Sunday, September 30, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/30/2012

I’m still stuck in a mental rut regarding the upcoming presidential debate. And the more I go over the premise in my mind, the more convinced I become that debating performance has absolutely nothing to do with anyone's abilities regarding job skills. Nor does the “gift of gab” add anything of great value to problem solving or the required talents in managing the greatest nation in the world.
So, while talking to myself, I came up with a few illustrations of where I think debating skills might come up short when other abilities are greatly needed.
Let’s suppose for example, someone’s responsible for managing the country’s budget, however fails to produce one at all, thus has no idea whatsoever of whether or not revenues will be sufficient to cover costs. Consequently, debt continues to pile up, soon reaching sixteen trillion dollars plus and likely to cause another major recession.  So, in that case, would you want someone in office whose only skill is BS, or someone who’s proven to know how to manage your money?
Then, what about foreign policy and who’d do a better job in that regard? Would the country be better off with someone in office who takes the time to travel to other nations himself, such as England, Poland and Israel. Or one who watches Middle-East turmoil increase, while his representatives lie to the public, and goes out to campaign for office instead?
And then there’s the huge price the public’s paying for oil, at the moment the base of the nation’s only viable vehicle fuel. The costs of that commodity alone are breaking citizen’s budgets, increasing prices of everything that gets shipped or flown, and send trillions of hard-earned American dollars to foreign nations. So, are we better off backing someone who only wants to make those problems worse, as already proven, or another who believes we should be self-sufficient and keep what we earn for ourselves?
Similarly, we have now seen the beginnings of increasing heath care taxes, and know that it’s only going to get financially worse for all while quality of service decreases. Consequently, would it be more beneficial to retain those who’ve made the huge managerial mistakes or start over with someone who wants to revise the whole issue and rebuild it so it makes sense?
Then there’s the whole area of taxes, which are already disproportionate and grossly out of line with what’s needed to keep the economy growing. Therefore, does it make more sense to elect someone who wants lower taxes for all, via revision of the tax code, which will stimulate growth, or should we retain someone who knows nothing about economics at all, but wishes to fleece cash from successful earners simply because they have some?
As for myself, there are many more issues that can be cited, and many more comparisons to be drawn. However the information forming the basis of comparison of candidates came from actual performance, not speeches, debates or other forms of hot air.
And that’s why even if the incumbent proved to be the greatest debater who ever lived, and his opponent the worst, I not only can’t think of a single issue that can be corrected by talk, I also know it was lack of presidential skills that caused all our current problems. And even the greatest BS artist on the planet can’t help fix that a bit.
That's it for today folks.

Saturday, September 29, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/29/2012

I’ve written this subject up before, but due to the timing I’ll mention it again.
Next week the presidential debates will begin, and I simply can’t understand their purpose, haven’t watched one in more years than I care to think about, and most importantly, believe that anyone who can be swayed by a politician's words is too dumb to tie their own shoes and likely not able to find a voting booth with a map, a flashlight, seeing eye dog, and Sherpa guide.
What’s more, I doubt there’s anyone on earth who really intends to vote that still doesn’t know where candidates stand on every issue imaginable.  Which is especially true today where every word, every breath, and virtually every action taken by politician's is bisected, dissected, analyzed, parsed, put under a microscope, discussed in detail on talk shows, news outlets and panels, shredded, digested, regurgitated and checked for accuracy in every kind of media there is on every side of the aisle, and has been 24/7/365 for the past four years and 366 in today’s case.
Beyond all the preceding, we now have the Internet where, I believe, more and more likely voters obtain input. I do that myself, whereas I can find considerably more data than quick TV sound bites or blurbs, especially since I rarely turn the volume on at all which brings me to another point.
While I certainly think I know more than enough about the incumbent and the horrendous mistakes he’s made trying to do a job that’s miles and miles above his competency level, while simultaneously attempting to socialize the nation, I also can’t stand the sound of his voice. I find his speech to be irritating, whiny and very spoiled-child like, so except for once a long a time ago I’ve never, ever turned the sound up when he speaks. I read transcripts and recaps instead.
Consequently, if I actually were to watch the ridiculous debate to determine who the best actor was as they tried to outdo one another in sounding presidential and stately, every time the incumbent spoke I’d hit the mute button anyway or flip to some other non-news channel till I though he was done.  And that means, all I’d really hear would be Romney anyway whom I'm very familiar with, so what’s the point in watching at all?
That’s it for today folks.

Friday, September 28, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/28/2012

I’ve often mentioned my thoughts about the actors comprising the so-called Hollywood left because, despite their extremely high profiles and constant public attention, as a group they have virtually nothing  in common with those in the real world.

And most of all in that regard, despite their strong political opinions, they themselves completely surrender their identities and whatever intellectuality they might possess to a host of others, whereas they become total and absolute puppets and robots  by profession.
It’s scriptwriters whom put all the words in actors mouths, directors who tell them precisely how, when and where to perform, make-up artists determine how they’ll appear, agents handle their income and budgets, and for many, a whole host of others tend to their routine needs and wants, up to and including, often even raising their children. Consequently, actor types don’t even use their own brains by professional choice, yet formulate strong opinions significantly affecting others while really knowing nothing about those others lives, circumstances, issues, or anything else.

And that’s why an article on line caught my eye just now, where Lachlan Markay of the Heritage Foundation, a research and educational institution think tank, addresses a new movie starring Matt Damon. 
According to Mr. Markay, the film portrays “American oil and natural gas producers as money-grubbing villains purportedly poisoning rural American towns.” 
He then relates that “The creators of Promised Land have gone to absurd lengths to vilify oil and gas companies.” But then he goes on to state that “Since recent events have demonstrated the relative environmental soundness of hydraulic fracturing – a technique for extracting oil and gas from shale formations – Promised Land’s script has been altered to make doom-saying environmentalists the tools of oil companies attempting to discredit legitimate “fracking” concerns.”

