What In The World Is A Kettle Of Fish?

OK. The elections are this Tuesday. If you're not going to vote, I have nothing to say to you except "shame". Having said that, on Wednesday we'll see little or no change in Washington or Harrisburg or almost any other state capital. In Washington, Republicans will still rule the roost except with a little more actual muscle. But the rancor will certainly still be there and with $4 billion plus spent on the election, somebody owes somebody some favors. Not just favors, but a real, under the blankets, "yessiree, anything you want" kind of respect. If you want the ear of a member of Congress, you'd better be ready and able to show them the money trail that leads to the secret money you gave to a PAC in their favor. And I don't mean a fin (that's a $5 bill). We're talking big time money, because that's what Washington is all about and will be until the Supreme Court's permission slip on secret spending is stopped. For that to happen, Congress will have to pass legislation outlawing it. Care to hold your breath? After all, Congress has been promising to pass such legislation for a long time without any progress. Well actually that's not true, they once did pass some laws, but those are the laws the Supreme Court stomped on. So the future of our government will be controlled by very wealthy people with agendas and corporations from who knows where and political action committees willing to falsely attack anyone they're told to. It's a fine kettle of fish they've gotten us into.

You Can Take China's Assurances And @%#&*

So China just assured America that it will always be willing to ship "rare earth minerals" to the world. Really? What good is that assurance? The next time they get officially mad at us and decide to slow or stop shipments like they recently did to Japan, what good will this assurance be? Is this something we can take to any corner convenience mart and get a loaf of bread? China controls 97% of rare earth minerals and almost 100% of production. Rare Earths are needed for hybred cars, most electronics and things like guided missiles and the so on. How good of an idea is it to have China be the only country in the world able to produce these minerals? We used to produce them but like so many other industries, we allowed that one to slip away too. Now if we want to build a robotic plane to stay in the air for long periods searching for terrorists and then pinpoint bomb them, we have to ask China for the rare earths necessary to build the thing. Is that a good idea? Next thing you know, we'll have to say pretty please. Letting our industry disappear from our shores, in fact rewarding companies for packing them up and shipping them to other countries, doesn't seem to me to be a wise decision. Of course there are the apologists who favor industry and tell us it'll be OK, that we still have the edge in technology even though our educational edge is fast disappearing. But will it really be OK? We had a technological edge because we had the best educational institutions both public and private in the world, from K-12 right on through doctorates. But we've fallen dangerously behind. As our educational foundation goes, so goes all of our edges. In Technology, research and industry. Oh, we'll always have a need for burger flippers and we'll always need cleanup in isle six, but the products in isle six won't be "Made in the USA". Of course by then we won't be able to afford them anyway.

Don't Say Goodbye Just Yet.

Well this Tuesday is election day. This Wednesday the Democrats will begin moving out of Washington. Actually that won't happen until after the first of the year, but there's not much they'll be able to do after Tuesday. At least until January 2013 when they should be back in charge again. Say what? The Republicans have made themselves and the American people some big promises. Promises they can't possibly keep. But then that's nothing new for either party. The problem this time is the economy and that's not likely to be all roses in just two years. Especially if the Republicans keep their biggest promise. That is to do everything they can to get Obama ousted in 2012. To do that, they can't accomplish anything good because by default, it would make him look good. That was a dumb promise to make. You can want something too bad sometimes. And if you do, it usually comes back and bites you.So what does this mean for all of us? It probably means more bad news, more difficult times and even some backward steps. In other words, our elected officials will be doing what they always do. Screwing up the works. Don't ya just wish for once there weren't any parties? I mean, if there weren't any Democrats or Republicans or Teaparties or Independents, we could actually get things done in a thoughtful, helpful way. Ya. How long would that last?

Here's Your Supreme Court

I just read up on the Supreme Court. Did you know that the constitution states only that there will be one Supreme Court. It doesn't say what it's supposed to do. Maybe that's what the Robert's Court should be doing. Nothing at all. That way they wouldn't screw things up so much. You may have guessed that I'm not a fan of our current court. Actually I would be if they weren't such activists. See right now, they seem to think corporations should have more rights then people. Of course that may be because they actually think that corporations are people. I don't mean the living, breathing sort of course, but people just the same. With the same rights. Except that if they have more money then people, they can exercise more rights, which actually puts a price tag on our rights. So, the rule is, not surprisingly, if you have enough money, you can do pretty much whatever you please. And if you can't, then go complain to the court and they'll fix it. What is it that I don't like about these good folks on the court? They have opened the doors for corporations to fund political attack ads secretly. So even if they aren't in your state and don't even do business in your state, they can still lie about one of your candidates and you won't know who is actually saying it. Does that sound right to you? Me either.

