Recession And Joblessness Explained.

I'm sure you've heard that the recession we're in, is officially over. Now stop that laughing and be serious. The recession is over and that's final. If you don't believe me, then believe the Dow. It's right back where it was before the Recession started. There's even one hedge fund manager who made $5 billion last year. He's the king of hedge fund managers. What more proof do you need, anyway? I'll bet you're gonna say that there are still millions of people out of work, right? Well, can hedge fund managers, wall streeters and bankers help that? Of course not. That's not their job. Nobody expects the people who handle the nation's money to create jobs. No, their job is to create wealth. It's not their job to distribute that wealth either. Just create it. If those poor folks and unemployed don't participate in acquiring that wealth, it's not the wealth makers problem. There it is, come and get it. If you don't grab some, that's you're fault. Well then, just who's job is it to create jobs? Problem is, nobody's figured out exactly who's responsible for doing it. If it's not the government's job, and the political right is adamant that it's not government's job, and it's not the wealth makers job, then just who is supposed to do it? Some say it's industry's job. But industry doesn't seem interested in doing what's necessary to create jobs either. They'd rather sit on their billions $$$ instead of building new factories. Can't blame them for not wanting to increase capacity when they can't sell the capacity they already have. Maybe it's the consumer. Consumers need to create the jobs by spending the money they've been trying to save for a rainy day. If they would spend that money, then industry would start new factories, if they can get bankers to lend them the money to build. But the bankers don't want to lend the money to them because there's not enough profit in that. They can make more money on foreclosing on homes. So we're back to where we started. The rich get richer and we can eat cake.

It's Not George W"s Or Obama's Prize.

Boy, how about the changes taking place in Tunisia and maybe even in Egypt and Yemen? These are, or were countries that were not democracies no matter what the leaders of those countries have said for years. They were and are currently corrupt countries that haven't allowed any real democracy. So all of a  sudden there's all sorts of opposition and demonstrations. Tunisia's government fell, it looks like Egypt could go as well and Yemen is heating up. Have you watched or heard the chatter here. There are folks coming forward to congratulate George W Bush for making it possible. There's also Obama supporters claiming it was his speeches and actions causing it. Wouldn't ya just know this would happen? If somebody in outer Mongolia discovered a tree that grew money, politicians would rush to take credit and ask for a share. If they found the fountain of youth in some South American country, the Politicians would be lined up to pass out campaign leaflets proclaiming their candidate made it possible. The truth is, in Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen as well as elsewhere, folks are looking to their own futures. American politicians should keep their hands off. Because, no matter what they try to do, they'll only screw the works up for us and probably for the people they're trying to influence. It's past time for America to stop trying to be the world's cops and saviors. We were never good at anyway. So lets mind our own business and get it straitened out, before we try telling others how to mind theirs. If countries need help, lets let the U.N. handle it. That's what the U.N. was formed to do in the first place. Again, we don't seem to be able to let anyone else do a job that we can mess up more. We just keep thinking we can inflict our thinking on people in completely different circumstances. It's time for us to get a life and allow others to do the same.

How Many Speeches Do We Need Anyway?

Well last night was the President's State Of The Union address to congress.It must have been really good because it took two Republicans to give their responses in stead of just one. Yep. The Republican and the Tea Party both had something to say. Of course most everybody else who heard it had something to say and will continue for several days yet. But I wonder if this is the start of a trend. In future years will we have to be punished by speech after speech in response to the SOTU address? I guess all the leaders of both houses of congress, including both parties, Independents and all fringe parties will get their time in front of the camera. Do we really need to have all those second guessers? I mean, the President is required to give this report to Congress. He doesn't have to appear before them. He can just mail it to them. But there's nothing in the constitution that requires everyone else on the planet to respond. The idea of a response comes from anxious political opponents who wanted their time in the sun. How about this? How about just let the President give a report without the opponent bashing. There's plenty of time to have a say in the days following. Besides, how much are they supposed to know about what he's going to say. It takes the President weeks to decide what to say. If these folks don't take as much time or if they only take a couple of minutes, how important is what they say? My guess is that it's not important at all. It's just politics. It's like the filibuster in the Senate or Earmarks. There really is no place for them and no good reason for them to continue. It's just politics as usual. And not very good politics at that. Now I understand the idea of the filibuster. I remember "Mr Smith Goes To Washington" So, OK, if they want to do it, let em do it right. Let em show they really do mean business. Let em stand up there and talk, non stop. We'd have a lot fewer filibusters. Or the Earmarks that get slipped into a bill in the middle of the night. I understand some earmarks are important and useful, but if you're going to allow earmarks, make sure the President has a line item veto. Doncha think?