But then, Markey further points out the best part about the movie. “It is therefore of particular note that it is financed in part by the royal family of the oil-rich United Arab Emirates.” And that, “A spokesperson with DDA Public Relations, which is running PR for the film, confirmed that AD Media is a financier. The company is wholly owned by the government of the UAE.”

So, here we have Matt Damon actually working for foreigners currently gauging the American public for oil, and using his misguided environmental beliefs to discredit a seemingly safe fuel production process for the benefit of Arabs wishing to eliminate U.S. domestic competition. 
As for me, although I believe that Damon’s involvement in this project is truly tragic and a shame that he seemingly has no doubts about financially harming his fellow countrymen for no proven reason, I simultaneously have some compassion for him.  Because I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt by assuming that he might have ultimately rejected the role if he only knew how to read and comprehend. 

That’s it for today folks.


Thursday, September 27, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/27/2012

Kimberly Schwandt of  Fox wrote that “President Obama misspoke in a speech at Kent State University yesterday, saying "I want to see us export more jobs." He then corrected himself, with “I want to see us export more products - excuse me."
Now, although from what I’ve heard this guy say for the past four years, I truly wouldn’t be surprised if he wanted to help anyone but his own nation and therefore, really did mean what he said the first time. But let’s give him benefit of the doubt and accept the correction. My questions today, however, are about the reporter herself who works for Fox no less. Because she went on to write that: 
“Romney of course has had his own fair share of misspeaking also, when he said "I like to be able to fire people" and in fuller context was saying more about services provided, adding "You know, if someone doesn't give me a good service that I need, I want to say, 'I'm going to go get someone else to provide that service to me."
From the reporters comment, it seems to me she thinks it’s “misspeaking” to want to control your own business and blow out employees who don’t measure up or otherwise are no longer desired for whatever reasons. And perhaps she simply doesn’t understand that jobs in the real world aren’t permanent licenses to underperform, produce below standard, or are positions devoid of responsibility for  poor results. However, employers operate businesses, not charities or public works.
Beyond that, when Mr. Romney stated that if he doesn’t get what he expects service-wise, he prefers to go elsewhere, I believe he’s  perfectly right. Because the other approach, which the reporter seems to think is correct, results in reductions in standards, ever decreasing quality, absence of provider’s responsibilities, continually declining performance and consistently weaker results. In fact, the only things that go up when poor performers are retained  are employer’s overhead and operating costs.
However, without continuing on to an in-depth economic comparison or to business formulations and charts. let’s look at at simple examples of the two alternatives involved, and decide which approach seems to make the most financial sense by comparison, by asking a fundamental question. 
If you were deciding which entity you think operates best and performs consistently well year in and year out, would you choose outfits like Exxon Mobil, Wal-Mart Stores, IBM, Ford Motors, GE, Berkshire Hathaway, or even Bain Capital perhaps? Or on the other hand, would you select the current administration as examples of superior performance, either regarding financial sophistication or managerial expertise? Or maybe any of the unions?
And I think, if you really consider the actual results among those who produce or fail on their own, rather than survive regardless…it’s always those who suffer consequences when performance is poor that produce the best results. And that's why I haven’t an iota of doubt that when it comes to demanding employees measure up or else, Mitt Romney is absolutely and unequivocally on the mark.  
That's it for today folks.

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/26/2012

Whereas today is an extremely important religious holiday for many in the nation, I think it’s also a very good time to cite a quote from Harry Reid who yesterday said about Mitt Romney: “He’s coming to a state where there are a lot of members of the LDS Church ... They understand that he is not the face of Mormonism.”
As for myself, knowing virtually nothing about Mormonism, I think Reid has taught me a lot. Because, judging by all of Romney’s actions I’ve seen I’d have to assume that Mormon’s are a hard-working, tax-paying, extremely charitable, family oriented group of highly successful people who go out of their way to help others wherever they can.
On the other hand, if Reed believes himself exemplary of a faith, I get a completely different picture. Because in his case I see a deceitful, lying obstructionist with no morals whatsoever, who’d say anything negative, regardless of truths, anywhere, any time, under any circumstances if he thought it would give him personal or political gain. Consequently, I doubt Reid’s comment has any religious validity whatsoever, but is just one more fabrication from a total political hack.
I also think that Reid is a very big help to Romney’s quest for the White House, because everything Reid does or attempts consistently backfires. And when you add his gaffes and distortions to his miserable performance in the Senate, you get the picture of total incompetence and unwillingness to help his own nation due to political bias.
Therefore, what Mitt  Romney really needs to make himself look unquestionably presidential is more ridiculous commentary from the vapid Harry Reid’s of the world.
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/25/2012

Daniel Halper of The Weekly Standard reports that: "Mr. Obama was scheduled to attend a reception for world leaders at the United Nations on Monday night. But a campaign adviser acknowledged privately that in this election year, campaigning trumped meetings with world leaders. 'Look, if he met with one leader, he would have to meet with 10,' the aide said, speaking on the condition of anonymity."
So here we have another confirmation of not only the incumbent’s being unqualified to lead the nation, but I believe also a case of extremely poor judgment. Because, for whatever reasons, the administration seems to feel that endless talk and speeches are the key to retaining office instead of proving competence and leadership via demonstration.
And in this particular case, I think a huge mistake was therefore made by ducking presidential job responsibilities, whereas worldwide respect would have been gained, and visual proof presented, that so many leaders sought and received counsel and support from the supposed leader of the free world. And that the attention given them would likely have had significantly more positive impact on voters than any kind of speeches made before audiences stacked with proven supporters on the campaign trail.
However, whoever the advisor was who gave the incumbent the ridiculous advice to evade his international responsibilities, that advisor did indeed help to win considerable voter support, I believe. Except, that support is far more likely to go to Mitt Romney because the incumbent now looks even more incompetent and unable to apply good judgment, not only here at home but also in regard to deteriorating foreign relations around the globe.
That’s it for today folks.

