The StaticNoise Journal

Upper Middle Class Disconnect

2012-01-28T15:32:00.000-08:00

In Charles Murray's new book "Coming Apart: The State of White America" much is being made his concept of the new upper middle class in America. In the past the folks that ultimately reached the upper middle class were still affected by the quintessential American experience. These people created small businesses or fought their way up the corporate ladder and by the sweat of their brow became successful. Murray submits the notion that this is largely gone today, disappearing over the last 50 years as America becomes more socialist, more European.

As the decades since 1960 passed a child from a middle class or an upper middle class family where the traditional patriarchal structure put them through college (or handed them the business outright) never experienced normal rites of passage. From getting one's hands dirty working for minimum wage to partaking in traditional activities like hunting or even fishing are largely foreign to the yuppies of the day.

Personally it's a bit more complicated in my mind than pitting the often liberal, well educated, well off segment of Urbana against the notions of 1960's America. I haven't read the book yet - I don't think it's been officially released yet - and I'm sure Murray treats it as such, but the book's little survey to do just that demands some examination.

Here are the questions (my response and comments in bold red)

1. Have you ever worked on a factory floor? NO
By 1981 when I entered the work force factories were closing on a daily basis, young men need not apply
2. Have you ever held a job that caused a part of your body to hurt at the end of the day? YES
Landscaping
3. Have you seen last year's mega-hit movie, "Transformers: Dark of the Moon"? NO
Crap movies are crap movies, this means nothing
4. Can you name this NASCAR champion? NO
NASCAR may be a massive sport, but I've got better things to do with my time, for God's sake there's paint drying and grass growing somewhere
5. In the past five years, have you been fishing or hunting? YES
Not nearly often enough
6. Do you have a close friend who is an evangelical Christian?YES
Several
7. During the past year, have you stocked your own fridge with domestic mass-market beer? NO
My wife and I don't drink. This question is designed to see if you are an import snob. Bogus on the face of it. Mass market beers were all there were in the 60's and 70's, today there are many domestic and import beers that are far better
8. Do you now have a close friend with whom you have strong and wide-ranging political disagreement? YES
Several. This question wants to declare that hard core liberals will not fraternize with sub-human conservatives. This may be so???
9. Have you eaten at an Applebee's, TGI Friday's, or Outback Steakhouse in the past year? YES
Apparently to the upper class snooty types these restaurants are far too pedestrian. Bogus question
10. Have you or your spouse ever bought a pickup truck? NO
A minivan, yes. A pickup truck is next to mother and apple pie, you are just not American if you don't have one.
11. Have you ever attended a Kiwanis or Rotary Club meeting, or a gathering at a union local? NO
Fraternal organizations and even unions are waning in America and many think it's because government has stepped in and usurped these functions, there may be truth in that. Clubs in general have diminished and big time sports and sports bars may have had a lot to do with it
12. Have you ever participated in a parade that did not involve global warming, gay rights, or a war protest? NO
Do Tea Party rally's count as parades? I went to one of them
13. Since leaving school, have you worn a uniform as part of your job? YES
I was an installer of voice and data cabling
14. Have you ever ridden on a Greyhound or Trailways bus? NO
I have traveled by Amtrak - buses suck
15. Did you ever watch an "Oprah" show all the way through? GOD, NO
Shouldn't the question have been about Jerry Springer?
16. Did you or your spouse ever serve in the armed forces? NO
When the Vietnam war ended the draft was long gone and the military had a terrible reputation. Very few of us went that way in the late seventies/early eighties
17. Did you grow up in a family in which the chief breadwinner was not in a managerial position or high-prestige occupation (defined as dentist, physician, architect, attorney, engineer, scientist, or college professor)? YES
If you lived in a home with college educated parents then the expectation to go to college was high, there was no such expectation in my home. Oddly all seven of us attended some college, technical school, or higher education - eventually
18. Have you ever lived for at least a year as an adult in an American neighborhood in which the majority of your nearest 50 neighbors probably did not have college degrees? YES
Still do
19. Have you ever had a close friend who could seldom get better than Cs in high school even if he or she tried hard? YES
Do not even understand the relevance of this question
20. During the last month, have you voluntarily hung out with people who were smoking cigarettes? YES

One commenter on Powerline.com added these questions which in many ways are more honest and to the point:

Do you think New Yorker cartoons are funny? NO
Playboy cartoons are funny
How many different labels of wine have you drank in the last 30 days? NONE

Wine knowledge fascinates me, being a teetotaler I just can't get into it

How many times have you been to a theme park for vacation? NONE
How many polo matches have you attended in your life? ONE
Was at a work convention and this was one of the planned offsite activities - it was a blast
Can you find the plumbing section in a Home Depot or Lowe's without asking someone for help? YES
How many quarters of NFL football did you watch last season? A LOT
How many hours of NPR do you listen to each week? SEVERAL
Here's the deal about NPR - once in a while you will be informed if you keep your liberal bullshit filters up. And you won't be assaulted by commercials at 120db's between obnoxious conservative platitudes (yes, conservatives spew bullshit too at times)
Can you identify the architectural style of your home? NO
Have you ever flown in a private jet? YES
A corporate jet w/8 seats, very, very cool.
Have you ever changed a tire? YES
If not your are either non-mechanical or you can afford a service that does it for you - either way you should be ashamed, right?

I scored 10 of 20 on the first set of 20 which put me on the cusp of this new upper middle class in America (the only thing keeping me out was the "upper" part). I think it's flawed to certain degree because things other than creeping socialism and crony capitalism have changed the landscape - technology being chief among them. It just reinforces the notion that the vast middle class is under assault in America. A robust middle class is the one thing that is absolutely historical about the American experiment. Never before has there been anything like it. I think Charles Murray will pointing that out with this book, looking forward to reading it.

CW

Oooh what a lucky man he was

2012-01-26T07:06:00.000-08:00

If Barack Obama gets re-elected using the tired old drivel of class warfare in a day and age where the economy is crap and the direction of the so-called recovery is steamroller flat then America will get the government it deserves. Never underestimate the stupidity of the public school/mainstream media educated electorate. The opposition party, the Republicans (aka The Stupid Party) is debating over an unelectable narcissist - a narcissism eclipsed only by the current occupant of the oval office - and a man who can't get out of his own way.

Despite my devotion to many of the same principles expressed by Newt Gingrich I will say this as simply as I can - women hate him. If you think Republicans can win without politics averse, middle of the road women you're deluding yourself. I know that my middle of the road, politics averse wife can't stand the man.

Women may not know or particularly trust Mitt Romney, but they do not hate him. Mitt is a loyal and faithful family man. Newt is a narcissist. Another thing women hate is selfish men who think only about themselves.

I'm not crazy about Mitt for a number of reasons but I have no doubt whatsoever that he will be a "great" President compared to the imposter in office now. Obama is a petulant man who does not even like the United States of America. He treats the job as some kind of rite that doesn't even deserve someone of his caliber. It's disgusting to see him put his damn feet all over that historic furniture in the Oval Office. Show some stinking respect, you turd...

It is amazing to me that thinking people can't see that the Obama campaign and the media is going to put capitalism on trial by pitting millionaires and billionaires - the people they really serve - against the rest of us. Weirder yet, they let him do it without retaliation. Can they really stand up and tell the American people that it's the rich and the ability to get rich that have made America what it is? Probably not. It is not government that makes a great country, it is the act of the government getting out of the way by insuring equal opportunity. The more and more the government steps in with a controlling mentality the less free and the less great this country is. This is simply because a meddling government ultimately serves only millionaires and billionaires.

I defy anyone to deny that Obama's true goal is a poorer nation of government dependents. I long for the day Barack Obama and his apologists are in the rear view mirror and America can move on and move up.

CW
PS: I don't like him

Hardening the heart

2012-01-20T12:26:00.000-08:00

I am often moved by the stream of consciousness posts on Bruce Charlton's Miscellany website. Some of his posts soar over my head and I can only hope to learn something, others such the piece he called "Hard and soft hearts - and toughness" really got to me.

One of the hardest things to do in this modern world is to really feel something. We have become so desensitized to human suffering by the real and fake (and manipulated) images we see in the modern media that we are severely jaded. I struggle with this greatly.

Over the last 20 plus years I can think of only a few instances where I was moved to tears and outward appearances of compassion or joy. How sad is that? When my premature son was born and was OK I was genuinely moved with relief and joy for both my son and my wife. There may have been a few times when I was on stage and performing (as a musician) I was moved by the experience, but I can't pin point them today. The attack and tragedy of 9/11 greatly moved me. I was beside my self for many days, welling up with each retelling of personal tragedies and miraculous stories. I know I was profoundly saddened when several good, good friends were leaving the company I worked for, although I wept in private never showing my feelings aloud (what is wrong with me?). There were a few days when my marriage was very rocky before the decision was made to gut it out that made me actually "feel". That's about it. What a sad life if that's all I can remember of sorrow and joy.

Charlton says emphatically nothing ever justifies deliberate hardening of the heart. Deliberately hardening the heart is an act of evil. We see it everyday and sometimes even participate in the exercises that permanently condemn our own hearts to a thoughtless, compassionless life.

He also says: Because to harden the heart is to exclude love, to build a carapace of pride - it is, indeed, an act of cowardice: hard-hearted people are cowards, in the sense that they take the easier and more expedient root of not caring. I perceive many people, many intellectuals in particular, and perhaps especially intellectuals...

This I have found to be true. Many of the people I know who are well above average in intelligence (I put myself at just above average) have hard hearts. They have no time or do they care for people below them in intelligence or social rank - they would not give them the time of day let alone for a minute consider what they have to say. Politically or as a matter of esoteric policy they may have all the compassion in the world for the "underprivileged" but they actually loathe them. Preferring some government program to take care of their issues rather than actually personally engage with the low-life-scum. I have to fight this in my own heart when I deal with people who do dumb things out of ignorance but not malice.

The sin of pride is alive in me, I guess. I'm aware (usually afterwards) of my horses-ass behavior and feel bad about it, and for a while try to change. I pull this on my wife and kids mostly. Proximity will do that. These are the people that deserve it least but see it most often. Sometimes their sorrow and pain makes me angry - and I don't know why. I can say it's because that's what I saw as a child when my Dad dealt with everything with his anger. Surely I know better???

I have noticed that there are couple of songs I found in the last few years that struck a chord with me (pardon the pun). I liked the songs instantly and still listen and sing along because the message speaks to me. One is called "Car Crash" by Matt Nathanson:

I wanna feel the car crash
I wanna feel the capsize
I wanna feel the bomb drop, the earth stop
'Til I'm satisfied
I wanna feel the car crash
'Cause I'm dyin' on the inside
I wanna let go and know
That I'll be alright, alright

The other is self explanatory called "I wanna Feel Something" by Trace Adkins:

But I wanna feel somethin
Somethin thats a real somethin
That moves me, that proves to me Im still alive
I wanna heart that beats and bleeds
A heart thats bustin at the seams
I wanna care, I wanna cry, I wanna scream
I just wanna feel somethin

These songs talk about getting lost in uncaring indifference and knowing it's just not right.

CW

Keystone around his neck

2012-01-20T05:57:00.000-08:00

It only makes sense if you are actively trying to kill an American economic resurgence or you plan on approving it after the 2012 election should you win. I refer to President Obama's insane decision to stop the proposed pipeline from Canada to America's oil refineries in the south.

I am not using the word insane in a vacuum. Robert Samuelson of the Washington Post - no bastion of opposition conservative thought - blasts the President in his Jan 19th editorial.

FTA
President Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity. It isn’t often that a president makes a decision that has no redeeming virtues and — beyond the symbolism — won’t even advance the goals of the groups that demanded it. All it tells us is that Obama is so obsessed with his reelection that, through some sort of political calculus, he believes that placating his environmental supporters will improve his chances. Aside from the political and public relations victory, environmentalists won’t get much. Stopping the pipeline won’t halt the development of tar sands, to which the Canadian government is committed; therefore, there will be little effect on global-warming emissions. Indeed, Obama’s decision might add to them. If Canada builds a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific for export to Asia, moving all that oil across the ocean by tanker will create extra emissions. There will also be the risk of added spills. Now consider how Obama’s decision hurts the United States. For starters, it insults and antagonizes a strong ally; getting future Canadian cooperation on other issues will be harder. Next, it threatens a large source of relatively secure oil that, combined with new discoveries in the United States, could reduce (though not eliminate) our dependence on insecure foreign oil.

Finally, Obama’s decision forgoes all the project’s jobs.

Canada throughout the 2000's has acted soberly and with reasoned self interest for it's economic future. The Canadians will build a pipeline to move their abundant oil to market. The question is will it be North American markets or Asian? I think we all know what Obama has decided.

Obama is so stuck on some green utopian vision of the world he is wantonly ignoring reason and facts. At this time in humanity's technological/economic development the pipe dream of sustainable and adequate energy from "green" sources is not ready yet. Almost no one denies that renewable clean energy is ideal, but we didn't replace the horse and buggy until automobiles were economically and reliably sufficient.

FTA
By law, Obama’s decision was supposed to reflect “the national interest.” His standard was his political interest. The State Department had spent three years evaluating Keystone and appeared ready to approve the project by year-end 2011. Then the administration, citing opposition to the pipeline’s route in Nebraska, reversed course and postponed a decision to 2013 — after the election.

Now, reacting to a congressional deadline to decide, Obama rejected the proposal. But he also suggested that a new application with a modified Nebraska route — already being negotiated — might be approved, after the election. So the sop tossed to the environmentalists could be temporary. The cynicism is breathtaking.

With this decision Obama is also dissing his union friends who have expressed complete dismay. One has to believe that this will be approved if he is reelected - that is unless the commenter on Lucianne.com is correct: The Left wants a crippled, weak, post-prosperity America, it's as simple as that. Everything Obama has done, is doing, will do is modus operandi to that end. No mystery about any of it, really.

It could go either way in my mind. President Obama is either a cynical opportunist playing one side of his constituency against the other or he is a destroyer of nations.

CW

November Calling

2012-01-15T08:06:00.000-08:00

So much has already been written and debated on the 2012 election cycle (and it's only January 15th) that November can't get here soon enough. The Republican Party (the stupid party) doesn't even have a nominee yet. Doesn't matter. I am firmly in the Anybody But Obama camp anyway.

For the life of me I cannot imagine anyone honestly looking at Obama's performance, his demeanor, his leadership style and saying - yes, we need four more years of that. This man never meets with members of congress of either party ahead of the game to work out compromise solutions - what we would call leadership - instead he throws out jabs and heaps on the blame and then issues executive orders to the cheers of the Washington pundits. He advances his agenda this way, not America's agenda. I hear his apologists say "give him a chance" or "he's trying as hard as he can". Blah blah blah. He's failing, and worse he's doing serious damage to the country and the constitution.

If the news media - the Big Media - did it's job Obama would be on trial for impeachment. The stimulus bill of 2009 was executed in a program of criminal acts that should have every taxpayer, every economics professor, every political scholar and every (honest) member of Congress beating the door down to the White House. These programs while not being legally criminal are morally and practically criminal in every way. It's all out there as a matter of public record and it's disgusting. Obama was given a $787 billion blank check (yes - billion with a b) which he used to benefit his benefactors and contributors in a blatant in your face mockery of the system.

When I finish the book "Throw Them All Out" by Peter Schweizer I intend to do an in depth review. Needless to say it's stunning. I'm about 1/3rd through it and I almost can't believe that this corruption inside our government is allowed to go on. Page after page of abuse by our congressmen and senators as they enrich themselves and their friends at the public trough (while nothing new the scale and scope today is unprecedented), but it all dulls in comparison to what Obama pulled off with the 2009 stimulus money.

As you read this book it gets more and more difficult. The legal graft is mind numbing. You find yourself wondering how the American people continue to allow this? The answer is the tried and true Roman concept of Bread and Circuses... As long as the Big Media spoon feeds slanted, incomplete news and there is plenty of junk food to eat as the new American Idol season airs the vast middle of the American landscape will remain clueless. Fox News occasional talks about this and CBS's Sixty Minutes did an expose on the Schweizer book - but there is little followup and nothing like the indignation it deserves.

To hear Obama Administration apologists claim that they didn't understand the depth of the economic downturn as an excuse as to why this poor recovery is eclipsed only by the Great Depression is completely laughable. Besides the 1990's era government policies and the financial industry's reaction to them that destroyed the housing market I contend the depth of the collapse is directly related to the anticipation and then the reality of an Obama presidency. You will hear the evidence of this every single day on the CNBC morning show as business leader after business leader explains why they are holding back on expansion of their businesses.

November can't get here soon enough.

CW

Morning Joe on MS(nob)NBC

2012-01-07T05:48:00.000-08:00

I get up early every morning mainly because I take at least 2 hours to "wake up" before I can actually function. Others I know get up singing, all full of joy and hope for the coming day. These people rattle off fifteen things I need to do or check on today before I've even poured my first cup of essential juice - coffee. They are lucky to get two words out of me, namely, uh and huh.

So, as you might imagine I plop down in front of the TV with the clicker and rotate through the cable news channels. I'll start with Fox and Friends if I'm in the mood for goofy. I'll pop over to CNN and to see which oh so serious news program they are airing this month. CNN has some sort of revolving door in their studio A because the host(s) never seem to last very long. It's very odd.

I then swing over to CNBC for the business news which I often find the most informative news I'll see all day. Plus, I love the daily Obama bashing from the business leaders, it's very cathartic. If I'm in the mood for beauty I'll hit Headline News and watch Robin for a while. Oddly I never really take notice of the news... Eventually I'll punch 70 on the remote. That's where we find Morning Joe up in these parts.

MSNBC is the anti-Fox channel. Everyone knows this. Those who hate Fox generally love MSNBC. In order for the operators of the anti-Fox network to feign balance they put up a show that features an ex-republican congressman, Joe Scarborough. It takes roughly 2 minutes of listening to him to invoke nausea. I am quite certain the phrase "are you still taking" was coined because of him. He's an impolite blowhard that talks and talks but says absolutely nothing. Even when he says something you might agree with you still feel like slugging the guy.

His co-host Mika Brzezinski, a liberal apologist and Democratic Party stooge, barely gets a word in edgewise. Believe me you're not missing much - she rarely says anything even slightly off script, but she is a human being deserving of respect and the time to have her say. Joe, however, talks over her continuously to the point where you see the wind taken out of sails and she gives up. I often wonder if she's there for atheistic value only as she is quite good looking. Occasionally she gets 20 seconds to complete a sentence (because Joe is momentarily distracted) and her political shallowness and in-the-know snobbery is revealed.

As bad as these two are it's the rotation of regulars that starts to get to you after a while. The anti-Fox crowd really thinks this show is sophisticated and thoughtful as opposed to the knuckle dragging and mouth breathing over on Fox. What they are is a cadre of snobs. Even the so-called conservatives they allow in the studio are there because they will mock or denigrate conservative, religious or fly-over country values. If these conservatives stray from the allowed guidelines they are summarily banished.

We never see Patrick Buchanan on the show anymore. Buchanan served his purpose during the Bush years because he was highly critical of the Bushes - Sr. and Jr. At some point he strayed, said something that roiled the waters and he is gone. Mark Halprin, a left leaning journalist (aren't they all) once said something slightly critical of Obama when he believed they were off the air and he was banished for months.

It isn't even what is actually discussed, dissected and beaten to death on the show that betrays the snobbish devotion to leftist elitism, it's also what is ignored. Rarely have I heard a word about the serious scandals this administration is involved in even in passing. The gun running scandal called Fast and Furious would put Watergate to shame in scale and outcome. If it had happened under Bush it would have been a daily topic. The apologetic devotion to liberal sensibilities even when all evidence would indicate failure is jaw dropping. Then Joe himself gets to riffing on one of these subjects (it is his show after all) and in slightly over 2 minutes you feel like throwing up.

There are three regulars that if I see any of them I instantly hit the back button on the remote. As nauseating as Joe Scarborough is these three make me convulse uncontrollably. Al Sharpton is obvious, even his mother is repulsed. It is Donny Deutsch and Eugene Robinson that literally make me sick. Robinson in particular is an abhorrent little man so blinded by his leftist elitism and race-bating ideology that every word from his lips is 180 degrees out of whack.

To be fair, every once in a while - particularly when Joe and Mika are out - that the show is actually informative. They do have interesting guests that are allowed to stray form the liberal elitist playbook. Of course these same guests show up at Fox too. It can be fun to gauge the mood of the liberals by watching them say slightly critical of - actually it is confusion over - Obama administration foibles. Make no mistake, by the time November 2012 comes around Barack Obama will again be walking on water on the Morning Joe show!

CW

The Golden Age

2012-01-02T10:01:00.000-08:00

Are we living in the Golden Age?

For those of us living in the West, America, Canada, Europe, Australia and Japan, it's not hard to imagine that we have reached the pinnacle of our societal development. If nothing else demographics will soon push us into a different paradigm. The West has stopped having babies and without babies there is no future.

If we think about how nice we have it as compared to all the peoples that have ever lived on this earth we should be amazed, but we aren't. We take it for granted. Worse, we condemn ourselves for the marvels we now enjoy that were forged by the sweat of our brow and of those who came before us. In that selfish condemnation we deny the next generation any choices at all since we are choosing this generation over theirs.

Think about it... We live in a world with instant communication between any 2 points on the planet. We have information, the collective knowledge of recorded history at our fingertips by virtue of the Internet. We have but to climb into a self-powered car with all it's luxury appointments and drive on super highways to any supermarket or mall and find just about any foodstuff or creature comfort we can imagine. A mere hundred years ago this would've been a fantasy. Our poor eat better, live better, enjoy better health and have better entertainment than all the princes and kings of a century ago. For all the griping by the Occupy movement it is never considered that the vast middle experiences life closer to the top 1% than at anytime in history. Do the ultra-rich watch better TV shows or movies than the rest of us? Do they have better music? Do their Ipods sound better, their Ipads look better? Is their food more nutritious? Are their cars more reliable or have better air conditioning than ours?

If we accept that we in the West, collectively, live a life of comfort and ease compared to those just a few short generations ago we have to ask; how long can it all last?

We are seeing the financial system begin to crumble globally. Japan, Europe and the U.S. have serious debt issues that are interconnected in a fashion that resembles a game of dominoes just before the first one topples. If or when the global financial system collapses the demand for oil - the principal product of the Middle East, North Africa and Russia - will take a dive, and likely trigger chaos in those politically unstable regions. Likewise, the demand for consumer goods from China and southeast Asia will plummet along with their economies - which might force a new military hegemony waiting in wings in Beijing.

Worse yet is the specter of apocalyptic religious zealots in Tehran possessing nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them. Regardless of which comes first, the collapse of the global economic system or a first strike (likely on Tel Aviv) by Iran, chaos will consume the world.

How bad can it get? No one knows. The world of fiction is rife with post-apocalyptic tales that frankly depict a world I wouldn't want to live in.

When the electricity fails and the supermarkets run out of food anarchy will prevail. Don't think the government - Federal or local - will save the day. It is the government (particularly Congress) that is destroying everything now - before the fall. In addition the current President is actively promoting the decline of America. These crony's are busy feathering their own nests and destroying the country in the process. There will be no help from the government when this all breaks down.

Does it have to end this way? Probably not, but simple hope is pale substitute for the cruelness of reality. Indeed, Europe(Germany) and Japan were thoroughly devastated after WWII and they came roaring back economically. But this collapse would be quite different. For one, Europe and Japan had the United States to help them rebuild. Do we suppose China would be in any shape to foster the rebuilding of the global economy this time? What would the world be rebuilding from? An economic collapse or nuclear war? I would not bet against either of these things happening if something isn't done soon.

I've read that it's already too late for Europe to avoid some of it's members from defaulting on their debts. America has unfunded liabilities in the trillions coming due over the next 20 years. Japan may simply be a lost cause. As Japan's population collapses they continue to maintain a closed door policy on immigration. Bold action is needed because the only thing that will turn the tide is confidence in the future. Confidence is the only thing that holds up the economic system as it is.The Western world had confidence after WWII because of the power of the United States. Restoring confidence is going to take bold action and like it or not it will have to come from the United States. Is China or India ready to step up and usher the world into the next era? I wouldn't bet on it.

So here we are a the precipice of collapse and the one nation with a chance at staving it off is led by a man actively directing a program of decline - and apologizing to the world on our behalf. This is not building confidence. Wanting the world to love us is a fool's game, especially when the world is seeking leadership.

When the history of this era is written generations from now will they lament the fact that when the world had such a benevolent hegemon in the United States of America it let itself be tore down from within, with the malice of forethought? Are we really ready to give up? Is this the beginning of the end of the Golden Age?

CW

Public unions are out of control

2011-12-27T13:24:00.000-08:00

A labor union, a collection of like-minded workers banded together to use their collective leverage to garner equitable wages and treatment makes a certain amount of sense in a labor intensive commercial enterprise. At one point in the history of America unions may have even been absolutely essential. Many of the benefits all "workers" take for granted today were brought about by men and women demanding a fair shake and we would be remiss in not recognizing these truths. However, once the world opened up for business beyond the U.S. borders private sector unions began disappearing at an incredible rate. They are not coming back.

Not to worry there are plenty of public sector unions...

It was President Kennedy, whom I'm told acquiesced against his better judgement to allow Federal workers to form unions. This is when the seeds of our current fiscal crisis were sown. Cities, counties and states all over the fruited plain allowed unions to form inside their work forces and during the good times when economies and tax receipts rose year after year no one batted an eye. Let the good times roll.

Getting a "government" job use to mean decent wages, though not great, but very good benefits and some measure of job security. When the economy began to change in the 1970's it was lower skilled manufacturing jobs in the private sector that disappeared and with them union membership. The industries that remained saw their unions lose power, wages stagnate and benefits cut. This was as much out of necessity as it was good old fashioned corporate greed - or they would see the industry leave entirely. In the meantime public sector unions became more powerful, demanding and receiving better pay and much, much better benefits. After all, the money was still rolling into state and local coffers.

While the paradigm shifted for everyone else the promises of excellent wages, wonderful pensions and marvelous medical insurance for public unions continued on unabated. The political machines responsible for them were rewarded time after time with generous campaign contributions and re-election.