Don't You Think Politicians Are Funny?

Sometimes it's hard to find humor in politics. Not politicians. It's fairly easy to find humor in politicians. Politicians are unknowing comedians. By that I mean they don't intend to be comedians. They're serious about what they do and goodness knows the work before them is very serious. But far too many elected officials are really comedians without realizing it. At least we all should hope they aren't intending to be funny. I once heard of a politician who wasn't funny at all. His name was McCarthy and he was a very troublesome person. He trampled all over the rights of the people and didn't seem to care. There aren't very many people like him in office today. Problem is, there shouldn't be any like him in office today. But there are lots of people in office who say and do dumb things, all the while thinking they're being good citizens and excellent leaders. Like the new head of some homeland security committee who has decided that some of the people he's been representing for many years are suddenly Muslim Terrorists or at the very least, sympathizers. He's been to their homes, to their weddings but now that he's in power, they're bad guys. I haven't figured out if this Congressman is an unknowing comedian or a McCarthyite. One thing for sure is that he's feeding the anti-Muslim rhetoric in this country. That wouldn't be so bad if it were all true, but the thing is, it just isn't true. More importantly, it's taking attention away from the real problems in our country. Maybe he's not a McCarthyite or an unknowing comedian. Maybe he's just a boob. Maybe he just hasn't figured out that there's more important work for him to do. Then there's the newly elected folks who have decided to live in their offices. I mean eat sleep and work there. Are they to cheap to rent a room or apartment? I'd tell them to get a job and get a life, but they've got a job and presumably a life, so get with it. I don't think most people are impressed by those antics.

Times, They're A Changin. But Not For Better.

I don't know about you, but I don't think things look so great. We know that America has a 14 trillion $$$ debt, but did you know that 46 states have substantial debts as well? Or that many cities and towns are in the same boat? Look at Camden, N.J. who has decided to fire half of it's police and a third or it's firemen. Or Arizona where they're thinking of canceling health insurance for 280,000 poor or Illinois that's considering a two thirds increase in the state income tax. There's a new cottage industry growing up that is focused on taking industrial plants that close down and they cannibalize them and send the equipment to foreign countries to make stuff to send back and sell to us. There's a business headed for extinction too. Then there's Detroit. They're talking about closing half their schools or the king of them all, Texas, where they think it might be a good idea to eliminate twelfth grade all together. How about that? Here we are falling behind the rest of the world in the most important area of all, education, and Texas, home of the creationist science textbook, wants to further hold it's youth back. Is limiting education the best idea? Is that a good way for us to dig our way out of this recession? Just dumb down the population and, presto, we're all rich again? Well, maybe for some it's a good idea. Wall Street seems to be weathering things fairly well. In fact, they're weathering things great. The Wall Street Tycoons are making millions again and they're not looking back. And they don't want anybody else looking back, either. I used to think that a recession was bad for bankers and Wall Streeters, but now I realize that doesn't seem to phase them one bit. No sirree bob. If things get too tight, they can squeal to the federal government to get a handout. But don't expect one in return. Oh no. You can see that in home foreclosures. They have about as much compassion as a scorpion. That's the banks. They have to screw people to make a profit, I guess. Wall Streeters, on the other hand, well, they don't need to screw people to make a bundle, they just seem to enjoy doing it for sport. I guess the only thing that would hurt them would be an actual Depression and that would hurt the public even more. So what else is new.

Maybe It's time To Bad-mouth The TV & Radio Talk-heads.