Monday, September 24, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/24/2012

This past weekend, the Tour Championship, last leg of the FedEx Cup professional golf competition, was played in Atlanta, Georgia. The other three events included in the overall contest, played over the three preceding weeks, were the The Barclays, Deutsche Bank Championship and BMW Championship tourneys.
This years Tour champion,  Brandt Snedeker,  won  $1.44 million for the individual tournament, plus a $10 million bonus for capturing the FedEx Cup itself. The balance of the $35 million bonus fund was paid out to the rest of the players as follows: The runner-up gets $3 million, 3rd place $2 million, 4th place $1.5 million, 5th place $1 million, and so on down to $32,000 for 126th through 150th place.
I bring this up because for the last four weeks, and many more times all season, the name FedEx was mentioned by announcers, commentators, golf pundits and others, thousands and thousands, if not millions of times. In fact, the company’s name flashed on TV screens seemingly every couple of minutes, whereas it was included on scoreboards, caddies pull-over tops, and all the crawlers that crept across the top or bottom of scenes. And while I never turned my TV volume up to listen, I know from past experience the FedEx name had to be mentioned almost continually by those covering the event.
In the meantime however, this past week FedEx Corp. (FDX) stock dropped the most in three months after cutting its annual profit outlook because a weakening economy has prompted shippers in the U.S. and overseas to switch to cheaper delivery options. Earnings for the year ending in May will be $6.20 to $6.60 a share compared with a previous forecast of $6.90 to $7.40.
So, I guess, all those millions spent on advertising, including the sponsorship of a very expensive month-long series of golfing events, isn’t enough to convince folks to spend bucks on things they don’t really need or want. And when push comes to shove, businessfolks and everyone else, are going to do precisely what’s good for them, and all the ads in the world aren’t going to change those facts an iota.
And that, of course, brings me back to the current presidential campaign. Whereas just about all I see and hear concerns the amount of money being spent on political ads by both parties, something I’ve never really understood at all.
It’s simply incomprehensible to me that anyone paying too much in taxes, can’t find a job, shelling out huge sums just to buy gasoline, seeing the cost of health care rising rapidly, watching nations going to war all over the Middle-East unbridled, wants to keep what they’ve earned from being “redistributed,” or sees overpaid teachers striking, just to name a few major governmental catastrophes is going to be swayed by anything produced in an ad promoting the incumbent.
So, in the preceding cases, I think FedEx and the incumbent would both have been far better off skipping the ad campaigns and keeping the money. Because the way things look at the moment, they’re going to need it to cover income they’re simply not going to receive anymore like they used to.
That’s it for today folks.

Sunday, September 23, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/23/2012

Although I’ve no intention of watching the upcoming presidential debates whereas I truly don’t understand their value, I’m pretty sure I can predict most of the candidate’s answers in advance. So, I’m going to jot down a few samples, and then later we can compare them to what was actually said by each. And since the economy’s such a huge issue, I’ll begin with that subject in my fictional contest.
Moderator: Starting with you Mr. Romney, what’s your plan to address the vast number of un or underemployed people around the nation?
Mitt Romney: I believe the problems stem from uncertainty among employers due to high taxes, strangling overregulation, far too much intervention by environmentalists and government policies that are strongly anti-business. So, my first step in office will be to reverse each and every one of these situations.
Moderator: And now, Mr. Incumbent, what’s your position?
The Incumbent: Well, actually Mr. Moderator, business isn’t really my forte. So, in that regard I’ve left decision making to highly experienced subordinates who tell me the problems are all “W.” Bush’s fault. Consequently, none of this stuff has anything to do with me, so I guess you’ll just have to ask him.
Moving on then to Mr. Romney. What’s your take on the state of education in the nation?
Mitt Romney: I think it’s quite clear to anyone who pays attention that the stranglehold put on our public educational system by far too powerful unions is the major cause for it’s absolute deterioration. So, we need to move toward a merit-based system for teachers, remove the weak ones and instead of having teachers primarily concerned with raises, vacation days and benefits, we’ve got to get them thinking about educating our kids instead.
Moderator: And how about you, Mr. Incumbent. What’s your take on the subject.
The Incumbent: Well. Gee whiz. This is another of of those things I really don’t know too much about personally. But I do know this much. Practically every public school teacher in the country voted for me last time, and they campaign everywhere for me right now. I also know their unions have given me an incredible amount of money too. And since they’re the one’s who’re actually doing the job, if they think that highly of me, I must be doing everything absolutely right. But, I am also aware that there might be a problem here or there, but they were left to me by “W.” Bush and need more time to fix.
Moderator: Now it’s time to move on to foreign policy issues. So Mr. Romney, what are your views regarding this area.
Mitt Romney: Having taken a great deal of time to study this subject, and even travelling to visit our strongest allies, I’ve come to realize that our nation’s lost it’s favored position around the globe. And this is something that must be immediately fixed. Therefore, I intend to let nations like Israel, Iraq, Great Britain, Poland and a whole host of other foreign friends, near and far, know that we’re back again, ready to support them and regain the international strength we worked so hard to attain in the first place.
Moderator: And now you, Mr. Incumbent. Where do you stand?
The Incumbent: By your question, I guess you’re referring to all those other countries everywhere else. And the truth is, none of those folks vote here -except for the illegal aliens that I strongly support- so I don’t pay a lot of attention to them. But, my advisors tell me that this is an area that my predecessor, “W” Bush really screwed up. So, in this case, I’m not only not to blame for anything at all, because I’ve never been involved, but nonetheless have it on very good authority that it was all “W’s” fault. 
Moderator: Lastly, we come to the question of dependency on foreign oil, Mr. Romney. Please tell us your thoughts.
Mitt Romney: This is one of our nation’s greatest problems of all. Not only because of the cost of things like gasoline and oil themselves, but because their ridiculously inflated prices affect the cost of so much else, such as food, clothing, travel, heating and just about everything else that has to be transported. And what’s even worse is that the situation’s so easy to fix. All that’s needed is relaxed permissions to stimulate drilling here, making us fuel independent and with that, just about every other aspect of our whole economy will fall into place for the best.
Moderator: And what are your final words Mr. Incumbent?
The Incumbent: Well, I guess we’ve finally come to a subject I understand quite clearly. Because going all the way back to my original campaign, I was told by people really in the know that all “W” Bush cared about was oil. So, I’ve done everything in my power to keep him and his Texas friends from enriching themselves. And that’s why we have folks paying four times as much as they should at the pump. Because although Arabs and Soros are taking zillions out of our citizen’s pockets, “W’s” crew isn’t making a dime in profits. And my administration will insure that that will be the case, even if we all go absolutely flat broke in the process. So, here’s another perfect example of why all our nation’s ill’s are “W’s” fault
Moderator: Thank you gentlemen, and good night.
That’s it for today folks.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/22/2012