So here we are today. The private sector has done away with unions for the most part - the worldwide labor situation dictated it and it became so. Now state, local and federal governments are broke and it has come like a monumental slap in the face just how much these outlandish contracts and promises are costing all of us. It is clear to everyone who is not in one of these privileged unions that it can't continue this way, it just can't. There is no more money.

Instead of going quietly along so that state and local governments can balance their books (they rely on tax receipts and can't print funny money like Uncle Sam) the unions have thrown a tantrum. The rest of us watch our measly 401k's tank as our PTO hours disappear on December 31st while learning our health care contribution and co-pays are going up again and look on incredulously at these babies who might have to pay a lousy $5 co-pay to visit the doctor's office.

These unions are bankrupting the country and they don't care. How many stories are we going to see of teachers and sanitation technicians and social workers retiring at 55 or 60 with 100,000+ pensions and full medical while the rest of us face working into our 70's to pay for them. Many paid nothing out of their wages for their own retirement. Just because they worked for a government employer instead of a private sector employer they somehow deserve and have the right to these generous retirement lifestyles.

We've learned recently that the Postal Service - which is a quasi governmental organization - is bankrupt. It has made extremely generous promises to it's union workforce and now that the paradigm has shifted they can't meet these obligations. The USPS's fate was sealed when Congress ordered them to fund a $5 billion pension obligation by the middle of next year. The Postal Service is going to have to lay off tens of thousands, close thousands of branch offices and lobby Congress to change the mandate from 6 days of door to door delivery to 5 days. The union will lose thousands of dues paying members, but those generous benefits will continue - and you and I (taxpayer) will end up with the bill, again.

Most of those who work or did work for a government employer worked hard and did necessary jobs that made our lives better, I'm certain of it. Still those of us in the private sector work hard too. What we do is important too - we help make lives better by creating and delivering products and services people need. Why are government employees deserving of worry-free retirements?

Plain and simple fact for you public unions - something's got to give.

CW

Exceptional again?

2011-12-24T05:31:00.000-08:00

Having reached the half century mark in 2011 I am starting to get the sense that I've been around the block a few times. Maybe this happens at a younger age for most people, but at last I feel like I have experience and some seasoning and maybe even a little wisdom. We start to see patterns and cycles in our culture and in our economics. These are things historians and professors thrive on. The rest of us come to see these things in the normal course of living our lives. We get to a point where we don't need to panic, and we can reassure younger folks that things will turn around. Up until the last few years I really thought that was true of this current "malaise" America finds itself in. Things will turn around, right?

If you read renown historian and thinker Victor Davis Hanson (and you should if you don't) you get the sense that history surely repeats itself and that the upside must be just around the corner. In a recent NationalReview.com piece Hanson covers the things that America does better than any other culture in the world. We are left with a sense of optimism, convinced an American revival is assured. But I wonder...

It's no secret that I don't care for President Obama at all. Anything the man has done that is good is so overwhelmingly shadowed by the sense of American decline he actively promotes. It is beyond me how anyone, anyone can support his agenda of decline and opt for four more years of it. Each aspect of Mr. Hanson's argument for new round of American exceptionalism as it were is being undermined by the Obama agenda.

1. American petroleum engineers over the last decade have discovered radical new methods of recovering previously unknown or unreachable reserves of oil and gas. Contrary to all conventional wisdom, America’s natural-gas and petroleum reserves just keep growing. Suddenly, we have enough known natural gas to supply 100 percent of our domestic needs for the next 90 years — (Hanson)

The Obama Administration and it's EPA have done everything to make it more difficult to utilize North American energy. The delay of the Keystone pipeline may be the most publicized, but the EPA's rulings on C02, mercury and the process of fracking for oil and gas are not conducive to a domestic energy strategy. Push back on new and expanding energy extraction and a policy of actively subsidizing loser alternative energy technologies is making the U.S. weaker. Every one can see the beauty of the vision of alternatives to oil and coal, but starving ourselves will only make getting to the promised land that much harder.

2. We are worried that China may soon deploy one aircraft carrier. Yet the United States now has eleven enormous carrier groups, each one more powerful than all the other aircraft carriers in the world combined. In areas as diverse as drone and space technology, counterinsurgency, battlefield experience, air power, armor, and ship design, the American military is the best-armed, best-trained, and most lethal armed force around — (Hanson)

The cuts in military spending - especially to our navel forces - will make our forces smaller than at anytime since before WWII. The readiness and abilities of American military will be significantly reduced at a time when China is building theirs up. Can any one honestly say that China will be a more preferable hegemon?

3. A billion adolescents worldwide are growing up with Apple iPhones, iPods, and iPads; with Facebook accounts, Amazon online ordering, Google searches, and Walmart discount purchasing. These are not Russian, French, Chinese, or Japanese companies, but American inventions that uniquely appeal to the human desire for economy, ease of use, wide choice, informality, and transparency. No other country could have invented them — or the next generation to come. The idea of a Chinese-invented Google is a paradox, a Russian Facebook a joke, a Japanese-inspired Walmart impossible. (Hanson)

Here Hanson is right - the ideas, the vision of American business and entrepreneurs is unique and always has been. However, the decline Obama promotes is going to make the brilliant people throughout the world less inclined to come to or stay in America to build their dreams. Many great ideas and products conceived in America have been perfected elsewhere and have benefited the workers of foreign nations. Simply because the poor primary education system and a post secondary system that promotes humanities and lawyers over science and engineering how long can we expect supremacy in the "ideas" arena. The Obama agenda is more and more Federal control over all education.

4. Race, tribe, and religion tear many countries apart, notably in the Middle East and the Balkans. Yet at the other extreme, racially uniform nations like Japan and China seem clumsy when dealing with even tiny minorities, since they define their citizens not just by national allegiance, language, and locale, but by the way they look. America alone –albeit often in rancorous and messy fashion — has no particular national ethnic or racial profile. Even in postmodern Europe, the idea of a Barack Obama as president of France, or a Condoleezza Rice as foreign minister of Germany, is the stuff of fantasy. We will see no prime minister of China or Russia who does not look like the majority of Chinese and Russians — much less a Colin Powell. Most of the world will continue to have some sort of practical or romantic claim on America because of the fact that anyone can be not just an American, but a very successful American. (Hanson)

So true, America is the melting pot. It is the only country in the world of any size that can claim this distinction. But the Obama, himself of mixed race, is far from a "uniter". He subtly promotes a Balkinization that undermines the uniqueness of the America experiment. He clearly courts Hispanics by demonizing anyone who demands the Federal government secure the border with Mexico. His policies have only hurt Black Americans, further eroding any sense of a light at the end of the tunnel for millions of urban denizens. He has done nothing to take advantage of his unique position in history to heal the wounds of the sins of the past. In this his failure is epic.

To put it mildly Barack Obama is not proud of his country, and there is much to be proud of. There much to be ashamed of too, but the uniqueness of our system is that is it designed to allow us to correct the wrongs. Obama doesn't care about healing or bridging the gaps, he only seeks to divide and rub salt in the wounds until America itself cries "I give up". That is what Obama wants and it has nothing to do with being exceptional again.

CW

Say it aint Joe...

2011-12-16T20:01:00.000-08:00

If there ever was a modern day real life John Wayne the sheriff of Maricopa County Arizona is him. Joe Arpaio is the no nonsense lawman who has taken the political correctness out of law enforcement - and now he has to pay the price.

The U.S. Justice Department released a scathing report saying that the sheriff and his staff have violated the human rights of illegal aliens, accusing Arpaio of violating the constitution. Arpaio has 30 days to respond or face Federal charges against him and members of his staff.

I think this could backfire on Obama's Justice Department. Sheriff Arpaio is perhaps the best known sheriff in the country precisely because of his no nonsense, common sense approach to the overwhelming invasion of illegals from Mexico into his jurisdiction. Furthermore the timing of this seems more than just a coincidence coming on the heals of the U.S. Supreme court agreeing to hear the Federal case against Arizona's immigration and border enforcement law.

Could this be designed as a distraction? The Justice Department is fiendishly fending off questions about the incredible scandal known as Fast and Furious. This is the scandal where the ATF (a law enforcement dept. under Justice) has been shown to have created a program to sell guns explicitly designed to fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels for very specious purposes. In the aftermath those very same guns have been implicated in the death of thousands of Mexicans and at least one U.S. Border Patrol agent, namely Agent Brian Terry.

This scandal, which makes Watergate look like a game of paddy cake, is getting very little press attention. No one died at Watergate except the presidency of Richard Nixon. Here thousands are dead and the press has totally insulated Obama since the very beginning. You don't hear about this from Morning Joe and Mika, nope. Not a word from Chrissy Mathews either. Tom Freidman isn't writing about in the Times and Brian Williams doesn't mention on the nightly news. But if it had been George Bush's Justice Department, well...

Back to Joe.

The good sheriff has had the ire of the progressives who long for open borders for quite some time, but the timing of this just ahead of the political season can be seen as another attempt to rally the president's Hispanic base. To portray border security advocates as racist and anti-Latino is just another way to drive a wedge into his continuous campaign to Balkanize the United States. Obama and his lackeys have never been 'uniters'. They have no intention of bringing Americans together, theirs is always to divide and conquer. Those who stand up for law and order and enforcing the very laws the constitution requires the Federal government to act upon are somehow unlawful and have to be stopped. I don't know... Maybe America will rally behind Joe.

I'd bet that Sheriff Joe is more popular than President Obama.

CW

Please God, not Newt

2011-12-11T02:29:00.001-08:00

Is this the best the Republicans can do? Really?

Newt's a bright guy, no one is arguing that. Is he presidential material? In my opinion - no. Mitt Romney may not pass the smell test for conservative purity (but then neither does Newt). Mitt, however, is presidential, at least in look and manner. That counts for something. But Republicans can't seem embrace Mitt Romney. Honestly they can't seem to embrace anybody. Newt is literally the last man standing.

I find it hard to see the sense in replacing one self interested narcissist with another.

I think it's pretty clear to those who oppose President Obama that he is a petulant little man. At one time he looked above the fray and quite polished. Now, just listen to the way he talks about those who criticize him... Unlike his predecessor his skin is as thin as crepe paper. To me he seems less presidential everyday. Still, with the press covering for Obama in every respect - personality and otherwise - his failings are being suppressed. This would not be the same for Newt, and his effectiveness would be severely hampered. Mitt on the other hand is squeaky clean.

I think the Obamanauts are salivating over the prospect of Newt being the nominee. I think they worry about the middle of the road voter being disappointed enough in Obama's first term that they might look to Mitt.

Mitt is not my ideal Presidential candidate, but Newt is my nightmare candidate. Of all of them he is one I wanted the least - I'd take Ron Paul over him, well, OK that may be going too far. Only Michelle Bachmann, whom I love on paper, is more open to slaughter than Newt is. Michelle, God love her, says really stupid things that betray her goodness. Newt does stupid things that betray his so-called genius. It's not his policies, or his smarts that worry me, in fact I agree with him most of the time. I just don't think he's electable in the general. Beating Obama is more important than purity. It's that simple.

Please think twice about supporting Newt in the primaries and caucuses. Beating Obama trumps conservative purity. Plus someone like Rep. Paul Ryan, as impressive as he is in my eyes, may be too conservative in the eyes of the squishy middle where presidential campaigns are won and lost. If Newt does win the nomination I will vote for him in the general enthusiastically - here's hoping it doesn't come to that.

CW

The The World Looks a Little Brighter Today - Thanks Barney

2011-12-09T10:50:00.001-08:00

It hasn't been since I heard that Yassir Arafat was proclaimed dead that I was so buoyed by a news story. I mean it was a great day for all the world when Yassir Arafat assumed room temperature. This news is a little more specific to the United States, but it's no less a ray of sunshine in what's been a terribly dark couple of years. The news that Barney Frank is retiring from Congress should set all American hearts alight.

Frank is one of the nastiest, most dangerous men in Washington. Dangerous? What do you call it when one of the men most responsible for destroying the mortgage lending market is put in charge of writing the new law to "clean-up" the very system he helped destroy. I call it dangerous!

The mortgage market meltdown has had worldwide implications. The damage caused by Frank and his co-conspirators is responsible for economic hardship on everyone but the super rich. This is not merely middle class folks missing out on a Mexican vacation, this is people losing their jobs and their homes. Frank can say what he wants about President Bush's role in all of this, but he is a liar. There has been deliberate obscuring of the government's role in the subprime crisis. Content to allow the public to believe all the blame belongs to Wallstreet and the "banks", Frank and his partner in crime Chris Dodd - also retiring - walk away millionaires while Rome burns. The passage of the Dodd/Frank bill regulating the banks into the ground will ensure a legacy that lingers (and I mean that in the worse possible "scents") long after they are gone.

This video is so indicative of Barney Frank's arrogance and willful deception...

As for the reason Frank is retiring - who cares? In all actuality it's the 2010 census gerrymandering that is the primary reason, he stands a real chance of losing this go round. I would have loved to have seen that.

After sixteen terms, that's 32 years in Congress, Frank will leave a wealthy man. He's just another in a long line of Washington elites that cashed in on his position. He was the benefactor of campaign contributions from the very GSE institutions he vociferously defended right to the point of collapse.

As Doc Zero (John Hayward) says: "Today the man whose personal ambitions and blind ideology wreaked havoc upon the American financial system said he has “no regrets,” and you can be damn sure the media won’t force him to find any. The absence of regret is one of the things that makes Big Government so dangerous."

Goodbye Barney - can't say I'm gonna miss 'ya. I'll be too busy trying to elect people who will try to undo the damage you have done.

CW

This is the fraud that never ends...

2011-11-25T09:10:00.001-08:00

So much has already been written and debated on the subject of Global Warming and its soul mate Climate Change that along with the general public I have become bored with it. This is possibly exactly what the fraudsters are counting on. So completely have they woven the narrative that mankind is the principal cause of climate change and burning fossil fuels is the culprit that every institution on Earth is "dedicated" to reducing their so-called carbon footprint in one way or another. If that was all there was to it then there is little harm in it. Efficient and wise use of fossil fuels is in everyone's best interest. Unfortunately that's not even close to the end game. Thank God there are dedicated souls ready to hold the fraudsters proclamations and activities up to the light.

Two years ago when a flood of e-mails was leaked out of the UEA's CRU in Britain "Climategate" was born. The e-mails revealed a pattern of concerted efforts to skew the data (or ignore the contradictory data), discredit skeptics and steer the UN's IPCC into global warming alarmism. This severely damaged the fraudsters cause and when coupled with the world economic downturn and rising oil prices the polls showed a significant change in the general publics attitude toward so-called climate change. Of course the sympathetic institutional and media investigations exonerated Phil Jones and Michael Mann and the rest of the players at the UEA.

Now another batch of e-mails has leaked that only bolster the case against the global warming fraudsters. The moniker Climategate 2.0 is being bandied about. In the coming days and weeks as these e-mails are parsed we'll learn even more about the duplicity and fraud the profiteers of this farce have tried to pull off. The question is - is it too late?

As I said earlier nearly every conceivable institution has embraced the Politically Correct position that mankind is a scourge on the Earth. Global Warming is just another piece of incontrovertible evidence. It is all sliding toward government control of the global economy with a World Government as the final authority. The only possible outcome is a decrease in the standard of living for the creative and productive societies. The seeds of this are being sewn as we speak while we watch the normalization of high unemployment and debt-ridden governments as corporate institutions continue to thrive. This is the set up of capitalism as the ultimate scapegoat. After all it is fruits of capitalism that brings us bad things like rich people, debt and global warming. (Never mind that capitalism brings us all the good things too).

Does anyone honestly think Occupy Wall Street is spontaneous? It is amorphous and indistinct on purpose. It is designed to sow discontent while the gun sights are firmly fixed on capitalism itself. It will not succeed on it's own as it is supposed to be just another piece of evidence that our system has utterly failed.

If and when that happens - a global meltdown of the world economic system the only possible outcome is the elimination of millions if not billions of people. This is the actual endgame. First the rich (people and nations) have to be made the scapegoats then the institutions must fail.

As Mark Steyn said in his best selling book America Alone it will be America that has to put a stop to this. Europe is in no position to do anything so momentous. We are literally seeing Germany, the only real rich country in Europe, being set up as the scapegoat for the collapse of the EU. China feels it will be able to fill vacuum when the West falls by it's own hand.

Until now the lynch pin of this scenario has not been mentioned. This is the very reason Barack Obama can not be allowed a second term. He instrumental in this normalization of America as a declining nation. He goes around the world criticizing then apologizing for America. He is in my mind a traitor. To others he is a realist because they are also convinced that for the world to succeed America itself must fail. Once America falls either before or after the EU then the West is lost. Barack Obama is doing his part.

I know it is said every election cycle... This is the most important election of our lifetime. This time it really is.

CW

Simply Not True: Lack of Oxygen Leads to Suffocation

2011-11-20T10:56:00.001-08:00

I used to enjoy reading the "Onion" a few decades ago. The stories were outrageous but with just enough plausibility to make them outright hilarious. These days, however, with the Onion having gone mainstream with a Internet TV channel to boot I have lost complete interest. It's not that the Onion has changed, it's as good as ever, but because the world has changed. The real news is more fantastic than any made up headline the Onion could come up with. I know this to be true because the mainstream media has more than once been fooled by "Onion" stories and reported them as true. Yeah, they looked pretty silly with onion all over their face.

Today I read with amazement in The Telegraph of London that the EU has banned the claim that water can prevent dehydration.

EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration
EU officials concluded that, following a three-year investigation, there was no evidence to prove the previously undisputed fact.

Wow. That even makes my stupid headline seem brilliant. A three year investigation? I think a class of first graders could have come up with that in two. Before you think it can't happen here in America consider that the EPA has declared the trace gas CO2 ( an element necessary for life on Earth) a pollutant. The lack of common sense knows no boundaries.

Many Europeans are questioning the usefulness (or is it the uselessness) of the EU in general. With the problems the common currency - the Euro - has been causing of late the whole notion of the European Union is in question.

When one digs down into the minutiae of this issue we find that the German scientists who made the claim that water can prevent dehydration filed it wrong, and they did so knowingly. They were openly testing the new laws which allow products to claim they can reduce the risk of disease, now subject to EU approval. So then the claim had to be rejected by EFSA because it was filed under the wrong legal provision (Article 14 of Regulation 1924/2006/EC instead of Article 13). In short, Article 14 deals with diseases and illnesses whereas dehydration was not regarded by EFSA as a disease.

Still, this could have been made clear in the ruling (and the newspaper article) and the issue could have never been brought into the bright light. Instead the claim is rejected outright leaving the impression that morons are in charge. This doesn't make the scientists look stupid, when presented like this after a 3 year investigation it does make the ruling authority look like imbeciles.

Three years ago a simple rejection of the case as being filed incorrectly would have prevented this whole affair. What this has done having been handled this way brings to mind a preposterous (now overturned) ban on curvy bananas and bent cucumbers. Sometimes government is needed to protect the safety of the public from misleading claims and unsafe products, however, preventing the declaration of water preventing dehydration and banning bent cucumbers will not save the public from risk. It will however put common sense in jeopardy.

CW

Legal Graft and other Games

2011-11-15T10:50:00.001-08:00

The new book "Throw Them All Out" by Peter Schweizer hits the shelves today. Schweizer has written many good books in the investigative journalism vein over the years, but this one strikes chord with me (after reading a few reviews).

One of the biggest unheard of, unseen scandals in American politics is festering. Will we get the full story of the inside game in DC that shows how the elite political class enriches itself at the expense of the rest of us, while driving our economy into the ground? Do we even want to know? Or does playing ostrich suit us just fine?

It's not new, it's not partisan and it's apparently not illegal, but it is disgusting and morally bankrupt. We have all watched as a nearly 800 billion dollar stimulus package became a funnel to supporters and benefactors, ensuring yet more campaign donations for Obama and the Democrats. We've seen the husbands of Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstien get lucrative deals based on their wives influential positions. John Kerry seems to always come out smelling like a rose with his investments. Republicans are no better, I imagine Bob Dole was not always a very wealthy man, but he was a Senator for a century, right? I mean hasn't Rick Perry done the same thing in Austin Texas? DC has become a profit center for the permanent ruling class and those that support them. They use the government to tilt the playing field in their favor with little regard for the country as a whole.

In her Indianola, Iowa speech last summer Sarah Palin said these same things and the country re-hit the snooze button, and we probably will again in 2012. While there has been a lot of condemnation of Wall Street and fat cat bankers (as well as greedy businessmen) it just misses the boat entirely. It's the ruling class that sets the rules and the rules just aren't going to favor the poor and the middle class. All the more evidence that the Occupy Wall Street uprising needs to move their tents to Washington, D.C. That's home base for people who are really gaming (read: effing up) the system.

In the book’s introduction, Schweizer refers the phenomenon that is the subject of Throw Them All Out "The Government Rich". Yes, these are the same people who are "fighting" for you! Makes you feel empowered, right? These politicians arrive in Washington as people of modest means and somehow become very rich. These elected jobs receive generous pay, but nothing exorbitant. The Government Rich, Schweizer writes, insider deals, insider trading, and taxpayer money have become a pathway to wealth. They walk this exclusive pathway because they get to operate by a different set of rules from the rest of us. Schweizer calls the means by which these politicians achieve wealth honest graft i.e., abuse of their office for personal gain and it's not illegal.

What bothers me more is the attitude of the average citizen. It's either - whataya gonna do? or - boys will be boys, that's how the game is played. Perhaps throwing the bums out will accomplish nothing, Washington will simply corrupt the next batch. Eventually an ethical chap will rise to the top and shame will return as a behavior modifier, right? Am I dreaming?

To think it was not going on when the country was in its ascendancy is maybe naive, but now while we decline it's like rubbing salt in the wound. They probably laugh at the rubes that vote them in time and again and especially at those who put $10 or $50 in an envelope for them. These guys and gals tell us they are fighting for us (the newbies probably believe they are). After a few terms and many flattering (lucrative) meetings with lobbyists and their party bosses they're all playing the game.

Whataya gonna do?

CW

What a good idea!

2011-11-06T20:34:00.000-08:00

This really makes me angry. You should be angry too...

Every time I shop at a home improvement store these days I make sure to buy incandescent light bulbs. Oh, yeah, and I make sure they are Sylvania brand too. The days of finding these on store shelves in America are numbered.

The ordinary light bulb symbolizes the human race coming out of the dark ages, literally. The light bulb is birth of modernity. Just as the light bulb symbolizes mankind coming out of the darkness the U.S. epitomizes the modern technological world. Soon, the ordinary incandescent light bulb will be banned in the U.S. - a dark day indeed.

What this all means is a huge boost to China and the American firms that will complete the Chinese takeover of this industry. All this is happening with the blessing AND the help of the U.S Treasury Department. Perennial light bulb maker GE is already in China making bulbs after having closed it's last U.S. plant in 2010 and laid off many American workers. It's a shocker, I know. In the name of a greener world other major U.S. firms are bankrolling the Chinese lighting industry. And here we thought President Obama's chief go-forward strategy was fostering a green everything industry.

To be fair to the President the seeds of this were sown long before his time in the White House, but he certainly was a part of the Democratically controlled Congress in 2007 when the Federal law was passed to ban the incandescent bulb. Regardless of the timing it is the notion that there is a concerted effort to build this industry in China with Federal government and United Nations backing. Enter the gigantic investment house Goldman Sachs and networking powerhouse Cisco Systems and a juggernaut is born.

The altruistic underpinnings of this project like all "green" efforts isn't helpful when American and other western workers are thrown out of their jobs. Here the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), which invests in projects that can produce global environmental benefits is spearheading this project. Yes, the U.S. Treasury is a major funder for the GEF. This is being done as an environmental benefit by reducing China's carbon dioxide emissions and thereby benefiting the whole planet. So, I guess the ends justify the means and the means is destroying yet another domestic industry.

This new project backed by the aforementioned investors builds on a previous, $26 million GEF/UNDP pilot project, known as the China Green Lights project. That project was a roaring success for the environment and for China. The claim that it saves 15.78 billion kilowatt hours of energy, worth about $986 million to consumers, and, using dubious calculating methods is supposed to have kept 6.8 million tons of carbon out of the atmosphere. All is well. Nevermind that it threw thousands of Americans out of work and shuttered numerous factories.

The fact that the incandescent bulb is being replaced by an inferior and possible dangerous product - the compact fluorescent bulb - is the just one part of this story that gets the dander up.That they are made primarily in China is the kicker. Perhaps the inevitability of the end of the lowly incandescent bulb was to be expected, but the destruction of an industry in order to force us to buy inferior foreign products is just wrong.

The LED light bulb is making a move.Currently they are expensive, but they are far more efficient, safer and at least for now they are being made in America where they are exported to China. Small victories I guess.

CW

We suck, yes, but, these other guys...

2011-10-25T21:18:00.000-07:00

I doubt at any time in American history there has been as inauspicious a beginning to a presidential campaign as we are seeing right now. The incumbent is presiding over a literal disaster. His one truly shining moment was being President when a nearly irrelevant Osama bin Laden was killed. Rumors abound that in fact Obama had to be dragged kicking and screaming to his fateful and "courageous" decision to take bin Laden out.

The administration can't point to a strong and growing economy, or robust job growth. We are mired in 9.1% unemployment land. They can't point to seminal legislation that was supposed to address a looming health care cost explosion. The plan was unpopular when it was passed in the dead of night just before Christmas 2009 and it's still unpopular. ObamaCare, as it has come to be known, has done more damage to an uncertain economy than can be measured. Already costs are rising just in anticipation of its implementation.

The Dodd/Frank bill the President signed is paralyzing the banking system even before the actual regulations have been written. Do they not understand that ours is a debt based economy and it's the private sector banks that introduce "new" money into the system. It's almost as if they - the President and the Democrats - are purposely suppressing the domestic economy (and by extension the global economy). To what end? Win elections? Hardly.

If ever there was a ready made situation for a John Wayne character to ride in on a white horse and save us from a deadly mess the 2012 election is it. Obama seems to be saying, yes, we suck, but these other guys, you won't want them, they're goofy.

So we turn to the Republicans which is like admitting to you're pining for hope and change. We hope this current field changes and soon. What a crop of misfits and dopes. Really? Can't we do any better?