Since the tragedy in Tucson, Az there have been calls for more civility in politics. What could be wrong with that? Well, there are more then a few people who seem to find fault with that idea. On the one side there has been blame pointed at those who use some rather violent rhetoric. I admit I'm one of the ones who pointed a finger, and I still believe such language does foster violence, even if not in this case. But to suggest that it's OK or even sound political discourse, is utter nonsense. If you want the truth about that kind of rhetoric, it is always intended to hide the truth. That's right. If you don't have a strong case, or if you're outmatched in debate, the standard defense is to make loud, false claims about your opponent. Now, there's a difference between this kind of talk and plain old, honest anger, although getting mad isn't the best thing to allow yourself to do. But the difference is, that sitting in front of a mike and making crude or false statements isn't getting mad, it's a blatant attempt to incite. And you can easily tell if the statements are false. If it sounds like someone is being accused of criminal acts or anti-Americanism, you can pretty much assume it's a lie. That it's meant to incite. If it were true, they'd have contacted the police already. Anyway, getting back to the idea of toning down the rhetoric, there is one very important benefit; you'll get to learn some  important information about the issues that are critical to all of us. You might even find out some truths you didn't know, if that's important to you. The next time you hear some radio or TV talk-head bad mouthing someone ,chalk it up for what it is. Nonsense.

Wadda Ya Mean They Want More Secrecy?

Well it isn't bad enough that our Supreme Court gave corporations many of the rights that belong to private individuals last year. Now AT&T wants to be given personal privacy rights as well. I suppose that the next thing they're going to demand is the right to vote too. Last year they got the right to donate pretty much all the money they want to politicians for campaign use. Either by direct campaign donation or through the secret PACs where they can give any amount, secretly. Now they're demanding the right to keep almost everything secret. It's called personal privacy, which is given to private individuals like you and me. So why's that a big deal? There's really only one way to keep an eye on Washington and corporations and that's the right of the public to know what kind of stunts they're trying to pull behind closed doors. Now they do have the right to keep trade secrets, and rightly so. But if they get to keep everything secret, who knows what they'll pull. Oh, I know, you might say I'm crying, the sky is falling, that there's nothing to worry about, that corporations won't do anything they shouldn't do.  Yeah, right. Corporate leaders have never done anything to suggest they can't be completely trusted, right? I for one know they are trustworthy, clean and reverent, but I still want to verify that fact, and that's why the Supreme Court should not give in to AT&T on this one. And, NO, I don't think Corporations should be given the vote either.

It's The Law.

Don't ya just love it? There seems to be a law on the books that says law enforcement can't do a legal search of any Congressman or Senator, past or present. not even a wiretap. So what this means is that a corrupt Congressman or Senator (of course we all know there is no such thing as corruption in Washington) can get away with breaking any law, any time, for any reason, and, it appears, can't be questioned. No searches for evidence, no bugging, no wiretap, nothing. Now I don't want to be a killjoy, but shouldn't the FBI or Homeland Security or the police be able to stop these folks from, at least, stealing the silver off the table? Or robbing Fort Knox? Not according to this bazaar law. I can foresee organized crime getting a hold of this information. Wait a minute? Maybe they already have. Has anybody checked any of these Senators' or Congressmen's past records? Maybe that can't be done either. So, if you think your congressman may be a crook, you may be close to the truth. Now, far be it from me to cast anyone in an unfair light, but if I see my Senator sneaking out of a fourth floor apartment some dark evening, I'll assume he lost his keys. I suppose any pictures of him holding onto a diamond neckless and a wad of cash would be in-admissible in court anyway. Boy oh boy, it's not bad enough that they get a benefits package that's the envy of the free world, and all the donations they can carry on the planes provided by their corporate benefactors, That's not bad enough. But now they can't be jailed for breaking any laws either. I wanna be a politician when I grow up, too.

I'll Say Nice Things About You If You Give In To My Demands.

Well, after the tragedy of the Arizona shootings, our legislative representatives have, pretty much, all agreed to tone down all the violent rhetoric. The question is, for how long? 5-4-3-2-1-0. OK.  That's enough. See, the thing is, addiction is nearly impossible to break. No matter whether drugs, alcohol, tobacco or political vitriol. You just can't go cold turkey. And when it comes to politicians, it's even worse. After all, these are weak willed individuals anyway. I mean, they seem to have only three things on their minds. Power. Power means they can make other people look up to them or at least pretend they look up to them. The other is money. They suddenly find themselves in a position that gives them the "power" to spend other peoples money on just about anything they want. These are addictions in and of themselves. But when coupled with the ability to say mean things about people who are trying to take away those powers, like opponents in elections, it's pretty hard not to be addicted. Oh yes, the third thing. That seems to be sex. Enough said about that, it speaks for itself. So, to expect our legislators to be civil for very long, is somewhat unfair and a lot unreasonable. It's sort of like fantasy. In fact it would be fantasy. Still, it would be nice not to have to hear a congresswoman claim the other party is made up mostly of communists or a Senator say the other party are all racists. What's really funny is to then hear them all say how much they respect the members of the other party. " Why, I just had lunch with my good friend  today". What they really mean is they happened to wind up at the same restaurant at about the same time. Take a look at both houses of Congress. They're segregated. Reaching across the isle could mean loosing an arm.

