The Preamble to the Constitution

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Friday, May 29, 2009

How to solve any State or Federal Budget crisis - Easy as Apple Pie

 
I listen to politicians and pundits go on and on forever about how the government is going to solve the current  budget crisis of mammoth proportions because the economy is down, revenues are down etc etc. I don't think any of these people we elected have a clue , and if they were on Wheel of Fortune, they would buy a Z and call it a vowel. Listen it is not that hard. The main problem is that they (politicians and the like) do not think of the Budget or Revenue as real money. To you and to me, when we talk about our household budget, we are talking about the money we earn from a paycheck and it is real , it is tangible and it has a beginning and an end point. We start off with no money. We earn money from work. We spend money paying bills. What is left over (if any) is a surplus, if none is left over, we are overdrawn and we owe the bank money.
 
The reason we can afford to think this simply is because it is not difficult to understand and it is real and it is effective to do it this way.
 
It actually is that simple.
 
Spend money you do not have and it is either credit (as in credit cards) or it is theft. Spend money from your bank account that you don't have in the bank and see what the bank brings charges against you for. Very easy to explain, very easy to understand. Real worry and real Pain happens when you do not have the money to pay the light bill or do not have money for groceries and you will get sued if you do not pay for the credit card. Trust me.
 
If you borrow more money to cover a shortfall this year, payments to cover this loan increase in future years. This debt increase may solve it this year, but will make it worse in future years as the payments towards the debt increase.  This is much the same as running up a big credit card balance. Using a credit card may help you now, but later on when you have to start paying for it, you have to use real money to cover the expense. If you raise taxes to cover a shortfall in revenue, the folks who pay the taxes make reductions in other areas because it is real money and there is only so much of it to go around. The way we treat it is , if you raise my taxes, I take less of a vacation (for example) and your revenues from vacationers is less because I had less to spend, and I had to make a reduction somewhere. There is a defined amount of money to spend. This is what is known as the self-fulfilling prophecy. You make me pay more, therefore I have less to spend so therefore I spend less and you (the Government) still have less money to work with and the problem is not any smaller, it is just paid a different way.
 
Simple huh? I think if I can figure this out and you can understand it, then anybody can. I also think this is what average people do every day when managing real money.They need to treat the budget just like you and I do. They need to treat it like real money and they don't. They forgot that every dime they spend comes from you and me to begin with.
 
The Politicians would have you believe that it is a whole lot more complex than I've explained. The problem (at least at the Federal level) is if you run out of money, you either borrow more or you print more. At the State level you either borrow more or you try to raise taxes to cover the costs or you try to adjust the money you spend to meet the expected level of revenue. In all cases , they forgot to treat money coming in as real dollars and cents. Here is why none of the three things mentioned above actually work. It seems as if it does because of bookkeeping but it really doesn't because the issue never goes away and we keep hearing about it year after year. Using any or all of these methods just extends the problem into the future. 
 
If you are the Federal government and you decide that you need more money and you decide to print more to increase the supply, it makes the problem worse immediately on two levels. First because the money supply is larger, every dollar in that supply is worth a smaller amount. