What Gun Control?

I was watching a news program the other day and the discussion was about guns. One fella mentioned that since Pres. Reagan was shot and wounded about thirty years ago, guns have become far more accessible, not less so. The moderator pointed out that the NRA has spent millions or perhaps billions to make sure that guns became more easily available. Now of course this show was not on FOX NEWS. I think it was MSNBC. But what's important isn't that Fox wouldn't have had this conversation, or that MSNBC would. What's important is that it's so easy to buy a gun or to buy a whole lot of guns. Don't get me wrong, I like guns. I like to hunt and target shoot. I even respect peoples right to collect guns. I don't care if you want to have a collection that includes every gun model ever made. What I don't care for is the idea that some fool can go out and buy dozens of the same model, usually a Glock or an AK47, or even larger quantities. Not even if they buy them one at a time. The only people that collect guns like that in those kinds of quantities are city gangs, Mexican Drug Cartels and police agencies. And now one of them has been found to be supplying a Cartel. What I don't understand is why the NRA wants to shield those folks. Oh, I know the claim. That they have to draw a line in the sand or the government will take away everyone's guns. Well, that's hogwash, and what's more, they know it. No, the real reason is that the gun manufacturers are paying the NRA millions to help them boost up sales. In the meantime they have good, honest gun owners all over the country believing that Obama is after their guns. You know, that un-American, Muslim loving, gun owner hating, ultra-liberal, snake in the grass. Why, he wasn't even born in America and therefore shouldn't be allowed to be president anyway. Who do he think he am? Usurper to the throne, that's who. Certainly not a fine upstanding conservative like the rest of the free world. Except for France, of course. Please don't get me wrong, I don't dislike conservatives, it's just that they seem to have been misled into thinking they're right. Well, they are right leaning, as opposed to left leaning. But they don't seem to be correct. I suppose that comes from watching Glen Beck on FOX NEWS. Which is a misnomer. It should be called FOX PROPAGANDA.

(ITOS) It's The Oil Stupid.

Hwy. Guess what? We're looking at the beginning of a whole new Middle-East. So what? You don't think it makes any difference to you? Well, you're probably right, or at least partly right. See, we'll still be buying our oil from there, and we'll still be sending our military there to protect our oil, while claiming to be doing it for humanitarian reasons. The folks there will still hate us and will still hate each other. So, there won't be any change to our lives, you think? Think again buster. The price of oil will continue to get higher and higher. Not just because they hate us, although that's a part of it. But mostly the price will go up because India and China are using tons more oil, which neither has. So they'll be buying more and more as their people begin to have more money to spend on items that require more power. Electric and gas. So, that's the good news. The bad news is that the world is unable to keep up with demand. When that happens, the oil will go to the highest bidder.  Unless a supplier nation decides to hold onto it's own oil for it's own consumption, which only complicates the problem even more.Since we are no longer the wealthy nation we once were, we aren't likely to be the highest bidder. Is there an answer? Well, sort of. Somewhere there's somebody with an idea on how to do the job of oil with another energy source. Wind, solar, hydrogen, natural gas, who knows. So why don't we do it? Because politicians would rather collect campaign funds from wealthy oil companies then from poor idea people. See, the poor idea people just don't have the cash necessary to get into the big game. And politicians are addicted to the big game. As soon as a poor idea person gets a few buck together to get into the big game, the big oil companies up the price of admission.

Weight Loss, 101.

Food inflation is upon us. That's right boys and girls. That package of candy or cookies mom bought for you is most likely a little smaller than the last time she bought it. At least the price is the same though. That's a relief. Yep, rather than hike up the price of what you buy, suppliers have decided to sell you less for the same. Of course that doesn't apply to everything. For instance a grapefruit or head of lettuce is still the same. And a pound of ground beef is still a pound. I'll bet there's a move on to change the weights and measures though. What an idea. If they could give you about three quarters of a pound and call it a pound. Or what if  three cups could be called a quart? Ya know that ice cream you love so much? It used to be a half gallon. Check it out now. I suppose they would cut the size of an egg if they could figure out how to do it. You could stop at the local diner for two eggs and home fries and find out they really are one and a half eggs and a home fry. Now, understand, there's good reason to handle inflation this way. After all, if they suddenly started charging more, why, people would buy less. That certainly wouldn't do. No. Better to charge the same but give less. It's sort of playing a game of secrets. Of course, if you buy just enough to provide for one meal for the family at a time, you may find that everyone is losing weight. That may be the one saving grace for this secrets business. After all, Americans are over weight. Well, this is your grocers way of letting you know, without letting you know, that you're fat.