Government And The Media. Oh Brother.

OK. I admit it. I was wrong. The shooter in Arizona was not politically motivated, maybe. Congresswoman Giffords is still gravely wounded and six are dead. It may not have been politically motivated, but it most assuredly was politically facilitated. What do I mean by that? Our elected officials in the states and in Washington do not have the courage to go against the NRA and other PACs on the subject of gun control. Now, don't get me wrong. I am absolutely in support of the second amendment's "right to bare arms". I own guns, I use them to hunt and target shoot. If someone feels it's necessary to carry a handgun for protection, that's fine. But firearms that are specifically designed to kill people and have no other reasonable use, are a real question in my mind. If they are to be allowed, then they need to be registered. A handgun that's capable of holding 20 or 30 rounds of ammunition is not a reasonable gun for sport or protection. Same for the AK47 style rifles. By not protecting the people from these type weapons, our elected officials do us a grave disservice. Secondly, mental health is poorly administered and the stigma that goes with it is unconscionable. Here again, our leaders need to make such help easily obtainable and acceptable. I find the media guilty of not being more helpful in this as well. In fact the media, with it's 24/7 mentality, continually sensationalizes such acts as took place here and elsewhere. Do we really need to know so much about this persons life? Do we really need to see his pictures from cradle to grave every minute of every day? In fact, we really don't need to see him or hear about him at all, except for occasional references to a shooter. Don't they realize that by holding him up in the limelight they give reasons for some people to mimic him? Some guts on the part of our representatives and some forethought on the part of the media would be extremely helpful.

Please Watch What You Say.

What a terrible thing this shooting of Rep Giffords  in Arizona on Saturday. I keep hearing that it was not likely motivated by politics. Sorry. I don't believe that. Let me ask you this; when politicians or radio talk-show hosts or TV commentators use language that sounds like they're inciting violence and then say "I'm not suggesting violence", do you believe them? I mean really. If you have to preface your comments with the statement that you're not recommending violence, you most certainly are. There's a lot of politicians and media and talk show hosts who are making a very nice living, thank you very much, on living close to the line. These folks are very careful not to step over the line. They don't want to go to jail or lose a court case because they crossed that line, so they get as close as possible without crossing. Then sometimes they use that "I'm not advocating violence" quotation just to cover their behinds. Are you really fooled by this kind of act? I'm convinced these folks know very well that there are people out there who are just unstable enough to take these comments as direction to act. What we need is not a whole new set of laws so much as a better understanding of how dangerous some of these favorite words and phrases really are. When a politician says it's time to take so-and-so out, or puts crosshairs on them, or any such word or action, they endanger that person's life. If that's their intent then maybe they don't deserve to be elected to any position of responsibility. Even dog catcher or sewer plant guard. Maybe cellblock inmate rep would be OK. Same for radio and TV talk-show hosts. Maybe they should be doing the morning news in the Arctic in the winter when there's no sunrise for several months at a time. Well anyway, my heart goes out to those who have lost loved ones on Saturday and my prayers to those we all hope will recover quickly. My respect will be withheld from those who use this ratcheted up rhetoric, mostly for personal gain.

We The People Ask Congress to Stop Grandstanding.

Is the end-time at hand? To many, it may seem so. Birds are dropping out of the sky all over the place, fish are washing up on shores and Republicans are back in control of the House of Representatives. To prove it was providence that they are back in charge, they read the Constitution on the first day of their taking over. Well actually they read part of the Constitution. They left out some, like how much a slave is human, three fifths. Now on the face of it, such a reading might have been very moving. If they had asked someone with a voice like James Earl Jones' to do the honors, it might have sent a chill up our collective spines. But saner minds than mine chose instead to allow any member of the house to take part. That's right. Any member. Even Democrats. Those scoundrels who had forsaken the document were, never-the-less, invited to participate. So, what we got was a single sentence, followed by the next name being called. A wait in silience while he or she came to the mike, followed by one more sentence, followed by another name called, followed by, oh what's the use. The point is, the Republicans blew it. I will, however, give them credit for being the first ones in history to read it on the floor of the House, not withstanding that they cut out parts of the document that didn't feed their goal of making the Democrats look bad. Don't get me wrong, the next time the Democrats get back the power, they will surely come up with a way to try to make the Republicans look bad. Next up? A vote to repeal the Health care law. Of course the Republicans don't like to call it health care because it has a positive connotation. So they call it Obama care. I guess they have the votes in the house, but everyone knows it has zero chance to become law. Since that's so, how come they're wasting time when there really are important things to be done? Oh. Silly me. They're politicians.

Jobs. Education Means Jobs.

Well, today is the day the new congress gets sworn in. The Republicans will once again control the House of Representatives. It seems to be a seesaw event. I guess the American people keep hoping one party or the other will actually do the right thing. So far in recent history there's little celebration. It's been decades since Congress has truly tried to do the "right thing". So, if the Republicans would like my opinion, and I'm certain they don't, it would be to put America back to work. There's to parts to that request. First, in the near term, Americans would like to have a job. Now I don't mean minimum wage flipping burgers, I'm talking about meaningful, good paying jobs. You know, the kind we've been exporting to China and India and a few other countries.. That's for right away. But at the same time we need for our educational system to get back to what it was thirty or forty years ago. So what's wrong with it now? After all, the folks who have lots of money can still get their kids into good schools and get them good jobs, can't they? Well then what's the problem? I hear rich people say "I made it on my own, why can't the rest of you do the same"?  I heard some very knowledgeable people state that the ultra-rich don't consider themselves Americans or French or Saudi or Brazilian or etc. They consider themselves citizens or residents of the world. So they don't really care about the needs of Americans or French or Brazilians etc. They're only interested in where the money is this minute. Well, that's nice for them, but we Americans need to be concerned with what it will take to get ourselves back on top or we'll wind up near the bottom. The only way for us to do that is to improve our educational system. If that means we need to scrap the educator's unions then so be it. If it means we need to spend more money on education then so be it. If we need to find a way the get parents involved with their children's education, then by golly, let's kick some butt. And whether or not that means bigger government better not be a concern. I see teachers getting laid off all over the country. Is that the best way to improve our educational system? Maybe it is. If the ones getting axed are the underachievers, then I'm pleased, but I doubt that's what's happening. Seniority may be a good thing to protect. Tenure is probably a terrible thing to protect. But the ones we really need to be protecting are our best teachers. Those who don't fit that criteria need to be retrained or replaced.

Get In Shape For The New Year.

After celebrating New Year's Eve, I realized that It was not my new year's eve. That fell on my birthday. Or, actually the eve of my birthday. That's when my new year started. Yours started on the eve of your birthday. While I'm at it I could point out that Christmas eve is Jesus' new year's eve. Or at least the date we celebrate it. How come we got so mixed up on this thing anyway. Oh, I know that it's the beginning of a new calender year, but to be truthful, I didn't like last year all that much and I'm not all that confident that I'll like the new year, so how come we celebrated it. I guess the answer is that we just look for any excuse to celebrate. That brings me to another problem. Did you ever hear the expression that you shouldn't do something because it'll stunt your growth? My mother used that line a lot as I was growing up. "Don't drink so much coffee, it'll stunt your growth". I've used that line as a joke many times. "Don't eat that dessert, it'll stunt your growth. Eating fatty foods may stunt your growth, but not your girth. Fortunately for us, packing on the girth is easily handled these days. There is almost nothing that draws more commercial time that weight loss and exercise cures. Yessiree bob. Oweightloss product is guaranteed to make you trim and irresistible in no time and our exercise equipment will turn your body into that of a god or goddess. Just twenty three easy payments of...... When's the last time you saw an ad that told you to just eat less and exercise more to lose weight? Of course, you can't lose 250 lbs in 48 hours that way. To do that you have to buy their products and services. Here's an idea. Send me the money. I''ll pretend you really want to lose weight and keep the money. If in two years you haven't lost all that weight, I'll return all the money, but not the interest I earned with it. And who ever said you have to walk on a machine to get in shape? Can't ya just walk on a sidewalk? That's free, ya know.