I’ve written fairly often about my professional career, because over time so many situations arise in almost all walks of life that can be compared to, and learned from, those occurring in the business world. 
In that regard, today I was reminded of a book I wrote several years ago, Selling Equipment Leasing, covering just about the entire scope of leasing and financing machinery and equipment.  And after the two introductory chapters that prepare readers for the more specific aspects of the subject to come, I wrote a chapter entitled, “A Winning Attitude.”
I included that chapter because, regardless of what’s being brought to market or being sold, I believe that to be effective, persuasive and successful, sellers themselves have to be absolutely convinced that what they offer is what they purport it to be, that it will perform as promised, and is truly worth without doubt whatever the price is. I then go on to provide examples and scenarios illustrating among other things, that astute buyers can routinely sense when a seller is hesitant, has doubts or isn’t certain him or herself that what’s being offered is right for particular situations. Especially in cases where failure to perform might be deemed likely.
Coming back to today's thought, and basis for this entry, is a blurb I saw on Fox News website just now, regarding the upcoming presidential debate. And although I have no intention of wasting my time watching, whereas I already know from past performance what the two candidates are all about, and neither can change their histories with flowery words, I did get a clear sense of their own self-opinions from the following paragraph:
According to Fox: “Romney's campaign hopes debate will offer chance for GOP candidate to make mark on race, as Obama's team sees it as chance to spread core message, rather than focus on besting rival.”
So here we have one guy, Romney who has specific purpose, goals and intent, wishing to positively influence listeners with his experience, wisdom and acumen which he is obviously betting on to help him win the White House. Because, among other things, he not only thinks he deserves it....he believes he can prove it.
Then on the other hand we have a lackluster failure, who not only isn’t sure he can win, he’s programmed himself for failure and pre-written the reasons beforehand. Which leads me to ask why in the world any voter with a modicum of common sense would go out and cast a vote for someone who obviously doesn’t even believe he deserves reelection himself?
That’s it for today folks

Friday, September 21, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/21/2012

While watching the current administration implode from incompetent foreign policy all over the world, as oil  prices creep up again, inflation reappears, education loses its value via unionized teachers, heath care taxes increase costs of living and stifle business growth, un/under employment remains above 14% and U.S. exceeds 16 trillion dollars,  Bill Kristol, editor of the 'Weekly Standard' and a former chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle, wrote: “Has there been a presidential race in modern times featuring two candidates who have done so little over their lifetimes for our country, and who have so little substance to say about the future of our country?”
I mention this because I can’t honestly believe the arrogance, narrow-mindedness, innate stupidity and blinding moronics of this empty suit who sits on the sidelines and critiques and pontificates about the performance of others, whoever they might be, while he himself has never stepped up, never taken responsibility and is totally clueless as to what the job of president’s is all about.
I also wonder where in the world this worthless turkey attained the right to state with such self-ordained haughtiness his lofty opinions whereas I’m unaware of his serving successfully in any elected capacity himself. All I've ever seen him do is sit on his tail spouting gibberish that’s just about totally unfounded and unsupported by even a pinch hit at the plate. Yet, this “expert” readily broadcasts to anyone bothering to pay attention about how a job he’s never come close to holding should be done.
Even in the case of the incumbent, who’s really botched up his turn in the White House, he at least earned the job by being duly elected. And as far as Mitt Romney’s concerned, he’s been a successful governor, revitalized the Olympics, and performed extremely well at Bain Capital, but this Kristol clown’s done zip, zero, nada in the real world, preferring to sit on his tail and bark instead of going out and hunting himself.
And the reason, I’m so upset that I’ve purposefully sat here to type about this miserable, whining, sniveling, runny-nose complainer is that I’ve run into folks like him all my professional life and, frankly, can’t stand them. Because, if you think someone’s doing a lousy job and have earned the right to critique because you’ve done it better yourself, that’s fine with me. But if all you can bring to the table is an inexperienced critique or complaint from the stands, shut the hell up and get out of my sight until you can show me some valid credentials that you've gained yourself.

That's it for today folks.