When Are No Taxes Not Enough? Think G.E.

You know me. I don't like to find fault with our government. But for just this once I'd like to say that I disagree somewhat. No, let me rephrase that. I strongly disagree with the idea of reducing the tax rate for corporations while cutting such things as Food Stamps and education and some are even cutting unemployment compensation. Now I know the argument that we have the highest tax rate in the world on corporations. But if that's true, then how come companies like G.E. that had over $14 billion in profits worldwide and over $5 billion in the U.S. is paying no taxes and in fact is owed over $3 billion from the government? Ya know? If I made $5 billion last year, I don't think I'd have the gall to ask for $3 billion in subsidies and tax credits from the government while the government has to cut out so many important lifelines for the poor and unemployed. How does G.E. and a lot of other companies get away with this rot? Well for one thing they hire former IRS and Treasury agents to figure out all the loopholes. Then they buy congress with massive donations to campaign funds and PACs. Of course it doesn't hurt when the CEO of G.E. is President Obama's liaison to the business community. So even the President is is being advised by the companies on how to get their taxes lower. How do you lower the taxes on somebody who pays no taxes? I go back to the argument that the wealthy, those earning over $250,000 per year, need to pay more taxes. The argument that it will stifle growth in industry and hurt jobs is pure rubbish. What will and is stifling job creation is cutting entitlements. The idea that if you give extra money to a rich man he'll go out and create a job, that giving extra money to a company will spur that company to expand and create jobs simply doesn't make any sense. Corporate holdings of cash is well over a  trillion dollars and growing. With that much money on hand, why would extra money make them expand when they already have enough to do it? What will make them expand is more sales of their products and services. That and that alone will spur jobs growth. How do you get more sales? Put money in the hands of the people who buy those products and services. Come on. It's not rocket science. Except maybe for a few folks like Palin, Gingrich, Backman and Trump et al. But then, they still think Obama wasn't born in America. They think the Revolutionary War started in New Hampshire, not Massachusetts. Newt, you should know better. Come on folks, study up a little.

Now, That Was A Close Call.

Boy oh boy. Picky picky. A couple of wimpy airline pilots are complaining because nobody was around at Reagan National airport to hold their hands while they landed. I mean, what's the problem? Afraid of running into another plane? Or maybe they thought a luggage cart might be in the way and somebody's luggage wouldn't arrive on time at the right destination? Hey look at the guy that landed in the river at New York. Nobody was holding his hand, right? If there was, then there was some poor planning there. Who said geese could be in the flight path, anyway? Ya gotta think back to the good old days of flying when pilots sat in open cockpits, held onto the stick and guessed at where the ground was. A little excitement in our lives is good for the constitution. Of course that's not to excuse the tower personnel (or person) in this story. He, or she should have been on duty 24/7. That's what bed pans are for. Any time a single person can't manage flights for a major international airport at our nation's capital, there needs to be an investigation. And wouldn't ya just know it, there are several in progress. You can bet they'll find somebody to blame. You don't suppose there should have been more than one person on duty, do you? Our country can't do a lot of things, but the one thing we can do is to hold hearings in investigations and find fault with somebody. In fact, we can find fault better then any country in the world or in all of history. Hey, even I've been known to point a gnarled finger or two, from time to time. Nothing serious, mind you, but point I do.

Keep An Eye On Your Neighbor.

Hey, how about that. We're going for the record. This makes three wars at once. I'm not sure if we need to get into another one to set a new record or not. One thing I am sure of is that we don't need another one. We don't need the three we're in now. How did we get where we're at, anyway? I mean, how did we tick that many people off that we had to get into three fights at the same time? Not even Bruce Lee would have picked this many fights all at once. Let's face it, we're not too bright at times. Now I understand how we got into Afghanistan to start with and if we had paid better attention to it, we would have been out of there long ago. But we didn't pay attention. We got all rapped up in going after WMDs that didn't exist and that we new didn't exist. Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but who made him that way. Well, we had a part in it. We supplied him with the wear-with-all to kill thousands of Iranians and his own people as well. Then we sort of gave him the impression it would be okay to invade Kuwait. And if we didn't need middle-east oil so much, none of it would have mattered enough to get involved anyway. Now we're getting sucked into another war. Don't get me wrong, this Qhadafy is one of the bad guys. But we only seem to go after bad guys in the middle-east. Anywhere else and it's "not in the best interests of our country".  Mark my words, even though we keep repeating that we won't go into Libya. No "boots on the ground". Just you wait. The only thing that'll stop us is the need for the draft. Our military is stretched so thin that the only way we can get drawn further into this third war is to re institute the draft. That'll put the fear of God into the hearts of congress and the administration. You wanna see every single member of congress get thrown out of office and the president too? Let em bring back the draft. But they'll walk right up to that line in the sand. They're going to keep using missiles and drones and ships and planes and everything they can without needing  the big D. Wars are the rich mans way of ending a recession. Rich people get richer off wars. Of course, they pretty much get richer off everything that happens, but they expecially like wars because it's hard to find out about the graft when there's lots of action in the news. Anyway, I hope you don't have to fight. Except maybe with your neighbor.

