White House all indicate that both sides of the battle remain adamant in their positions, especially in regard to taxes. Democrats insist that tax increases be imposed on the "rich," while Republicans say they'll never agree to that, regardless.
As I've been mentioning in the recent past, I find this continuing political disagreement almost beyond comprehension. Because I believe that anyone with half a gram of common sense can clearly see what reckless spending and unskilled, thoughtless leadership has cost the nation. Yet the administration insists on the right to keep repeating their failures and mistakes. And that led me to refresh my memory by looking up the definition of insanity, which is: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
But, what's really extremely troubling is that not only do they want to keep running around in proven pointless circles, they're also demanding that those who've succeeded financially bail them out. According to Fox News, at Monday's meeting, while Republicans still balked at proposed tax increases on “oil and gas companies and corporate jet owners,” an "exasperated" Vice President Joe Biden said, "come on man, let's get real."
To me, Biden's comments, if he really means them, are unbelievably naive and incredibly stupid because what he's really saying is that it doesn't matter how much he and his inept cronies have lost or frittered away of high earners funds already, he expects to steal even more from them. And, as I keep asking, what would happen if things like this took place in the real world?
First of all, any organization as financially inept as those currently in political office would have been gone months, perhaps years, ago. Because no commercial enterprise buried in so much debt could possibly remain in business. And, if the company were publicly traded there'd be slews of suits and actions by stockholders, seeking their money back. And, that's really what should be done in this case. Because, if their own money was involved, not just what they're able to rip off from high-earners in taxes, maybe the current incumbents would either learn how to really do their jobs, or better yet, quit.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
As I've been mentioning in the recent past, I find this continuing political disagreement almost beyond comprehension. Because I believe that anyone with half a gram of common sense can clearly see what reckless spending and unskilled, thoughtless leadership has cost the nation. Yet the administration insists on the right to keep repeating their failures and mistakes. And that led me to refresh my memory by looking up the definition of insanity, which is: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
But, what's really extremely troubling is that not only do they want to keep running around in proven pointless circles, they're also demanding that those who've succeeded financially bail them out. According to Fox News, at Monday's meeting, while Republicans still balked at proposed tax increases on “oil and gas companies and corporate jet owners,” an "exasperated" Vice President Joe Biden said, "come on man, let's get real."
To me, Biden's comments, if he really means them, are unbelievably naive and incredibly stupid because what he's really saying is that it doesn't matter how much he and his inept cronies have lost or frittered away of high earners funds already, he expects to steal even more from them. And, as I keep asking, what would happen if things like this took place in the real world?
First of all, any organization as financially inept as those currently in political office would have been gone months, perhaps years, ago. Because no commercial enterprise buried in so much debt could possibly remain in business. And, if the company were publicly traded there'd be slews of suits and actions by stockholders, seeking their money back. And, that's really what should be done in this case. Because, if their own money was involved, not just what they're able to rip off from high-earners in taxes, maybe the current incumbents would either learn how to really do their jobs, or better yet, quit.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, July 11, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/11/2011
As I've been writing for what seems quite a while now, the best way for me to try understanding what goes on in the political world is to read what's said instead of listening to the bombasting from both ends. And today's no exception.
Because, after the president was through droning another lecture to the press about the stalemate regarding the budget (how do those press guys sit through all that incredibly meaningless drivel and not toss their cookies?) the Democrat's said: "they were in favor of a big deal all along and claimed Republicans were backing out only because they didn't want tax hikes."
Now, I have nothing to do with the political system, and I live in New York, hundreds of miles from DC. Beyond that, I generally skim the news, not pore over the details. I never turn on my radio and leave the sound off on my TV. And in spite of my self-imposed limited access to input, even I've known for many months now about the Republican's absolute refusal to consider tax hikes. In fact, many of my prior entries have addressed that very subject. So, exactly what is the Democrat's point?
It seems to me that for the sake of political spin, Democrats, especially their leader, care quite little about the fact that they've broken the fiscal back of the nation, yet rather than trying to help fix the huge problems they've caused, they're seeking what they believe are political points of advantage with their base who care nothing at all about solvency.
And that brings me back to my business comparator, because no commercial enterprise on Earth could stay afloat with a management as fiscally inept as our current administration. What's more, no business entity on the planet could burn, mis-use and squander it's stockholder's assets away like they have, and then have the gall to turn around and send them the bill.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Because, after the president was through droning another lecture to the press about the stalemate regarding the budget (how do those press guys sit through all that incredibly meaningless drivel and not toss their cookies?) the Democrat's said: "they were in favor of a big deal all along and claimed Republicans were backing out only because they didn't want tax hikes."
Now, I have nothing to do with the political system, and I live in New York, hundreds of miles from DC. Beyond that, I generally skim the news, not pore over the details. I never turn on my radio and leave the sound off on my TV. And in spite of my self-imposed limited access to input, even I've known for many months now about the Republican's absolute refusal to consider tax hikes. In fact, many of my prior entries have addressed that very subject. So, exactly what is the Democrat's point?