Thursday, September 20, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/20/2012

As most regular readers know, my professional background is in marketing and sales. And, over the years I’ve excelled to the extent that I’ve also become a trainer and consultant to businesses and individuals wishing to avail themselves of my experience, as a tool to help improve their own performance. I don’t mention these things to brag or boast of my achievement, they are simply matters of fact.
Now, in that regard I’m often asked how I’ve come to know so much, and why is it that others readily seek my counsel. And why is it that my suggestions or opinions are generally so accurate, do I have some kind of sixth sense in business situations? The answer I give them, however, has nothing to do with extraordinary perception, magic formulations or a crystal ball, because I emply nothing more than the most basic common sense.
I found out early on in life that, in most cases, the most valuable knowledge comes from hands on experience, attention to detail, and insuring that your mistakes are rarely, if ever, repeated again. In fact, quite often big mistakes are the best teachers of all, because they're the ones you’ll most likely never, ever, wish to live through at all.
Another founding block on the road to success for me was doing my best to find, join if I could, and learn everything possible from those who were the greatest achievers themselves. And in that regard, filter through what I learned, retaining the most valuable input for my own use.
I also realized within a short time that the harder you work, and the more positive effort you exert, the greater your odds for achievement. Consequently, if those around me were working on five possible opportunities found, and I was working on ten, for example, simple probability alone gave me a two to one chance of doubling their performance. And, what was more, working twice as hard gave me the chance to learn two times more.
Now, throughout all this time I’ve never minded or complained about the effort I’ve extended, and I certainly believe that hard work is the singlemost cause of any success I’ve had. And when it comes to helping others, I try to do that through my consultation, writing and even via my blogs at times. However, I do those things by choice and in the case of business arrangements, I expect and receive compensation. Because I did all the required work to attain my position and no one on earth, without equivocation, is “entitled” to get anything from me, unless I specifically choose to donate it.
So, in my book,  if you want the rewards of success and the fulfillment of whatever your needs are, go out and earn them yourself like I did. I didn’t compete all my life so that some sludge can sustain from my efforts for free via "redistribution." And in that regard, we’re absolutely even, because, as far as the hopeless, or homeless, or worthless are concerned, I don’t want anything from them either.
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/19/2012

Yesterday, Dem’s went ballistic because Mitt Romney commented several months ago that 47% of voters won’t select him, whereas they strongly feel entitled to governmental support. Then, this morning,  a 1998 audio clip of the incumbent gave Romney a key issue to pursue in retaliation, since in that clip the incumbent embraces “redistribution” of wealth.
I mention it because although I think both issues clearly illustrate fundamental differences between the vying presidential candidates regarding entitlements, I also have questions about “redistribution” theory altogether.
To me, there's no such thing as redistribution because U.S. “wealth” was never distributed to begin with. The Founding Fathers came here to form a free country and began with nothing financially, since there was nothing here back then at all. So they went out and built the foundation themselves, laying the groundwork for the greatest nation on earth. In fact, income taxes weren’t even applied until 1913, to help raise money for war, and even then, were meant to be only temporarily employed.
Consequently, if the incumbent want’s to restart fairly as it was originally done, he has to take everything from everyone, leaving them with no money, no government support, no welfare or medical aid or anything else but their innate ability to get things done. Because any other approach is simply a new form of government here, known as socialism everywhere else, where the helpless, hopeless and outright lazy feed off everyone that produces.
However,  for the sake of discussion, let’s say that wealth was actually distributed equally among our population. And in that case, I’d have to agree with J. Paul Getty who said “I contend that if all the money and property in the world were divided up equally...within a year or two at the most, the distribution of wealth would conform to patterns almost identical with those that had previously prevailed. Some individuals will always rise to higher levels of recognition and reward than others."
So, in the case of individual economic success it isn’t really the “wealth” that’s the issue, it comes down to the people themselves. And for those who believe it’s the successful one’s responsibility to carry those who aren’t, I have some very simple questions. What would happen if all the producers got together and out of governmental frustration left here to begin somewhere else? Who’d support those who stayed here? And once all the remaining wealth here was exhausted, who'd there be to replace it if nobody worked or paid taxes?
On the other hand though, for those who left to found a new place for workers and doers, I think we’d soon see the formation of a brand new greatest nation on earth. 
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/18/2012

An article on this morning, by Julie Pace of  Associated Press, says that “President Barack Obama's re-election campaign doesn't want to talk about what the Democrat is doing to prepare for the fall debates with Republican Mitt Romney. But aides are readily setting expectations - and not surprisingly, they want to keep them low for Obama while raising the stakes for Romney.” And I still don’t get it.
I’ve written this subject up before, and still don’t understand debates. To me they rank right up there with speeches, another aspect of politics that I believe, makes no sense. Because we’ve all got a very clear picture of politicians records, and for those who don’t, the information’s quite simple to research, especially today where there’s reams of data of all types on the web. So, knowing precisely what they do, and how, and when, what difference does it possibly make as to what politico’s say? Especially when it’s also been proven for all time that 99% of it is BS and always has been in the cases of those whom are unfit for the office they now hold.  
Consequently, after close to four years of watching complete and utter failure in almost every aspect of job performance there is, who in the world could be dumb enough to believe anything put forth by the incumbent? Because there are simply no words left that can overcome his actual performance, especially in the case of this guy who does nothing 24/7/365 but talk, and talk, and talk, and talk.
And, as I’ve stated many times here before, I myself wish I could have gotten away with hot air excuses when I totally screwed up jobs in the real world. However, in that realm, people are forced to produce or get out because business folks tend to really care about positive results and therefore, quickly toss poor performers and unqualified phonies out on their ears.  
Along the same lines, in a posting on The New York Times on-line,   Michael D. Shear and Michael Barbnaro write that  “Romney Calls 47% of Voters Dependent in Leaked Video.”  
The authors say that: “During a private reception with wealthy donors this year, Mitt Romney described almost half of Americans as “people who pay no income tax” and are “dependent upon government.” Those voters, he said, would probably support President Obama because they believe they are “victims” who are “entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.”
They continue on to state: “In a brief and hastily called news conference Monday, Mr. Romney acknowledged having made the blunt political and cultural assessment, saying it was “not elegantly stated,” but he stood by the substance of the remarks, insisting that he had made similar observations in public without generating controversy.”
Furthermore, they claim “Democrats quickly condemned the remarks as insensitive, and Mr. Obama’s campaign accused Mr. Romney of having “disdainfully written off half the nation.”
Then Romney went on to say that, 47 percent of the people will vote for Mr. Obama no matter what, and  are dependent upon government, believe that they are victims, and believe the government has a responsibility to care for them. And also, those people “pay no income tax,” and “so our message of low taxes doesn’t connect.”
Consequently, he concludes, “My job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
In this instance, what I find amusing is how the failing New York Times finds Mitt Romney’s views so appalling. They seem to deem it wrong, rude, or out of line to relate in public factors that are unequivocally true and correct. So, perhaps, this is another vivid example of a major difference between Republicans and Dems'. Because Republicans will clearly state their views, beliefs and opinions out loud instead of presenting totally phony precepts whenever they think somebody else might be listening.
That’s it for today folks.