I had hope for Perry, but then he opened his mouth and removed all doubt. I thought Obama was petulant little prick. Perry disappoints.

Newt, no.

Bachmann, hell no!

Santorum, Huntsman, Paul... zzz...

Cain. I love him, but every day I wonder if today will be the day he admits he's been yanking our chain.

That leaves Mitt. If it has to be Mitt so be (M)it.

This is the one time Obama seems to be telling the truth, these guys are goofy. But, as I've said before:
dogcatcher vs Obama. Dogcatcher.

CW

Occupy This

2011-10-18T18:40:00.000-07:00

I think it's interesting that the kids occupying Wall Street for 4 weeks now still don't know what they want. Mostly what I am hearing is that rich people suck. I'm sure some of them do, but I think some poor people probably suck too.

There, now that we've gotten that out of the way, we can delve into the true meaning of this protest. Just as with the Tea Party it's frustration over this country's failures that is driving this. While there is plenty of blame to go around I think the protesters are "occupying" the wrong city. Washington DC is where they need to be.

Simply put it's not capitalism or the so-called rich that have failed us. It is forced socialist policies designed to fail that make everything and everyone they touch fizzle a little bit more with each new layer of government bureaucracy. Am I being facetious when I declare that forced socialist policies are supposed to fail? Not really.

I used to think and still do in some instances that the do-gooders have the best of intentions, but it is the unintended consequences (of human nature) that ruin everything they foist upon us. After reading Bruce Carlton's post: Good intentions? Not so, I have to conclude that the good intentions motivation I have bestowed on extreme leftist (PC) policies are just the opposite.

At least capitalism in it's pure form is honest. Socialism, leftism or PCism - whatever you want to call it is a liar's game. If you believe the lies that America's financial problems are the result of greedy capitalists then no doubt you will side with the Occupiers and demand "someone" gives you what you want for free. The ones who believe the liars are ignorant or deceived or are lying to themselves. A child knows that someone else will always have more than they do, but only a child is allowed to deceive themselves into believing that the unfairness of it all should be rectified with more unfairness.

I have always marveled at the notion that a rich man's inheritors should be forced give a huge percentage of their gains to the government out of some sense of fairness. What fairness is it that the government deserves or has any right to that money? I don't care if it is more money than any one person could ever use - it is theirs. It is more obscene in my eyes that the government can by the use of force take a man's inheritence than it is for a man to have more money than he could ever use. To what end? So that the government can spend it better?

The list of government programs and agencies that have been wildly successful and worked as intended (without costing society in other ways) is very, very short.

The failure of America's financial system, fiscal system, educational system and moral system can be laid at the feet of the men and women in Washington DC not New York City's Wall Street. DC acts Wall Street reacts. This not defending Wall Street, this placing the fault where it belongs.

The totality of "good" government failures (with all the good intentions, or lies if you will) is long. From the mortgage/subprime meltdown and it's inception in government policies to the coming demise of the venerable postal system. Government makes the rules, the rules are fixed so that some succeed and the rest...

So tell me how (real) capitalism has destroyed our country?

CW

Occupy Wall Street and Me

2011-10-12T12:12:00.000-07:00

My natural inclination would be to scoff at the "kids" putting on this Occupy Wall Street event. In general the proclamations I've been hearing from the participants leads one to believe they aren't really serious. It sounds like "we want everything, for free of course". Of the list of actions they are demanding almost none of them are reasonable or even realistic, but if I really listen what I hear is extreme frustration. Back in 2009 I myself participated in a rally where the overarching feeling was extreme frustration. It was the initial Tea Party rally in my area.

Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party are two sides of the same coin.

The Occupiers are upset about Wall Street bailouts, so is the Tea Party. The Occupiers oppose bailouts because Wall Street is "the rich" and the rich are the reason they are poor. The Tea Party opposed the bailouts because it's bad policy (so they say) and because it was done with deficit spending. The Occupiers are upset about corporate lobbyists because corporations are rich and the rich are the reason they are poor. The Tea Party opposes corporate lobbyists because they steer public policy so that it enhances their bottom line instead of ensuring that policy is good for the public.

The Occupiers sees corporate America as the enemy, the Tea Party sees an out of control government as the enemy. In some ways they are both right. The truth is the mega-government and mega-corporations are in bed together. It's a symbiosis that ensures riches for the prime movers in both entities. The worker and middle management in both government and corporate America are fungible and ultimately anonymous.

There is a divergence depending on on which side of the coin lands face up. While the Occupiers believe the government should give them the basic necessities of life just because they are breathing - not realistic or reasonable. They see rich corporations walking off with millions and billions while human services worthy or not are getting cut. Whereas the Tea Party sees government, particularly the Federal government as out of control as it exercises extra-constitutional power and enriching the elites inside corporations and by symbiosis the elites inside government as they move from one to other.

The rules are made by the government - and the rules are rigged. This is the source of the frustration for both.

Wouldn't be interesting if they somehow came together? Nah.

CW

Shocker: Lawrence O'Donnell is off his rocker

2011-10-07T14:56:00.000-07:00

Late to game yes, I am not the first to notice that Lawrence O'Donnell is insane. His antics are so off putting he is making Sean Hannity, Keith Olberman and Martin Bashir seem like reasonable commentators. It is his absolute pettiness and vitriol that makes him so "icky". Frankly he seems a bit unstable. His utter hatred for George Bush (either of them) is over the top. No one should hate that much. (Don't for a minute equate "policy" differences with Bush with O'Donnell's unadulterated hatred).

Recently his hatred was turned toward Herman Cain, a black man who has the audacity to be a Republican. Mr. Cain is diametrically opposed to President Obama on many levels and this is unacceptable to O'Donnell. A black man has no right to oppose the first black president. According to O'Donnell Cain is a traitor to blacks because he is not aligned with the socialist agenda of the Obama administration. Cain for his part believes that blacks should be allowed think for themselves, asking if they are better off since Obama has been President. I'll answer that Herman, no they aren't.

O'Donnell, in a recent diatribe I heard replayed on talk radio, (since I can't actually watch his show I rely on clips) about how Mitt Romney and Rick Perry don't want you to know their real names. Obviously they are hiding something from the American people. Apparently Mitt is actually Willard Mitt Romney and Rick Perry is James Richard Perry. Wow, men who use their middle name - this has never been done before. What do suppose they're hiding? A birth certificate? A false Social Security number? College transcripts? A forfeiture of their law degrees? Oh, wait, that's what Barry Soetoro has been hiding. Who is Barry Soetoro? Why that's Barack Obama's real name. Well, Lawrence, how about that?

One thing I imagine is that O'Donnell is a hoot at cocktail parties, but to prevent spittle from getting on you stay on the balconies and patios and avoid the bushes.

CW

Fallout in Wisconsin:Walker sees vindication

2011-10-03T13:55:00.000-07:00

The truth being revealed in the fallout of the turbulent legislative session in Madison Wisconsin earlier this year is instructive for many public union scenarios.

Racked by stories of destruction the liberal media in Madison and indeed across the country painted a picture of financial carnage for teachers and school districts. Now that some time has passed and the law implemented reality is somewhat different and somewhat rosier.

Byron York in a column on the WashingtonExaminer.com website describes the windfall one beleaguered school district will enjoy.

FTA
The Kaukauna School District, in the Fox River Valley of Wisconsin near Appleton, has about 4,200 students and about 400 employees. It has struggled in recent times and this year faced a deficit of $400,000. But after the law went into effect, at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, school officials put in place new policies they estimate will turn that $400,000 deficit into a $1.5 million surplus. And it's all because of the very provisions that union leaders predicted would be disastrous.

Far from disastrous, in fact because the bargaining now taken from the unions for contracting for health benefits led to a reexamination of the cost of these plans to the district. Lo and behold, a sweetheart deal for the union was undone and everyone benefited (except maybe be the union itself.)

FTA
In the past, Kaukauna's agreement with the teachers union required the school district to purchase health insurance coverage from something called WEA Trust -- a company created by the Wisconsin teachers union. "It was in the collective bargaining agreement that we could only negotiate with them," says Arnoldussen. "Well, you know what happens when you can only negotiate with one vendor." This year, WEA Trust told Kaukauna that it would face a significant increase in premiums.
Now, the collective bargaining agreement is gone, and the school district is free to shop around for coverage. And all of a sudden, WEA Trust has changed its position. "With these changes, the schools could go out for bids, and lo and behold, WEA Trust said, 'We can match the lowest bid,'" says Republican state Rep. Jim Steineke, who represents the area and supports the Walker changes. At least for the moment, Kaukauna is staying with WEA Trust, but saving substantial amounts of money.

The reason this is instructive for school districts in Wisconsin as well as government entities all over the country is because this is the kind of thing going on with many public unions. It's the public unions that fund political campaigns almost exclusively for Democrats. The representatives they help get elected create these spiffy little arrangements. The elected official has a vested interest in the status quo since they derive their war chests from some of this money as it gets folded back. These exclusive contracts cost the tax payer a ton of money. Honestly, it should a crime, but it isn't. This sort of thing wouldn't stand up to public scrutiny, but it never has to because the media just doesn't report it.

American tax payers should be incensed about these things, and Gov. Walker should be thanked for exposing the gratuitous under belly of Democratic politics. He won't be, it just doesn't fit the view of Walker as a cold hearted, anti-worker monster. These sorts of deals and the incredibly generous pensions afforded to public workers are out of whack, and even the retirees will admit this privately - whispering "I don't know how it can go on like this". It can't.

This is the kind of thing Gov.Walker was after. He shoots, he scores!

CW

NEW WEBSITE: Sacracyliac

2011-09-26T04:33:00.000-07:00

Sacracyliac - Music, Art, TV, Movie and Product Reviews

I'm launching a new blogspot website today. The site will be a repository for reviews that I do on occasion. The intention is to convey my impressions and information about all sorts of things that I experience while it's on my mind.

Most reviews will be short and sweet, but some will be longer since some subjects can't be handled with a thumbs up or thumbs down. I don't promise there won't be spoilers but I'll try not to ruin "The Sixth Sense" for you. Ultimately I'll use a 5 star rating scale with 1 being don't bother, really, and 5 being a must...

Bookmark the URL and pass it on!!!

www.Sacracyliac.blogspot.com

What's with the name? Absolutely nothing, I just made it up. I just like the way it rolls off the tongue.

No need for green

2011-09-23T14:39:00.000-07:00

The decades long obsession hard core leftists and everyday liberals have had with alternative energy culminating in President Obama's energy starvation policies in favor of "green energy" is based on false premises all around.

Just taking for a moment the whole Global Warming debate and boiling it all down it becomes a matter of burning fossil fuels. The dubious inference that C02 as a byproduct of burning oil and coal is the main cause of Global Warming is the only arrow in their quiver. Almost daily a new story emerges that casts even more doubt on the C02 based computer models that have promised the end of the world. It seems Global Warming, or rather, climate change is a natural, cyclical process.

Without Global Warming the Greens would have to rely on pollution and tragic accidents to make a case against fossil fuels. This may not be enough. Accidents are just that. Accidents are understandable. Pollution is probably not enough to turn the public against fossil fuels since people can see with their own eyes that the environment (yes, with controls, regulations and government rules) is getting better all the time. In my state they discontinued vehicle emissions inspections a decade ago. Air quality doesn't fall below thresholds that dictate such a requirement.

The reason CAGW and pollution are so important to the Greens is because the depletion angle of peak oil has been smashed. In a recent story at Salon.com "Everything you've heard about fossil fuels may be wrong" by Michael Lind dispels the notion that the U.S. is hopelessly dependent on foreign sources of oil and that we must move toward alternative energy. Yeah, this was at Salon.com. I know, who would have guessed...

FTA
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, these advances mean there is at least six times as much recoverable natural gas today as there was a decade ago.

Natural gas, which emits less carbon dioxide than coal, can be used in both electricity generation and as a fuel for automobiles.

The implications for energy security are startling. Natural gas may be only the beginning. Fracking also permits the extraction of previously-unrecoverable “tight oil,” thereby postponing the day when the world runs out of petroleum. There is enough coal to produce energy for centuries. And governments, universities and corporations in the U.S., Canada, Japan and other countries are studying ways to obtain energy from gas hydrates, which mix methane with ice in high-density formations under the seafloor. The potential energy in gas hydrates may equal that of all other fossils, including other forms of natural gas, combined.

If gas hydrates as well as shale gas, tight oil, oil sands and other unconventional sources can be tapped at reasonable cost, then the global energy picture looks radically different than it did only a few years ago. Suddenly it appears that there may be enough accessible hydrocarbons to power industrial civilization for centuries, if not millennia, to come.

The realization that we as a society need not rush to the green side needs to have an advocacy and a bullhorn. The green "save the environment" mantra has permeated everything. Every corporation, even the energy companies - the enemy - pay lip service to the greens. There's nothing wrong with being an advocate for clean air and water, but that doesn't mean we should be made to feel guilty about the lifestyle we've created with the viable energy options we enjoy now.

The costs of propping up green energy while at the same time stifling domestic fossil fuel production always falls on the poorest among us. The average person will not be able to afford to fly, or even take a long vacation by car. Major industries will wither (and millions will lose their jobs) during a forced transition. This isn't even taking into account the unreliability of so called green energy. Simply put the technology is just not ready for the utopian dreams of the greens - the reality of a green revolution will be a nightmare for millions.

One day the age of oil and the age of coal will end, but it will be when the magic of solar energy is actually realized (or some other such magic). We need to fight vigorously the forces that would diminish our quality of life with lies about man-caused global warming or the preposterousness that C02 is a dangerous pollutant.

Read the whole story - it's eye opening

CW

The Transfer Payment Casino Society

2011-09-18T10:11:00.000-07:00

Occasionally my wife and I go to one of the many casinos in our area. Myself, I'm not much of a gambler but my wife genuinely enjoys it so I go along for the ride and of course the wonderful buffet. I'll pluck $20 or $40 in a few slot machines and play until it's gone. I told my wife once that I might as well just visit the cashier on my way in and give him the money outright. The rest of the time I spend people watching while my wife plays her favorite slots with her own money (we keep separate finances).

What amazes me is that during this so-called Great Recession the casinos are brimming with customers - regular customers. I'm sure the casino operators we tell us that business is down, but if things are that bad shouldn't the casinos be nearly empty? Of course things are bad in general and yet the casinos are bustling with young and old alike with their money presumably experiencing the same fate as mine.

I would bet - pun intended - that a huge percentage of the money filling the casino's coffers are a direct result of government transfers. Social Security and various government employee pension money in the case of the older set. Not to mention the money the senior crowd is NOT spending on prescription drugs. There would also be unemployment benefits and SSI and other direct government payment money, not to mention food money made possible by food stamps, WIC and other benefits the younger set is not spending at the grocery store.

Tim Worstall's interesting article at Forbes.com made me think of my casino experiences of the last few years. How can there be so many people throwing their money away at the casinos when so many people are presumably so poor? Maybe it's not really their money.

In the article "The New US Poverty Numbers: Everyone, Just Everyone, Gets This Wrong" Worstall tells us that poverty numbers as reported in recent years are calculated before said poor people receive government benefits. It used to be that government benefits were calculated into the poverty figures.

FTA
We used to measure those who were poor after we’d helped them. Now, by and large, we’re measuring who would be poor if we didn’t help them. These just aren’t the same thing and so the numbers are not directly comparable.

This explanation will also aid you in understanding one of the great conundrums of modern America. How on earth can the US be spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year on beating poverty without actually beating poverty? Simple, we spend the money but don’t measure how much poverty we’ve beaten by spending it.

This is just one more way the government and mass media deceive us with calculated dishonesty. We as a society have spent trillions on "fighting poverty" and trillions more on corporate welfare (which is even more obscene) and yet poverty rates are unchanged if not higher. No one is advocating a society without a social safety net, but when will we have an honest policy direction that addresses the reason we are dumping good money after bad on transfer payments that literally do nothing to reduce poverty - except that is for the casino operators.

More power to the casinos, they obviously offer something beyond my comprehension, but it concerns me that people getting direct benefits from the government just take the money they don't spend on their own needs and give it to the casinos. Obviously this paints casino denizens with a broad brush, but do not deceive yourself into thinking that this is not happening.

Go east young man

2011-09-13T08:01:00.000-07:00

Need a new job? Go east.

If you think California's economic woes are bad now just wait until 2016. Once the Panama Canal upgrade is finished so too will be tens of thousands of jobs on the western seaboard from San Diego to Seattle.

The canal will be able to support gigantic modern container ships that today are serviced in California where the goods from Asia are then trucked across the country for distribution to eastern cities. Port cities all along the east coast and the Gulf of Mexico are completing upgrades of their own to handle the large ships. The opportunities for trucking and railroad companies to expand employment in the east look promising.

The benefits for the distribution system in a vast consumer market like the eastern United States is only part of the story. The entire Eastern seaboard of South America will benefit as well. Ships that used to take the long and dangerous trip around the southern tip of Chile will be able to reach Brazil and Venezuela via the relatively calm waters of the gulf.

While the exact impact is still hard to quantify one thing is certain California will suffer. The Golden State is already on the brink of total financial collapse due in large part to political idiocy and a fatal devotion to public unions and "green" policies. Despite some of the best weather and natural abundance the state government has made California number 50 on the list of "Best States to Do Business In". The Panama Canal upgrade will devastate two of the states thriving occupations - longshoreman and truckers.

There's not much California can do about this. Will this be the final nail in the coffin? It appears the folks up in Sacramento don't care anyway.

CW

The dictator of New York

2011-09-11T10:46:00.000-07:00

On the tenth anniversary of 9/11, Bloomberg has decreed that clergy will be excluded from the 9/11 memorial ceremony. He says the memorial schedule is too busy to allow prayer. What is wrong with this guy? Is he a petty tyrant or just an asshat?

I hope New Yorkers like Mayor Bloomberg. I certainly don't. He seems like a typical dictator to me. His decisions are final and no one is going to change his "open" mind. It's not even his ridiculous decisions to keep firefighters and clergy from the remembrance ceremonies of 9/11 that frost me, but also his numerous bans on foodstuffs, perp walks, indefensible defenses of government funded abortions and mosques in the shadow of ground zero.

On the mosque flap, as many have said, and I agree - they should and do have the right to build their mosque anywhere, but having the right and being a good idea are two different things. My problem with Bloomberg on this issue was his lashing out at those who see it differently than him. It makes him look like a petulant child.

If Bloomberg's open mind is so consistent on the ground zero mosque issue as well as his push back against the atheists protesting the inclusion into the 9/11 museum a Christian cross made from steel beams from the WTC wreckage, then why the attitude toward religion during the remembrance ceremonies?

What about the FDNY firefighters? Why exclude them?

CW

Are you still talking?

2011-09-09T08:18:00.000-07:00

Second verse same as the first...

President Obama's jobs speech as it's being reported was simply more of the same. Maybe a little less blaming Bush, but all and all just another hodge podge of targeted this and one-time that, essentially nothing that would really change the game.

When it comes America's economic woes it's really a matter of global competitiveness. China has the cheap labor and open doors. Oh yeah, and a dictatorial central government. China's economy is what American, Japanese and European business has made it with encouragement from their respective governments. Isn't it time for America to put our spirit, innovation, work ethic and dynamism to work for us instead of for China?

Did the President even hint at this fundamental issue in his jobs speech? Not really.

What we got from the President was a cobbled together rehash of tiny, targeted tax cuts, some that made no sense (a silly tax credit for hiring someone who's been out of work more than six months? Does any business choose or vet a new employee like this?)

He calls for more "infrastructure spending", and more straw men arguments with millionaire and billionaire "fair share" rhetoric. None of it was serious and wasn't meant to be, because it was simply campaign politics. Not that anyone was really expecting different, but why such a build-up, why such expectations only to deliver such a turd? Simple, he and his ideological brethren are incapable of any admission that their philosophy is defective(absent Utopia).

One thing that the President says - repeatedly - is absolutely true. We didn't get into this mess overnight and we won't get out of it overnight. Then why the short term gimmicks and targeted stimulus when fundamental changes are called for? Simple, he and his ideological brethren are incapable of any admission that their philosophy is defective.

So imagine my surprise to find The New York Times (aforementioned ideological brethren) had published an opinion piece that echoed my previous post The message, not the messenger. The message that Washington DC is broken and both parties are corrupt is so patently obvious to any conscious human being that it seems odd a major newspaper needs to even highlight the subject. In a rare commentary in said newspaper Sarah Palin's substantive words are examined - fairly...

FTA
She made three interlocking points. First, that the United States is now governed by a “permanent political class,” drawn from both parties, that is increasingly cut off from the concerns of regular people. Second, that these Republicans and Democrats have allied with big business to mutual advantage to create what she called “corporate crony capitalism.” Third, that the real political divide in the United States may no longer be between friends and foes of Big Government, but between friends and foes of vast, remote, unaccountable institutions (both public and private).

In supporting her first point, about the permanent political class, she attacked both parties’ tendency to talk of spending cuts while spending more and more; to stoke public anxiety about a credit downgrade, but take a vacation anyway; to arrive in Washington of modest means and then somehow ride the gravy train to fabulous wealth. She observed that 7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the United States happen to be suburbs of the nation’s capital.

There's even more cogent analysis of what Palin said in her Indianola, Iowa speech in the NYT article. Perhaps the President should co-opt some of these sentiments as his own. No doubt the adoring media would run with it and it might just be a difference maker in his reelection bid. He won't of course, but why not? Simple, he and his ideological brethren are incapable of any admission that their philosophy is defective.

CW

Crony, or not to crony

2011-09-07T09:07:00.000-07:00

Ben Shapiro a columnist for Townhall.com declares that Sarah Palin was wrong to use the term crony capitalism in her speech last week . He says the term disparages capitalism and that correct term is corporatism. I think it's a distinction without a difference, a 'to-mai-toe' 'to-mah-toe' thing. I knew what she meant and any thinking person knew it too. Whether the rigged game the giant corporations engage in with the government elites (in D.C. or the local statehouse) is technically crony capitalism or corporatism is beside the point.

As Shapiro correctly points out it's nothing new, it's been going on since the so-called robber baron days of the late 19th century. It's always been championed by the Democratic party. The problem is that now it's being used to make American cronies/corporatists (and their government operatives) very wealthy at the expense of American middle class economic power. By exporting the work to Asia along with the technology the corporate/government cabal is in direct conflict with everyday working Americans.

This is one of the reasons I can't understand why the so-called working class in America is so enthralled with the Democrats who support and foster the corporate/government cabal at every level. Oh yeah, the alternative is the corporate jelly party called the Republicans. Now that the Democrat boosters in the Main Stream Media have painted the Tea Party Movement as insanity personified the working class has no real voice. The Tea Party is as opposed to the corporate/government cabal as it is to the Federal overreach into extra-constitutional powers.

No matter, I still think Palin is the only one with the courage to say these things with real conviction, the party and the people dismiss the message at their own peril.

CW

The message, not the messenger

2011-09-06T06:29:00.000-07:00

Sarah Palin may be the only one in American politics who has the guts to point out what's right in front of us - the ugly truth amid the obvious dishonesty of the ruling class. Unfortunately while the message is strong and demands a respectable hearing the messenger is weak and does not get the respect she deserves.

As I've said before I don't believe any public figure in politics has ever been treated the way Palin has, but lately she has become her own worst enemy. She has every right to be disgusted and even angry at the major media in this country, still she often acts like the kid banging a stick against the fence just to keep the big dog all riled up - all it does is annoy everyone within earshot.

However she does have something powerful to say...

Some have said if we were to give the transcript of her Indianola Iowa speech cleared of self referential passages to people on the left and the right not knowing who spoke the words they would nod and cheer their approval. She clearly spells out the problems Washington has created for us all. She makes a point that ruling is class is doing just fine by cleverly saying: Seven of the ten wealthiest counties (in the U.S.) are suburbs of Washington, D.C. Interesting isn't it?

From the transcript
Yeah, the permanent political class – they’re doing just fine. Ever notice how so many of them arrive in Washington, D.C. of modest means and then miraculously throughout the years they end up becoming very, very wealthy? Well, it’s because they derive power and their wealth from their access to our money – to taxpayer dollars. They use it to bail out their friends on Wall Street and their corporate cronies, and to reward campaign contributors, and to buy votes via earmarks. There is so much waste. And there is a name for this: It’s called corporate crony capitalism.

When the names on the wall of the Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs and the U.S. Treasury Dept are interchangeable I defy anyone to say we aren't being ruled under a system of crony capitalism. I urge everyone to take the time to read the transcript, suspend your preconceived prejudices and be honest with yourself. The bottom line is it's as much crony capitalism as pure socialist policies that are ruining this country. People are sick of it on both sides of the aisle.

Palin goes on to give a prescriptive outline for what needs to done, some of it arguable, most of it dead on, but the notion she sells in this statement should be the rallying cry for all Americans pining for our economy back...

From the transcript
So, to make America the most attractive and competitive place to do business, to set up shop here and hire people here, to attract capital from all over the globe that will lead to an explosion of growth, instead of chasing industry offshore, I propose to eliminate all federal corporate income tax. And hear me out on this. This is how we create millions of high-paying jobs. This is how we increase opportunity and prosperity for all.

But here’s the best part: To balance out any loss of federal revenue from this tax cut, we eliminate corporate welfare and all the loopholes and we eliminate bailouts. This is how we break the back of crony capitalism because it feeds off corporate welfare, which is just socialism for the very rich. We can change all of that. The message then to job-creating corporations is: We’ll unshackle you from the world’s highest federal corporate income tax rate, but you will stand or fall on your own, just like all the rest of us out on main street.

The ruling class is the elites in both parties. It's the cozy deals they strike with corporations, farmers and special interest groups while the major media glosses it over that skews everything, skews hell, ruins everything. The lefty's will hate this plan because corporations are evil, of course, but the current tax laws hamper expansion and job creation in this country while simultaneously encouraging outsourcing overseas. This is killing the working class the left claims to care so much about. While I don't see the elimination of all corporate income tax being politically possible, I do see a huge reduction as being imperative. Palin's right about this.