It seems to me that for the sake of political spin, Democrats, especially their leader, care quite little about the fact that they've broken the fiscal back of the nation, yet rather than trying to help fix the huge problems they've caused, they're seeking what they believe are political points of advantage with their base who care nothing at all about solvency.
And that brings me back to my business comparator, because no commercial enterprise on Earth could stay afloat with a management as fiscally inept as our current administration. What's more, no business entity on the planet could burn, mis-use and squander it's stockholder's assets away like they have, and then have the gall to turn around and send them the bill.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, July 10, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/10/2011
While politicos on all fronts continue to point fingers at each other regarding the national debt, taxes and the budget I decided to do what I always do about subjects like these. I learned long ago that what those in office say or do has little to do with the truth, that's why I never listen to them. Instead, I looked the data up.
In my research, I found a perfect example of the extent to which those in office will go to appease their constituents, in the following comments from Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada. When offering a resolution on Thursday, he asked lawmakers to insure that “any agreement to wealthier taxpayers should reduce the budget deficit should require that those earning $1,000,000 or more per year make a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort.” (Note: the botched grammar in Reid's quoted statement is his, not mine -I simply cut and pasted his comments. So he not only can't legislate worth a dime, he can't speak coherent English either. I guess he must have attended a public school.)
Now, Reid's comments are not news because, as I understand it, the Democrats have been insisting for some time now that any budget deal include increases in taxes, and if nothing else...demand more from the rich because of their "wealth."
However, per the most recent statistics: as of right now the top 1% of taxpayers earn 19% of all income, but pay 37% of federal income taxes and the top 10% pay 68% of those taxes as a group. At the other extreme, the bottom 50% of the spectrum earn below the median income level, amounting to 13% of total income while paying only 3% of the tax.
So, what we have here is a political panderer, Harry Reid, whose constituency adds virtually zip to the economy via taxes, yet makes up half or more of the voting population. And much like his fiscally short-sighted compatriots, he's willing to redistribute wealth to keep himself in office, though destroying the productivity of the nation to get that done.
Nonetheless, as I've been mentioning more and more often lately, folks seem to be waking up. And thanks to broadcast and information technology, coupled with very empty wallets, people no longer just sit there listening to political pap while their dollars are shipped overseas by the boatload. So, I think it's just a matter of a very short time when people start casting their votes for those who care about them more than they do about growing the Arab republics. And that will likely get those on the bottom back to earning enough to start paying their fair share of taxes again.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
In my research, I found a perfect example of the extent to which those in office will go to appease their constituents, in the following comments from Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada. When offering a resolution on Thursday, he asked lawmakers to insure that “any agreement to wealthier taxpayers should reduce the budget deficit should require that those earning $1,000,000 or more per year make a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort.” (Note: the botched grammar in Reid's quoted statement is his, not mine -I simply cut and pasted his comments. So he not only can't legislate worth a dime, he can't speak coherent English either. I guess he must have attended a public school.)
Now, Reid's comments are not news because, as I understand it, the Democrats have been insisting for some time now that any budget deal include increases in taxes, and if nothing else...demand more from the rich because of their "wealth."
However, per the most recent statistics: as of right now the top 1% of taxpayers earn 19% of all income, but pay 37% of federal income taxes and the top 10% pay 68% of those taxes as a group. At the other extreme, the bottom 50% of the spectrum earn below the median income level, amounting to 13% of total income while paying only 3% of the tax.
So, what we have here is a political panderer, Harry Reid, whose constituency adds virtually zip to the economy via taxes, yet makes up half or more of the voting population. And much like his fiscally short-sighted compatriots, he's willing to redistribute wealth to keep himself in office, though destroying the productivity of the nation to get that done.
Nonetheless, as I've been mentioning more and more often lately, folks seem to be waking up. And thanks to broadcast and information technology, coupled with very empty wallets, people no longer just sit there listening to political pap while their dollars are shipped overseas by the boatload. So, I think it's just a matter of a very short time when people start casting their votes for those who care about them more than they do about growing the Arab republics. And that will likely get those on the bottom back to earning enough to start paying their fair share of taxes again.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, July 9, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/9/2011
The further the hostility goes regarding the debt debate, the more I realize that the president, along with his willing or unaware stooges in Congress, has painted his political enemies and the public into a corner. And, at the moment, both have little chance to get out.
By cutting off almost every alternative to producing domestic oil, he's forced the public to send billions of dollars a day to foreign nations. And while those nations continue to prosper from our funds, setting oil prices at whim, folks here are forced to decide whether to buy food, necessities, or fuel. The end result of that dilemma is a situation where our whole economy shrinks because so many dollars have been sent somewhere else, and with each passing day there's less money here.
The removal of what is now trillions from our economy and the resultant domestic spending shrinkage has forced unemployment to soar, with no hope of recovery in the small business sector because among other things, banks are fearful to lend. Bankers realize the economy's choking to death and see no signs of recovery any time soon.