Monday, September 17, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/17/2012

While disappointment and disagreement festers between the administration and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, over the U.S.’s wishes to wait for sanctions on Iran to take hold rather than taking more aggressive actions,  I found a link on Drudge to an article headed “Iran atomic chief says 'explosives' cut power at facility.”
It seems that Iranian, Fereydoon Abbasi Davani, told a 155-nation International Atomic Energy Agency gathering in a speech that, “On 17th August 2012, the electric power lines from the city of Qom to the Fordo complex ...were cut using explosives," and, "It should be reminded that the same act had been performed on the power lines to the Natanz facilities."
He didn’t, however, accuse anyone of sabotage, but in the past Iran has claimed both Israel and the United States were behind the assassinations of nuclear scientists and computer viruses targeting its facilities.

The article also points out that, “Fordo itself  is a key site in Iran's nuclear program, dug deep into a mountain to protect it against air strikes and enriching uranium to purities of 20 percent, a short step from the 90 percent needed for a nuclear weapon.” But, nonetheless, “Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful and that uranium enrichment is for power generation and medical purposes.”
So here, I think, we have an example of Israel's core conclusions regarding Iran developing nuclear weapons. Because while all the talk, hype, smoke and politicking go on on the international diplomatic stage, Netanyahu’s making sure they take care of business. And one thing I’m absolutely sure of is, he isn’t going going to stand by and watch his country get nuked simply because some American politico will sell it out to scam some votes.  

Then along the same lines of ridiculous decision making by an administration having no business experience, credentials or economic smarts, Fox News on-line also reports that: “The Treasury Department is resisting a push by General Motors Co. to sell the government's entire stake in the auto maker -the latest source of tension between two unlikely partners thrust together at the depths of the financial crisis. U.S. taxpayers kept the nation's largest auto maker by sales afloat with a $50 billion bailout in 2009 and now own 26.5% of the Detroit company.”

It seems that G.M.’s upset because of regulations and rigidity forced on them due to significant government ownership tying their hands and slowing their growth. However, if the government sells out now, taxpayers will take a significant financial hit due to G.M’s poor stock performance, and thus the merry-go-round of economically wrongful intervention will likely continue.

So here we have a Catch-22 caused by a misguided bailout decision, as was done with Chrysler, while Ford simultaneously provides a very successful example of how companies do far better on their own in the end. 

But if nothing else, at least the administration’s demonstrating that it’s very, very, consistent regardless. Because as the preceding situations illustrate, it doesn’t matter whether the situations are foreign or domestic, it can’t do anything right whatsoever. Which, I guess, is to be expected when the world’s greatest nation is in the hands of hopeless amateurs on all fronts.

That’s it for today folks.


Sunday, September 16, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/16/2012

Sitting here typing after scanning today’s news, I realize I’m extremely confused. Because, according to Fox News on-line. “Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif says in interview he believes Al Qaeda-linked foreigners infiltrated his country to carry out 'precalculated, preplanned' attack on US consulate in Benghazi.”
Then I found an article posted by Haaretz, the Israeli publication, saying: “For months before the most recent attacks on U.S. embassies in North African states, Foreign Ministry and U.S. State Department officials had been arguing over developments in these countries. Senior figures in Jerusalem claimed that Washington was burying its head in the sand and ignoring the increasing radicalization in states such as Tunisia and Egypt.”
Then there were comments Michele Kelemen, reported, on NPR’s Weekend Edition Saturday no less, about Benjamin Netanyahu openly clashing with the administration by saying about Iran, "They are six months away from being about 90 percent of having the enriched uranium for an atom bomb. I think that you have to place that red line before them now — before it's too late."
However today, Susan Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, backed up the administration’s position that the violence last week directed at more than 20 U.S. posts in the Middle East is the result of an anti-Muslim video, not America's foreign policy.
Now, looking at the preceding items, which are only a sampling of many more examples, I’d have to assume that our nation’s foreign policy makers are either totally out of touch with reality, completely and naively confused, or simply in so deep over their heads that they don’t know which way is up because these situations are light years beyond the scope of the street organizer from Chicago with no international scope whatsoever who now directs them.
And then there are the facts that here at home: Gasoline prices are going through the ceiling again, but new  domestic drilling is stifled, the new health care tax is strangling most business growth, the Fed now has to buy $40 billion a month in mortgages in a misguided attempt to stimulate a housing market that doesn’t even exist, inflation’s creeping back in on necessities and food and total un/under employment is over fourteen percent and climbing, just to name a few economic areas negatively impacted by the administration. 
So, when you total up all the aspects of governance that simply aren’t working at all, here and abroad, and add to them the fact that the nation has slipped to 7th in world standing from it’s former long-term place at the top, how come the national polls show the incumbent leading in the presidential polls after the DNC convention bounce? Don’t Democrats and Independents have an iota of brains at all? Because most of the things I’ve listed above don’t take any real political acumen to understand the faults and perils…after all how much do you really have to know when you’re broke and currently hopeless?
Thus, the only thing that upsets me more than all the preceding examples of total ineptitude and misjudgment is that I wasn’t aware of how gullible Dem’s actually are. Because if I had, I might have been able to come up with some worthless scam myself, and who knows, If I screwed up badly enough and did it quite often, I might even have wound up in the oval office myself. 
That’s it for today folks.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/15/2012