CW

Exporting Exceptionalism

2011-09-03T06:14:00.000-07:00

Shelby Steele, author and thinker, wrote an excellent column for the Wall Street Journal published Sept 1 2011. It's hard to argue with anything Steele posits in this piece. The premise that the President's anti-exceptionalist demeanor summed up in this paragraph is that America comes about it's status illegitimately:

FTA
there is something more than inexperience or lack of character that defines this presidency: Mr. Obama came of age in a bubble of post-'60s liberalism that conditioned him to be an adversary of American exceptionalism. In this liberalism America's exceptional status in the world follows from a bargain with the devil—an indulgence in militarism, racism, sexism, corporate greed, and environmental disregard as the means to a broad economic, military, and even cultural supremacy in the world. And therefore America's greatness is as much the fruit of evil as of a devotion to freedom.

This passage as well as many others in Steele's article is dead on. But I think ultimately pinning the decline of the U.S. power and exceptionalism on this brand of liberalism is not the whole story. Capitalists and capitalism live by the tenet - grow or die. It was inevitable that the world so devastated by war and poverty would not remain so. Capitalists made sure of it

Expanding beyond our borders the market based system was instrumental in the demise of creeping communism. Specific laws helped American brands expand overseas because it was good for capitalism and for the West's battle against Soviet expansionism. Once the Cold War was over and bans on exporting American technology were lifted the race was on.

Some would say, and even I feel it sometimes that American based multi-nationals are disloyal and even treasonous in the way they export American jobs that literally shutter up entire towns across the country. Is it really their duty to maintain expensive operations just because they are American based? Not necessarily. What we find is that the very same laws (tax laws especially) used to great extent to promote market systems during the Cold War now stymie expansion and growth in America by our own companies. It makes it difficult for profits made overseas to be repatriated into the domestic economy. As well, free trade agreements pushed by the capitalists when coupled with intransigent labor unions also contribute to the outflow of jobs and wealth.

We can say that liberal legislatures create legislation that disfavors business domestically, true enough, but, Republicans have not once championed turning this around when they held the power. Can you say campaign contributions? In many respects multi-nationals like the rules the way they are. With business expanding in other countries they have yet to really feel the pinch of the loss of America's middle class. Until now that is.

I think it's imperative Obama be a one termer. His brand of Americanism is dangerous to the world, but Republicans and American mega corporations have failed in every way imaginable as well. It takes two to tango. It's time one party does what needs to be done to expand our own economy again. The debt and deficit at all levels of government will take care of itself when American economic power is asserted once again. We need leaders and statesmen who, one, believe in American exceptionalism (not today's Democrats, unfortunately) and two, will do what's best for America and not their own campaign war chests. Fat chance...

CW

Your Les Paul guitar is illegal

2011-08-31T07:44:00.000-07:00

The Holder Justice Department staged a raid on the factories and headquarters of Gibson Guitars in Nashville and Memphis. They confiscated guitars, wood and documents in an effort to implicate the historic luthier in an illegal exotic woods scandal. This is the second time this has happened to Gibson, oddly other guitar makers that use the exact same materials have not been raided. If you are wondering why, consider that Gibson's CEO Henry Juszkiewicz is a Republican donor. Chris Martin, CEO of CF Martin Guitars, a darling of the green crowd, is an Obama supporter. Martin, while also implicated in using protected exotic woods has not been investigated - or raided.

In a statement Juszkiewicz suggested the Feds are using the aggressive enforcement of overly broad laws to snare the company.

The Justice Department refused to speak to - anyone.

While the notion that the Justice Department is being used to exact political revenge is nothing new, especially for this regime, the idea that simply owning a guitar made with these woods puts the musician and collector in jeopardy is distressing.

When a musician crosses an international border with an instrument made of that restricted wood, he will be required to have correct and complete documentation proving the age of the instrument or the origin of the materials. It could confiscated by a zealous customs agent - these guitars can be worth $2000 to $200,000 - as well as face fines and even prosecution.

As an owner of high end guitars that were bought new from the manufacturer I have never been given any document declaring the source of the materials used in it's creation. I never received anything from GM or Chrysler in this regard either. As for the age of the guitar it usually buried cryptically in the serial number and takes significant digging to determine the exact manufacture date if it is possible at all. This places a high burden on the owner of an instrument that doesn't apply to other manufactured goods.

The implications are disturbing to say the least - are rock stars exempt? When will they rise up in opposition? I guess it depends whether it's Toby Keith and Ted Nuggent who gets nailed or Tom Petty and Bon Jovi.

~ from the foxnews.com article linked above: ~ Consider the recent experience of Pascal Vieillard, whose Atlanta-area company, A-440 Pianos, imported several antique Bösendorfers. Mr. Vieillard asked officials at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species how to fill out the correct paperwork—which simply encouraged them to alert U.S. Customs to give his shipment added scrutiny.

There was never any question that the instruments were old enough to have grandfathered ivory keys. But Mr. Vieillard didn't have his paperwork straight when two-dozen federal agents came calling.

Facing criminal charges that might have put him in prison for years, Mr. Vieillard pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of violating the Lacey Act, and was handed a $17,500 fine and three years probation.

This is bad, very bad...

CW

What is wrong with this guy???

2011-08-24T13:18:00.000-07:00

My God I can't believe this guy...

Everyday President Obama succeeds. Yes, he succeeds in lowering my respect for him when I thought I was already at rock bottom. What is it this time? The first so-called black president who was going to heal the racial divide in this country chooses to slap white people upside the head by displaying this painting in the West Wing.

Clearly he only intends to stir things up, not bridge the divide. This painting should be on display, and yes, maybe in the White House, but not in the West Wing. By displaying it in his offices he is making a personal statement that whites should not be forgiven - ever. Tell me, does he have any paintings/art depicting the Arabs destroying the Twin Towers? I thought not...

He has done nothing to help heal the black community, in fact his economic and welfare policies have further devastated blacks in this country. Black youth unemployment is markedly worse under his reign and the issue receives zero attention from his administration. Lately we have seen a disturbing trend in black youth mob violence directed randomly on whites, including to women and children. Is this really the time to endorse this kind of imagery at the Presidential level, especially by this President.

I really can't stand this man.

CW

We Can Only Hope!

2011-08-16T09:19:00.000-07:00

This is the first I've heard rumblings of a possible bid for the White House for Rep. Paul Ryan. The Wisconsin Congressman is now the Chairman of the House Budget Committee and has been more visible on the public airwaves than ever before. He successfully passed a rather revolutionary budget through the House this year that received a lot of press. Alas, it received zero consideration in the upper chamber. Harry Reid killed it immediately in the Senate, no hearings, no vote. It did however raise his stock among conservatives and Republicans - as well as the ire of the progressives.

I can't remember the last time I heard a politician talk - about anything - that blew me away. Ryan does it nearly every time I hear him speak. It's not soaring rhetoric or nebulous promises coming from this politician, it's answers, directions, thought-out solutions to real problems. He does criticize the liberals, Democrats and hyper-partisans, but it is not with malice or scorn. It is done with an air of a difference of opinion, rather than a unveiled hints that the other side is somehow evil.

Do I suspect Ryan's answers and solutions are the perfect remedy for America? I don't know. It seems clear though we have tried the Nanny-state prescription since LBJ and we are dying as an economy and as a culture. Ryan's solutions seem to lean towards making the country a place for business to thrive which brings along jobs and prosperity rather than a place for government to thrive. Just who is served by a bigger and bigger, more costly government? Well, it's mostly the government itself and those "bitter clingers" from government-created welfare Moms to corporate chieftains whose lives and businesses are built around government largess.

I would be seriously enthused by a Ryan for President campaign, I would volunteer and I would open my wallet. It is time for something different.

CW

Bat Shit Crazy

2011-08-11T10:40:00.001-07:00

So, yesterday when an e-mail was circulating the office deriding President Obama for the stock market's woes the defensive mode kicked in almost instantaneously. The replies began flying...

Essentially it was said in so many words that the President didn't have anything to do with the stock market (and even if he did - it was still all Bush's fault). Another couple of e-mails went on to chronicle the Dow's performance under the last 3 Presidents trying to show that Democrats were the superior guardians of the equities.

The President, any President doesn't directly have control over the direction of the stock market day to day, but their policies and the rhetoric absolutely contribute to trends and sometimes even short term developments. Still, that was not what struck me about the e-mail chain. It was one that said - the markets wouldn't be any different today if McCain and that "Bat Shit Crazy" Palin had been elected.

I was struck by how a generally well informed, intelligent person could just label someone they know absolutely nothing about - or rather knows only what CNN, Newsweek and the New York Times has told him - such a derogatory term. In none of e-mail responses did anyone say that "Marxist" Obama or any other , inflammatory descriptor. But it was OK to to just flame Sarah Palin, hell it is expected, right?

I see it all the time with my smart, above average intelligence friends (family) and associates when it comes to Palin. None of them have taken one minute to actually look into this woman's accomplishments. These are the same people who hate (or strongly dislike) Republicans, which is one strike against her immediately. But do they know that it was Sarah Palin who took on the established, entrenched Republicans in her state as a Republican herself and corrected decades of problems. She was a real and consistent problem solver who didn't stand on convention. Palin was a get it done type of leader - pretty much exactly what we need now. That was a picture never painted in the early days of 2008. What they know is what the media and the celebrity class has told them. They don't like her because they aren't supposed to.

Before she had the misfortune of being selected as John McCain's running mate in a year that the Messiah himself was running (oops, I just used a derogatory term, didn't I) Palin was a successful governor of a small state. Her disarming beauty and folksy mannerisms automatically disqualified her among the elites and the intellectuals. Ya sure, she is a dumb hick, dontcha know. Yes, she was out of her element in 2008, she was not ready, she probably should have had more prep and less "handling". But nothing she said or did deserved the drubbing she took, particularly in light of the fact that the media has still not vetted Barack Obama.

Unfortunately "Bat Shit Crazy" is one of the mildest things said about her by her detractors.

I was of the mind that she is so damaged that she didn't stand a chance if she ran for President. I don't know if I've changed my mind yet, but I actually admire her fortitude and her ability to shake it off and keep going. I've said it before that if by some circumstance she becomes the nominee I wouldn't hesitate to vote for her.

Here's the deal:
The progressive attacks will be coordinated and vicious, no matter whom the nominee is this election cycle. One has to wonder who will be able to withstand the pending storm. I believe Sarah Palin has been vetted. None of the others have been prepped to level they'll need to withstand a vicious, blistering attack from every flank. No stone will be left unturned in trying to discredit, embarrass or shame the Republican nominee. The left knows they can't run on their record this time, so destroying their opponent is the only thing they have.

You could say, yeah, well, that's politics. The Republicans play that game too. They did it to Clinton and Gore and John Kerry. Don't make me laugh. Major media constituents votes 90 to 10 for Democrats every time, you can't tell me it's the same thing. President Obama was never scrutinized or demonized like Bush, or Palin, not even close. In fact no politician has ever received the treatment Palin and her family endured in 2008. It's only gotten worse since.

I really like a few of the declared candidates on the Republican side and I like some that haven't declared and likely won't this time. I'd take anyone of them over Obama. The question is are any of them Bat Shit Crazy enough to withstand the coming onslaught?

CW

Escape to God's Country

2011-08-05T15:38:00.000-07:00

It's been a strange year...

Every summer for the last 4 or 5 years my son, his friend and I head up to northern Wisconsin for a little fishing and escapism. This year more than most I really needed it. (Yes, we are albino deer country. I hope to see one with my own eyes)

I feel overwhelmed and blessed at the same time. Life, as many of us who have lived more than a few decades know intuitively, speeds up as we get older. Is it because we are going downhill in more ways than one or is it because we don't get to take breaks like we once did? My breaks are few and far between for all kinds of reasons - no need to go into that now - but I not only looked forward to this one, I really needed it!

It seems health is on everybody's mind this year. I had a scare of my own and I've seen my dear mother, my mother and father-in-law, my younger brother and some friends at work all having health scares or issues. My wife had surgery twice. I can safely say we've reached our maximum out of pocket this year.

Of course the national economy and the politics that surround it have filled our hearts with dread as it seems there is no end in sight for this constant stream of bad news. At work we as as busy as I've ever seen but we are not growing the business - we are bracing ourselves for compliance audits. A huge percentage of our work is non-productive CYA work. Not saying it is all necessarily wrong or pointless, but the deadlines are crazy and arbitrary - that's all I'm saying.

On the blessed side I saw both my kids graduate this year, one with honors and one in a blaze of A's and B's on his way out. I couldn't be happier or more proud! Of course I am very happy that both of my wife's surgeries turned out well and she looks to have full recovery in her sights. On the personal side I started writing songs again!!! I am busily recording a new album. It gives me great joy and something to look forward to week in and week out. Nearly all the songs have a personal redemption angle to them. I wrote them in a six week period and tried not to over analyze them as I finished. We have 4 in the bag and I'm really excited to get them out there.

So this little escape to beautiful northern Wisconsin couldn't have come at better time. Hopefully we'll have great weather and the fish will be biting!

CW

Hoyt's Mountain

2011-07-31T07:15:00.001-07:00

"Hoyt's Mountain"
18 X 24 acrylic

2011
by Craig Willms

For an old friend. His father was moved from his beloved home due to health issues. Here's hoping this painting brings some comfort and joy.

See more paintings at http://static-art.blogspot.com/

CW

But can he (she) win?

2011-07-23T09:42:00.000-07:00

Going into the political season, which by the way starts earlier and earlier each cycle, the field of candidates to challenge President Obama is setting up nicely. Personally I will enthusiastically support any one of them to replace Obama. I honestly don't see how anyone can look at Obama's record and the direction the country is heading and be happy about it. Looking out on the horizon who can see good times ahead?

The truth is America needs to be unleashed economically. Obama and his ilk are restraining the economic engine of the most dynamic country the world has ever seen - and to what end? Someone please answer that.

In my view and the view of many, many others Obama and the "government is the answer" crowd has got to go or this country is going to be ruined. Government should be a facilitator not a dictator.

The Republican field of candidates has two things against them from the get go, and neither of them trivial. One is the power of incumbency and the other is the fawning, adoring media that will not turn on Obama even when this disaster of a presidency is so evident. Each candidate will have to endure a blistering attack from the media while knowing that not one aspect of Obama's shortcomings will even be discussed. Unfortunately the media has already unjustifiably poisoned some of these fine people in manner never seen before.

When each of these candidates is examined against the reality of the pounding they'll get from the media the question "but can he (she) win," becomes paramount. The greatest conservative darling in the world does no good if he or she can't win.

Let's take a look:

Newt Gingrich - no
Too much baggage, conservatives respect him but realize he is damaged and most of it by his own hand.

Herman Cain - maybe
Not well known, but is a marvelous speaker and has excellent business and economic instincts. Very light on foreign affairs. He would need to be more specific in his speeches and debates to balance his beautiful rhetoric.

Michele Bachmann - no
Frankly she's not ready for this. Her Christian morality play will be pummeled and some of her old mis-steps will bury her. While I like her and am impressed by her personal story I find her the weakest of all the candidates when the campaign gets to the major leagues.

Jon Huntsman - maybe
He's not even as well known as Cain. In media circles he is well known and is often said to be the Republican that liberals like. That's low praise in conservative circles. He does not win any points for being President Obama's ambassador to China either. He was a popular governor of a small western state which doesn't help. I don't think he can get the nomination. If he did could he possibly beat Obama, maybe...

Tim Pawlenty - yes
If he wins the nomination that is. Pawlently's problem is two-fold; a mis-interpretation of his personality and Michele Bachmann. Bachmann sucks the oxygen out of the room. He's actually a first rate executive and as wonky as he need be, he absolutely could go toe to toe with Obama. He will not be given the chance unless something breaks his way early.

Mitt Romney - yes
Romney could beat Obama, of that I am certain, but it will be without enthusiastic support from the conservative base. There are many conservatives who will stay home rather than vote for him. He is another John McCain in their eyes. While his business credentials are a major plus as well as his reputation for turning around failing enterprises his support is wobbly in the party and especially with conservatives.

Sarah Palin - ???
Palin is a big question mark. She should be given points for withstanding an onslaught never before seen in American politics. She doesn't deserve (no one does) the vile hatred she has endured for nothing more than being nominated for the vice Presidential post in 2008. Nothing she'd done justified the ridicule and scrutiny she endured and continues to endure. The media has purposely fomented a kind of hatred toward one person that hasn't been seen since Adolph Hitler. I would vote for her in a second just out of respect for the strength she's shown. But can she beat Obama? If she even got close you and I know what she's seen so far would be paddy cakes.

Rick Perry - yes
Though undeclared as a candidate Perry may be the strongest of them all. The media has so little to attack him on. The angle they will take is that both he and George W. Bush are Texan's. That association is the biggest stick they have against him. Unfortunately it would be willow stick. Bush and Perry are not tight, there is no real association. Perry has been a very successful governor of a pretty successful state. Texas has done almost exactly the opposite of what Obama has prescribed for America and Texas prospers and grows, America - not so much. I like what I see with Rick Perry

Ron Paul - no
Ron Paul is an enigma. So much of what he says is right on. He seems to look right through political rhetoric and gets to it's common sense essence. But his manner and demeanor is strange and uninspiring. He would not fair well in a debate with Obama. He would not inspire confidence. Unfortunately for Paul, people like to be bamboozled, they like to believe that those in authority known things we don't and that's why they do crazy, nonsensical things. Paul Paul is too sane. What a sad commentary on American politics. He cannot win.

Obama is beatable - and he has to be defeated before the country (perhaps the world) collapses economically, but the Republicans have to put up someone who can win.

CW

Life is a distraction

2011-07-18T11:13:00.000-07:00

From what, you ask? From death, of course.

In a recent post on his teaching blog Bruce Charlton tosses out some quotes by Blaise Pascal a 17th century thinker that have really stuck with me for some reason.

the quotes courtesy of Mr. Charlton:
Who does not perceive the vanity of the world? So, who does not see it, apart from young people whose lives are all noise, diversions, and thoughts for the future?

But take away their diversion and you will see them bored to extinction.

Them they feel their nullity without recognizing it, for nothing could be more wretched than to be intolerably depressed as soon as one is reduced to introspection with no means of diversion.

Not that I've been thinking about death so much as I have been thinking about life. I suppose its because I recently reached a milestone age-wise and that my children are grown and will soon be off living their own lives. Pascal is saying that if we removed all the noise and distraction from our lives all that would be left is quiet introspection. Left with only this we would see the futility of life itself.

We are born, we live, we die.

Unless we are actively engaged in working to put food on the table or directly caring for children everything else is a distraction. Distractions that without we would become insane with boredom.

Professor Charlton takes it a step further and delves into how this is manifested in the current culture. Youth, he says, is incapable of seeing the futility of this life because they live in constant noise and diversion and lack the ability for introspection. These are the traits that make being young so much fun. When you scold a child and say, "how would that make you feel" you are forcing them to examine themselves. Children almost always become sad when forced to do that.

In this new culture, the one that has been championed since the 1960's, the culture I grew up in, we are not allowed to grow up, says Prof Charlton. I believe he is right. Everything outside of work is positioned around having fun and being youthful. Seriousness is frowned on.

Those who look at the world in a larger sense are sometimes criticized for being too serious and being no fun at all. Why drag people down with your bitterness and negativity. If you're introspective about your country and your culture you run the risk of coming off as a grownup. Not good. Look at everything being sold from night cream to Viagra, it's all about being youthful.

What's wrong with that? What is the alternative? Surely if we didn't surround ourselves - especially as we get older - with TV, sports and hobbies and any number of busy-body activities we would soon be bored with our own company and likely fall into depression. The question is are some of these activities even worthwhile? Are some destructive? Wasteful? Of course. Vanity is usually destructive, wasteful.

We could lose ourselves in the glory of God too... But no, this culture clearly frowns on that. Our culture is drifting into destruction by our own unserious hand. While we culturally worship youth we are financially transferring the wealth to the old - in the most wasteful and inefficient manner, potentially destroying both. The one thing that could bring things together is the one thing the new cultural overlords hate the most - that would be God Himself.

CW

Doing my part

2011-07-15T09:56:00.000-07:00

The economy is still in the tank, no news there. I remember way back in the early 80's America faced similar economic doldrums. Reagan was elected President in 1980 and after a few years things started to pick up. They started calling it the Reagan Revolution. It wasn't that the economy was great by 1983-84, but it was because the mood, the outlook and the prospects looked so much better than they had just a few years earlier.

I was married in '83 and we bought a house in October of that year. We spent money like crazy back then. We needed everything. We used to joke that we were the Reagan Revolution! Well I'm here to say this year I'm doing my part to jumpstart this morbid economy despite all the evidence that I'm spitting in the wind.

This year alone I bought a new refrigerator, a new lawnmower, a new dehumidifier, a new gas grill, 2 new cell phones, a new 18-speed bike, building materials for deck project, paid thousand$ in medical bills and I'm sure much, much more. I will need a new car soon as well.

So, I am doing my part to create an Obama Revolution. I just wish he would.

CW

A gun to the head...

2011-07-09T09:26:00.001-07:00

I don't want to turn this forum, meager as it may be, into a routine tirade against President Obama, but this latest one can't go unnoticed.

During the aftermath of the Tuscon shootings last winter where Rep. Gabrielle Gifford was severely injured by a crazed gunman we were all treated to an excoriation of Sarah"gun toting"Palin and all conservative talkers. We were to understand that it was incendiary violent language that had caused marginally sane people to go on shooting rampages. The debate that followed became all about Sarah Palin who had absolutely nothing to do with any of it.

Palin had "targeted" Gifford's re-election race as winnable for the Republicans and therefore she and she alone was responsible for this tragedy. We all know that war analogy's are rarely ever used in political campaigns (pun intended).

When I was listening to coverage of President Obama's electronic town hall and heard him utter the phrase - - "the debt ceiling should not be used as a gun against the heads of Americans to retain breaks for corporate jet owners or oil and gas companies"- - I was a little stunned.

The imagery was simple - Republicans were threatening to put a bullet in the head of Americans by not capitulating to Obama. A rather violent picture.

So I waited for the storm of outrage over a politician using such violent and incendiary language. Crickets. Doing a Google search - maybe it was Bing- I found a few odd mentions and no outrage at all. Here and here.

Yeah, you're not going hear any feigned outrage. Why didn't the conservative punditry make hay with this? Because it would be stupid, disingenuous tripe. I mention it only to prove that the media in general, so bent on destroying Sarah Palin was unrestrained and gleeful to have such a grenade to throw at her. Calling out Mr. Obama would be counterproductive to their goals.

So here goes: Shame on you President Obama, I'm outraged that you would use such violent and incendiary imagery.

CW

To Fetch a Pail of Money...

2011-07-02T07:48:00.000-07:00

According to George Will a new book called “Reckless Endangerment” is a study of contemporary Washington, where showing “compassion” with other people’s money pays off in the currency of political power, and currency.

It's worth noting that despite all the things written about the financial crisis that still grips America and the world it does have an embryo and a focal point. I have not yet read the book, but it appears that names and faces will finally be applied to the culprits.

We've known for quite some time that "Wall Street" was to blame for the implosion of 2008, right? In reality Wall Street's part in all this was a reaction, a devastating reaction to the rules laid down by Washington. The slime merchants of credit default swaps and collateralized debt obligations should not go unscathed, however the gleeful manipulation of lenders, borrowers, investors and insurers was almost an inevitable result.

It started in the Carter years with the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act which pressured banks to relax lending standards. As a way to spread the American Dream to folks whose incomes, assets, or abilities to own a home would never pass muster in the home loan department of a bank the CRA was the epitome of liberal compassion. The embryo if you will.

President Clinton stepped upped the ante by putting teeth behind the compulsory lending standards but then offering banks a way to protect themselves. In comes Fannie Mae, a “government-sponsored enterprise” or GSE. The focal point emerges.

This set in motion the events that eventually (inevitably) led to the housing market meltdown that still grips us today. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac became perhaps the most powerful financial institutions in the world. While the stage was being set to bring down the most powerful economy in the world James Johnson, the head of Fannie Mae at the time and his - mostly Democrat - friends and associates walked away with millions in bonuses. The money flowing out of Fannie and Freddie for campaign contributions went mostly to Democrats and it was mostly Democrats who defended and then obstructed any attempt to stop the speeding locomotive.

The rest is history. Wall Street did what they always do by creating complicated financial vehicles to maximize their profit. Losing grip on reality and sinking of major "too big to fail" firms was ultimately a bump in the road as we watched the Federal government ride to the rescue with TARP and other bailouts.

Average homeowners, the real losers in all this were thrown a bone with new Financial Industry Reform legislation. Intended to assure us that the banks will never do this again, incidentally written by the same men (Democrats) who brought us reform in the 1990's. They missed one little thing in all the fine print. The reform didn't address Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac at all. Hmmm, were the Democrats behind the legislation still angling for cash for next years campaign?

You may have noticed that I mention "Democrats" once or twice in this story. I'm just trying to set the stage for the inevitable fall guy... It was all George Bush's fault!!!

CW

Perception vs Reality : Paul Ryan vs MMT

2011-06-25T11:20:00.000-07:00

Continuing on from my last post where we looked at Warren Mosler's MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) and pondered its legitimacy. I find that I struggle reconciling what MMT says with the current debate over the debt, the deficit and Paul Ryan's budget. Paul Ryan is a hero and some circles, frightening in others. To some he is just plain wrong.

Ryan, (R-WI) the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, produced what some would say was a radical budget for 2012. The bill passed in the House and it failed in the Senate. Some praised Ryan for being a grownup by facing the debt problem with a solution instead of more rhetoric. It called for drastic cuts in Federal spending, restructuring some entitlement programs - Medicare in particular - and streamlining tax policy. Ryan along with many conservatives and centrists believes government spending is out of control and is absolutely dangerous to America's future. Yet according to MMT deficits don't matter at the Federal level, that the U.S. government cannot run out of money. Well, which is it? Is debt and deficits the death of us or are they no big thing?

The average person sees the U.S. government "spending money it doesn't have" and tries to relate it to their own lives. Obviously if we average Joes and Janes kept spending and spending well beyond our ability to even pay the interest let alone the loans themselves then we would soon be bankrupt and in the poorhouse. Can the U. S. government become bankrupt? MMT says no, Paul Ryan says it already is. Most of us see Paul Ryan's point of view because it's something we can related to. This is the perception we all live under right now.

What if MMT is right and theoretically the Feds can't really run out of money. In fact the Federal government doesn't have to actually borrow cash, sell bonds or even collect taxes to get the money they need to run the country? Well, consider for a moment that the value of our currency is confidence based. If every one is losing confidence because the Federal Reserve pumps billions of dollars into the system which devalues the dollar and in turn causes inflation (in the cost of energy and food in particular). Is this some kind of false reality?

How many times do you have to hear the old phrase that perception IS reality? Whether MMT is technically right doesn't matter if the wheels that turn the world economy are based on the perception that the U.S. government is broke. When American citizens and foreign governments lose confidence in the U.S. dollar all the theory in the world isn't going to change that.

Why are there no brave politicians espousing the "truth" of MMT? An oxymoron, there are no brave politicians. Or are there? Is Paul Ryan brave for proposing a massive restructuring of venerable government programs because even though in reality the government will always pay for Social Security and Medicare the perception is that they will bankrupt the country.

Perception vs Reality.

Is Warren Mosler right?

2011-06-14T06:01:00.000-07:00

I've been following the proclamations of Warren Mosler for some time now. I always come away thinking that what he says is just too good to be true. What he says in a nutshell is that deficits don't matter. With everyone in Washington, Wall Street and Main Street decrying Federal budget deficits as the concrete around the ankles of this economy it seems impossible that everyone is dead wrong and Warren Mosler and merry band of MMTers are right. Mosler has a nice explanatory article on the Huffington Post that appeals to progressives not to follow the conservatives down the deficit doom and gloom road. It's short, and worth reading.

MMT stands for Modern Monetary Theory. MMT was born when President Nixon removed the U.S. currency from the Gold Standard creating a free floating fiat currency tied to absolutely nothing. It works by plying simple accounting methods. So, as Mosler points out:

...when the government spends or lends, it does so by adding numbers to private bank accounts. When it taxes, it marks those same accounts down. When it borrows, it simply shifts funds from a demand deposit (called a reserve account) at the Fed to a savings account (called a securities account) at the Fed. The money government spends doesn’t come from anywhere, and it doesn’t cost anything to produce. The government therefore cannot run out of money, nor does it need to borrow from the likes of China to finance anything.

It seems the value of our money is the value we give it. Our confidence in the almighty dollar is what gives it power, oh yeah, and demand too... Currently demand for goods and services is down, way down. Aggregate demand which combines government demand and private sector demand is what drives the value of the dollar. All this deficit talk and wringing of the hands is what is driving down aggregate demand and that is not good for anyone.

Mosler's main point is since there is no shortage of goods, labor or materials to drive the economy to full employment and full funding of our entitlement obligations, the only restraints are self-imposed by a deficit reduction mentality. Conservatives, he says, are wrong headed (as opposed to evil) about deficits and debt, and liberals are equally wrong headed about taxes.

Convincing conservatives that deficits (at the Federal level) don't matter and convincing liberals that high taxes only serve to put the brakes on demand (and real economic growth) is an awfully large mountain to climb. If he is right then we are wasting so much time and so much human potential with self imposed and painful austerity.

The most interesting idea is his call to suspend FICA taxes:

...many MMT progressives today favor the immediate suspension of all FICA taxes, which are highly regressive, punishing taxes on people working for a living that no progressive should tolerate. Eliminating FICA fixes the economy the progressive way, from the bottom up versus the highly regressive top down trickle-down economics practiced by the current administration that would have made even President Reagan blush. Yes, the last two years have seen positive real growth, but with employment remaining near post depression lows, and wages under continuous downward pressure, executive compensation just hit new highs and stocks more than doubled, as this administration presided over the largest transfer of wealth from the least to the most wealthy in the history of the world.

I can see the wisdom in this if one believes that deficits don't matter and that taxes stunt private sector demand. Frankly, there is no "lock box" for Social Security, there never has been, so we wouldn't be robbing from grandma. This will be a tough sell, but it has an appeal that can't be dismissed easily. FICA taxes are the most punitive taxes we have. A FICA holiday would add billions to the economy every week. If you believe, as MMTers do, that taxes don’t really serve to collect revenue, but are more like a gas pedal that controls the speed of the economy. When the economy is going too fast, raising taxes is like taking your foot off the gas slowing it down. Right now a very large tax cut is called for and a FICA holiday would be the simplest to enact and the most fair.

I really do want to believe that MMT is right and the Mosler is an oracle, but like I said it seems too good to be true - and when things seem to be too good to be true they usually are.

CW

The Real Welfare Queens

2011-06-06T09:11:00.000-07:00

We've all been there, standing in line at the grocery store behind someone using their EBT card or food stamps or whatever you call it. We wonder if her mother before her relied on the government to feed the family and if her daughter, busily playing with the button that moves the conveyor belt, will follow in her footsteps. We look at the kind of food on the conveyor and think, these people eat better than I do and not a dime is coming out of their pocket. We lay seven meager items on the belt and get charged $51.67. It just seems unfair.

On the heals of reading Michael Lewis' "The Big Short" (see review from and earlier post) I have been reading more about the financial crisis of 2008 and becoming more and more sick about it. The waste, fraud and abuse we suspect of welfare Mom's is spittle in the wind compared to fraud practiced on Wall Street and Washington DC. Our anger, our disgust is completely misplaced. The fact is the relationship between Washington DC and Wall Street is criminal. It does not matter who the President is, the revolving door that spins between executive positions in the Treasury and the White House into all the big Wall Street firms is one massive conflict of interest. The corruption is almost unfathomable. That's really all you can call it, corruption.

Whether or not TARP or any of the other government rescue "loans" saved the financial system from total collapse is irrelevant, what's transpired since the fall of 2008 is the biggest financial crime in all of history.

The roots of the problems go back to 80's and especially the 90's, but now that it has come to a head you'd think something would be done about it to prevent such a disaster from happening again. If you thought that you'd be wrong.

Wall Street traditionally made it's money on commissions being brokers, traders and advisers. In the new century the Internet changed the way many investors did their business and Wall Street needed new sources of revenue. Amazingly in the late 90's deregulation fell into their lap paving the way for complex, potentially dangerous financial instruments called derivatives. Many pushed strenuously for their regulation, but some members of Congress and White House appointees (Democrats and Republicans alike) were so entirely opposed that in 2000 a bill was passed specifically prohibiting any such regulation.

These derivatives made it possible for banks and mortgage lenders to minimize their risk if (when) there was a default. This is what fueled the boom in subprime mortgages. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, quasi-governmental lending agencies, were front and center of this scheme. Financial institutions on from Wall Street to Berlin combined these risky loans and made them seem as reliable as government securities. All of this is detailed in "The Big Short". Employing the notorious credit default swaps, Wall Street firms blatantly, knowingly, sold fraudulent securities to gullible clients while betting at the same time that they were going to fail.

This ponzi scheme like all ponzi schemes crashed. This time no one went to jail, no one was shamed, no, this time there was a government bail out as a reward. Sickeningly the executives at Fannie and Freddie as well nearly all the big Wall Street firms walked away with millions - millions in government money. The numbers are so staggering and the fraud so complex that most Americans can't or won't even let themselves be upset by it. Worse, many people just smile slyly and say "boys will be boys" as if we should expect no less. But it's the overweight welfare Mom shopping with abandon that should be cut off!

Barack Obama thinks we should pay more taxes, that the government needs more revenue... While it's clear that most of the lefty criticisms of "the rich" are true they fail to see that it's their "guy" who is and has perpetuated this fraud for decades to keep the money flowing into the party and the campaigns. Barack Obama was the #1 recipient of campaign contributions out of Fannie, Freddie and Goldman Sachs. Boys will be boys. Meanwhile he'll try to convince us that a husband wife team that owns a little business generating $250,000 a year are the filthy rich.

The Republicans may be saying no to higher taxes, but they are no pillars of virtue in this whole affair. The incestuous relationship among the Wall Street elites and the executive branch (of any Preisdent) should be severed. The notion that the finances of the nation are just too complicated for someone without a Goldman Sachs background is preposterous. Isn't clear by now that the qualifications for high government posts are how well you can game the system for the benefit of Wall Street. Most of the filthy rich up and down Wall Street were Republicans at one time. No, the Republicans are no better at all.

Americans need to start getting educated about this and learn to direct their anger at the real welfare queens in NY and DC and not the welfare Moms at their local grocery store.

CW

We have choices to make

2011-05-27T10:37:00.000-07:00

Prerequisite: please read Victor Davis Hanson's Ok, Let's Decline

There are people, Americans, who suffer a deep sense of self loathing. They have convinced themselves that America has no redeeming values. Granted these may be the same people who hate their nuclear families and the local pro football team too. Let's set them aside. There are others who plod along blindly, taking life as it comes, too lazy or preoccupied to be concerned with esoteric existentialism as it relates to the country as a whole. There's not much anyone can do to get these people engaged. Then there's the rest of us with some measure of love of country and pride in being Americans, not necessarily deluded into believing as a nation we've never done anything wrong, but recognizing there is something special here in the land of the free and the home of the brave. We are the ones who are sickened by what is becoming of our country.

In 2010 a large segment of these people woke up from their powerlessness and formed a movement that became known as the Tea Party in direct reaction to the overreach by Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats. The landslide election threw the Democrats out of power in the House of Representatives and transformed many statehouses across country. Since then the major media has done a nice job painting the Tea Party as racists and crazy right-wing extremists (which they are not). Worried for all the blood, sweat and tears they've expended on the magisterium of Barack Obama the media has pulled out all stops in marginalizing anyone opposing the "One".

Why not examine the real reason Barack Obama is opposed by so many? In my eyes he is purposefully leading the decline of the United States as a world power in his every presidential act. People see it, people sense it and people feel it. Barack Obama has chosen to lead the decline of America. It was his choice, our choice will come when he asks for our support on election day in November 2012. Personally I'd would vote for the dog catcher before I will vote that man.

We have choices to make... As Mr. Hanson points out in his article, nations decide to ascend or decline. England is just such an example. Before WWII Great Britain was a world superpower, partnering with the U.S. and the Soviets to defeat the Axis Powers. Since 1945 - as VDH explains:

By September 1945, England had far more of its industrial base intact than had Germany or Japan, and had suffered far fewer losses, both material and human, since 1939 than either of the defeated Axis powers whose entire national ideologies had been rendered bankrupt and their people reduced to global pariahs. Why, then, did a country that produced the sort of four-engine bombers en masse that its wartime adversaries could not, or a Spitfire fighter better than any produced by Japan or Germany until the advent of the jet, end up decades later with unsold Jaguars while Mercedes and Lexus swept world markets?

Britain choose to create a welfare state, and that's what they've got. Currently Barack Obama is choosing to put the United States on the same path. We are becoming a welfare state where everyone (especially the crony capitalists) are on the dole. We are a country with so much potential, but Barack Obama and people of his ideological ilk are choosing decline over prosperity. His goal is wealth redistribution rather than wealth creation. He cannot or will not see that one leads to the other and not the other way around.

Again VDH:

Our poor suffer far more from obesity than malnutrition; diabetes and clogged arteries, not scurvy and rickets, are the plagues of the underclass. Is driving a Kia that much less comfortable than a Mercedes, is hot water in Trump Towers hotter than a mile from my house in federally subsidized apartments? Does a middle seat on a 737 mean you are tortured and exploited while the “rich” zoom by in a Gulfstream? My local Wal-Mart parking lot yesterday in Selma — poorest section of one of the poorest counties in the most bankrupt state in America — had 3 BMWs, 3 Mercedes, 1 Jaguar, 2 Metros, 16 Camrys, 13 Accords, 21 newer double-cab pickups, and lots of late-model Civics, Nissans, and Kias among 82 cars. I counted them for this article; my statistically “poor” town did not look like Dickensian London. Wealth has been distributed to millions in a way once thought impossible. When did driving a Civic make you poor because someone else was driving a BMW, or why was living in a downtown Fresno condo unfair if someone else had one about the same size and with the same accoutrements in Santa Monica with a view of the ocean?

I could go on, so why does Mr. Obama see us in decline? Is it a wish rather than a descriptive assessment?

Yes, yes it is, Mr. Hanson. I actually do believe that the President of the United States hates his country to some degree. Probably not a good thing...

In November of 2012 choose wisely. President Obama has made his case for decline. I don't like the looks of it.

CW

REVIEW:The Big Short

2011-05-22T13:20:00.000-07:00

The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine
by Michael Lewis

Where to start?

In late 2008 when the TARP bill was being debated I was thoroughly confused. What the heck was a credit crisis anyway? I wasn't the only one who was confused to be sure, in fact, I would wager that 98% of Congress - the people voting on the bill - were too. The financial system had cracked and was spilling out all over the place. Wall Street, Main Street and every street from Berlin to Tokyo was affected. In retrospect it's entirely possible that TARP saved the world from complete disaster although we will never really know because we can't go back and replay what might have happened had TARP never passed. It's also entirely possible, even probable that it was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated.

What actually happened is not easy to explain and even harder to understand technically, but in simple terms greed and mass psychosis cast a pall over Wall Street that prompted a fairy-tale like reaction among the few peripheral players that had tossed their blinders aside. As light began to shine on the inner workings of a handful of massive Wall Street firms at different times and in different ways these players realized that the Emperor actually had no clothes.

With The Big Short Michael Lewis, a former Wall Streeter himself spins a tale of the few men who saw the whole thing coming. Even while they were setting themselves up to make a profit by throwing rocks at glass houses they were for all intents and purposes shouting at the top of their lungs that something terrible was about to happen. But nobody would listen...

Mike Burry, a doctor turned investment adviser, Steve Eisman, a cranky, tell-it-like-it-is analyst, a tiny California firm called Cornwall Capital and an employee of Deutsche Bank, Gregg Lippmann stood at the center of the financial storm of the century. These guys were not men in white shining armor, but neither were they responsible for the pain we are all suffering to this day as our home values continue to fall and our economy struggles to keep it's head above the water.

The scoundrels in this story are plenty...

As the subprime market evolved the complexity of the financial vehicles and game playing by firms like Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bank of America and Citigroup became so mysterious that the under-manned, under-trained Federal regulators stood no chance. When you learn the final authority, namely the two ratings agencies of Moody's and Standard and Poor's were no better trained and no better paid than the Feds - no one stood a chance.

Nothing was on the level. Not to overlook the people who took loans they knew they could never pay back, but it was the mortgage originators pushing booby-trapped loans on the lower middle class that were particularly slimy. Add the pure greed of the Wall Street bond market, their complicated schemes for packaging and selling junk to unwary traders and the delusion that the housing market would go up in value forever and the perfect storm was brewing.

This is where Mike Burry came in. His knack was in seeing things clearly. This was because he did his homework - actually reading "the prospectus" and pouring over the boring details in the fine print. From day one he knew something was terribly wrong with the subprime mortgage business. The big firms on Wall Street were packaging mortgages in investment vehicles called mortgage-backed securities and selling them without the buyers knowing what was actually in them. This got Burry's attention. The more he looked the more convinced he was that these things were a time bomb for the investor. He wanted to bet against them in a big way. He approached different firms looking to buy "insurance" against the possibility of these mortgages defaulting. For a small premium Burry would buy what became known as a Credit Default Swap and the middlemen at Goldman Sachs and other brokers would take a small fee. For Goldman Sachs it was like taking candy from a baby and then getting the baby to pay them for stealing it. Burry would be paid when a certain percentage of the mortgages in any one of the mortgage backed bonds went into default.

Soon every big Wall Street firm and most the super large banks worldwide got in the game. CDO's or Collateralized Debt Obligations were bundles of these mortgage backed securities that the big firms put together and then sent up to the ratings agency for a bond rating. Neither Moody's nor Standard and Poor's had any better idea what was in the CDO's than next guy, so in a sense the ratings were meaningless - except that the higher the rating the more confidence the investor had that it would never go bad. The dirty secret was that regardless of what was in the CDO's they were getting AAA ratings.

Eventually Gregg Lippmann of Deutsche Bank caught on to what Mike Burry was doing and he began a campaign to get investors interested in credit default swaps. Mostly people thought he was crazy for betting that the subprime market was a fraud and would eventually collapse. There were a few for whom the light-bulb flickered. I say flicker because even as they bought into Lippmann's ideas they were still mostly in the dark convinced that what Lippmann said and what Burry knew was just too good to be true. All they had to do was hold the line for a few years with these insurance policies in their hands and their payday would come in spades. The trigger would be falling housing values, the bet was that they couldn't go up forever.

Steve Eisman, skeptical of Wall Street and Lippmann from the start could find no evidence that the whole subprime market was anything but a fantasy. His style was to challenge everyone for details and justification for the seemingly ridiculous level of confidence in the housing and mortgage markets. In California the operators of Cornwall Capital, a firm so small no one on Wall Street would even talk to them, scratched an clawed their way into Lippmann's world having no idea what they were doing - convinced that they had to be missing something. It couldn't be this easy, could it?

When it happened - housing values started to fall - nothing much happened. The world went on. Wall Street went on. Subprime mortgage fraud went on. It was still a year or so away from when a majority on the teaser rate mortgages would start to fail in large numbers. For the next 18 months the people betting short on the subprime market were either questioning themselves or being questioned by their investors convinced they were either fools or thieves. With just a few months left in 2007 the calls came pouring in. The big Wall Street players who had treated the short sellers like chumps suddenly wanted in and were willing to pay big for credit default swaps.

The rest is history, we all lived through it. Burry, Eisman, Cornwall Capital and the rest made at lot of money. Wall Street firms one by one crashed and burned. Eventually the whole credit system went belly up. But none of them felt vindicated, no one was happy with the way it went down. Burry quit the business, Eisman became a kind a caring man for the first time in his life. These men were who had been right all along and tried telling the world were changed. Oddly, sadly, Wall Street wasn't changed.

Michael Lewis doesn't even get into the government and regulatory villains until the epilogue, but this book wasn't about the headlines it was a story about being there in the midst of it all. To that end Lewis succeeds brilliantly. It was a nonfiction book that was hard to put down - and that's rare. Sadly, Lewis concludes that what is strange and complicated about the whole affair is that all the important people on both sides of the subprime gamble left the table rich. The rest of us unimportant schleps got screwed and we are still paying the price to this day.

The biggest slap in the face was that the TARP money was paid to make everyone's bad bets good. No one lost their jobs, no one was sent to jail for fraud. AIG, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and Bank of America were given billions with nothing asked in return, nothing. Bonuses were paid with TARP funds. Government stimulus money paid off the outrageous 40:1 bets made by AIG and the worst part of it all is that nothing has been structurally changed. On Wall Street it's business as usual, looking for the next scam to screw us with.

We continue to struggle with joblessness, lack of investment, and diminished outlooks for the next generation. Governments face crushing deficits and the middle class is squeezed. I repeat: on Wall Street it's business as usual - busy looking for the next scam to screw us all with.

I used to think what went on with regards to Wall Street, as mysterious as it was , was necessary for our system and our way of life. It's not. The legitimate functions of equities trading and bond trading have been superseded by those who have only self interested greed in their hearts. Maybe it's always been that way, who am I kidding, but these pricks in DC shouldn't be feeding this pricks on Wall Street.

CW

A Green World Gone Mad

2011-05-19T10:51:00.000-07:00

When we watch the TV show Dharma and Greg (now in reruns) the biggest laughs are elicited when Dharma's parents defy common sense with some 60's hippy nonsense or some 90's "the Earth is our mother" sentiment. It's funny not because of what they believe, but because of the degree to which they take it. Caring and common sense are not really at odds for most of us. In contrast the parents of the Greg character, filthy rich capitalist socialites, are people far above us regular folk, yet they seem far more normal to us than the left over hippies.

There is a point here...

There is group that has taken the counter culture mentality that the Earth is dying and it's our (America's) fault. We are killing Mother Earth by driving our cars and powering our businesses and homes. This group called Our Children's Trust is currently making its case not in the court of public opinion but in the courts themselves. They are in the process of suing the Federal government and 10 states. The are suing on the grounds that our carbon emissions are violating the public trust. The concept of the public trust goes all the way back to Roman times and was meant to protect waters and shorelines from being taken over by private interests, thus restricting access to public resources. Public trust cannot be applied to the atmosphere, but this is exactly what Our Children's Trust is trying to do.

A quick look at their web page tells you all you need to know in the first few paragraphs:

The most basic role of a government is to protect its citizens from dangers too large and complex for individuals to deal with on their own. Global warming is just such a danger...

Earth's climate has passed through many warm and cold phases over many millions of years, but the carbon added to the atmosphere by humans during the past two centuries has changed everything...

We still have a chance to restore the balance, but time is running out. Congress is deadlocked, the Obama administration has failed to show leadership, and the climate crisis is close to spiraling out of control. Take to the courts. Take to the streets. Demand a solution to global warming...

Renewable energy could account for almost 80% of the world's energy supply within four decades - but only if governments pursue the policies needed to promote green power

Yes, Chicken Little the sky is falling and we're all gonna DIE!!!

Taking the notion that renewables would be able to supply 80% of the world energy needs in four decades with a grain of salt I would be totally on board with it if it didn't come with all the green baggage.

As for the strategy of stomping their feet in America's court rooms it defies common sense. Since carbon emissions mix evenly around the globe there is no practical way to distribute any kind of claim. The same society Our Children's Trust touts as leading the green technology charge - our beloved China - is spewing more pollution and toxins into the atmosphere than any other country by far. Thankfully so far these type of green law suits have failed in America and even liberal judges raise an eyebrow when rendering a verdict. Some, including the Wall Street Journal editorial board, think it's time to start issuing sanctions for these nuisance court actions that waste time and state & Federal dollars.

Hear, hear.

CW

Proud moments in life...

2011-05-17T18:30:00.000-07:00

There are few moments in life when pride overcomes. As parent nothing compares to when your child succeeds. My daughter marked a couple years of very hard work by graduating with High Honors from St. Paul College with an AS degree in Early Childhood Development - on to University next year with the goal of becoming a teacher. She is focused like a laser beam and I couldn't be more proud!

Way to go Jenelle!

CW

Yes, Chris, I will answer your questions...

2011-05-06T11:20:00.000-07:00

At the end of his MSNBC show the other night Chris Matthews expressed his wish that the Republican candidates be asked these questions in the upcoming debate ...

I'll answer for myself as a right of center guy, Mr. Matthews, but first let me ask you a pertinent question: are you a moron or do you just play one on TV?

Q: Do you believe in evolution?
A: Yes, but at micro level not necessarily at a macro level. Do you understand the difference? I believe species evolve special traits due to environmental changes. Humans are getting taller, that's a fact, that's evolution (or adaptation if you will). Darwin's own research showed that animals developed specialized adaptations to take advantage of the environment they found themselves in. There are just way too many gaps to create a linear evolutionary map from ameoba to man.

Q: Are you a fundamentalist who believes in the Bible as written?
A: No, I do not believe everything in the Bible is to be taken literally. Jesus Himself taught with parables and metaphors so His lessons could be applied in real life situations. Did you take everything your father said literally? Then go jump off a bridge...

Q: Has man been around millions of years or, say, just about 6,000?
A: Well that's an interesting question, that goes right along with your last one. The human form, homo sapiens is tens of thousands and maybe hundreds of thousands of years old. The Bible says that God looked upon what he had created and was most pleased with homo sapiens (man), the exact year, Mr Matthews, is unknown. At some point homo sapiens became aware of God, probably by first becoming self aware . A relationship began. The rest is history so they say.

Q: Why do we conduct health experiments for people on animals if there's no relation?
A: All earthly material is connected. We all, you and me, are made of stardust, as are the rocks and the trees. The same poisons that kill us will kill almost all life in the right concentrations. So, yes it makes sense to test things on animals, why is that so hard to understand. Animals are not people, people are set apart.

Q: Do you believe man affects climate change?
A: Yes, at the local level without question. I don't believe man's activities compare to the power of nature, it's the height of arrogance to believe we are more powerful than the cosmos. Our contribution to global climate change is minuscule when compared to the power of the oceans, volcanoes and the Sun. Therefore curbing our lifestyle (creating more needless human suffering) as a pointless reaction to an unstoppable force is the essence of human cruelty.

Q: Do you wish to outlaw abortion and if so what should be the punishment?
A: We should outlaw the subsidies, no public money whatsoever.

Q: If having an abortion doesn't deserve punishment, why are you pushing to outlaw it?
A: N/A

Q: Do you support a return to Don't Ask, Don't Tell?
A: No.

Q: Do you support removing Medicare from existence and replacing it with a subsidy?
A: Yes, a means tested, adjusted subsidy.

There you have it.

CW

Undue Credit?

2011-05-05T09:07:00.000-07:00

In the post immediately preceding this one I credited the President with making a tough and dangerous decision. Well hold on there...

While I watched only a little of his 9 minute announcement - seeing clips on subsequent news broadcasts as well - I was struck by how many I's, me's, and mine's were used by a confident President Obama. This is his natural MO, but in this case it seemed, perhaps, justified. Not so fast.

After reading this article on Pamela Geller's Atlas Shrugs website a different picture emerges that begins to show the true picture of a tentative, nervous "undecider" rather than the confident I, me, mine man standing before the cameras and the world last Sunday night.

The following is the jist of it - and if true my opinion of President Obama has, if possible, sunk even further...

RE: Osama Bin Laden. Significant push to take him out months ago. Senior WH staff resisted. This was cause of much strain between HC and Obama/Jarrett. HC and LP were in constant communication over matter – both attempted to convince administration to act. Administration feared failure and resulting negative impact on president. Intel disgusted over politics over national security. Staff resigned/left. Check timeline to corroborate.
Now Intel already leaking to media facts surrounding how info obtained. Namely from enhanced interrogation efforts via GITMO prisoners. Obama administration placed in corner on this. Some media aware of danger to president RE this and attempting protection. Others looking for further investigation. We are pushing for them to follow through and already meeting with some access.

Point of determination made FOR Obama not BY Obama. Will clarify as details become more clear. Very clear divide between Military and WH. Jarrett marginalized 100% on decision to take out OBL. She played no part. BD worked with LP and HC to form coalition to force CoC to engage.

IMPORTANT SPECIFIC: When 48 hour go order issued, CoC was told, not requested. Administration scrambled to abort. That order was overruled. This order did not originate from CoC. Repeat – this order did not originate from CoC. He complied, but did not originate.

Independent military contacts have confirmed. Stories corroborate one another. This is legit.

The killing of Osama Bin Laden was in fact a Coup within Obama WH.

This story is far from over!

CW

Good Riddance

2011-05-03T08:24:00.000-07:00

Good riddance indeed. Osama bin Laden is dead. A great job by everyone involved. The President made a dangerous decision, dangerous for his career and for the military men involved, but it was the right decision.

I will refrain from making any predictions. I remember being confident that once Saddam Hussein was gone that Iraq would settle down. I couldn't have been more wrong. While is was great to be excited that Saddam was dead just as it is great to be jubuliant that bin Laden is dead the future is just as uncertain.

Part of me wants Obama to declare victory and go home, but that part of the world left to its own devices could spell trouble for the rest of the world. I don't know exactly what should done, no one really does. Osama's death should change something though...

CW

Where does ultra liberal domination lead?

2011-04-24T17:58:00.000-07:00

... to California.

I have lamented before on this blog over the mess the state of California finds itself in. How the Golden State, the place that once upon a time epitomized everything that was great about America has literally become the place that showcases everything that's wrong. It's not much of mystery, really. California has been dominated by ultra liberals for decades. Even when they've had semi-conservative governors the lunacy of the liberals running the state house in Sacramento has ruled the day.

People - I should say, people with money and business have been moving out of California in droves. Soon there will no one left to pay the high taxes. Sure you could write off California as a loss cause, but it doesn't take long to realize that as severe as California is it's not alone. Everywhere liberal government dominates we see similar fiscal and societal carnage. (everywhere except where I live, but I'll get to that later). Take Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey and even New York for example. Each of these states is virtually broke. Each one of them is hemorrhaging jobs. Each has failing school systems and crumbling infrastructure. They have all been dominated by liberal legislatures, with liberals running their cities and their school systems. Sure occasionally a Republican is elected mayor or governor but they are never strong enough to stem the tide of decay and collapse brought on by endlessly smothering liberalism.

Liberalism may have moved in with the departure of heavy manufacturing as a "humanitarian movement", but the billions of dollars spent and decades of liberal policy domination has seen so little in the way of actual progress, rather we've seen only a growing dependence on government programs and so-called entitlements.

The fact that school systems all over this country are dominated by liberalism should be enough to drive home the fact that it's a failed philosophy, but it never seems to stick. The problem is always that we just haven't spent enough on "the children". Our students finish so low by international standards that it's embarrassing.

Recently John Fund had an interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal (April 22 2011 pg A11) that highlighted a trip taken by several California state house representatives and Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom to Texas. It was a fact finding mission to see why so many California businesses were moving to Texas. While Newsom didn't see the exodus as a partisan issue clearly the California public unions did. The unions threatened several Democrats who planned to attend who then abruptly canceled the trip.

To add insult to injury after their meetings with Texas governor Rick Perry they learned another California business, Fujistu Frontenach was picking up stakes and moving to Texas. It was the 70th business to leave California this year. Why so many departures? Again, not much of a mystery. High taxes, onerous business and environmental regulation. It could also be said that Sacramento doesn't really care. While their state is tens of billions in debt and business and wealthy people are fleeing their state like rats from a sinking ship they are busy passing bills that mandate that school children will be taught the history of gays and disabled persons.

My heart breaks for California, I've loved every minute I've spent there. It's hard to say if they will ever wake up. We thought maybe Arnold Schwarzenegger was going to be a turning point, but he was a bigger disappointment than Governor Ventura was.

That brings me to my home state of Minnesota. This state has also been dominated by liberalism my whole life. And yes, the fiscal health and the good standing of Minnesota's famous quality of life is in some question, however it is not a failure waiting happen. Things are relatively good here. How can that be if liberal domination leads to collapse and decay? Minnesotans by and large are very conservative people. We are very hard working and have had held together a decent education system (until recently) for decades. These people vote liberal but live very conservatively. To be sure the state is closer to 50/50 than 60/40 in favor of Democrats, but liberalism is what's taken for granted around the water cooler and church halls. People here may say anything goes, praise diversity and declare tolerance from the rooftops, but just not for them. It's an odd thing, but that's the way it is here. That's why liberalism hasn't quite destroyed our great state - yet.

CW

New Paintings

2011-04-20T12:17:00.000-07:00

"It's Something You Are"
18 X 24 acrylic

2011
by Craig Willms

For my daughters boyfriend Blake, who is a fireman and EMT.

"Babcock's Garden"
18 X 24 acrylic

2011
by Craig Willms

For my Mom in remembrance of her sister Lois who left us last year. Her garden was her joy.

Much more to see at http://www.static-art.blogspot.com/

CW

Where's the blame:Obama & high gas prices

2011-04-16T12:08:00.001-07:00

Around here - the upper Midwest - prices at the pump are nearing $4 a gallon. In Chicago and California they are already over $4 a gallon. Yet, does anyone else find it odd that there are so few stories by the major news outlets - including Fox News- about these high prices?

Oil prices have topped $110 a barrel just a day or so after President Obama laughed off high oil prices. Essentially blaming ordinary Americans for the problem and not his policies by ridiculing those who drive big vehicles. I'm sorry but the man is an asshole. When was the last time he took out his wallet to fill the tank? My wife's small Toyota now costs twice as much to fill as it did last year.

The media is still doing his bidding, allowing this bizarre interaction with the audience during a recent speech to go by with minimal comment. Interestingly as gas prices rose in 2008, reporters mentioned President Bush in 15 times as many stories, than they brought up President Obama in a similar period in 2011. But you see Bush was an oil man, obviously he was to blame. But it's not about blame now, this is the desired effect the Obama administration had hoped for when they took office.

All the networks but Fox News fail to mention Obama's serious anti-oil actions.

The President has taken specific steps to limit domestic oil production including a moratorium on deep water drilling in May 2010 after the BP spill as well as a recent imposition of new regulations on the industry. Still, the media refuse to notice. Few of the news stories about rising gas prices brought up any of Obama's anti-oil policies despite the impact they have on supply and prices.

Obama's deepwater drilling ban was overturned by a federal court judge in June, but the administration continues to enforce it. In a Feb. 3 story, Bloomberg News reported that the administration has "acted in contempt" of court by doing so.

There are few things that have such a profound impact on the economic health of regular families than skyrocketing energy prices. This President not only doesn't care he actually applauds high prices.

Did I mention I think he is an asshole?

CW

The Arab/Muslim world just isn't appealing to me...

2011-04-10T07:01:00.000-07:00

When I think of other cultures on this great big planet as I sit snug in my middle class American life I can think of none that appeal to me less than Arab/Muslim cultures. Put another way when I think of all the places in the world that interest me or fascinate me only one Middle East country even makes the list and that would be Israel. Maybe I'm being short sighted, but I doubt I'm the only American that feels this way. Frankly I wish America would just get out of that part of the world all together so I could go on and blissfully ignore it.

The truth is America and the West have created this reality and the Arab/Muslim world is just in reactionary mode. With this so-called "Arab Spring" happening across the Middle East and Northern Africa we are seeing the inevitable backlash against decades of the West propping up brutal dictatorships in the name of stability. In many of these tribal cultures there has been little chance that democracy or free societies would ever temper centuries of inter-mural conflict and violence. Such instability is totally unacceptable to the West because it interrupts the spice flow. The spice of course is the oil that is absolutely vital to all civilization on Earth. Due to the luck of geography the Middle East sat atop a gold mine it could have never hoped to exploit without the West and for that they have been under the thumb of one dictator or another for a the better part of a century.

All that, it seems, is about to change.

One has to wonder if the powers that be - the ones above and beyond Presidents and Prime Ministers - love this chess game that much? Or perhaps they need endless conflict as a cover. It asks the question: are we all then merely puppets? These men in the shadows have all the money they need, it can't be about money. Money then is just the way they keep score. However, this clash between the Arab/Muslims and the West has the potential to remake the world. Are the shadow men playing the ultimate game of "chicken" this time? Many are convinced the West cannot win. The West has the weapons, the technology and enough money to win, but it lacks the one key element necessary to prevail. The will to win.

The Muslim world has two weapons the West is unwilling to develop or utilize that will make all the difference in the world. Oil and the womb. Western economies and therefore Western war machines are dependent on oil. The West is unwilling to stand up to the self-loathing aspects of our own societies and make a commitment to end the dependency on Middle East oil. Secondly, we have convinced our own women to forgo motherhood and thereby have embarked on a path of self extinction.

Europe is particularly fragile. Having made a deal decades ago with Arab oil kingpins to allow mass immigration from the Middle East and Northern Africa in exchange for no interruptions in the oil flow. Simultaneously they've been replacing their own religious underpinnings with political correctness resulting in a dearth of native born children. They have all but submitted to eradication. Demographically Europe may already beyond the point of no return. Underneath Europe is slowly transforming into a Muslim culture, and their own self-loathers stand in the way of any meaningful effort to turn the tide.

I think it's a ways off for America to be transformed into a Muslim culture. While Political Correctness has polluted everything here as well there is still enough resistance and backbone to defend America - at least for a while.

World history is replete with cultural expansion and domination. Cultures rise and cultures fall and there's no reason to suspect the fall won't happen to America itself. There's is just something wrong when cultures literally give up as it seems many European countries have. I'm not alone in believing that the great things about American culture are worth fighting for. The people on the ground are willing, but we lack any leadership at all. Our fearless leaders won't buck the prevailing religion. The ultimate battle is not going to be Islam vs Christianity, rather Islam vs Political Correctness. As a religion Political Correctness is doomed to failure the question is are we stupid enough to follow it down?

CW

Showdown on Capitol Hill

2011-04-06T05:38:00.000-07:00

The budget battle for the second half of FY2011 is heading for a climax, but it is the battle over the 2012 budget that will be the key ideological battle of our generation. One side is convinced that the Federal government is simply out of control and is strangling the American economy. The other side is equally convinced that only government spending ( a government that can legally create money from thin air) will save the country from a depression and mass poverty.

With his budget plan for 2012 Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has laid down the gauntlet for the progressives and the Democrats to cross. It remains to be seen if government austerity and tight budgets are the prescription for prosperity. It seems counter-intuitive in some aspects, but it seems rather obvious that unrestrained government spending with the attendant massive budget deficits are not a panacea either.

What is clear is that Paul Ryan will become an absolute lighting rod. He will be called every rotten thing in the book. I can already see the cartoons of him with the Hitler mustache. He will have to be portrayed as evil or at least totally self serving, because he can't be portrayed as stupid like all other Republicans are. He also seems to have a backbone made of something other than jelly (like all other Republicans have). He is a bright and articulate man and if he had a little more seasoning he would easily give Obama a run for the money.

Again, I'm not sure if Ryan's prescription is going to work. Intellectually I understand what MMT'ers (Modern Monetary Theory adherents) claim to be true. Namely that Federal deficits don't really matter. Technically they are correct in saying the the government can not run out of money. The government is an issuer of a fiat currency, a floating rate currency tied to nothing. It's been that way since the 1970's when Nixon took the U.S. off the gold standard. If the Federal government needs more money they just add zero's on balance sheets. Taxes are collected to temper the public's ability to spend and potentially overheat the economy, but not to actually fund the Federal government. It's a hard concept to grasp considering how much emotion and rhetoric goes into the tax question. Still, I have a hard time with the notion that deficits don't matter at all. Small deficits really don't matter, but multi-trillion dollar deficits???

Yes, 2012 should be a pretty interesting year. Either the Republicans will join Ryan and really take the fight to President Obama or they will capitulate and enjoy another four years of multi-trillion dollar Federal deficits while they wring their hands in dismay. The problem I see with allowing the Federal government to spend without restraint is the overreach and power grabbing that will inevitably result. Freedom just slips away. More states and more individuals will become wards of the Federal government. It's already happening.

CW

Insanity Reigns

2011-03-31T20:17:00.000-07:00

It's come down to this. I have nothing to say. And what can one say to insanity? It's the equivalent of shouting at a brick wall. Friends, the world's gone insane.

We act like what we say, what we believe, somehow makes a difference. But nobody's listening. We can't sway people anymore, not with logic anyway. Not with emotion either... We are numb. Who are we supposed to believe anyway? Politicians? Clergy? Columnists and commentators? The TV news? Our friends and co-workers? Ourselves. Everybody is full of shit anyway.

There was a time when this life made sense. It was good. Somewhere along the line that changed. Now nothing can be counted on. What was up yesterday is down today. What was in last week is out this week. Who can keep up? Who cares?

Maybe it's just me, but I doubt it. Maybe it's a bad dream and I'll wake up one day and everything will be OK. Maybe there's a nice man in a white coat waiting for me with with a new jacket with strings that tie in the back. Ha Ha, Ho Ho, Hee Hee!

The Sad State of the Economy

2011-03-20T14:07:00.000-07:00

We risk losing an entire generation of human advancement due to the mismanagement of our monetary system...

Craig Willms - blogger

I think it's safe to say that people from all walks of life are at a loss to adequately explain the reasons we have such a sustained economic mess. I watch CNBC nearly everyday only to see the talking heads spew one thing one day and another the next. Obviously the political class is too self-serving to actually offer explanations beyond platitudes and sound bites. Liberals offer only higher taxes, higher spending and stifling government control as the answer to everything. And the conservatives? They are currently in scare monger mode when it comes to debt and taxes (and a whole host of social decay issues).

There are some who think government spending is out of control - this is only human nature when we see the terrifying numbers associated with our national debt - believing basically that the Federal government is sucking all the oxygen out of the economy. Others believe that only government spending can spur the economy back into growth. Who's right?

Unemployment is chronically high. State and local governments are (actually) broke. We've seen energy and food costs soar while being told that inflation is not actually happening. We watch our personal wealth circle the drain as the value of our homes and 401k's go south. Why?

Where are the solutions, where is the leadership?

Currently we have people like Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) chairman of the House Budget Committee looking to cut billions from future budgets in an apparent austerity movement. We have Fed Chairman Bernanke pumping billions into the Treasury in an effort called QE2 (Quantitative Easing Round 2) in order to keep the government and the banking system flush. We have Democrats and liberals resisting any budget cuts either out of genuine concern for the "disadvantaged" or just to oppose the Republicans.

Are these really solutions?

First, I guess we have to define the problem. For the longest time we heard that companies aren't hiring because of the uncertainty created by the President Obama/Speaker Pelosi agenda. Even I buy this to a certain extent, but it can't be the significant cause of this horrible economic malaise. Productivity is up but the current workforce has not becomes slaves to the job. If it were true then the average number hours worked would have increased since 2007 and they haven't. The current average is 34.1 hours. This is nearly 2 percent lower than the 34.7 average in December of 2007, the month the recession officially began.

The economy is operating far below its potential largely because of a lack of demand caused by a precipitous loss of financial and housing wealth, which obviously results in less consumption. But it's worse than that. The bigger problem is a worldwide lack of demand threatens to push the world into a global depression. The price of oil may be just the straw that breaks the camel's back. Here we have to rely on Saudi Arabia to save us by jacking up their production and thus stifling the speculators who are currently mucking things up.

Of the largest economies only China looks strong right now, but I wonder if China is really just a house of cards. In truth China needs external demand more than anyone. Both Japan (even before the earthquake) and Germany are net exporters who can afford their domestic austerity movements. Is the U.S. actual going to enter a austerity phase too or is the Republican bark much worse than it's bite? And is it wise? I'm just not sure.

Listening to Congressmen declare that America is broke is annoying and it's disingenuous. The Federal government is not broke. However, many of the states are broke because they, unlike the Feds, can't just "print money". Since the U.S. is an issuer of a sovereign currency that's not tied to anything it literally can just create money out of thin air. If the U.S. government was broke the bond raters and the markets would be acting quite differently. Yeah, inflation is a concern, but when aggregate demand is so low inflation is not a factor.

So, yes, there is still faith in the U.S. monetary system, but is it actually possible to have the Federal government spend our way out this? If so why didn't the stimulus package have much of an effect? We all know why - don't we? To say it was poorly managed is an understatement, most political paybacks are poor jobs programs.

Conservatives and old school supply-siders believe that a large cut in federal spending will reduce the government's stranglehold on the economy. I think everyone agrees that the deficits are way too high, but drastically cutting federal spending in the current climate will simply decrease demand, just the opposite of what we need.

There are those who believe Obama didn't go high enough with the stimulus. What's needed now is huge increases in both public and private spending to spur an increase in demand and therefore create jobs. When people have jobs they will want houses...

Honestly, I don't know who is right. Emotion says these outrageous deficits and Federal overreach is beyond frightening, but there is a certain logic to priming the pump. If businesses and private sector can't or won't do it - someone has to, right?

CW

(and yes, I quoted myself, it's my blog)

Who knew insurance was so funny...

2011-03-14T11:25:00.000-07:00

It started with Geico I think. It was either the cute little lizard or the cavemen. The question is when did selling insurance become so funny?

In today's ultra competitive world of insurance to be successful you need a differentiator. Decades ago an insurance company only had to show it was large and strong and most importantly it had to be trustworthy. An insurance company had to be solid like the Rock of Gibraltar, as sturdy as the majestic elk or some such immovable object. Now, just being stalwart and at the ready is not enough - you have to be funny.

It's an ad executive's dream. These are clients with lots of money that fill the commercial airwaves with hundreds of 30 second spots everyday. Geico, a company I had never heard of before the little green gecko, was ahead of the game with several effective campaigns before the others got off the ground. Though I quickly grew tired of the cavemen spots the first few were very funny. The little Geico Gecko is always pretty good, I don't cringe or feel the desire to change the channel when he pops up. Some of Geico's other campaigns make me want to shoot the TV. All I can say is the wee wee pig was about as much as I could take.

Progressive, another company I had never heard of, jumped in with Flo the perky insurance sales-floor clerk. They rode this one for a long, long time and have largely succeeded it keeping it funny. It too is starting to wear thin. There are people who truly hate this woman - I've read somewhere the real life actor has had death threats.

Obviously these ad campaigns have been effective. The proof is probably in their respective bottom lines if you so inclined to do some homework, but all the proof you need is to see that the big boys are all trotting out funny ad campaigns of their own.

Perhaps my favorite is Mayhem. This ad campaign is so clever and downright funny that I have become "friends" with Mayhem on Facebook. Allstate, which is one of the biggest and most well known companies in the country, has a hit. Mayhem, if you haven't seen it is the personification of the trouble that awaits drivers out in the cold cruel world. The commercials can be downright hilarious.

Nationwide has their "World's Greatest Spokesperson" bit that is also clever and fresh. Statefarm went the serious route with young modern male singing the praises of a company that's bigger than both Progressive and Geico combined. Statefarm has supplemented those commercials with funny spots where the insured simply sing the famous company jingle "Like a good neighbor Statefarm is there" and an insurance man pops in out of thin air. These can be quite funny, but ultimately not sustainable like the little Gecko guy. Farmers recruited the actor J.K. Simmons to guide us through the courses at Farmers University. Some of these spots have been pretty good because J.K. Simmons is pretty good.

Don't surprised to see even more dull and stuffy insurance companies going the comedy channel route in the future. Me, I personally don't use any of these companies as the choices we have as insurance consumers is legion. This super competition keeps the rates low and that is good thing. I for one don't mind quick, funny little commercials, it's when 14-15 of them get shoved into a 3 minute space that gets me spitting at the TV.

CW

The Snows of Kilimanjaro and other lies

2011-03-14T06:43:00.000-07:00

Even though Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" has been repeatedly discredited I still hear assertions from the film thrown out as absolute truth. One such is the notion that the dwindling snow cover on Mount Kilimanjaro is a direct result of so-called global warming. Gore will show disturbing time-lapsed images of the the mountain losing the very snow cap that makes Kilimanjaro a stunning visual as juts out of the African savanna.

The inconvenient truth is that there is no evidence that temperatures on Mount Kilimanjaro are any higher than they have been for decades. If Gore was interested in the truth he would show time-lapsed photos of the African landscape that surrounds the mountain. What you'd see is massive deforestation over the decades. This deforestation reduces the moisture available to fall as snow in the higher elevations. Without new snow the very natural process of sublimation proceeds apace. Sublimation, the process of a solid turning into a gas, is the real reason the snow cap on Kilimanjaro is disappearing.

None of this is denying climate change since we "deniers" understand that climate change is real and perpetual. As Al Gore says, this is not a political issue, it's a moral issue. It's the alarmists who are immoral. The alarmists simply lie. They lie not only to enhance a political agenda that sets out to denude advanced Western cultures in preparation for an eventual one world government, but mostly they lie to line their own pockets. Al Gore's carbon trading scheme is the scam it seems, but heady scientists scratching for billions in government grant money with cooked science is just as immoral. How is it moral to destroy what Western culture has built in some il-conceived Utopian quest? Padding your wallet by shaming the populace into believing they are responsible for destroying Mother Earth is despicable.

One truth is that energy use equals power and wealth. The culture that uses the most energy (in the wisest way) will be dominant and rich. Al Gore, President Obama and the progressives have made it a goal to strip the United States of easy access to cheap power and by extension the path extinguish our wealth. Despite what he says, no one can examine Obama's actions before or after the horrible Deep Water Horizon incident and say he hasn't been categorically, systematically denying the U.S. the ability to discover and develop domestic energy. He has actually called for the destruction of the American coal industry.

In a time when good paying jobs are scarce domestic energy development would (literally) pump billions of dollars into local and state economies. Modern nuclear power, which has been deemed imminently safe here and abroad, gets lip service and nothing more. So is the President really interested in good jobs?

The green energy paradigm Obama urges is a canard, it's window dressing. It is the illusion that he is doing something about energy and jobs. Windmills are a joke. Solar power is just not ready and ethanol is anything but cost efficient. Spain's il-conceived green economy instituted years ago in a socialist-utopian fog has produced 20% (official) unemployment. All of these alternative energy solutions may provide useful supplemental energy provided the national energy backbone is robust.

There's nothing wrong with the continuing and even urgent development of promising alternative energy solutions. The end of the oil age is inevitable and desirable in the long run. What is happening now is self mutilation, cutting off our nose to spite our face. The Global Warming lies regarding human causation and the categorization of carbon dioxide as a poison only serves to make regular everyday people poorer. The cost of essential energy takes money out of the family budget and gives it to foreign dictators. This is what is truly immoral.

CW

Incommunicado

2011-03-04T07:27:00.000-08:00

I'm down for the count. I'll be back to posting on semi-regular basis soon. I'm dealing with some health issues... Hope to see you all soon.

CW

Sustainability: Not just for environmentalists anymore

2011-02-27T11:24:00.000-08:00

The public unions in Wisconsin and in other states may feel like they have a target on their backs in the here and now - and they do - but it's the future for everyone of us that's at stake. States and municipalities are facing collective liabilities in the trillions of dollars due primarily to promises made to public employees. These promises in many cases defy all common sense, in a few cases they defy common decency.

When a public servant can retire at the ripe old age of 55 and collect a benefit check from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars for the rest of their lives with paid health insurance thrown on top it's no wonder we have an unsustainable situation. The rest of us working in the private sector would be lucky to retire at 67 with no pension and a (devastated) 401K and only Medicare to look forward to. Will there be Social Security in 20 years for those of us who paid 7% of our wages into it for 40-50 years? Many state a municipal workers don't care, why should they?

Traditionally public employees enjoyed very good benefits and job security, and that was just fine. It was assumed that they were paid a little less as compared to their private sector counterparts. That part of it is probably not true anymore. The average wage for a Federal employee is reported to be over $80,000 a year, there is no way the private sector can claim that. Even factoring in the education level differences it's clear that government workers are getting sweetheart deal when it comes to wages and benefits - including generous vacations, educational opportunities and even sabbaticals.

The problem is that since the day public workers have been allowed to unionize they have had direct involvement with determining who sits across the table come contract negotiation time. They have essentially bought sympathetic bargainers through the election process. Unions fund political campaigns and then reap the benefit of the symbiotic arrangement. Since there was an ever rising revenue stream while the economy grew this worked for them. Today, however, the party is over, state and local governments are broke. Governors and legislatures face the possiblity that the jobs that have been lost are not coming back. Unlike the Federal government they can't just have the treasury print more money. Something's got to give.

Gov. Scott Walker simply must not back down. He does need to come across as reasonable and fair and that means explaining with simple facts why this has to be done - and now. It's all about sustainability.

CW

Facebook drama

2011-02-21T08:58:00.000-08:00

I was on Facebook the other day and came across a post by one of my so-called "friends" rallying the troops against Wisconsin Gov. Walker and his stance on public union collective bargaining. One of her commenters, a young woman, falling right into line, threw out a bomb that went something like: go figure... corporations, modern day mass murders and thieves.

Several other commenters chimed in bolstering her rather ridiculous statement. So I thought I'd have a little fun. You see people who make such preposterous statements don't expect to be challenged. In my initial reply I simply turned the tables and made a mildly preposterous statement about public unions, something like: go figure... Public unions, selfish budget busters, why should they pay ONE DIME for their own health care and pensions.

What followed was a lashing out by a liberal who was just infuriated that anyone would challenge her world view. My second reply simply said: Incendiary language perverts the discourse, it's unhelpful. Just like the Madison protesters carrying their signs comparing Gov. Walker to Hitler, while very original having never been tried before, does not an argument make.

Well, the floodgates were wide open now. This young woman was beside herself with rage. She posted 5 incoherent flaming posts direct at me. There was no attempt now to engage in a dialogue, only lashing out. When I logged back on to Facebook her comments had been deleted, most likely by herself, and that was fine, I deleted mine as well.

The thing to take away is evident. Liberals feel free to flame anything they don't like, regardless of how utterly preposterous it is. When challenged they go nuts. Are some corporations mass murderers and thieves? Probably. I'll bet it wouldn't be too hard to dredge up evidence were a rouge corporation was in some way partly responsible for mass murder and certainly even easier to find thieving corporations - but these would be extreme exceptions not the rule. Just as it would be possible, I assume, to find responsible public unions.

Was her initial post tongue-in-cheek? I don't think so, at least nothing that followed would have indicated that she didn't really believe that corporations were evil. Was she exaggerating? Yeah probably.

It was fun and I dare say instructive. But then I've seen it before. When I used to go to the Daily Kos and Democratic Underground websites and try to post reasonable retorts I found myself under attack or my posts deleted almost instantly.

I probably will stay away from getting political on Facebook, but I just had to stir this one up...

CW

The Chart

2011-02-15T11:08:00.000-08:00

This chart has been floating around the Internet for some time but it is so amazing that it's worth sharing. What brought it up was some mind numbingly stupid comment by George Stupidnopolis on ABC. Apparently Obama's 2011 wildly high budget deficit is George W. Bush's fault.

I am not in the business of defending Bush's spending. He had a complimentary Republican Congress through 2006 and frankly many on the right were dismayed by the profligate spending by so-called fiscal conservatives. But just looking at the chart it becomes clear that #1.) the 2001-2003 tax cuts did not balloon the deficit. In fact the deficit was in a downward trajectory until 2007 and #2.) something changed in 2007.

Obviously the Congress changed hands in 2007. The Democrats - Nancy Pelosi -took over. Until TARP was passed in late 2008 the deficit was seemingly manageable. TARP was dismaying, but it has been deemed successful by almost any measure since most of the money has been paid back. Only AIG's share and Obama's bailout of GM and Chrysler have yet to be paid back - but then the government owns a substantial share of GM and AIG.

So what really went wrong?

Start with 800 billion in ineffective stimulus and add a shaky economy and presto a trillion dollar deficit as far as the eye can see. This recession was primarily a result of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown with its many villains spanning government and the financial industry. As deep and profound as this crisis was we should be seeing light at the end of the tunnel but we're not. Why? Well, the Obama administration doesn't leave an encouraging taste in anyone's mouth. Business is wringing every ounce of production out of their current employees (just glad to have a job) and racking up profit and fat bank accounts. Until business is comfortable there will be no hiring. Revenue to the government will continue to stagnate, social spending will escalate and the deficit will grow.

We have to get these guys out of the White House in 2012.

CW

Political Correctness Distilled

2011-02-10T13:45:00.000-08:00

For some reason I find the subject of Political Correctness fascinating. I guess I'm not the only one. Bruce Charlton, a professor at University of Buckingham, UK, authors a teaching blog called Bruce Charlton's Miscellany that delves deeply into the subject. Lately he published an interesting digest of what Political Correctness (or Post Christian, if you will) really is. I want convey the way I see it - my comments in red.

For PC the ultimate evil is selfishness - therefore the highest good it can conceive is unselfishness: i.e. altruism.

This worldly altruism is operationalized in terms of the allocation of 'goods' (money, power, status etc).

But PC sees humans as innately selfish - therefor the allocation of goods must be done impersonally - in practice, by rules and bureaucracies.

The organizational enforcement of Political Correctness is primarily through government and NGO bureaucracies because they are normally faceless non-individuals. However, the PC attitude is practiced in nearly all organizations to prevent any possibility of public shaming. In order to be spared the PC wrath most organizations and individuals simply play along. Any that stand against conventional PCism suffer a robotic and unrelenting attack. A good example of a specific organization under PC assault is the Boy Scouts of America. Or, of course, the Republican Party in general.

*

What governs the principles of PC? Reaction, rejection. The past is tainted. There must be a fresh start. The good is the opposite of what people used to believe. Hence moral inversion.

This is the core of PCism. To color traditions as backward and invalid is the PC way. In Western cultures Christianity in particular must be invalidated. We see the ultra toleration of Islam, an intolerant religion, and the routine intoleration of Christianity's mores, symbols and holidays by the media and by secular institutions. By extension traditional American values of individualism and the ownership of private property must be denigrated at every turn.

The fact that all this is anti-spontaneous, anti-natural, alien, scary - is actually taken as a sign of its virtuousness. The truly altruistic must sacrifice themselves.

The mass media is essential to this since it fills our minds everyday, continually displacing the past - so whatever is in the mass media is reality.

The mass media and the education cabal has attempted to rewrite much of Western history. For the incurious and self absorbed what they see on TV is truth, history is unimportant and passe. Even when history is presented factually the modern sheen of PCism is applied to the motives and actions of historical figures in order to discredit them as self serving misogynists.

*
Atheism leads to this-worldliness, and to relativism, and to the working rule that the inversion of the traditional is virtuous.

Reinforcement for this tendency comes from population growth, meritocracy, division of labour, prosperity and the mass media.

Unlimited mass immigration then favouring immigrants over natives, damaging economic productivity by taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive (in order to generate dependency), enforcing laws with zero-tolerance against the well-behaved while being soft on bad people, foreign policy which attacks allies and builds up enemies, attacking normal sexuality and the family and allocating status to everything else - all the usual stuff.

The fact that we see this everyday has made us numb to its insidiousness. A traditional family of a mother, a father and few children is often treated as odd in popular culture, where the father is either enslaving his wife and damaging his children or he is completely and utterly inept (except the Huxtables, of course). Whereas racially blended or homosexual families are enlightened and rightous, beyond reproach.

It has gotten to the point where the truth is skirted, often on critical issues, because it is impolitic to actually verbalize plain facts. A study that concludes based on the facts that black men commit more crime will not get cited except in the most obscure journals. A incident that involves Islamic terrorism is couched in conciliatory or apologetic language regardless of how egregious the act. Celebrities, CEO's and politicians are shunned and even forced to resign if they stray by speaking of obvious truths. Clumsiness is not a sin.

PCism has become entrenched and immovable. It is the very reasonableness of human nature to not want to offend unnecessarily that gives political correctness surface validation. The problem comes when reasonableness crosses the line into unreasonableness. When the power of government policy or law enforcement (like hate crimes) is applied based on political correctness and not objective facts we are all a little less free. Piece by piece, issue by issue PCism destroys freedom. In the end PCism is enslaving, and inhuman. Until we systematically and forcefully reject it we will continue to lose individual freedom.

CW

Which will blow first? Yellowstone or the Treasury

2011-02-01T05:03:00.000-08:00

We are all aware that popular culture has a small obsession with the year 2012. According to the ancient Mayan calendar either the world (or the Mayan calendar) will end on December 21st 2012. Well, count me as skeptical that some coincidental alignment of the stars will blow the world apart. However, 2012 could see the world as we know it change beyond all recognition as a result of two looming cauldrons of disaster bubbling to the surface of our lives.

I read somewhere that the cauldron of the super massive volcano that is Yellowstone literally raised by 10 inches recently. This is a land surface of many, many square miles - spontaneously raising 10 inches!

There has been increased volcanic and earthquake activity around Yellowstone recently. They say that evidence points to a massive eruption every 500,000 years or so. It's been more than 600,000 years since the last one. If it blows life as we know it here in America will end. The whole world would be affected, possibly causing mass extinctions and the death of millions upon millions. This is a truly frightening prospect.

There is another disaster that could also cause life as we know it to end. That would be the default of the United States Treasury. Some believe this would be literally impossible, but it will get to the point where the interest alone on the national debt can not be paid. Simply "printing" money won't fix it if the value of the dollar is zero. If the U.S. defaults the economy would grind to a halt. The world economy will crash. Human suffering would be unlike anything we've ever seen. The real scary part is as we are driving off the cliff we are accelerating. America collectively stomped on the gas pedal by choosing the Obama regime.

Obama aside, does anyone really believe that politicians have the answers or more importantly the courage to set things right? Not me.

CW

Belly Up

2011-01-23T05:23:00.000-08:00

The state of Illinois is flat broke. So is California. There are in fact half a dozen states close to the edge. All the states except North Dakota are bleeding red ink. It's so bad that some in Congress are writing up legislation to allow states to declare bankruptcy.

The state of Illinois owes creditors 6 billion dollars. The state comptroller in Feb 2011 is paying the bills for Aug 2010. Drivers of state vehicles are seeing their state issued credit cards being rejected when they try to fill up the gas tank. Everyone is tired of not getting paid. No one want's to do business with Illinois. The legislature in Springfield believes the solution is raising tax rates. A huge tax rate increase for individuals and businesses that recently passed has neighboring states salivating. Wisconsin is aggressively wooing businesses to hop the border and enjoy lower taxes and a shiny new business friendly climate.

California is most likely the reason DC legislatures are crafting a bill to legalize bankruptcy for states. The state is billions in debt and there's no light at the end of the tunnel. Is it somehow poetic justice that the man most responsible for the decline of the Golden State is now faced with the carnage his policies have wrought? Is Gov. Jerry Brown at least a bit humbled by what he found oh so many years later? Possibly. California's suffering in the current economy is exponentially greater than almost every other state. The housing bubble hit the state especially hard. Public services for illegal aliens are a massive drag, but it is the state pension system that is killing California. Bankruptcy would allow the state a way out of the pension nightmare.

America basically has it's own Greece in California. Except that instead of a small minor economic power California has an economy the size of Italy. If California gets a Federal bailout then watch the floodgates open wide. The Cloward/Piven Strategy to overwhelm the government with social obligations will be complete.

One has to wonder if what's happened to America was the inevitable result of blind fate or of cynical manipulation. Probably both. A true unplanned capitalist free market society is equally as impossible as a successful totalitarian communist society. American capitalists see a billion consumers in China and a billion more in the neighborhood. With visions of cheap labor and selling product dancing in their heads coupled with encouragement from the governments in DC and Beijing a massive jobs migration was inevitable. So far the reality of an enormous consumer driven middle class in China has failed to materialize. Maybe it will someday...

In the meantime American's are losing their jobs and the government is forced to borrow billions from China to pay pension and unemployment benefits. Seems crazy, but what do I know?

In a catch 22 situation we realize that a growing, robust American economy would help fill both state and federal coffers, but that's not going to happen if the jobs keep going overseas while the government squeezes the remaining producer class even harder. The current paradigm is unsustainable. How long before the whole thing goes belly up?

CW

2012 Disaster? The China Bubble

2011-01-16T19:17:00.001-08:00

For years we have been hearing two tales about China. The obvious one that China will overtake the U.S. as the dominant economy on the planet and eventually even hold the world' s default currency. Not to mention China's expanding military and its ambitious goals to lead in space exploration among other likely conquests. Who's to stop it? The other tale is the specter of the grand daddy of all "bubbles".

If you have been listening and reading you will have seen the occasional China bubble story. While it seems impossible in the back of your mind you wonder to yourself what will it mean to me...

I've relied on one of my favorite bloggers for specific information, that would be Al Fin of http://alfin2100.blogspot.com/. While I find Al Fin extremely credible it doesn't hurt to see evidence in main stream publications. Take a minute to read this article in The Times of London called "Hedge funds bet China is a bubble close to bursting".

FTA
We think we’ve experienced credit bubbles over the past few years, but China is the biggest. And yet the global economy is looking to China as not just a crutch but a springboard out of the recession. It’s crazy.”

He is not alone. Hugh Hendry, a former star of Odey Asset Management, has launched a distressed China fund at Eclectica Asset Management.

He follows Mark Hart of Corriente Advisors, the American hedge fund manager who made millions of dollars predicting both the subprime crisis and the European sovereign debt crisis, who started a fund based on the belief that rather than being the “key engine for global growth”, China is an “enormous tail-risk”.

There have been academics and analysts who have argued about the dangers of China’s economy overheating for some time. But for many, the fact that hedge funds, particularly those with track records on previous crises, are launching specific funds is the sign that the bubble is close to bursting.

One academic said: “Economists have contrarian views all the time. But these hedge funds have their shirts on the line and do their analysis carefully. The flurry of 'distress China’ funds is a sign to sit up.”

More analysts are becoming bearish too. Last week, Lombard Street Research put out a note warning of China’s “already dangerously home-grown inflation”.

The analysts said figures showing the continuing boom in China were far from welcome: “On the contrary, Chinese policymakers have to slam on the brakes.” The financiers are warning that rather than depending on China as the prop of the recovery plan, Britain needs to be braced for another shock.
END QUOTE

The housing bubble in The U.S. and to some degree in Europe has caused a near global economic meltdown. It's hard to say what havoc the bursting of the China bubble will do. Nothing good I'm sure.

If one thinks about it the very fact that China became an economic powerhouse is intrinsically tied to the American housing bubble. Through the 80's and 90's technology, computers, the Internet and the digital device revolution helped keep the U.S. economy afloat. First it was the manufacturing of the devices and later, when the manufacturing went overseas, the servicing of the technology culminating in the Y2K economic boom. Thereafter it was the housing market and the wildly inflating real estate prices forged by bad government policy and ridiculously low interest rates that fed the economy the equity capital that would float the economy for a few more years. All the while the jobs flooded out of the U.S. and into China with the blessing of the multi-nationals as well as the Federal government. U.S. consumers flush with all that home equity money bought a lot of Chinese manufactured goods.

Let the good times roll, right?

Where does that leave us now. Well, does a sustained (official) unemployment rate of nearly 10% ring a bell? Does record bank foreclosures sound familiar? Do bankrupt state governments and multi-trillion dollar Federal deficits come to mind? Bad, yes, all bad, but thank God we have cheap Chinese imports at WalMart!!!

If the Chinese bubble bursts we could actually see shortages of some basic supplies since they are not made here anymore, but that would be the least of our worries. Many companies would be hurt and it could cascade into more job losses here, maybe even enough to send us into a deep recession or even a global depression.

No one really knows what might happen. These hedge fund managers, some of whom were ringing the warning bells about the U.S. housing bubble, will point out the canaries in the coal mine for us - we should listen this time.

CW

REVIEW: Decision Points

2011-01-15T03:54:00.000-08:00

Decision Points is George W. Bush's memoir. In it he highlights major decisions he faced as President. It is not a chronological look at his two terms in office. His was a consequential presidency on many levels, good and bad and I suspect this format served him well as he recounted his days in the White House.

Overall I didn't find anything revelatory in the book. Most of the subjects and his positions on them were well known and were endlessly hashed out in the public discourse at the time. This to me was a little disappointing. I had hoped for more, I guess.

There's little point in recounting the "decision points" chapter and verse here since we all lived through them. What I can do is give an impression. I had supported President Bush, voted for him twice. I definitely bonded with him in the aftermath of 9/11. I was ultimately disappointed with his presidency on the whole, but I continue to like the man.

The one thing that becomes clear in Decision Points, and its no small thing, is that Bush is a very thoughtful man. He is neither the evil genius nor the blithering dunce he was alternately portrayed as in the hostile media. President Bush was acutely aware that his job was to make decisions on difficult and consequential matters. He took the job very seriously and not with some cliched shooting from the hip cowboy style.

Bush was profoundly affected by the events of 9/11 as you would imagine. Protecting the country from further attack became the central tenant of his presidency. In his every waking moment and I suspect even in his dreams he was waging a war on terrorism. Obviously this overshadowed everything else and the consequences of the actions the administration took to protect the nation cluttered everything inside the White House as well as inside the newsrooms.

The cacophony of dissent once the immediate shock of 9/11 wore off colored every single topic and poisoned the airwaves and headlines for the remainder of his term. He was determined to proceed on the course he had chosen, knowing quite well that it was going to have to be historians fifty years hence that would have final judgment on the decisions he made - including invading Iraq and taking out Saddam Hussein.

The other thing that come out in this memoir was that Bush did not hate his critics, he actually understood their vitriol. Much to the chagrin of his supporters he did not lash out at his attackers or defend himself from the scurrilous lies. This attitude I suspect was deep in his Texas heart and it was not in his nature to feel the need to defend his own honor. Did it serve him well? It's hard to say. Letting your worse critics define you without correcting the record now and then is a tough bet.

Even in his private life he continues to turn the other cheek. He is respecting a time honored tradition that former Presidents shall not criticize their successor - even as he endures his successor trashing his presidency at every turn. There is not one negative reference to President Obama or even President Clinton is this book. He makes it clear that in a 235 year old nation of hundreds of millions people that less than 50 men stood where he stood. Only a few people have ever had that unique understanding of what it took to be President of the United States. He is not about to make President Obama's job harder.

Decision Points was worth reading, but it probably won't change anyone's mind about the man or the President. I came away with the impression that Bush is an intelligent, thoughtful, honorable and yes, also a stubborn man. He made big decisions, some right, some wrong. He admits his mistakes openly and explains (rather than defends) the things he believes he got right.

CW

It's Bush's Fault

2011-01-09T17:06:00.000-08:00

Hey, I'm just trying to be first.

Not to make light of the horrific tragedy that took place in Tuscon AZ on Saturday, but the drive-by media and their minions are already painting conservatism and conservatives as the guilty party in all of this.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has somehow miraculously survived a gunshot to the head. Several others were not as lucky. It is a senseless tragedy. The gunman Jared Lee Loughner is clearly deranged. The anti-gun left, so eager to pin this on Sarah Palin and conservatism, have wasted no time making such dubious links in public. It's not even known if this nut-burger has any particular political allegiances or influences.

Remember the massacre in Fort Hood, TX? Or, the murder at the Arkansas Army recruitment office that took place last year? Hard right conservatives got zero traction throwing multicultural tolerance up against the wall. These were hate crimes if you want to call them that, Muslim hatred for the American military, nonetheless few blamed liberalism or specific leftists. Why? Because it was ridiculous to do so. It's just as ridiculous to blame right-wingers and especially Sarah Palin for this. Sorry, but people can be convinced of anything if it is repeated enough. Lies and smears can be embedded far easier than they can be removed. When they find that there wasn't any connection whatsoever between Jared Loughner and any aspect of the conservative movement will that be remembered? Probably not.

God Bless Giffords and the other innocent souls, my heart breaks for them. Let's not go blaming the sky for the darkness...

CW

Political Correctness Inspected

2010-12-30T13:19:00.000-08:00

If there is one thing we can point to as the cause of the precipitous decline of Western Civilization it is the rise to supremacy of Political Correctness. PC is so much more than just the speech police. It first hit my radar decades ago as simple speech correction by self assigned entities of virtue who would call out those who didn't tow the line. One can remember Howard Cossell crying out "look at that monkey run!" when calling a Monday Night Football game as a black, err, I mean African American, no, no, I mean black player made a mad dash to the goal line. (Ironically, as a person who loathes political correctness I just felt compelled to stop myself from using a rational and descriptive word in favor of the politically acceptable term, interesting to say the least...) Anyway, by the time this incident occurred and Howard Cossell had been publically chastised the foundation for political correctness was already firmly entrenched.

Today no one can or does deny that Political Correctness exists and that it holds tremendous power in its exercise. Yet, everyone claims to hate it. Liberals and conservatives, the young and the old, the rich and the poor all claim to hate what PCism has done to rational discourse in our society. What or who gives it such power?

PC has found it's home inside the bureaucracies of Western Civilization. Political Correctness is the natural child of communism and socialism, all seeking to downgrade the individual in favor of the collective. It shouldn't come as a surprise since communism and socialism are themselves the children of Western Civilization. In a communist utopia the the elites and the common man would be subsumed into the collective, eventually becoming indistinguishable. This we know instinctively to be impossible. It is thought that Political Correctness was conjured up as a tool of the elites to strip the masses of their individualism while maintaining their hold on the upper reaches of society. According to the scholar Bruce Charlton, PC's ultimate goal is the destruction of what it means to be human...

excerpt from:
Bruce Charlton's Miscellany "Political correctness cannot be explained by selfishness among the elite" (hat tip to Al Fin)

...the culture of atheistic, leftism - which is now PC - stripped away the basic toolkit of assumptions with which humans were born into the world. So the culture of radicalism rapidly made humans helpless in the face of reality; took pre-designed people - created for this world - and made them into (psychologically) formless blobs.

The hope behind this was that formless blobs would be amenable to re-programming - and indeed they are (many of them). But, in an unreal world, what to reprogram them with?

The formless blob humans created by PC deprogramming are being filled with the highest thing known to PC; which is impersonal abstract altruism; they are being filled with the idea that the highest goal a human can aim-at is to impose upon human behaviours an abstractly virtuous system which does not depend on individual humans, does not require moral humans, does not need human choice - human agency.

*
At a deep level, PC has become a program to destroy humanity (destroy not the physical form of humans, but destroy their agency, freedom, choice etc) - and this is not seen as a bad thing to do, since humans are intrinsically selfish animals, and therefore the highest imaginable thing in the PC world is an abstract system which shares-out 'goods' despite what humans might feel about it. Of course PC cannot justify that imposing a system of altruism is objectively a valid endeavor. Because no endeavors are valid. There is no valid positive goal for PC - it is negative and reactive against our spontaneous perception of selfishness/ injustice/ corruptibility.

PC is therefore always working-towards - and if it ever actually arrives and achieves its goal, then it will collapse from its internal contradictions. That collapse might still leave humans enslaved to abstract systems of altruism, but the humans so enslaved would no longer be politically correct.
:END excerpt

If we take Mr. Charlton's definition and break it down the true hideousness of PC comes into focus.

From Merriam-Webster.com

impersonal adj \(ˌ)im-ˈpərs-nəl, -ˈpər-sə-nəl\
2. b : not engaging the human personality or emotions c : not existing as a person : not having human qualities or characteristics

ab·stract adj \ab-ˈstrakt, ˈab-ˌ\
1. a : disassociated from any specific instance b : difficult to understand : abstruse c : insufficiently factual : formal

al·tru·ism noun \ˈal-trü-ˌi-zəm\
1 : unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others 2 : behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species

Reading these definitions one thing is perfectly clear, there is no place for individuals, or individual freedom in the world of political correctness. Is it any wonder Political Correctness is so destructive to a nation like the United States where individual liberty is actually a right.

If Charlton is right Political Correctness will (eventually) collapse of it's own weight, but not before it takes out entire societies and civilizations. Currently many liberal causes and passions use political correctness as a bludgeon. It's used as a poison in the court of public opinion against its enemies, rendering entire rational arguments invalid by virtue of a slip of the tongue. Their day will come, hypocrisy eventually reaches critical mass and the unequal application of the "poison" on only right of center transgressors will no longer stand.

How do we fight political correctness? This is an enemy without a focal point, there is no army, no king, no central command. It exists primarily in the bureaucracies, halls of academia and the popular media all of which have the power to influence and cast aspersions. We can work outside these institutions as much as possible. We can teach our children to think for themselves. We can start to develop alternate institutions such as home schooling or the Tea Party-like movements. We can fight the media by disabusing ourselves from its perceived power. We can play the game without losing ourselves and use political correctness as a rope to hang the left every time they slip up. The time has come to fight fire with fire.

CW

Where are we going?

2010-12-27T18:16:00.000-08:00

So where are we going?

The better question may be: are we going up or are we going down? It is in our human nature to see the sky falling, believing the world is going to hell in a hand basket. Can we even see the sky when our gaze is on each tedious step we take through the muck and mire of daily life? I'll be first to admit it's hard to be an optimist even if all the evidence that has come before predicts a better future than the past.

When the Soviet Union collapsed twenty years ago I saw a spectacular future for the world. To me the Cold War represented shackles on all of humanity. I was convinced that much of humanity's potential and Earth's treasure was wasted on waging the MADness of the U.S./Soviet conflict. Well, as it turns out there were shackles holding us back. The Cold War wasn't holding back astounding human potential, it was holding back pent up conflict in every little corner of the world. Face it, the twenty years that have passed since the end of the Cold War have been a major disappointment. How could I have been so wrong?

I am ready to admit my naivete. Yet, according to people like Matt Ridley, Thomas Sowell and Peter Dupont there is still reason to be optimistic. The good old days weren't all that good.

Still, considering the state of affairs the world finds itself in am I really the one being naive?

One of the problems with my perception is that I live in times when changes in the human condition are readily apparent. Up until about two hundred years ago the pace of change in daily life was glacial. Since then the transportation of people and goods (ideas and trade) has set the world on a breakneck pace. According to Matt Ridley's book "The Rational Optimist" (hat tip to Al Fin) trade and specialization has been responsible for the blessings of prosperity we have enjoyed since the 19th century. The way the average Westerner lives today is radically different than the way our ancestors lived in the 1770's. Our colonial fore-bearers had more in common with the humans who battled the mammoths ten thousand years ago than with us.

We tend to see everything in the here and now, failing to consider there were dark times and dire predictions many times before and yet mankind forged ahead. Things were pretty bleak in the American heartland in the 1930's. What must Europeans have thought about their future as the smoke cleared in 1945?

Looking at the state of affairs here in the United States one can easily conclude we are heading downhill and fast. Ridley acknowledges in his book that the U.S. and his homeland of Britain may be in for a rough couple of decades, but progress, innovation and specialization continues. Trade with China and India has moved capital and jobs where it is more efficient for the time being. History shows that when one power contracts financially another expands. It took significant political an economic changes in these emerging economies to ensure that progress and prosperity continue unabated. Refreshingly Ridley reinforces what most people know instinctively (whether they will admit it or not) that prosperity is a positive benefit to all of humanity and not some planet-destroying consumerist nightmare. Additionally, it is individual freedom that results in millions of transactions of personal choice and not government planning or humanitarian drivel that is the primary engine of prosperity.

To that point Thomas Sowell shows us in his book "Economic Facts and Fallacies," how the use of undefined terms and non-evidenced based assumptions are used to manipulate an uninformed public. Much of the financial, political, and psychological basis for left-wing policies are shibboleths and canards. When everything is structured in the language of social justice, racism, sexism, fairness and inequality it weakens the pillars of a prosperous society. This is what has happened to the American psyche over the past 40 years. We have talked ourselves out of our place as the economic leader of the world even while we still are. While there is always an element of truth in the doomsayers proclamations their heavy handed prescriptions applied with a brute force of the courts almost always burdens society with terrible, debilitating and unintended consequences.

And yet humanity overcomes to create even more with less.

We have seen this with our own eyes, more than once. Doomsayers predicting the collapse of economic and environmental systems are as old as the written word. Today's global warming or climate change if you will, is only the latest sky is falling narrative. The real danger here is that coordinated efforts by governments and NGO's can enact policies that will shackle rich, energy consuming societies in favor of poorer nations, when in the end the charlatans themselves will be the only real beneficiaries.