Education? What Education?

I was going to talk about the bank fraud called the foreclosure system, but something even more important is our educational system. Now I'm not calling it fraud because it's not so much the educational system that's screwed up as it is our political system that's screwed up and that's what's got our educational system screwed up. You don't agree? How about Texas where the state determines which textbooks schools can buy and the content in them, like calling slavery in colonial America a three way trade system. And since Texas is the largest buyer of textbooks in the country, what Texas buys is what everybody has to buy. Publishers don't print anything else. We've fallen behind in education to where we're ranked 27th in industrial nations in proportion of college students with science or engineering degrees, 11th in the fraction of 25 - 34  year olds with a high school degree, 48th in K-12 quality of math and science education. In 2005 a bi-partisan group of Senators asked our National Academies to list 10 actions the Federal Government could take to improve our science standings. It's second report came out in September of this year. Have any of you heard anything about it from our politicians this campaign season? Isn't this the best time ever to talk about it? How come none of the candidates have mentioned it? How come nothing is being done about it in congress? Some things have been proposed by Obama and some have been implemented, but this is how we get ourselves out of the rut we're in and into real prosperity in the future. I guess if you're a Congressman or Senator you're already prosperous so there's no real point in talking further about it. And if you're aspiring to become a Congressman or Senator, campaigning is all you want to talk about. You know. Say something bad about the incumbent. Truth isn't a factor. In fact truth seems to be a liability nobody wants to carry.

Ahh. Who To Vote For?

Wouldn't ya wonder why anyone would want to be a lawmaker these days? What with the cost of running for office being so high and all the problems with the economy and all, being a Congressman or Senator would be very difficult work with not a whole lot of profit in either money or fame. More likely you'd wind up with a bad name because you couldn't solve the many problems. So how come we have so many folks who keep wanting to get reelected? Well, aside from the graft, some folks are just gluttons for punishment. But how about the opponents? Have you looked at the selection of misfits running against the incumbents? You go from a woman who assures voters she's not a witch, to a gal who sees headless horsemen or at least headless corpses in the desert, to a hitman from New York (where else), to a lady wrestler or more appropriately, a kick boxer, to an ex-CEO who sent a hundred thousand jobs overseas and was fired, to a guy who worked for Wall Street and on behalf of China, and how about the one who fired the maid because she was an illegal but the candidate knew it all along,  to a lady bear who quit her job as governor presumably because she saw Russia in the mirror, to a..... The list goes on and on. How come so many basket cases? Maybe it's because nobody sane was willing to run for office. But I like to think it's because they all drank from the same pot of tea.  It's not so much that these folks are running as it is that many of them have a real shot at winning. What does that say of the ones they're running against? These weird people have been telling their foes to "man up" or "put on your man pants". Well maybe they should have done that last year when they had the majority to do whatever they wanted. There are some "bluedog" Democrats who are really conservatives. In other words they should have been Republicans, but they won office because of Obama's coattails. They owe their office to him but seemed to have been afraid to vote with him for fear of loosing their seats. Now they're sure to loose them without having accomplished anything. Smart thinking, I say.

Liars Lie And Cheaters Cheat.

Multi-national American corporations are sitting on about one trillion $$$ "off shore" and they'd like to bring it back into the U.S.of A if only our government would lower the taxes on it to about, oh I don't know, maybe next to nothing would be nice. They promise to spend it on investments and create jobs along the way. The problem is, they did exactly the same thing in 2004. They promised to invest and create jobs with the money if we lowered taxes on it to 5.5%. Almost all that money ended up in investors pockets instead. Oh no, wait. That was different money. Not the same money they brought back for 5.5%. Doesn't this bring shell games to mind? Anyway, no jobs were created from it. Maybe we should promise to lower taxes to 1% and then when the money is back here, tax it 100%. It's all a matter of trust. I trust large corporations to lie about things like that. I expect big banks and insurance companies to lie like that. I expect politicians to lie like that. I wonder who taught all these folks to lie like that? Was there a course in college called "telling whoppers 101" or "lying like that 102"? It's never been published or promoted that I know of. Must have been spread by word of mouth. If companies who have all this money offshore, as they claim, really saw an opportunity to build, invest and create jobs here, it would only be because they saw an opportunity to make a profit. And believe you me, nothing would stand in their way to get the money here and build, invest and create jobs. Not even high taxes would stop them if there's a profit to be made. No, I think we should write some new laws that say, any money you're holding offshore, you must pay the same tax as onshore plus a transport fee. And if you move you're whole company offshore, then anything you export back to us, we'll put a 100% tariff on it. The reason I think this, is because I think it's time to get tough with these whiners and wieners.

The State Of Health Care.