When I was eleven or twelve years old, I played lots of different sports: particularly baseball, basketball, swimming and diving, and rode my bike all over New York City’s Upper East Side. I also dreaded being cooped up indoors and was never a couch potato at all.
Regardless of all the athletic participation, though, I hadn’t begun any kind of growth spurt yet and frankly, not only wasn’t too tall…I was pretty dumpy and pudgy in appearance.
Then one day in Spring, I was walking my way home from school on a very quiet block: East Eighty Eight Street between Park and Lex when I heard a voice say, “Keep walking, don't turn around.” Nonetheless, although I didn't slow my pace, I turned my head and peeked over my shoulder.
What I saw there behind me was another guy, perhaps a year or two older than I, a couple of inches taller, with a nasty sneer on his face and a very tough sounding voice with which he repeated: “I told you not to turn around. And the next time you do, you’ll be very sorry you did.”
Now, I’ve got to admit, I knew a real threat when I heard one, and also that one way or another, the guy behind me was going to keep needling me until he got tired of playing around and then beat me bloody, either for my money or just for the hell of it. I also suspected that although I didn’t know him, after this situation, every time he saw me again he’d repeat the scenario, or something else like it, and I’d be a continual pigeon.
That’s when I decided to stop in my tracks, either from fear, desperation or some other realization, and do my best to defend myself, take my lumps best I could and hopefully, get to my home and find enough Band Aids for my wounds.
As soon as I stopped, the tough kid approached me, saying, “I warned you,” and shoved me hard with both hands to my chest. And that’s when in sheer panic, I shoved him back. He then threw a punch toward my head which to my shock, I ducked. And then even more surprising to myself, I shot a quick jab back that actually connected with his mouth.
In a couple of more moments, the whole encounter was over and although I’d not really been touched, the other guy was not only in very bad shape, tough-looking as he seemed, he was bleeding, whining and begging me not to clip him again. That’s when I turned around again and headed for home, extremely glad it was over.
The reason I mention this story today is, I believe it’s a tenet of life that when you’re threatened, physically or otherwise, if you back down in fear, try to appease bullies, thugs or simply nasty people, you invariably lose every time. And, worse yet, once those types have your number, they generally become more aggressive because they now know you have no spine. And even if you do, you’ve now proven that you won’t use it.
Which is why, as I sit here and type, more and more nations around the Middle East, and elsewhere, now know that our nation no longer has a backbone and would rather try to toothlessly talk than physically protect U.S. citizens and possessions in harms way.
These enemies also now know that when it comes to the core, the incumbent's forte is two different types of running. One is the kind where he makes speeches intended to help keep his office and the other is where he prefers to get away as fast as he can, because he simply doesn’t know how to fight with anything else but his harmless, repetitive, mouth.
That’s it for today folks.

Friday, September 14, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/14/2012

The White House had Ben Bernanke move the mirrors into a different corner yesterday, and change the color of the smoke to green, whereas the Fed chairman announced that the Fed would purchase $40 billion of mortgages a month continually until the economy shows signs of life.
Now naturally, this latest tactic got lot’s of press, being touted as a “bold move” and a huge step in the right direction. However, I don’t really see much being done here due to a considerable number of other factors.
First and foremost, Fed rates right now are just about zero and have been for quite a while, which means home mortgage rates are the lowest they’ve ever been before. So, the problem isn’t the cost of funds, it’s the fact that banks are afraid to lend.
Lending issues stem from the fact that folks aren’t able to find jobs, ergo they can’t make the mortgage payments. While still others are stuck with homes they can’t sell because there’s no market and their incomes have either been clipped or disappeared altogether.
Add to that the basic fact that while the Feds are printing more money to spend on housing, oil prices are on their way through the roof once more and inflation's raising the cost of food and necessities. Nonetheless the administration steadfastly refuses to permit oil drilling here, or to open the Canadian pipeline,  while the EPA and other governmental agencies work determinedly to stifle business growth at every turn continually.
Then there’s the issue of the new health care tax, which adds so much cost that businesses try every method there is to avoid hiring because what’s the sense of making more money if it’s simply going to get taken away in additional overhead via regulations?
What’s more, beyond the gross misunderstanding of basic economics, is the more than trillion dollars sitting offshore because businesses won’t spend it here under current tax law which will cost them dearly. But, since the government can’t see the practical forest for the trees, they'd rather threaten, wheedle and cajole instead of really trying to fix the problem intelligently and simply work out a fair deal to get that trillion bucks back here and providing some real stimulation.
So, when all's said and done, the only one’s who’ll make out from yesterday's political ploy will likely be the block traders, major funds and institutional investors in stocks and bonds, while the little guys like us hang on to the roller-coaster. And what’s most important is that we’re able to figure out when to get off before the whole damn thing really goes down the chute and doesn’t come back up again at all.
That’s it for today folks.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/13/2012