As far as big business goes, most are doing quite well. So to counter that situation the administration has brought uncertainty to bear. Inconsistency in law and regulation has made managements fearful of investment, expansion and hiring, further stifling national economic growth. And those who do try to buck the odds, such as Boeing, soon find that the government, in this case via the NLRB, will take every measure to choke them off.
As each day goes by, I try to figure out why anyone would make such a determined effort to try to insure the failure of the greatest nation ever conceived. Because it just doesn't seem to make any kind of sense, economic or otherwise. But lately, I think I'm beginning to glean the answer.
The original plan of the Founding Fathers was to create a place where everyone could strive to achieve without limitation and reap the rewards of their efforts in return. And that's exactly how the country was built. Hard work, dedication and knowledge, coupled with desire, drove folks to produce as best they could, resulting in a prosperous, successful society outperforming all others on earth. Those efforts ultimately led to a nation where there were not many dregs.
And then, one came along who felt that the dregs were far more important than others had before him and deserved a larger share of the wealth. However, that societal segment, either by choice or chance, was incapable of moving ahead. So, instead of incenting, cajoling or pressuring them to produce, he rewrote the rulebook thereby handing them what they couldn't gain for themselves.
The good news, however, is that now that two and a half years have gone by, more and more of that strategy has become obvious, and productive folks, especially big businesses are no longer playing along. So, it appears most have decided they're better off sitting on their hands, and wealth, rather than throwing their cash down a bottomless pit. And, I'm sure that they all pray that eighteen months from now most of the nation will be wiser, and use the voting booth to right the ship.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
By cutting off almost every alternative to producing domestic oil, he's forced the public to send billions of dollars a day to foreign nations. And while those nations continue to prosper from our funds, setting oil prices at whim, folks here are forced to decide whether to buy food, necessities, or fuel. The end result of that dilemma is a situation where our whole economy shrinks because so many dollars have been sent somewhere else, and with each passing day there's less money here.
The removal of what is now trillions from our economy and the resultant domestic spending shrinkage has forced unemployment to soar, with no hope of recovery in the small business sector because among other things, banks are fearful to lend. Bankers realize the economy's choking to death and see no signs of recovery any time soon.
As far as big business goes, most are doing quite well. So to counter that situation the administration has brought uncertainty to bear. Inconsistency in law and regulation has made managements fearful of investment, expansion and hiring, further stifling national economic growth. And those who do try to buck the odds, such as Boeing, soon find that the government, in this case via the NLRB, will take every measure to choke them off.
As each day goes by, I try to figure out why anyone would make such a determined effort to try to insure the failure of the greatest nation ever conceived. Because it just doesn't seem to make any kind of sense, economic or otherwise. But lately, I think I'm beginning to glean the answer.
The original plan of the Founding Fathers was to create a place where everyone could strive to achieve without limitation and reap the rewards of their efforts in return. And that's exactly how the country was built. Hard work, dedication and knowledge, coupled with desire, drove folks to produce as best they could, resulting in a prosperous, successful society outperforming all others on earth. Those efforts ultimately led to a nation where there were not many dregs.
And then, one came along who felt that the dregs were far more important than others had before him and deserved a larger share of the wealth. However, that societal segment, either by choice or chance, was incapable of moving ahead. So, instead of incenting, cajoling or pressuring them to produce, he rewrote the rulebook thereby handing them what they couldn't gain for themselves.
The good news, however, is that now that two and a half years have gone by, more and more of that strategy has become obvious, and productive folks, especially big businesses are no longer playing along. So, it appears most have decided they're better off sitting on their hands, and wealth, rather than throwing their cash down a bottomless pit. And, I'm sure that they all pray that eighteen months from now most of the nation will be wiser, and use the voting booth to right the ship.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, July 8, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/8/2011
Numbers posted today show that unemployment remains at a very high level, 9.2%, with little hope for improvement. Although certain types of managerial jobs are becoming more available, that does little for the mainstream that's out of work. Then, if you add those who are working, but "under-employed" because their hours have been significantly cut back, about 25% of the total workforce is either idle or on a reduced schedule.
So, in view of the continuing poor economic news, what does our leader do? He delivers another speech of course, as if words piled on words will help fix the problem. And, I find that especially frustrating since, as far as unemployment goes, his policies are the major cause. What's more, I often wonder exactly who it is he's talking to, because anyone with any awareness knows the truth and that real hiring won't begin until he's out of office.
In the last few days though, the president's shown some willingness to listen to Republicans who are adamant that taxes not be raised. The Republican's fear is that tax increases of any kind will stifle the economy further. And although the president's acquiescence has nothing to do with a sudden flash of good economic sense, he's simply trying to keep his job even though his party disagrees with his wavering, the result might be good for the nation.
But, through it all what's really moronic is the solid stance of the left who prefer to let the country crumble than use common sense. At the moment leftists are jumping up and down, screaming that the rich be taxed no matter, mainly because they have too much. And much like the disastrous health care bill that nobody read before enactment, Democrat leadership in the House and Senate continue to demonize the successful, yet have no idea as to what damage their thoughtlessness will cause in the end, because it's been done before by their predecessors.
In 1993 the Clinton administration enacted the Yacht Tax, under which the "rich" were taxed via ownership of luxury items. And in the end what happened was, those very same rich found other loopholes and other places to spend their money. But in the meantime, the administration practically killed the luxury item business, put thousands more out of work, reduced their tax income to almost zero in the sector and eventually the act was repealed in 1996 after doing horrendous economic damage.
So, I guess when it's all said and done it's pretty clear as to where political lines get drawn. And it isn't so much ideology or firm commitment or fanatical belief, it actually comes down to intellect in the end. Because anyone who'd give up their chance at livelihood, economic freedom, and perhaps even their survival out of hatred of the successful has got to be pretty stupid.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
So, in view of the continuing poor economic news, what does our leader do? He delivers another speech of course, as if words piled on words will help fix the problem. And, I find that especially frustrating since, as far as unemployment goes, his policies are the major cause. What's more, I often wonder exactly who it is he's talking to, because anyone with any awareness knows the truth and that real hiring won't begin until he's out of office.
In the last few days though, the president's shown some willingness to listen to Republicans who are adamant that taxes not be raised. The Republican's fear is that tax increases of any kind will stifle the economy further. And although the president's acquiescence has nothing to do with a sudden flash of good economic sense, he's simply trying to keep his job even though his party disagrees with his wavering, the result might be good for the nation.
But, through it all what's really moronic is the solid stance of the left who prefer to let the country crumble than use common sense. At the moment leftists are jumping up and down, screaming that the rich be taxed no matter, mainly because they have too much. And much like the disastrous health care bill that nobody read before enactment, Democrat leadership in the House and Senate continue to demonize the successful, yet have no idea as to what damage their thoughtlessness will cause in the end, because it's been done before by their predecessors.
In 1993 the Clinton administration enacted the Yacht Tax, under which the "rich" were taxed via ownership of luxury items. And in the end what happened was, those very same rich found other loopholes and other places to spend their money. But in the meantime, the administration practically killed the luxury item business, put thousands more out of work, reduced their tax income to almost zero in the sector and eventually the act was repealed in 1996 after doing horrendous economic damage.
So, I guess when it's all said and done it's pretty clear as to where political lines get drawn. And it isn't so much ideology or firm commitment or fanatical belief, it actually comes down to intellect in the end. Because anyone who'd give up their chance at livelihood, economic freedom, and perhaps even their survival out of hatred of the successful has got to be pretty stupid.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, July 7, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/7/2011
Reading a presidential comment this morning about the debt ceiling debate made me realize that the Democrat leadership seems to have a somewhat schizophrenic approach in their beliefs.
On one hand, they want our borders open so that any and all can enter the country with little serious obstruction. Then they want those same illegals given virtually the same rights and freedoms as those who were born here, including health care and access to education. And when questioned about their attitude toward those who've sneaked in, their answer is that this is the land of opportunity for all, and that it's a good thing to give folks a chance to succeed because here in the land of the free and the brave, the sky's the limit for those who achieve and everyone should have a chance, no matter.
Then at the same time, after frittering the nation's wealth away by instituting one hare-brained scheme after another, and having nowhere else to turn for funds, they target the successful and "rich." But, instead of going to those who've done well and seeking some kind of fair-minded solution, they demonize those very same people and demand they do more to help as if financial success was some kind of sin.
So, I think there's a wide discrepancy regarding what Democrat's, and especially their leader, are all about. Because it seems from his actions, that's its fine to come here any way you can and chase the American Dream of success. But then, if you actually achieve it, you become a vilified target for having surpassed all the rest.
And, I guess, that's the Dem's ultimate goal: to take every possible step to insure that everyone except those in office loses.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
On one hand, they want our borders open so that any and all can enter the country with little serious obstruction. Then they want those same illegals given virtually the same rights and freedoms as those who were born here, including health care and access to education. And when questioned about their attitude toward those who've sneaked in, their answer is that this is the land of opportunity for all, and that it's a good thing to give folks a chance to succeed because here in the land of the free and the brave, the sky's the limit for those who achieve and everyone should have a chance, no matter.
Then at the same time, after frittering the nation's wealth away by instituting one hare-brained scheme after another, and having nowhere else to turn for funds, they target the successful and "rich." But, instead of going to those who've done well and seeking some kind of fair-minded solution, they demonize those very same people and demand they do more to help as if financial success was some kind of sin.
So, I think there's a wide discrepancy regarding what Democrat's, and especially their leader, are all about. Because it seems from his actions, that's its fine to come here any way you can and chase the American Dream of success. But then, if you actually achieve it, you become a vilified target for having surpassed all the rest.
And, I guess, that's the Dem's ultimate goal: to take every possible step to insure that everyone except those in office loses.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/6/2011
This disagreement over the budget that's been getting major coverage in the news is something I've naturally seen every day for months now, like everyone else. We're inundated with up to the moment stories everywhere we look. Then today, skimming an item on Fox News, I saw the following paragraph which gave me a slightly different perspective of the situation.