Insuring Made Easy.

I've been giving some thought to automobile insurance of late. Particularly the cost of car insurance. It's high. Like most everything else. Although it's hard to explain, since it's little affected by high oil prices, unlike everything else. I mean, just because cars burn gasoline, that doesn't cost the insurance companies any more, except that maybe the insurance salesmen have to pay more to get around and call on customers. There's a way to get around these high prices though. In fact, there's a way to get car insurance for free. I've been watching the commercials for car insurance on TV, and have come to the conclusion that I've been paying for something that's available for nothing. Here's how I envision it working. First you look to the insurance companies that are offering anywhere from ten to fifteen percent discount or even more, over their competitors. Select a company, take the discount then move on to the next. When you run out of these companies, start with the insurance companies that offer up to $400 or more in savings over their competitors. Be sure not to miss any of these opportunities. And don't pass up accident forgiveness deals either, they can come in handy. Once you've gotten all these savings, you should have enough to pay for your car insurance and have enough left over to enjoy a night out at the movies or a concert, a fine meal at a local eatery and plenty of cash to fill up the tank. So, enjoy, enjoy the great out-of-doors. Take a ride and see the USA in your Chevrolet.  Don't worry about tomorrow, tomorrow never comes. So, what do you think of my idea? A penny for your thoughts. Just remember, it's your money, use it when you want it. But it's my idea and I want a commission on your savings.

The Trouble With Teachers Isn't Too Much Power, It's Too Little Respect.

I think I've changed my mind about teachers. I think their right to collective bargain should be taken away from them. That's because they are professionals and their status as such needs to be raised in the minds and hearts of the general public. Now. No, I don't think that removing collective bargaining alone will do that, but it will help. See, here's the thing. Teachers are the most important tool we have in our toolbox to make America competative in the world marketplace. So, how come we pay forty percent of college graduates substantially more then teachers? And don't give me that hogwash about teachers only working nine months a year at an easy job. Because that's hogwash, just like I said. It's a tough job for a dedicated teacher. And dedicated teachers are what we need. The thing is, if we take away the right to bargain, and leave teachers to the mercy local elected officials, we doom them to low pay, little support and low status. Is that what we want or need for our children? Is that how we can get ahead of the rest of the world? Hardly. A lot of school districts give more support to sports teams then they do to teachers. So, in order to draw the best of college students into teaching, we need to convince them they'll be appreciated. They need to know they'll be paid  on par with other college grads, but also that they'll receive the kind of support that a winning coach gets. They need to know they'll have good equipment and facilities, and that they'll have the respect and support from administrations and school boards that a winning team enjoys. There will need to be testing of students in order to keep track of how they and their teachers are doing, but there needs to be some sort of testing to determine how the administrations and school boards are doing as well. And don't forget States support. You can't put all the weight on teachers and let the leadership off the hook, entirely. I think that, often, the problem with under-achieving teachers and schools has more to do with leadership and funding then it does with teachers. Think about your own profession and job. If the boss supports and respects you, and gives you the proper tools, you are able to do a far better job. Do you really think that teachers are different in that respect? So, hug a teacher today. Especially the pretty ones.

Why Won't More Money Help?

I've heard the argument that throwing more money at a problem isn't the answer. Especially when it comes to education. At least that's what the politicians will tell you. I have to say, that's a true statement. Even when it comes to education. The only noted exception to this rule is corporate money being thrown at politicians. In that case, more money certainly does work. It's a win-win-lose proposition. It's a win for the corporations, it's a win for the politicians, but it's a lose for Americans. Getting back to the general rule, while it's fairly accurate to state that throwing more money at a problem doesn't solve the problem, it's also true that throwing less money at the problem isn't likely to solve the problem either. This is where politicians fail to see the big picture. In fact, they fail to see anything except the amount on the check. In order to solve financial shortfalls in budgets these days, the current rule is "no more taxes". This is aimed mostly at the very, very rich, corporations and any other backers. What am I saying? There are no other backers of concern. The thing is, while there may be no new taxes that show up as taxes, the loss of funding for the wide variety of programs, means far greater expense to the average American. So, you may not pay higher taxes, but you're going to pay out more, somehow, somewhere. There's no such thing, for you and me, as a free ride. The only free rides in town are reserved for the politicians. Too bad those free rides don't come with tar and feathers.