The same is true for the financial manipulators. There is a fine line between debt and disaster. A monetary and fiscal system reliant on debt can't make debt the enemy and the savior through manipulation and continue to create prosperity. It takes debt to inject new money into the system, providing the fuel for wealth creation. However, the use of massive amounts of government debt as we are seeing today can't succeed due to the inefficiencies of forced redistribution. Such government spending drains private capital through higher taxes, increased debt burden or inflation. Right now with taxes and hyper-inflation held in check the looming debt burden actually leads to deflation fears. Nothing is more dangerous to prosperity than deflation.

On one side you have the debt scare mongers and on the other the government panacea. Neither side has exclusivity on truth, but this statistic is telling: since the end of World War II, average annual Federal government spending was a relatively consistent 19% of gross domestic product, but in the last few years it has spiked up to around 24% or 25%. If you were to include state and local spending, total government spending is now probably about 50% of GDP. We have seen a proportional dip in our economic prospects as a result. With much of the government spending going toward transfer payments via social programs overall prosperity suffers the inefficiencies of government ineptness.

Is there new hope that the government beast will be tamed? I'm skeptical. The Republican track record during the Bush era was hardly different than the Democrats. It is hopeful thinking on The Wall Street Journal's Peter DuPont's part to believe that "when the Republican House comes into session there will be new rules, new procedures, and very new thinking about what the government should be doing."

DuPont does offer this The Wall Street Journal sentiment that I wholeheartedly agree with... "The single most important result of the November 2 election is the marginalization of the House Democratic left... Paul Ryan has replaced Barney Frank as the most prominent House spokesman on economics."

Amen to that!

CW

Merry Christmas

2010-12-25T21:28:00.001-08:00

If there is ever a good time to set aside life's worries and tribulations it is Christmas Day. Visit with family and friends, eat good food and smile a lot. It is good for your soul whether you're a believer or not.

As commercialized as Christmas has become it is still a time of hope, of grace, of companionship and good will. All these things Jesus wished for us. There will be other days to contemplate repentance, forgiveness and life everlasting.

Christmas itself is not the pinnacle of the Christian tradition, but it is important. More than anything it brings friends and families together. For this one night nearly the world over hearts lighten, children smile and people of the planet Earth take a second to inhale...

CW

They Just Can't Help Themselves

2010-12-17T20:49:00.001-08:00

We are fools to think that the mid-term election of 2010 would change anything in Washington DC. These people just can't help themselves. And the newly re-forged Republications... Spines of steel I tell 'ya.

Voters were rightfully dismayed by the Harry Pelosi Show. Even their trusty sidekick Barrack the Dog ran out of tricks. The Hope and Change Tour was a major disappointment. Still, the show goes on while the audience just turns the channel - the new season of The Bachelor is coming soon.

As if the clear repudiation of the policies and and philosophies of the Democratic leadership we've been under for four years (yes, 4 years since Harry and Nancy took over) wasn't loud and clear they were back at it again with the so-called tax compromise bill.

You'd think that the extension of the Bush era tax cuts - all of them - constituted a major victory for the Republicans. Well, what did we really get? Certainly not a tax cut. Our taxes will stay the same. In fact the most unfair tax of all, the death tax is going up. (I never understood the mentality that because someone dies their assets suddenly belong to the government).

The tax cut extension would've been good if the spending was held down, but it wasn't. Billions for an extension of unemployment benefits, billions for "green energy" schemes, billions for the implementation of government health care, billions for pet projects. Sure, one could argue that the unemployment benefits are a stimulus for the economy. I think it's a catch 22. It does nothing to get people back to work. It's a band aid, the kind of band aid the Democrats love, the kind that create more dependency on big government.

At election time the country was bleeding red ink, massive government stimulus failed to even spark the economy, hope and change had become uncertainty and despair and the voters sent an unmistakable signal to change course. Signal received, signal ignored.

They just can't help themselves.

CW

I Don't Even Like Chipotle...

2010-12-10T11:48:00.000-08:00

I stumbled across this article about Chipotles restaurants in my home town and was actually heartened - and I don't even like Chipotles!

The message has to be sent to those in this country illegally and to the businesses that exploit them.

I don't like the idea of anyone losing their job if it can be avoided, but this action taken by local Chipotles was the right thing. According to The Minnesota Immigration Rights Action Committeee (MIRAC), a local group that fights for the legalization of undocumented workers, around 50 of the restaurant’s Latino workers have been fired in the last week.

An I-9 audit was completed where they check the paperwork and fire anyone who can’t prove they have the right to work. The fact a Mexican restaurant was targeted is telling in this era when legal Americans hard up for work themselves are tired of illegal immigrants taking jobs as lawbreakers.

For its part a spokesman for Chipotle said, “We are fully cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in Minnesota in connection with a document request they have made.” ICE it seems offered no comment.

No one want's to see another human being lose their job at this time of year. However, these people made the choice to come here illegally and these choices have consequences - and they knew it. Honestly, would I have the right to expect a Mexican business and the Mexican government to ignore the fact that I had come to their country illegally and took a job from a citizen? Shoe meet the other foot...

The real moral failing here is as much the Federal government of the U.S. as it is the poor Mexican crossing the border uninvited. The fault lies as much with the past 4 administrations as it does with the current one. The government is not doing its job. Frankly this American is tired of seeing good jobs being exported to China and then workers being "imported" from Latin America to fill the ones that can't be sent overseas.

At the end of the article one commenter summed it up nicely by conveying the sentiment that it's not easy to see anyone thrown out of work. JohnCS said: They are human beings trying to feed their families and get ahead. Unfortunately we (the U.S.) cannot absorb so many low skilled/poor and provide entitlements anymore. They must work on fixing their own countries.

I applaud Chipotles, I'm sure it wasn't easy.

CW

The Palin Question Answered

2010-12-05T09:19:00.001-08:00

I do like Sarah Palin - for many reasons. No real need to go into them here, that's not the point of this exercise. The question is should Palin run for President in 2012 or not? I say not.

There is one reason and one reason only. If Obama is to be ousted, which simply has to happen, we need the one advantage we having going for us right now. Energy. The center/right has it and the center/left doesn't. The one sure way to energize the center/left is nominating Sarah Palin.

Today the left is utterly demoralized by Obama and the right is energized by him. It was this same sort of energy that propelled Obama to power, energy that was extracted as voters of all stripes were drained by the second Bush term. It is a dead certainty that a Palin nomination would be a rallying cry for Democrats and independents, but she would also cause serious strife on the right. Establishment Republicans and the Washington conservative elites are already deriding her. For good or ill the eventual Republican nominee needs these people on his or her side. The Republicans, the right-wingers, a large majority of independents and even the Tea Party will need to be on board if they intend to beat an incumbent Democrat with the main stream media in his camp.

Obama must go in 2012. Palin is young, and with some seasoning she may have real shot at it under different circumstances, but right now I believe she is the wrong person. This isn't a high school popularity contest, this is the future of our country at stake. Palin's core beliefs are correct in my opinion, but she is not going to be able to articulate them when half the country truly believes she is not up to the job.

It's too bad that the media didn't do their job in 2008. It is clear by now that President Obama is in over his head, he was improperly vetted and inadequately challenged by the opinion makers at the time. Under the current circumstances it really should be a slam dunk for the Republicans in November of 2012, a Sarah Palin nomination, I'm sad to say, would make it a toss up.

All that said if it came down to Obama vs Palin... I'm with Sarah.

CW

The Sun Sets on the Mariner

2010-12-02T18:29:00.000-08:00

"The Sun Sets on the Mariner"

18 x 24 acrylic
by Craig Willms
2010

Here's a new painting I recently finished as part of my Vacation Photo Project. This scene I'm told is a sunset viewed from "The Mariner" a Door County hotel on Lake Michigan. Sadly The Mariner has since closed... Inspired by an excellent photo shot by frequent Mariner guest Mike Wagner.

Please visit my online art gallery Static Art to see more of the project.

CW

Destroyer of The World?

2010-11-22T19:17:00.000-08:00

Newsweek in all its wisdom has put out an image of President Barack Obama, a man they helped elect that depicts him as the Hindu God Lord Shiva. Shiva is known in the Hindu faith as the Destroyer of the World.

What was Newsweek thinking? It may have been as we say in flyover country too clever by half. In other words Shiva, destroyer of the world, performs his task in order to fulfill an inevitability. You see the world must be destroyed in order to be reborn into a universal order. You know, one world in peace and harmony. How many of us dullards would ever get past "destroyer of the world"? Not too many, obviously.

How could the geniuses at Newsweek being such deep thinkers who clearly see below the the surface tension of our polarized society and into the metaphysical realm not see that this might be offensive to Hindus? Really? The same magazine that regards the average American as hopelessly Islamophobic thinks nothing of insulting the nation with the world's largest democracy. What's next pictures of Obama with a halo around his head?

Obviously I understand what Newsweek was getting at on multiple levels, but was this really the best way or the best time for this? I know the President didn't ask for this, but it makes him and us look bad. With friends like Newsweek, does the President even need enemies...

CW

Get Out of Jail Free Cards

2010-11-15T11:01:00.001-08:00

So far 113 "ObamaCare" waivers have been granted to companies and unions. These are 1 year exemptions, but I just wonder how easy it will be to extend them? Should we be surprised? Not really. What needs to be asked is if these institutions are Democratic Party donors. Hmmm.

This health care law is going to be a disaster in so many ways. Liberals can cite many good and righteous things about it, but in the end everyone knows 2 things: the uninsured could have been covered far more cheaply and efficiently than what this will cost, secondly, this is merely the grease for the skids to usher in government-owned health care.

The ill-effects of this law are already affecting hospitals and doctors - and patients. Locally a large health care system of hospitals and clinics have made the move to completely homogenize the delivery of medicine. Innovative surgeons are already moving out because they will be bound by hospitals rules directly or indirectly compelled by the new Federal laws that prescribe but one approved procedure for all hospitals in the chain. Cutting edge medicine will suffer. Eventually when the government controls the insurance apparatus it will be government panels that will decide if your mother gets the lifesaving surgery she needs or sent home to die. Death panels anyone?

Private hospitals will take no chances on expensive new or experimental equipment that may or may not pay off. Since reimbursement will be dictated by the government expensive equipment that may take ten or more years to payoff will never be purchased. How do I know this? We have a perfect example on our northern border. My home state with 5 million people has more MRI machines, more CT scanners than the entire nation of Canada with well over 30 million people. The Canadian government owns health care, owns it...

Standard operating procedure in Washington DC, sad as it may be, is for legislators to propose bills, lobbyists, corporations and business groups to actually craft the legislation, politicians (not same as legislators) to wrangle over them for their own purposes and then finally put them up for a vote. It seems wrong, even criminal considering we didn't elect industry insiders to write the laws, but at least these people know something about the way things actually work. This health care bill was written by socialist utopians that did not care how things actually work. They crafted it precisely to wreck the current health care system so that we clamor for the government to step in and rescue us. The legislators who voted for it never even read it, no one did.

So, as the fine print is disseminated institutions either change their business model to protect themselves, petition for a waver or get out of health care altogether. Health care experts, not the ones on TV, but the ones in the hospitals and clinics know this is a disaster in the making. A complete above board takeover of the health care system would've been better than this. At least then we would move directly to rationing and sub par health care, instead this law will collapse the system causing unprecedented suffering.

You ought to be mad about it.

CW

T.M.I. The Confessional Generation

2010-11-08T15:56:00.000-08:00

It used to be that there were things we just didn't talk about outside the family. People had their secrets. 'Need to know' was the measuring stick for what was OK to reveal outside these four walls. Some things were never meant to be shared with anyone but a doctor or a priest. There was a condition known as shame that helped keep things bottled up inside - for better or for worse. As the pendulum swings it reaches an apex on either end which leads me to ask how far can this confessional culture go?

Psychologists may agree that keeping things too tightly bound up is ultimately unhealthy for the individual. When, however, is too much information too much? In the world of the Internet, cell phones, texting, Facebook and Twitter the younger generation reveals all, willingly and with glee. All of us have encountered the cell phone user in a public place carrying on a much too personal conversation. It's quite uncomfortable and actually it's really annoying.

The children of my generation coming at the tail end of the baby boom had our gossip chains and whisper campaigns (or louder when alcohol was involved), but there were lines that were not crossed. We had our confidants, our circle of friends that were close and most certainly personal. The Facebook/Twitter generation seemingly has no shame, no filters and no sense of what is appropriate. Nothing is too personal anymore. Because of the distance both physically and emotionally many of these so-called friends are altogether impersonal. Frankly, it's unsettling.

One thing that clearly separates the baby boomers from generation-next is what we revealed to our parents. Simply put - as little as possible. Not so today. Honestly there are things I will never tell my mother - not her business for one and not good for her psyche for another. There are things parents don't need to know. Today the kids involve us in everything. These days it seems it's the parents running around with their hands over their ears yelling "I can't hear you, I can't hear you."

Obviously the modern media has played a major part in this. Raunchy reality TV shows remove any semblance of decorum or personal shame in a calculated attempt at shock and awe. What it succeeds in doing is completely desensitizing a whole generation of kids to what is really OK to air in public. Movies have pushed the envelope for generations blurring the lines between appealing and appalling. What was called blasphemy centuries ago was called indecent generations ago is now called edgy. Everyone wants to be edgy.

The confessional culture extends beyond the attention driven, self centered celebrity class (ie: Paris Hilton or Charlie Sheen) to the political class and all the way to the top. I learned way too much about President Clinton in the late 1990's. A simple rule of thumb should be that what we would not want to know about our grandparents we would not want to know about the President and our leaders. Some illusion of their superiority needs to exist if we are to have any respect for them at all. Yet, tell all books even dig back into history exposing failures and the indigressions of our most esteemed heroes. To what end I ask?

In the interest of full disclosure I joined Facebook too. I do not Twitter. I rarely text and I hate reality shows (except for American Chopper). Facebook has some redeeming value if you don't take it too far. I joined in advance of a class reunion and it was excellent for reconnecting with old friends and coordinating reunion related events. Since the reunion in mid-July I have been on Facebook a half a dozen times max. I must say it makes a really great bulletin board.

I struggle to imagine that the confessional generation will extend into the indefinite future. Revealing too much will have it's consequences. Facebook, MySpace, personal blogs and YouTube are already being used by HR departments to pre-screen potential employees. What you confess by way of what you say, respond to and the pictures you post could be costly in ways you'll never know. People are already losing their jobs because of things they've posted on social websites.

Plus, in all honestly, at the risk of sounding crude, let me just say - does anybody really need to that shit? Please keep it to yourself.

Wow!

2010-11-03T19:13:00.001-07:00

The repudiation of Obama/Pelosi is undeniable.

This was a course change of historical proportions. The Republicans have been given the proverbial second chance.

In 1994 a similarly historical electoral tsunami rolled into Washington. By 1996 the Democrats had the upper hand again - legislatively. President Clinton played both ends against the middle like no one had before or since. I don't think Obama has one tenth the talent of Bill Clinton. This is true because he is no political chameleon like President Clinton, but mostly because he is in over his head and always has been.

The Republicans must act in the interest of the nation (meaning fostering an environment for private sector job creation) and not in the interest of the party, making points against Obama with a goal of capturing the White House as they did in 95 and 96. The people are watching even more closely this time.

If Obama vetoes legislative action that is directly relevant to aiding the expansion of the private sector jobs machine let the chips fall where they may. However, if the Republicans pursue a witch hunt against the Obama Administration, jump on sticky social issues or push political paybacks (like Obama did) they will be thrown out in 2012. There's just too much at stake for political games this time.

We shall see...

CW

The Reconstruction

2010-10-30T13:29:00.001-07:00

This fall bathed in the finest autumn weather I can ever remember I tore down and rebuilt my screenhouse/deck. What I tore down was 23 years old and was built to unexacting standards, in other words it was terrible.

I did reuse the deck frame and the roof, but everything else was rebuilt.
I decided not to use treated lumber this time. I really hate the way it looks for one, and it is literally toxic. For the rebuilt screenhouse I used construction lumber which was then primed and painted (with the expensive stuff). For the decking itself I opted to use the "ultra deck" composite material.

I am in no mood to have to deal with refinishing ugly treated wood every few years. As everyone who has had a deck in this part of the country knows if you don't maintain the decking it begins to look like crap in a few short years. Traditionalists are never going to sanction this "fake" decking, but realists love it.

I opted for the white ultra deck which as it gets dirty it takes on the appearance of bleached out planks. The rest of the structure was painted to match the house itself. My goal was to make it look more or less as an extension of the house rather than a stand alone deck.

For now winter is just around the corner so I really won't get much pleasure out of it until next year, oh well...

CW

Schizophrenic Voters of Minnesota

2010-10-26T10:02:00.000-07:00

I live in a state where it is not unusual to see brand new cars adorning green Wellstone bumpers stickers. Senator Wellstone died tragically in a plane crash eight years ago, God rest his soul. He's not coming back...

This is of course the state that elected independent Jesse "the body" Ventura in a stunner back in the 90's as well as comedian turned politician Al Franken in 2008. Our senior Senator is a true leftist and so is our Secretary of State. This is a state that hasn't broken for a Republican Presidential candidate since Nixon in 72. In 84 we were the only state that didn't.

Despite all this we have not elected a Democrat Governor since the 80's. We have had several prominent Senators from the GOP including Norm Coleman and Rod Grams, two of the nation's most accomplished Senators without multiple terms under their belts. We've had constitutional officers from both parties that have been elected one after another, each from the far end of the political spectrum in their policies and their governance - enough real difference I tell you to cause whiplash!

Today, in 2010, we sit on the verge, if the polls can be believed of electing Mark Dayton, a serious flake, as our next governor. Succeeding Tim Pawlenty, who has been a decent steward of our state during tumultuous times, Dayton would be an about face of schizophrenic proportions. I can not image the tax burden placed on our citizens and our corporations had Pawlenty not been there. He has been blamed for kicking the can down the road on funding a 5 billion dollar deficit, but the truth is the Minnesota legislature is just slightly on the black side of the legislature in Sacramento California when it comes to spending money they do not have. Per capita our $5 billion deficit is on par with California's $25 billion. Pawlenty vetoed several out of whack budgets passed by the legislature - kicking the can this time was a joint compromise...

Mark Dayton is a former Senator of some repute. His claim to fame in the six years he spent in DC was to be the only politician to close up his office and flee when the terrorist threat level reached ORANGE. He looked a fool when nothing happened and shortly thereafter he announced he would not seek another term. Today he tops the polls for the office of Governor. How can this be?

Dayton's chief rival is Republican Tom Emmer. While I know little of Emmer - I supported the other guy in the primary, he seems a typical conservative who values small but effective state government and wants lower taxes and lower regulation on business expansion and formation. What I have found out since the primary that Emmer is actually the Devil. Satan himself. He eats little babies for breakfast and old people and immigrants for lunch. And how do I know this? Why I heard it on TV commercials funded by PAC's that support Dayton. When you look into the biggest of them, Alliance for a Better Minnesota and WIN Minnesota you find they are funded in large part by Dayton's own family. In case you didn't know this is old family money from the Dayton Hudson Department store chain which is now part of Macy's. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been donated by family. Not illegal, but not forth coming either.

No one except a few right wing bloggers have investigated Dayton's funding. The papers and TV news stations have been silent. But not so for Emmer. When certain prominent local corporations like Target and Best Buy donated to a PAC that has supported Emmer they were taken to the proverbial woodshed by progressives with a cause. Isn't funny that Target which is a spin-off of Dayton Hudson would prefer the other guy? Target was a "target" of a boycott by GLBT activists for daring to indirectly support Emmer. Target apologized and promised not to do it again! You see Emmer's sin is to support the notion that the citizens of Minnesota should be able to vote directly on same-sex marriage issues. What a tyrant!

Much has been made of Emmer's DWI arrests from his younger days but the local media doesn't breath a word about the fact that Dayton is an alcoholic (recovering) having relapsed as late as 2007 and has been institutionalized for mental health problems.

Emmer is not helped by the fact that a third party candidate, Mr. Common Sense Solutions is on ballot again this year. The schizophrenic voters of Minnesota love common sense in theory, but since they have none Tom Horner will likely siphon votes from Emmer because Dayton's supporters don't really like common sense that much (common sense says that over taxing the producers of jobs, ie: the rich, is stupid).

So, if Dayton wins Minnesota's reputation will be intact. We seem to love the fact that we're different up here, or maybe we don't. Maybe we only think we're different. We know that you know that we know we're only different on election day, otherwise we have the same differences as everyone else except for those who say they're different when deep inside they're really the same.

CW

How Dare You...

2010-10-21T06:12:00.000-07:00

Democrats Intentionally Scare the Public Into Believing That Republicans Want to Destroy Social Security

But who has really destroyed Social Security and who actually wants to save it? When I read these bullet points sent to me by a good friend I was stunned. Stunned not because of what the Democrats have actually done, I would put nothing past them, but rather that they are successfully painting Republican plans to rescue SS as stealth destroyers. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has seen even his Republican brethren shy away in the face of the assault by the left on his thoughtful and reasonable plans to save the system.

That you Democrats intentionally lie to cover what you have actually done to Social Security is a travesty. How dare you!

Here are the facts:

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary, Participation is no longer voluntary.

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program, Now we pay 7.65% on the first $90,000

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year, No longer tax deductible

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and, Under Johnson the money was moved to The General Fund and Spent

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed. Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government (which has already been taxed) to 'put away' -- you may be interested in the following:

6.) Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.

7.) Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

8.) Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

9.) Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

There you have it - facts that paint the Democrats as the liars they are.

The worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe Republicans are hell bent on destroying what the Democrats have already decimated. Yes, we live in an upside down world.

Some Weather We've Been Having...

2010-10-18T20:23:00.001-07:00

We have been enjoying no-less than three weeks of inexplicably superb weather for this time of year. Unusual to say the least for this part of the country. This morning - in the wee hours - a light rain fell, other than that clear blue skies for as far as the eye can see.

I have taken this rare and beautiful opportunity to do some construction work around the house. I am rebuilding my screenhouse/deck. What luck I've had.

I tore it down to the frame and did a little straightening here and there where my lack of patience and skills failed me 23 years ago. Alas, I'm still doing a good share of workarounds since taking it all the way down to the footings was not an option with the inevitability of winter approaching.

I was prepared to cover over my meager progress with poly for the winter and resume in the warmth of spring, but as it happens the Good Lord has seen fit to give me this opportunity to finish. He has also given my a tremendous blessing of a brother who is very, very good with tools and a knack for design. Thanks Tom!

I hope to have pictures when it is all said and done. I hope to be posting again soon - after all there is an election coming, isn't there?

CW

Random Observations

2010-10-13T09:39:00.000-07:00

1. Ethanol pollutes in Minnesota
I heard in passing yesterday while getting ready for work that something like 5 ethanol plants in Minnesota are being cited and fined for violations to the clean air and clean water laws. The irony is almost too much. I don't have anything against ethanol per se (other than the little issue of state government subsidizing rich farmers and corporations) but wasn't ethanol not only supposed to lessen our dependence on foreign oil but also save the Earth? Hmmm.

2. Gay, Gay, Gay
Is it just me or are you also getting sick and tired of gay issues permeating every single aspect of American life. For God's Sake you'd think 50% of the people in this country are gay! It seems every movie and most the TV shows have to have the obligatory adorable gay character who is above reproach. (I'm pretty sure that was in the new contract after the last Hollywood writers strike) These cuddly gay characters are always far wiser and more pure than the hapless heterosexuals they support.

You can't make any statement critical of any aspect of the gay lifestyle, just ask Carl Paladino. After last week I would vote for candidate Paladino for governor of NY if I lived there! It's a new week and the new topic is "bullying". There will be new laws passed because this such a pressing national concern. I'll give you one guess which special interest group is behind this garbage.

3. Isn't it ironic
By the mid term elections of 1982 in the midst of a recession a popular President had signed significant and popular legislation, but still saw his party lose ground. In the 2010 mid terms we seem to be staring at a repeat... But wait!

An unpopular President signs the Affordable Care Act (unpopular and frankly mysterious), the Recovery Act (wildly unpopular and ineffective), Wall Street reform (confusing and not likely to prevent future financial catastrophes), student loan reform (done by decree with no debate whatsoever), new regulation of the credit card industry (20%+ interests rates and rising, helpful, no?), the Hate Crimes Prevention Act (aka thought crimes). Sorry, but these are not popular or even helpful during an anemic, jobless recovery.

I don't see this as an equivalent situation.

4. Foreclose This!
Does the fact that foreclosure paperwork may have errors, typo's or the wrong signature excuse the "homeowner" for not making the payments he or she agreed upon? The bottom line is this: if you don't pay the bank back they get to take the house. A mortgage is a contract signed by both parties. When it is breached the aggrieved party has recourse. This is contract law which is the basis for our civil society and now we have lawmakers threatening banks with punative legislation if they don't act against their own interests. Yes, it's sad that so many people will lose their houses, but the law is the law and reality is reality. Yes shit happens, jobs are lost, but this is not the bank's fault.

If you find yourself unable to make the payments, call the bank and see if you can't work something out. Simply not paying your monthly bill is a violation of the contract YOU signed.

5. Take this climate change and shove it
Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, reigns from the American Physical Society after 60+ years. What follows is the key paragraph from his resignation letter to Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society:

For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the facts very well.) I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

The problem is that folks like Curtis G. Callan hold the the key to kingdom of grant money that pays the salaries career physicists. The only ones courageous to speak out against this farce are the old men, the ones with nothing to lose. What happens when they are all gone?

CW

Eagle Mountain

2010-10-04T16:46:00.000-07:00

We took a few days off during the fall color season and drove up to Lutsen. About 20 miles inland from Lake Superior is Eagle Mountain which is the highest point in Minnesota. As mountains go this does not even rise to level of foothills at only 2,301 feet (or 701 m). It is located in northern Cook County the summit is inside the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Regardless, for a man my age climbing Eagle Mountain is most definitely mountain climbing.

The following are few photos I took on this spectacular autumn day under perfectly clear blue skies.

We found the animals to be unusually friendly... This little guy above came down the tree until he was nearly sitting on my shoulder. And this little guy below, was checking out my Nikes.

CW