According to Fox "The Senate returned to Congress Tuesday after canceling its week-long July 4 recess to work on a deal to raise the debt limit, but so far on the schedule is a nonbinding resolution by Democrats expressing a sense of the Senate that households earning $1 million or more need to make "a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort."
Now, there's really nothing different mentioned about their position, but the way the paragraph's worded seems to me the best definition of the Democrats position I've seen to date. Because, for me at least, it puts the Democrat's demand in perspective.
As I read the paragraph, it actually says; the Democrat congress and administration have totally mismanaged the country's economy and run up trillions in debt due to failed ideas and legislation such as major bailouts, ill-conceived health care reform and business policies causing continually high levels of unemployment. So, in view of the fact that the government's lost so much taxpayer money, the only one's who have anything left have to give it to us to help cover our gross mistakes.
And what's really interesting about the Dem's wanting more from top producers is that they're trying to do it through legislation which is diametrically opposite to how money's earned. Because it's like a penalty for success. It's as if those who've done well are the bad guys, and since they've had the gall to succeed, now they must pay some of it back, despite the fact that it's already been taxed.
On the other hand, however, think about what would happen if those unsuccessful in business acted like the government. For example, what would happen if a large public corporation lost money hand over fist and went to their stockholders and said, "We've had a terrible couple of years and we and our employees have not only lost all our equity, we're head over heels in debt and see no way to ever recoup. So, we've enclosed a bill we expect you to pay immediately to help cover our ineptitude, or else we'll be forced to send our attorneys out to collect."
Well, we all know that's not how the real world works, and mismanaged businesses don't last very long because they've proven they have no worth to anyone, be they stockholders or customers. So, let's all hope that for once businesses teach the rest of the public a lesson they won't forget and simply let those in office figure out what to do without another cent of help.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
According to Fox "The Senate returned to Congress Tuesday after canceling its week-long July 4 recess to work on a deal to raise the debt limit, but so far on the schedule is a nonbinding resolution by Democrats expressing a sense of the Senate that households earning $1 million or more need to make "a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort."
Now, there's really nothing different mentioned about their position, but the way the paragraph's worded seems to me the best definition of the Democrats position I've seen to date. Because, for me at least, it puts the Democrat's demand in perspective.
As I read the paragraph, it actually says; the Democrat congress and administration have totally mismanaged the country's economy and run up trillions in debt due to failed ideas and legislation such as major bailouts, ill-conceived health care reform and business policies causing continually high levels of unemployment. So, in view of the fact that the government's lost so much taxpayer money, the only one's who have anything left have to give it to us to help cover our gross mistakes.
And what's really interesting about the Dem's wanting more from top producers is that they're trying to do it through legislation which is diametrically opposite to how money's earned. Because it's like a penalty for success. It's as if those who've done well are the bad guys, and since they've had the gall to succeed, now they must pay some of it back, despite the fact that it's already been taxed.
On the other hand, however, think about what would happen if those unsuccessful in business acted like the government. For example, what would happen if a large public corporation lost money hand over fist and went to their stockholders and said, "We've had a terrible couple of years and we and our employees have not only lost all our equity, we're head over heels in debt and see no way to ever recoup. So, we've enclosed a bill we expect you to pay immediately to help cover our ineptitude, or else we'll be forced to send our attorneys out to collect."
Well, we all know that's not how the real world works, and mismanaged businesses don't last very long because they've proven they have no worth to anyone, be they stockholders or customers. So, let's all hope that for once businesses teach the rest of the public a lesson they won't forget and simply let those in office figure out what to do without another cent of help.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/5/2011
There's this case I didn't care very much about, involving this guy Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who headed the International Monetary Fund. The guy was arrested and charged with sexually assaulting a Guinean hotel maid who claimed he tried to rape her in his plush Manhattan hotel suite. Since then, he's been under "house" arrest.
But as of Tuesday, according to the New York Post newspaper, eventual dismissal of the case, likely quite soon, is now a "certainty."
Although I do remember the headline going by, right after the perp was arrested, the item was quickly forgotten. Since I don't do much business with the IMF, to me this was simply another guy who abused a woman and got himself arrested. While that doesn't get headline news every day, it probably should, because these freaks are all over the place. But, now that they're going to spring this guy, it is catching my attention.
Because although I believe that everyone truly is innocent until proven guilty, and that's what evidence and trials are all about, there are some folks who might be slightly above the law. And in this case, something just doesn't seem right to me.
Going back to square one, this guy was arrested by the New York City police, not some redneck sheriff in a hick town in fly-over country. Having been born and raised in NYC, I know that those guys generally follow very strict procedures before announcing the arrest of high profile perps, especially diplomats, because the backlash on mistakes is horrific on them. What's more, the pressure from the press puts them in a fishbowl. To me, that indicates they were probably very careful and sure of themselves, evidence-wise, before they made the collar.
Now, all of a sudden, however many weeks later, they no longer have a case because their star witness, the victim's, word can't be trusted. And, according to an "insider" at the center of the NYPD investigation, speaking only on the condition of anonymity of course, "She is not to be believed in anything that comes out of her mouth -which is a shame, because now we may never know what happened in that hotel room. Did Strauss-Kahn use force? Was there actually a crime? I don't think we'll ever know."
Well, maybe I've just been around too long, or maybe I was born a cynic, but for whatever reason, I simply get skeptical when miracles happen out of the blue, especially when they involve folks at the seat of money and politics.
Now, naturally, just like the cops and the courts, at this point I don't know if the guy's guilty or not. But, it doesn't seem right that just because the perp's a high profile political figure and the maid has no influence at all, this guy's avoiding a trial that would show us all exactly what he's all about. And, if this guy wasn't who he is, I'm pretty sure we'd see one.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
But as of Tuesday, according to the New York Post newspaper, eventual dismissal of the case, likely quite soon, is now a "certainty."
Although I do remember the headline going by, right after the perp was arrested, the item was quickly forgotten. Since I don't do much business with the IMF, to me this was simply another guy who abused a woman and got himself arrested. While that doesn't get headline news every day, it probably should, because these freaks are all over the place. But, now that they're going to spring this guy, it is catching my attention.
Because although I believe that everyone truly is innocent until proven guilty, and that's what evidence and trials are all about, there are some folks who might be slightly above the law. And in this case, something just doesn't seem right to me.
Going back to square one, this guy was arrested by the New York City police, not some redneck sheriff in a hick town in fly-over country. Having been born and raised in NYC, I know that those guys generally follow very strict procedures before announcing the arrest of high profile perps, especially diplomats, because the backlash on mistakes is horrific on them. What's more, the pressure from the press puts them in a fishbowl. To me, that indicates they were probably very careful and sure of themselves, evidence-wise, before they made the collar.
Now, all of a sudden, however many weeks later, they no longer have a case because their star witness, the victim's, word can't be trusted. And, according to an "insider" at the center of the NYPD investigation, speaking only on the condition of anonymity of course, "She is not to be believed in anything that comes out of her mouth -which is a shame, because now we may never know what happened in that hotel room. Did Strauss-Kahn use force? Was there actually a crime? I don't think we'll ever know."
Well, maybe I've just been around too long, or maybe I was born a cynic, but for whatever reason, I simply get skeptical when miracles happen out of the blue, especially when they involve folks at the seat of money and politics.
Now, naturally, just like the cops and the courts, at this point I don't know if the guy's guilty or not. But, it doesn't seem right that just because the perp's a high profile political figure and the maid has no influence at all, this guy's avoiding a trial that would show us all exactly what he's all about. And, if this guy wasn't who he is, I'm pretty sure we'd see one.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, July 4, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/4/2011
Right before the July 4th holiday, a slow time for the press, Attorney General Eric Holder said examination of more than 100 instances in which the CIA had contact or was alleged to have had contact with terrorist detainees will no longer undergo law enforcement action in all but two discrete cases. It also happened to be the last day for current CIA Director, Leon Panetta, who's becoming the next Defense Secretary.
Similarly, General David Petraeus, who's taking over the CIA helm, said “We do not any longer truly, I think, appreciate the context of the post-9/11 period and some actions that were taking place under direction. And I, for one, again, as the potential leader of the agency, would like to see us focus forward and indeed put some of these actions behind us once and for all and put our workforce at rest with respect to that.”
Now, while it's good that the investigation's being dropped almost in total, what's really going on here is the administration's trying to quietly step away from a travesty that never should have begun in the first place. Because Holder's goal, against considerable opposition in his own party, was to try to smear the previous administration, and particularly President Bush himself.
As I understand what happened, the cases in question had already been thoroughly investigated while Bush was still in office and deemed legally handled. What's more, the files were offered to Holder for review. However, he apparently declined them, and started over from scratch. And now, all these months and wasted dollars later, he's found nothing really out of order. It's also highly likely that the two cases still open will be found acceptable as well.
The reason I'm mentioning all this is because it's another example of how an administration performs that has no clue about how to conduct themselves in times of war. Because while our nation's trying to deal with enemies that have no regard for rules of any kind and are basically barbaric heathens hiding under "religious" guise, our so-called leaders are jeopardizing our safety by playing politics above all. They'd rather try to smear a prior president from another party than protect their own nation's population from terrorists.
While the bad news is that those currently in office risk our safety by exposing all they can about those in the prior administration in an effort to make them look bad, the good news is that the exposure tells us all about how incompetent and naive the current office-holders are. So, now that we all know how much damage they're willing to do purely for political purpose, they're also simultaneously numbering their remaining days in office.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Similarly, General David Petraeus, who's taking over the CIA helm, said “We do not any longer truly, I think, appreciate the context of the post-9/11 period and some actions that were taking place under direction. And I, for one, again, as the potential leader of the agency, would like to see us focus forward and indeed put some of these actions behind us once and for all and put our workforce at rest with respect to that.”
Now, while it's good that the investigation's being dropped almost in total, what's really going on here is the administration's trying to quietly step away from a travesty that never should have begun in the first place. Because Holder's goal, against considerable opposition in his own party, was to try to smear the previous administration, and particularly President Bush himself.
As I understand what happened, the cases in question had already been thoroughly investigated while Bush was still in office and deemed legally handled. What's more, the files were offered to Holder for review. However, he apparently declined them, and started over from scratch. And now, all these months and wasted dollars later, he's found nothing really out of order. It's also highly likely that the two cases still open will be found acceptable as well.
The reason I'm mentioning all this is because it's another example of how an administration performs that has no clue about how to conduct themselves in times of war. Because while our nation's trying to deal with enemies that have no regard for rules of any kind and are basically barbaric heathens hiding under "religious" guise, our so-called leaders are jeopardizing our safety by playing politics above all. They'd rather try to smear a prior president from another party than protect their own nation's population from terrorists.
While the bad news is that those currently in office risk our safety by exposing all they can about those in the prior administration in an effort to make them look bad, the good news is that the exposure tells us all about how incompetent and naive the current office-holders are. So, now that we all know how much damage they're willing to do purely for political purpose, they're also simultaneously numbering their remaining days in office.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, July 3, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/3/2011
Not an awful lot going on in the news. Although I'm sure the president must be yammering somewhere. But I'm not where he is, so he can rant all he wants.
In the meantime though, although she's not worth the keystrokes, I thought I'd mention this Bachmann chick. She's out in Treestump, Iowa, or wherever, telling farmers and backhoe drivers and whoever else lives there what a great president she'd make and it seems they like her quite a lot. Her basic theme, from what I Googled about her is all the things she'd do right that the incumbent's done wrong.
However, in regard to what this country really needs, she's not only unqualified, I really don't understand how she gets a serious audience at all. Because as far as telling audiences what they already know, regarding the terrible shape we're in as a nation, anybody capable of reading a newspaper or tuning a TV can do the same thing. Aside from that, we all know how and why we're in the jam we're in. But, what she hasn't got an iota of is credentials.
We've already seen what an inexperienced amateur can do to this nation if he's left alone by irresponsible supporters, and are paying dearly because he's not been reigned in. And regardless that it's perfectly alright for someone to assume an office because constituents voted him in, the cost of on-the-job training is not only huge, it's practically devastated the country financially and otherwise.
So, I hope that when the hoopla and noise in farm country ceases, and we get on with selecting serious, qualified candidates, that we all remember that regardless of party: this time around we absolutely must have someone at the helm that really knows what they're doing and this Bachmann chick isn't it.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
In the meantime though, although she's not worth the keystrokes, I thought I'd mention this Bachmann chick. She's out in Treestump, Iowa, or wherever, telling farmers and backhoe drivers and whoever else lives there what a great president she'd make and it seems they like her quite a lot. Her basic theme, from what I Googled about her is all the things she'd do right that the incumbent's done wrong.
However, in regard to what this country really needs, she's not only unqualified, I really don't understand how she gets a serious audience at all. Because as far as telling audiences what they already know, regarding the terrible shape we're in as a nation, anybody capable of reading a newspaper or tuning a TV can do the same thing. Aside from that, we all know how and why we're in the jam we're in. But, what she hasn't got an iota of is credentials.
We've already seen what an inexperienced amateur can do to this nation if he's left alone by irresponsible supporters, and are paying dearly because he's not been reigned in. And regardless that it's perfectly alright for someone to assume an office because constituents voted him in, the cost of on-the-job training is not only huge, it's practically devastated the country financially and otherwise.
So, I hope that when the hoopla and noise in farm country ceases, and we get on with selecting serious, qualified candidates, that we all remember that regardless of party: this time around we absolutely must have someone at the helm that really knows what they're doing and this Bachmann chick isn't it.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, July 2, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/2/2011
According to the Associated Press, "Thousands of marchers stormed the Georgia Capitol on Saturday to protest the state's new immigration law, which they say creates an unwelcome environment for people of color and those in search of a better life." Capitol police and organizers estimated that between 8,000 and 14,000 protesters gathered.
Jessica Bamaca and Melany Cordero held a poster saying, "How would you feel if your family got broken apart?" Bamaca was born in the U.S., but her mother and sister are from Guatemala. She said she fears they will be deported and that "I would be here by myself. I have a feeling the governor doesn't know the pain affecting families. If he were to be in our position, how would he react?"
I think that by now there probably are thousands of stories like that. And maybe some sympathy's felt in many cases. Nonetheless, I keep coming back to the same conclusion. The first word in the description "Illegal aliens" is ILLEGAL. And until there's a law change, the status of those who have come here that way remains as criminal and is subject to whatever the penalties may be. These folks weren't dragged here, they sneaked their way in.
But, what's worse, as I've mentioned in prior entries is what closing our eyes to illegal entry does to those who've come here the way they should. Because leniency toward illegals, and allowing them to remain, makes all who've law abided look like complete fools and schnooks. And if that's the example government wants to set, why should any law be obeyed?
So, I think a new precedents being set here, particularly by this administration, that people can now simply pick the laws they want to abide by and ignore all the rest, because illegal no longer has any impact. And, not only that, if the laws you break help the incumbents, they'll try their very best to help you beat their own system.
That's why, when you look at what this country's become in just over two years you can clearly see how we've degenerated into a complete Obamanation.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Jessica Bamaca and Melany Cordero held a poster saying, "How would you feel if your family got broken apart?" Bamaca was born in the U.S., but her mother and sister are from Guatemala. She said she fears they will be deported and that "I would be here by myself. I have a feeling the governor doesn't know the pain affecting families. If he were to be in our position, how would he react?"
I think that by now there probably are thousands of stories like that. And maybe some sympathy's felt in many cases. Nonetheless, I keep coming back to the same conclusion. The first word in the description "Illegal aliens" is ILLEGAL. And until there's a law change, the status of those who have come here that way remains as criminal and is subject to whatever the penalties may be. These folks weren't dragged here, they sneaked their way in.
But, what's worse, as I've mentioned in prior entries is what closing our eyes to illegal entry does to those who've come here the way they should. Because leniency toward illegals, and allowing them to remain, makes all who've law abided look like complete fools and schnooks. And if that's the example government wants to set, why should any law be obeyed?
So, I think a new precedents being set here, particularly by this administration, that people can now simply pick the laws they want to abide by and ignore all the rest, because illegal no longer has any impact. And, not only that, if the laws you break help the incumbents, they'll try their very best to help you beat their own system.
That's why, when you look at what this country's become in just over two years you can clearly see how we've degenerated into a complete Obamanation.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, July 1, 2011
BloggeRhythms 7/1/2011
I saw a TV blurb go by yesterday about time expiring for raising campaign contributions in the second quarter. And that's when it dawned on me to consider how and why that money's spent.
To my understanding, most of the funds go toward advertising and getting out the vote. But, exactly who are these candidates advertising to? Because I can't believe that any ad by any politician is going to make up or change any likely voter's mind.
To begin with, only about half the population votes, and of those voters, most already have some kind of interest or focus on their candidates or parties of choice. So then, how is an ad from the opposition going to change their minds? Beyond that, in today's day and age where folks are hammered all day long by advertising for every conceivable thing on earth, how much effect is any ad going to have on them at all? It's also my bet that even if people have their TV sound on, the pap that's spouted bounces off them like white noise because they're inured. And aside from the fact that nobody really listens or cares about ads, even if they did, experience has taught them that little in advertisements is ever the truth.
But despite the preceding, let's pretend that folks actually do pay attention to ads and absorb the information presented. And if that's the case, then how do those ads affect them? Because they know what they've actually seen or experienced from candidates as those incumbents have performed in their roles. So, how or why is any ad going to change the truth?
At the moment we have an incumbent who's proven track record's horrendous in almost every category there is, unless you're one of those who wants to see our nation crumbled, and that's simply everyday fact. So how can any ad on earth change his record? His primary opponent wasn't very effective when leading a state, and that too is documented truth. And as far as the rest of the current field goes, none stand out as head and shoulders above the rest, in fact most of them are nothing but glorified political hacks. So, how can an ad change their stripes?
Lastly, in today's day and age I don't think anyone with an IQ bigger than their shoe size buys anything because of ads or promotion, simply because they've been fooled, disappointed or defrauded too many times in their lives to believe the hype and smoke. So since political ads are highly unlikely to have any real effect at all, why not put all that money back into people's pockets where it might have a chance to do some good?
That's it for today folks.
Adios
To my understanding, most of the funds go toward advertising and getting out the vote. But, exactly who are these candidates advertising to? Because I can't believe that any ad by any politician is going to make up or change any likely voter's mind.
To begin with, only about half the population votes, and of those voters, most already have some kind of interest or focus on their candidates or parties of choice. So then, how is an ad from the opposition going to change their minds? Beyond that, in today's day and age where folks are hammered all day long by advertising for every conceivable thing on earth, how much effect is any ad going to have on them at all? It's also my bet that even if people have their TV sound on, the pap that's spouted bounces off them like white noise because they're inured. And aside from the fact that nobody really listens or cares about ads, even if they did, experience has taught them that little in advertisements is ever the truth.
But despite the preceding, let's pretend that folks actually do pay attention to ads and absorb the information presented. And if that's the case, then how do those ads affect them? Because they know what they've actually seen or experienced from candidates as those incumbents have performed in their roles. So, how or why is any ad going to change the truth?
At the moment we have an incumbent who's proven track record's horrendous in almost every category there is, unless you're one of those who wants to see our nation crumbled, and that's simply everyday fact. So how can any ad on earth change his record? His primary opponent wasn't very effective when leading a state, and that too is documented truth. And as far as the rest of the current field goes, none stand out as head and shoulders above the rest, in fact most of them are nothing but glorified political hacks. So, how can an ad change their stripes?
Lastly, in today's day and age I don't think anyone with an IQ bigger than their shoe size buys anything because of ads or promotion, simply because they've been fooled, disappointed or defrauded too many times in their lives to believe the hype and smoke. So since political ads are highly unlikely to have any real effect at all, why not put all that money back into people's pockets where it might have a chance to do some good?
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)