Ya know, I had an appointment with a specialist the other day. They had sent me a four page questionaire to fill out and a panphlet. Have you ever read a panphlet from a doctor? Well, I didn't read it. When I got to the office, the receptionist asked if I got the questionaire and if I filled it out. I said I did. She asked if I read the panphlet. I said no, I don't read instructions when putting things together. She smiled. She asked if they had my permission to mail me information. I said they already had. The questionaire. I think it was a test. She smiled and said I'm the first person to ever catch that. She took my insurance card, co-pay, drivers license, phone number, date of birth, address and my mothers maiden name. I think she was stealing my identity. She told me to have a seat, I would be called shortly. Two articles from family circle later, a door opened and a nurse hollored "Eddie". I followed her to a well lighted closet with a high gurney and a rickety chair and a small sink. She took the same information the receptionist took plus all the information on the questionaire. Why did they ask me to fill out the questionnaire? Was this a test? Did I pass? Now let me stop here. I never told these children they could call me Eddie. I don't know them at all. How come I'm not Mr. Snowbeard any more? When I was in my twenties, I was Sir or Mr. Snowbeard. And that pamphlet they sent me along with the questionnaire? I know a guy who always follows the directions that come with anything to be put together. He actually follows them until he has to call somebody who goes over and plugs the new toaster into the wall outlet. They call him Mr. Fixit. Not Tommy. No, the guy who couldn't figure out how to make the toaster work is... No, I better not say. He's liable to sue me . Wadda ya think about law suits? Ahh, that's a for another day. I'll send you a questionnaire to fill out on the subject. And a pamphlet.

Oops. It's A Recession. Again? No, Yet.

For those whose homes are in foreclosure, things are about as bad as they can get. But for those with "money in the bank" or more accurately, invested, they may be thanking the homeowner who's loosing his home. Say what? Well, investments in such things a law offices that specialize in foreclosure work and banks, the money is flowing in, in fact it's flooding in. Is that a good thing? Should people with jobs be profiting from people without jobs? That's one of the hard facts about the free market system. That's why bankers love people who are about to loose their home to foreclosure. Thar's profit in them thar homes. Or to be more accurate, there's profit in that foreclosure. Now it's important for banks and all companies to make profits. After all, that's how they can afford to hire workers to clean their pools or mow their lawns or flip their burgers and ask if you want fries with that order. Where the problem comes in, is when people who used to earn a good comfortable living in manufacturing are now cleaning those pools and etc. Then companies earning huge profits, isn't such a great idea. In America's system, everyone is supposed to have a fair chance to "make it". But when the deck is stacked against you, our system doesn't work. People wonder how come we're in a recession. Well, when you trade good, high paying manufacturing jobs for low paying service industry jobs like America has done, who can afford to buy the products that used to be made here but are now made more cheaply elsewhere? There's two ways to make a buck. Sell one widget for a dollar more then you paid for it or sell ten widgets for ten cents more then you paid for them. either way you make the buck and the workers can afford to buy what you made. Send the factory overseas where you can sell it for two bucks more then you paid for it, is OK until nobody can afford to buy it at any price. That's a recession.

Turnips,Wars, Recessions And Lost Industry.

Have you ever heard of my Turnip Truck Theory? Well I won't go into it, but you'll get the idea in a minute. Take a look around. In Iraq, they still don't have a government after I don't know how long. In Afghanistan we have to deal with the Taliban to get anywhere, while hoping that the corrupt regime there won't just sell out for the money. In Pakistan, the government is still supporting Al Qaida and the Taliban. Meantime we're sending our military there at great cost in human lives and our treasure. Isreal still can't get along with it's neighbors. Here at home we're still in a severe recession in spite of our government assuring us we're out of it. There's a greater disparity between the rich and the poor then at any time since records have been kept and the gulf is getting bigger. We have so many kooks running for national office that even if you took off your socks you still wouldn't be able to count them all. And some actually have a chance to win. China continues to dominate the import/export industries, all the while shipping out defective and contaminated products and garnering the market on rare earth minerals and now controls 97% of them world wide. They also are hacking the computers of our country and those of our industries. Mining for secrets, technologies and plans. It's national and industrial espionage. We don't know how to deal with smart countries who are willing to play innocent while picking our pockets clean. In the meantime, we have allowed our industries to ship their jobs and technologies over seas and still reward those companies for doing it, which is why our middle class is disappearing. And it's not like this is something new. It's been happening for decades. In fact since the 1970s. I sort of feel like we have fallen off that turnip truck. Meaning we're so dumb we allow it to happen and don't do anything about it. Actually we're afraid to do anything about it. Can you imagine, we're supposed to be the last superpower and we're afraid to hurt anybody's feelings. Maybe our government's right. We've lost so many industries that we might not be able to make it on our own. At least in the short term. Do you think we could redevelop our industrial base in a couple of years time? Whatever would we do in the interim? Depending on the information age, ain't maken it.