The King Has Decided Against Muslims.

Well, Sen Joe McCarthy's hearings got under way yesterday. Oops! Sorry. I mean Rep Peter King's hearings got under way yesterday. See, I got confused because of the similarities. McCarthy was looking for Communists, mostly in Hollywood, while King is looking for terrorists exclusively in Muslim families. There are differences between the two, though. I have no information that McCarthy was ever a supporter of terrorists, while King was a very vocal supporter of the Irish Republican Party. Maybe the key is the "Republican" part of the name. Though he claims the difference is that the IRA never attacked America. They did manage to kill a bunch of innocent bystanders intentionally though. Why, or how are English less human then Americans? So, how does a man who stands up for terrorists on the one hand, get to search for terrorists in a religious community, all the while completely ignoring all other sources of terrorism? For that matter, how does he get to be chairman of the Homeland Security Committee? Or how does such a person get elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in the first place? Is the Republican party so devoid of competent, qualified Representatives that they can't find anyone else to lead such an important committee? Are there no other more important issues facing America then to alienate a whole religion? I'll bet that there are several people, Republicans, on the committee who can see beyond their own personal phobias. Why is it that the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives haven't sat this bird down for an old fashioned scolding?

Here's A Plan To Cut Taxes For The Wealthy, And Not A minute Too Soon.

Well, I just got back from Washington where I met with and was briefed by the president, leaders of both houses of congress and all fifty governors. OK, that's not exactly true. But I think I've figured out what they're all trying to accomplish. See, the thing is this.  America is still struggling with unemployment and high taxes on the wealthy who don't like it one bit. The high taxes, not the unemployment. So all of our governmental entities have been working feverishly to solve the problem. The high taxes on the rich, not unemployment. Now they feel they've come up with the perfect solution. The plans seem to be to cut spending on education at all levels. Federal aid to public schools and funding for college grants and loans, and states cutting funding for school districts and cutting salaries and/or firing of teachers as well as cutting funding for state affiliated colleges and universities. Now, you may ask how this will aid the wealthy. That's simple. By cutting this sort of spending, they can cut taxes for the wealthy. At the same time this plan will serve to dumb down the rest of the population. See, the wealthy don't send their kids to public schools of state universities, so it doesn't affect them. But by dumbing down the rest of the population they know that they will, more easily be swayed and convinced that everything is all right. Another benefit to this plan is that it won't take too long before America can begin to beg other countries for subsidies and foreign aid as well as humaniterian aid for the poor. It will be a nearly complete turn around for us. We can take our place as a poor nation. One of the under-developed nations of the world. By doing that, we can lower taxes for the wealthy and soon we'll be able to bring back industry that can employ our unemployed and children for a dollar a day. Twelve hours a day, seven days a week. It's a great plan and I salute all of our elected officials for their close attention and support for the plan.

Change, Just For The Sake Of Change.

By golly, I haven't done any fear mongering in quite a while, so here goes. People are looking at the unrest in the middle east and wondering what's gonna happen to the price of oil. What about terrorism? What happens when countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and U.A.E. fall? What about Iran? Well that's nice to worry about those countries as well as the ones that are already changing, but what about the rest of the world? What about countries like China? Now there's the big kahuna. With the largest population in the world, the fastest growing economy and what else? And how about other countries? There are a lot of countries that are having serious problems with their economies. So, maybe they haven't been oppressive dictatorships, but with the world economy in it's current state, who knows what people might do? Look at our own country. We had something of a rebellion in the last election with the Tea party. It was peaceful, but did you listen to the rhetoric? The rhetoric wasn't all that peaceful. Whenever a government messes with the people and their customary lifestyle or circumstances cause change for the worse, people get mad. But what if those countries I've mentioned and a lot I haven't, reach boiling points? In the current state, it's pretty easy to find countries up against it. Economic concerns about debt forces a country to slash programs that affect the people, there's bound to be push back.  A peaceful election that throws out the old leadership is the best one can hope for. Unfortunately an electoral change alone won't generally fix this kind of problem. Promises made are hard to break without risking another change in the next election. Often an electoral change of leadership improves nothing, changes nothing. So, now. What happens if a country like China were to fall? What would a new China look like? Think it would be a USA style democracy? Likely not. Would it fall into anarchy? How would that affect America? Remember two things. They supply us with much of our consumer goods, and they hold much of our debt. We have a problem. On the one hand, we want other people around the world to enjoy the kind of freedom we have, but on the other hand we depend on stability around the world for our own stability. And the thing is, we have no way of controlling what happens around the world. I mean, we think we should be able to control change, but in fact, we can't. Feel better now?