I’ve now read many varying opinions as to why there are currently riots and attacks on U.S. sites in the Middle-East at such places as Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, and Bahrain. Some news writers blame it on the uprisings called the Arab Spring, others say it’s in protest to an anti-Prophet Muhammad film, “Innocence of Muslims,” while still others opine it’s tied to insurgents celebrating the memory of September 11th, 2001.
As for myself, I think it’s likely due to the recognition that our policy has drastically changed and these rebels no longer fear retaliation from us. Whereas we used to be feared, it’s now known that we back away, no longer have spine and frankly, don’t seem to give a real damn about what goes on over there whatsoever. 
Furthermore, and most important, the leader of the free world doesn’t really have time for this stuff right now.  He’s mired in a campaign for keeping his job, which he knows he hasn’t done very well right here at home, so how on earth is he supposed to put out fires occurring half a globe away? After all, he can't fix the ones right under his nose, so he’s best off flying to Vegas to raise funds he can use in ads calling Mitt Romney a dithering dunce. 
Unfortunately for the incumbent, however, is the fact that while Romney not only isn’t dense, the incumbent actually is. So, all the funds being raised aren’t going to help him stay in office because his proven record is what's doing him in and ads and endless, repetitive speeches  simply wont overcome that fact.
Nonetheless, the leftist press is still out there trying their slanted best for the incumbent's reelection. And in that vein, Tim Graham, of NewsBusters on line reports that “The Right Scoop has posted video with an open microphone that shows the Romney press corps “coordinating questions to ask Romney," with CBS reporter Jan Crawford saying, “no matter who he calls on, we’re covered on the one question.”
Because, Graham says, "They wanted to make Romney take credit or walk back his statement condemning Obama weakness after the embassy attacks: “Do you stand by your statement or regret your statement?”
What's more, according to Graham, "NPR’s Ari Shapiro –the one who won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance – is one of the reporters planning their agenda on the clip.”
So, as Tom Hank’s said while playing as Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.” And as far as the biased clowns in the press go, perhaps that’s why their ratings are almost at zero. Because anyone possessing half a brain and desiring actual facts, is highly unlikely to tune in to the mainstream media’s worthless pap in today's communication day and age.
That’s it for today folks.

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/12/2012

Scanning the news this morning, there’s much speculation that the tragic attacks on our consulates in Libya and Egypt stem from international beliefs that U.S. retaliation is no longer feared as it was because the administration prefers to avoid confrontation.
At the same time,  according to CBSDC/AP, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday regarding Iran, “The world tells Israel, `Wait. There’s still time. And I say: `Wait for what? Wait until when?’ Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.”
The article continues that, the administration has consistently stated that they don’t want to go the military route against Iran and give more time for the sanctions to force Tehran to give up its nuclear ambitions. However, Netanyahu worries Iran will continue developing nuclear technology without giving the Islamic nation a firm timeline to stop and he asks “If Iran knows that there is no deadline, what will it do? Exactly what it’s doing. It’s continuing, without any interference, towards obtaining nuclear weapons capability and from there, nuclear bombs.” 
Additionally, Israeli news outlet Haaertz reports that the White House denied Netanyahu’s request to visit President Obama at the end of this month.
Then aside from these international issues, Donald Lambro of The Washington Times writes that, “August’s abysmally weak job growth proved yet again that President Obama’s economic policies are a miserable failure that will continue to undermine our country until he leaves office. The government’s report that the economy added just a minuscule 96,000 jobs last month came at the end of the Democrats’ defensive national convention, where the president, Bill Clinton and other party luminaries made extravagant claims that things will get better if Mr. Obama is re-elected to a second term.”
Lambro then points out that, analysts at the Federal Reserve Board, economists and business leaders say the declining economy is not going to get significantly better this year, next year or the year after that, until there are dramatic changes in the nation’s fiscal policies. “Changes Obama Democrats refuse to make.”
Deepening employment weaknesses were also underscored by revisions in the June and July job numbers, which found 41,000 fewer jobs were created than was reported previously, while the economy’s growth rate is slowing this year to the snail’s pace of 1.7% in the third quarter.
So, in conclusion I guess it really doesn’t matter where in the world you look, if our current administration's involved the chances are nothing works as it should. Lack of skill, absence of knowledge, gross ineptitude and an arrogant refusal to bend in the face of total disaster are the cornerstones of the worst performance since Jimmy Carter, who still hasn’t learned anything either. 
And the most ridiculous, absolutely incredible thing is, these totally incompetent, misguided, screw-ups are out there begging for another four years because while absolutely creating a shambles they point fingers and claim it’s not their fault. However, anyone believing that one is very likely too dumb to vote.
That’s it for today folks.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

BloggeRhythms 9/11/2012

Although I’m now a writer by trade, I can’t find appropriate words to express the depth of my sorrow each September 11th.
I remember the horrific events vividly and clearly as they unfolded throughout the day, and can only fervently hope that no citizen ever forgets them in the future. And while we’ve made significant progress in dealing with those who oppose and despise us, for whatever their reasons, our job isn’t yet done, and I sincerely hope that each and every one of us doesn’t ever forget that either.
But, our nation is one that goes on each day and therefore there are other things taking place aside from the somber and heartfelt memorials to those we lost.
On CNBC’s Squawk Box this morning, Ken Langone, financial backer of Home Depot and Dick Grasso, retired NYSE Chairman, had some interesting thoughts about the state of the economy and the upcoming election.
Paraphrasing Langone, he opined that if the incumbent’s reelected the nation will suffer hugely, and economically things will get far worse than even now. However, after that, the rebound will be so huge for the next president, no matter who’s elected or from what party, he only hopes that he’ll live long enough to see it because it will be so good to participate and so much fun. 
Grasso on the other hand said it doesn’t matter if there’s a reelection because the country survived on it’s own from 1976 to 1980 having no “president then either.”
In conclusion, I think days like today are significant proof of the incredible talents, strengths, resiliency and knowledge of our population. Because in the face of two immense threats to our nation, one foreign and philosophical and the other domestic and economic, we see a willingness and fervent desire to overcome what’s happened to all of  us. And the one thing that’s absolutely certain is, none of us are going to give up.
That’s it for today folks.