Woodwork Candidates

Have you been following the riots in France lately? Now admittedly, France is a country that has long seemed to be somewhat paranoid. Or at least it's people do. I mean, just because people were starving, they beheaded Marie. Poor gal. And all she wanted is for folks to eat cake. Back to the present. The French are as mad as wet hens because the government wants them to work two more years. Yep, you heard it right. Retirement age is to move from 60 to 62. Why, you'd think they were being asked to eat cake again. So why do they have to work longer? It's the economy. It's bad just like ours, who knows maybe worse. Anyway one problem is there are too many retired French people collecting pensions. So instead of using a guillotine, they're making people work longer. It looks like the French would prefer the guillotine, though. Now here in America, we're much more civilized. We would never think of rioting. Well, almost never. Instead, we're taking it to the election booth. By that I mean we, as a country, we have decided to nominate and try to elect the biggest group of space jockeys we could possibly find. They seem to be coming out of the woodwork. And it's knotwood woodwork. Now, I know that some time ago I suggested we elect Miss Piggy and Big Bird and the Cookie Monster, but come on folks. I didn't think you could ever find the likes of these candidates. Look, if you want to elect Angle or Paul or O'Donnell or Miller or Fiorinna and the rest, maybe you should think about rioting instead. The after shocks will be far less painful.

From China To Delaware.

Can you imagine? Two articles in the papers today about China and Iran. It seems Chinese companies and banks are dealing with Iran to help with it's nuclear program against U.N. Sanctions and in the other both countries are trying to steal secrets from private U.S. companies. Ya know, it's not bad enough that they steal jobs from America, but now we find out they've been stealing our corporate technology simply by buying it from employees. Presumably employees who's jobs haven't already been shipped to China. Ya gotta hand it to these folks. They're not timid. That and they know pushovers when they see them. I mean like us (as in U.S.). I do so mean us. We may have the best equipped, best trained, most dedicated military, but look who runs it. Our government, that's who. Now if you want to talk about how well trained our leaders are, check out what John McCain's daughter said about the O'Donnell woman running for the Senate in Delaware. Called her a nut case, that's what. Said she is making a mockery of our electoral system. Ya know what? She's right. And O'Donnell isn't alone. In fact I 'd say well over half the folks running for office are unfit to serve. But some will win. Maybe more then just some. When your only claim to fame is being blessed by someone who quit her job as Governor before half her term had expired, because you look like a grizzly bear, are you sure you're the right person for the job? If I'd known that, I'd have quit my job years ago. I can't quit now. I'm retired.

Newt Gingrich Is Back. Lock The Refrigerator.

Ya know, I've read a couple of history novels about the Civil War that Newt Gingrich has co-written. If you don't know who Newt Gingrich is, he was once the Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives and came up with the GOP's "Contract with America". He's a history professor in real life. I don't know how good he is, but his books aren't too bad. In fact I enjoyed them. Having said that, I must tell you he's not real good for America. For instance, he's very much in favor of keeping the Bush tax cuts for multi-millionaires at a cost to American taxpayers of something like 800 billion $$$, but he's against food stamps for the poor that generates $9 for every $5 in stamps. So in Newt's mind a whopping net loss to the American economy is good, but an economic generator is bad. Does that make sense to you? Maybe it was that kind of thinking that got rid of him before. Well actually it had more to do with infidelity then his lack of economic acumen. Anyway, he's trying to give advise to the Republican candidates this year. Can you imagine? If you're a Democrat, that might be a little good news. But whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, don't start thinking like Newt. We've got enough problems in America right now. Maybe he should go back to teaching. At a very small college. At a very small wage. He could then cut out his own food stamps. No, that won't work. He's in the 2% of income earners he's trying to protect.

Tax Credits My Foot.

Did any of you know that two separate tax cuts took place in 2001 and 2003? And with these tax cuts still in place and no thought of any change to that fact, the Great Recession hit in 2007? Hey, that can't be. It's true. So then, why does anyone think they will magically and miraculously pluck us out of the recession? For all of our information, they can't, they won't. So then why are so many politicians screaming bloody murder that the tax cuts will help? Maybe because they're politicians. At the same time, ending some of these tax credits won't cure the recession either, although nobody is claiming it will. What's being claimed is that allowing some of the tax cuts to expire will cure the debt problems and allow for spending on other things. That can't be either. You can use that money to pay down debt, or to spur the economy, but not both. But either way, nothing's going to happen quickly. And these cuts are only on 2% of the people. You know like Wall Street brokers and Bankers. Not too many other people fall into this category. The truth is we're going to have to continue to face tough times for some time to come and promising silver bullets isn't helping people to face the facts. The French minister of finance suggested, half in fun, that everybody should have a backyard garden. She may have been kidding a little, but she's closer to right then wrong.