Trickle Down My Foot.

Leave it to a comedian to cut right to the chase. Jon Stewart of The Daily Show, pointed out that the folks who are against tax increases for the rich, earning over $250,000 per year, as being unfair, think it is fair to demand that teachers and other union members, all of whom don't make even half as much,  accept a cut in pay and increase in costs to their benefits. In other words, if you make really big money, you shouldn't have to pay more taxes, but if you're making less than half that much, then you should take a cut. I can see how that way of thinking is fair to the wealthy, but I just can't figure out how it's fair to anyone else. Especially teachers. Think about it. They said the government shouldn't make CEOs of corporations and banks that accepted  bailout money take a cut in pay and bonuses because it would be harmful to those corporations and banks. Why? Because good, qualified people wouldn't want the jobs. But now they seem to think that making teachers take those cuts will be good for education. That cuts in pay will inspire teachers to do better? Does that make sense to you? Because it makes no sense to me. Now, don't get me wrong. I don't think we should elect a comedian to run the country. Lord knows we have enough in office already. They just don't realize that they're comedians. They seem to think they have great ideas. Either that, or they're secretly working for the filthy rich. Of course most successful politicians do get a whole lot of money given them by the filthy rich. But those politicians will explain to you that all that money in no way influences them. I'm a trusting soul. I believe every word they tell me. Don't you? By the way, I bought severl large bridges just the other day. If you're interested, I can put you in touch with the salesman who sold them to me. I know the Trickle Down Theory is what these politicians are really talking about. They just don't want to use that term. The idea that if you make life good for the rich, they'll drop some crumbs on the plates of the rest of us. But look at the past thirty years or so. It just simply hasn't worked. Not in America or anywhere else. Rick folks don't like to share. They just want to get richer. And they don't care who they have to crawl over to get there. That's why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is disappearing. Is that the direction you want to go in? Me either.

I know What Else.

Ya know what? Charlie Sheen has the whole country exactly where he wants it. Talking about him, 24/7. He's crazy like a fox. It won't be long before every network in the world will be banging on his door begging him to sign with them. Just like he said they would.
Ya know what else? People are wondering why America hasn't stepped in to help the rebels in Libya. Well, Duh. We're only involved in two wars already. Where are we supposed to get the extra troops and equipment to do the right thing. Of course we could always try to do it on the cheap, again. But that hasn't worked so far in the two wars we've been fighting for far too long.
Ya know what else? Next year the Farm Subsidy Bill is set to expire. Question is, will it get renewed? I'll tell you this. With people like Michelle Bachmann and a number of other Tea-Partiers on the receiving end, Bachmann with $250,000 and others getting several million $$$, you can bet it has a better than average chance of continuing. But can you imagine Michelle Bachman getting $250,000 for farm subsidy? What's she got to do with farming? I thought farm subsidies were originally set up to help poor farmers survive hard times, floods and the like. Well, not any more. Now it's only job is to put tax in the pockets of rich politicians and agri-business.
Ya know what else? More states have joined Wisconsin in attempts to end Unions. Most people any more don't know why Unions were and are needed to protect workers. Have the Unions overstepped their justification? Sure. But what's needed is to cut back, not destroy. Just wait until you see what happens to workers in America if the Unions cease to exist as a viable representative of workers. Corporations are foaming at the mouth at the opportunities that will open up to them.  Why do they send manufacturing to other countries? Because of lower labor costs? Because they can get away with child labor, severe pollution and a whole host of other bad excuses. Given the chance, corporations will always take unfair advantage of labor.
Ya know what else? The wealthy don't much care about any of this stuff. In fact, they really aren't aware that people are suffering through a severe recession. It's just not on their radar. It's always warm and cozy for them. They just don't want to be bothered with the mundane.
Ya know what else? It's sunny out, in spite of everything I've said.