So What's Wrong With A Little Support?

Well, our administration is "looking into" allegations that China is subsidizing it's clean energy industry. You know, what we should be doing, but are too stubborn to do. I think every other industrial country in the world is helping it's Green technology except the U.S. of A. Why is this you may ask? Well, the answer, that is the official answer from some quarters is that to do so would be to admit there's global warming brought on by humans. Some folks aren't ready to admit that. The claim is that the science does not fully back that statement. Really? There are probably a couple of hundred scientists who say it's happening to every one that doesn't. Remember back when the government was trying to cut back on smoking? Remember that there were scientists then who claimed it wasn't bad for you health? Of course they were employees of the tobacco industry. Check out these new naysayers. Anyway, for once China is probably doing the right thing and we're not. Why is that? It would mean so many new jobs that it's mind-boggling. Meanwhile we can't even get a clean energy bill through Congress. WE can't even agree that fuels like coal and oil pollute. Are you kidding me?

Mortgage Foreclosures

I don't know if you have any interest in the home mortgage foreclosure business that's been in the news of late, but I've been following it some. Now don't stop reading, because it's important. After all, you might have a mortgage and if not you might still be affected. See, here's the thing. The big Mortgage handlers are JP Morgan Chase, Welles Fargo, Bank of America and Ally (GMAC) all said they'd put a freeze on foreclosures except Wells Fargo who kindheartedly decided to continue full speed. How come there's a problem? Well they hired "Burger King Kids". No kidding that's what they called them, young men and women who got no training, to sign off on foreclosure paperwork stating that it was all "in order" so it could go to court where judges were signing off just as quickly. How Quickly? In September there were 347,000 foreclosures. That's an increase from August of about 10,400. Now if you only think of them as buildings, it's no big deal. But what you really need to do is to think of them as 347,000 families. That's maybe 1,400,000 people. In one month. Put out of their homes. Are there really that many deadbeats in America or is there a problem that needs to be addressed by government. Why not let the banks handle it? Oh, you mean the same banks who had to go begging the government for bailouts but aren't willing to give any help to families? Families who bailed them out? There's just one problem. The Congress is unwilling to help and the Administration has asked the banks politely to play nice. The banks haven't. Obama still won't step in. How come? I realize we need to tread carefully so as not to cause more problems, but asking politely doesn't work. It's time to step boldly. Will anyone do so?

What Monsoon?

In the movie Cold Mountain about the Civil War, there's a line when one of the women finds out her father's been shot, she says " They say this war's a cloud on the land. But the men caused it to rain and then stand out in the rain and say, Oh, it's raining. It's a good movie and that was a powerful line. We've got a cloud over the land now. There are some who would say we're in three wars and our economy is in the toilet. Fortunately we've got a Congress that's right on top of things. They're in recess. But before they left Washington they solved all our problems. As I've stated before, they voted unanimously to require TV commercials to be played quieter. Well I for one am greatly thankful. Our sensitive ears won't be attacked by loud noises. So now with the political PACs running vial attack ads, we only have to worry about our sensitive sensibilities. The thing is, most people don't see these wars as a cloud. That's because most people aren't directly affected by them. In fact the majority isn't even affected by the recession either. So Congress can pretty much ignore it. Oh, they like to talk about it as though it was the other party's fault. It was brought on by the Republicans. The Democrats have done nothing to resolve the problem except spend money. The Republicans stymie any attempt by the Democrats to fix the problem. The Democrats hold sufficient numbers to override any attempt by Republicans to stymie them, and can't get the votes to do it. Unfortunately, no matter what the outcome of the mid term elections, nothing will change. There's no cloud over the land, there's a monsoon. And we're the cause.

No Recession Here.

In spite of what the statistics say, we're still in a recession. Now, bankers and Wall Street would beg to differ. They're doing quite well, thank you very much. And well they should be. They're all making gigantic bonuses again, they're hoarding tons of money (in the case of bankers) that they got for nothing or next to nothing and Wall Street is back into junk bonds which is sort of what got us all into trouble in the first place. And although there's danger in junk bonds, for that very reason, there's huge profits to be made. Then there's all that money the banks are holding. Now a banks job is to loan money. It's how they're supposed to earn money. No loans, no interest, no income, right? Apparently, although that used top be true, it's not true any more. I'm not sure I understand how keeping money under the mattress or in the vault makes profits. I think it doesn't. I think they're loaning it to people who are making huge bets in junk bonds and the like. That's sort of what happened before. Bankers aren't dumb when it comes to smelling a buck or two. And they're pretty sure that if they get into trouble again, Uncle Sam will bail them out again. What they're not thinking about is that Uncle Sam 'ain't got no' money left to use to bail them out again. Might just serve em right if it weren't that we'll all suffer if it happens again. So what are our politicians talking about this campaign season? It ain't about the problems we're facing. Only a little lip service.

From TARP To Elections.

We should talk more about the TARP deal. A lot of people aren't very happy about TARP. It stands for troubled assets relief program. Those who voted for it think it helped the country stay out of a depression. Maybe so, maybe not. We'll never know. One thing we know is that a whole lot of people are mad as the dickens because the bankers are still making obscene bonuses and they're not giving out loans. They're holding a ton of money. How come? Because they got it for free and are still getting it for next to free. So instead of lending it out cheap, they're holding on to it cheaper or lending it overseas for more money. We don't know. We don't even know if they're funding political attack ads, because they're secret. Nobody knows who's paying for these ads. For instance there's one PAC called "over 60" or "60 Plus" or something. Now that doesn't mean it's funded by people over 60 years old. It doesn't even mean there's more than 60 donors funding it. It's just a phony name that's meant to sound like it's helping seniors. For all we know it could be a bunch of 30 somethings from Wall Street or the banks or Tehran or who knows where. So!!! If you listen to any of these attack ads, and believe any of them, what does that make you? Smart? A deep thinker? An honest voter? An informed voter? Or none of the above? If you're not listening to the candidate to find out what he or she believes or wants to do, you are "none of the above". If you're listening to the candidate tear down somebody else, you are "none of the above". I don't know about you, but I think I'd rather be one of the informed voters. Now I can understand why candidates don't mind these attack ads. At least the ones against the opponent. But how come the Supreme Court likes them? What's up with them anyway? Can that possibly be what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution? Lots of lies ? In secret? Well if not, then how come the Supreme Court allows it?

Can The Court Answer This?

I don't know. Maybe I've been too hard on the Supreme Court. After all, they're just plain, down home country barristers, who have answered their countries call to be interpreters, right? That's right, they agreed to spend the rest of their lives telling us what we can and can't do. By that I mean they agreed to interpret the Constitution and tell us what it means, right? Well, no. Actually they agreed to compare what people do and tell us if that's what the Constitution told us we can do. And if we aren't supposed to do that, they tell us why they think we're wrong. Of course, nobody can tell them if they're wrong, because apparently they're never wrong, except when the next Supreme Court says they are. This gets more confusing all the time. Anyway, our current Supreme Court, which was put in place because the last one was said to be making law instead of interpreting the Constitution, has been busy writing law. See, here's the thing. They decided that Corporations can, because they're citizens too, they can spend as much money as they want on elections and they can do it in secret. What the court didn't think of is how it affects our elections. For one thing it means that our elections will no longer be decided by voting. They will be decided by who spends the most money. And it doesn't matter where the money comes from. It can come from corporations who have broken the law many, many times and are mad at a Senator or Congressman, or even from a foreign country. How can this be? Because it's all secret. For instance, the TARP program that bailed out a bunch of banks and bankers. Now those bankers who got billions from the government for free can spend any amount of that money to buy elections and nobody will know. Ya know who's getting the most money? The Republicans. Next time around it'll probably be the Democrats. What I don't understand is how come the Supreme Court allowed these corporations to do this in secret? So, how come?

There's Another Ad Coming To Your TV Today.

Hey! Tomorrow is 10-10-10. I have no idea if that has any significance, but I thought it was neat. Well anyway off to the races. Some people don't feel it's any big deal that political attack ads are financed by individuals or entities who's identities are kept secret. After all, both sides do it. But the problem isn't that one side or the other does it. Nor is the problem that we have to endure all these miserable ads, and they are miserable. No, the problem is that because of these ads, we will not know the truth about any of the candidates because we can't tell if there is any truth to any of the information being blared at us night and day. Even the candidates themselves aren't really telling the truth when they run down their opponents. What we get is outright lies or partial statements taken out of context. Which is the same thing as a lie to me. How about you? I mean If I say "good morning and how are you" to you. Then say "It's supposed to rain on Tuesday". You could play back "rain on you" which would sound like I was saying something unpleasant to you. Now, maybe I felt like saying that to you, but I didn't. And that's about as nice as you'll hear on any of these ads they're running. The big problem though is still that they're being paid for by corporations or countries that you probably don't like very much. If they were proud of what was being said, don't you think they'd be putting their names on the ads? I mean they sure put their names on commercials that show their products or services in a good light. So if they really believe in the content of these ads and are proud to say so, how come they do it in secret? How come our government allows them to keep it secret? Oh, that's right. Our Supreme Court thinks it's a good idea. And since it's campaign time, the politicians think so too. Do you think that after the elections, congress will put a stop to this secret stuff? Or unlimited amounts of money being used? Well, if it works for them, they sure won't.

What's Wrong With Our Political Campaigns?

I don't know about you but I'm worried about our electoral process. I mean, I understand that here in America everyone has the right to free speech, even corporations, though I don't understand how they're people like you and me. But how come you get to have more free speech if you're a rich corporation, even if you might be a foreign corporation, or even a foreign government. And I particularly don't understand why you get to keep it a secret. Why, a hog farmer from Idaho, or a chicken rancher from Kansas can spend tons of money on attack ads against a candidate from Pennsylvania or Florida and doesn't even have to say who they are or where they're from or what business they're in. How come they can do that? Oh I know the Supreme Court said they could, but why? What was the reason the court gave for this nonsense? If they want to influence somebody, let them influence their neighbors and let them put their name on the line. How do we know if they're even legal citizens? Ya know, even if they're saying something you like to hear, that doesn't make it right. And how come the Supreme Court decided that the more money you have, the more right to free speech you should have? It seems to me that free speech isn't free after all. Free speech belongs to the folks with the most money. Is that right? Is that the way we should decide elections? Only multi-millionaires need apply? Next thing you know it'll be, only multi-billionaires need apply. Does anyone think that only very wealthy people have any brains? That's not to say that wealthy don't have brains. Of course they do. But so do regular folks. The problem is that it's getting so if you're not rich, the only chance you have to get elected is to sell your soul to the devil. And it looks like some of those rich folks already did.

Detention Explained.

Ya know, Thanksgiving is just under two months away, but there are things we should be thankful for now. Like the fact that Congress is in recess for a month and a half. Although, I'd be even more thankful if they were in detention. In Fact they should have been in detention for the last decade or so. While we're at it, the Supreme Court should be in detention too. There are some other things we should be thankful for though. Like our democratic process that allows us to choose our leaders. Maybe they should be in detention too. The leaders, not the process. But our process allows for the freedom of speech. How it got changed around so that corporations are treated the same as people, or maybe even better then people when it comes to freedom of speech, I'm not sure. They have freedom of speech but they can do it secretly. In fact other countries can take advantage of this freedom and influence our elections secretly. See, if it's secret, then nobody knows who's doing it. That's what secret means. So China can tell lies about a candidate in order to get him or her defeated and we'll never know it, because they have freedom of speech, because they're people too, at least according to the Supreme Court. See what I mean about the Supreme Court? I like our system of government, I just don't like our system of government. By that I mean I like the freedoms we have, but I don't like to have to share those freedoms with corporations and countries who are trying to beat the system. I'm thankful for a judicial process that insures that I have the right to prove my innocence, or at least my non-guilt, but I'm not happy that judges aren't always honest or that lawyers and police sometimes lie because they think it furthers the truth. I think they should get detention for doing it, and some do, but not enough. Come to think of it, I'm thankful for detention. It's a very useful place. Too bad it's used so sparingly everywhere but in school.

I'm Campaigning On Quieter TV Ads.

Isn't this a great time of the year? I mean the mountainsides are showing off their autumn splendor, fields and orchards and vineyards are offering their bounty. Even Congress is in recess. In fact, before they left for a month and a half, they unanimously passed a bill requiring all TV ads to be no louder then the programs they are interrupting. And you thought there could be no consensus within those hallowed halls. What more could we ask for? How could things be more perfect? Oh, I know. They left a lot of people out on a limb without extensions to unemployment benefits, and mortgage foreclosures increasing. But then, it is an election year which means endless, nasty attack ads bought and paid for by we know not whom. Very likely most are paid for by corporations and countries we would be truly unhappy to hear are running these ads. We don't know though, and the reason is that our Supreme Court told them it was OK to do it secretly. You know. The court that Pres. George W. Bush said was too actively involved with writing law and not enough interested in interpreting the constitution. Well, guess what Mr President. The new Supreme Court is so active, that over 100 years of precedent is being upended in favor of corporations and against the people. Come to think of it there's a lot that could have been done to improve the season. Like, oh I don't know, like energy legislation or job creation or two wars still going on or corporate leadership still pillaging their companies' pockets. I guess things aren't so hot after all. Maybe things will get better after the election. Then again, there will always be another campaign season and election and there will probably never be a time when the two parties will agree on anything more substantive then the volume of TV ads.

The Prophet Glen Beck, et al

Anybody watch Glen Beck on Fox or listen to him on radio? Well I just read about his first appearance of Fox's Bill O'Rielley show. He said I'm afraid the constitution is hanging by a thread. That doesn't sound like any big deal. Until you understand that he's a Mormon. One of the beliefs of that church is the White Horse Theory. See, Joseph Smith, founder of the sect back in the 1800s is supposed to have said that when the Constitution is in grave danger and hanging by a thread, the elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) will be called upon to save the Constitution. They will ride in on a white horse. So now Fox News has a preacher working for them. Beck is, it turns out, preaching the Mormon gospel at the same time he's slamming the Democrats and Obama in particular. It seems Fox is not above turning a profit from a prophet. Like the pun? Well it's said, anyway. Here's the thing, is Fox in competition with ABC, NBC and CBS, or are they in competition with Comedy Central? I mean, they have a lineup that's over the top and certainly not to be believed, with the possible exception of O'Rielly. You start with insinuations during the day from commentators that end up on the evening news as fact. And everybody is making a fortune. What a deal.

Apearing On A TV Station Near You.

Has anyone noticed that with only one exception, every single potential Republican candidate for president who does not now hold elected office, is now a paid commentator on Fox News? Yep, if a Republican wins the 2012 election for president, he or she will likely also be an employee of Fox News. It's also important to know that there is not one single Democratic hopeful employed by any news network. What does that tell you about Fox News' claim of "fair and impartial"? Oh, by the way, Mitt Romney is the only Republican not on Fox's payroll. What does that tell you about all the other news networks? Which ones are more likely to be "fair and impartial"? Don't get me wrong, I think unemployed politicians should be allowed to work. But should they be working for a TV network, as a political commentator? Especially if they plan to run for high office? This is a new precedent for any news agency so far as I'm aware. I have seen in the past where people working for a news agency have resigned as soon as they decide to run for office, but never have I heard of people being hired because they might run for office. So I guess if you are a Republican who would never consider voting for anyone who is not a Republican, Fox News is the place where your only choices are showcased. But if you're a thinking Republican, or anyone else who might want to see who else might run, or who else might be of interest to you, you'll just have to look elsewhere. It's not that Fox News is Biased. Most news networks are biased to some degree. It's that Fox News is rabidly biased.

The Answer Is Always With The Money.

My good friend Fred and I have come up with a solution to the problems associated with political campaigns. No, we're not recommending anyone be anointed king, nor are we suggesting anyone be elected to any positions for life. Not even the Supreme Court. I realize the court is already peopled by lifers, but I don't think it's all that great an idea. And while term limits are excellent ideas because if you can't get it done in about six years, you probably aren't up to the task anyway, they aren't a part of our plan. Another idea we aren't blessing is an aptitude test, although that would be a good idea as well. No, our plan is for the government to pass a law that requires all TV and radio networks and stations to review all political commercials before airing to make sure they are not lies. If the ad tells a lie, it cannot be aired. The part that makes this a viable plan is that if the network or station finds that the ad is a lie, it gets to keep the money paid in full, in advance for the ad. We all know that it's the money that drives the campaigns. There's no reason the money can't drive the cleanup campaign. I can see Political Action Committee's (PACs) going out of business entirely. After all, I haven't seen any PAC attack ad that isn't a lie, have you? The real perk to this law would be the fact that we would actually begin to find out what the politicians actually want to do and if they're competent and capable of doing it.

Boy, Have I Got A Candidate Or Two For You.

This campaign season is turning out to be the greatest show on earth. It includes more kooks then any campaign in history, I'm sure. I mean it can't have been any more strange any other time in history. Take for example Delaware's Christine O'donnell who doesn't seem to have a clue where or if she's been educated, to Arizona's Jan Brewer who keeps seeing headless bodies in the desert that aren't there, to Nevada where both candidates are equally despised and perhaps rightfully so. There are other states that deserve Kook awards like New York, Colorado, California, Illinois, and South Carolina. And these are only the high profile cases. But the worst is California, I think. It's where incumbent Barbara Boxer is up against Meg Whitman. Ms Whitman has spent over $100 million of her own money and is still struggling. Especially after, as an anti-illegal alien candidate, she fired her maid of many years for not having a green card. Turns out she, or at least her husband new very well the maid was illegal. Now, I know that elections bring out the sleaze in politics, or at least brings it to the surface, but this year seems to have brought out the worst of the worst. The creme de la creme, so to speak, of unworthiness. What I don't understand is how so many people can be so gullible. Would you vote for someone who said to a reporter, come near my daughter and I'll take you out and obviously meant it. Or one who claims to have taken part in an undercover drug ring investigation in another state that never heard of him? If you would, then this is, most certainly, your year.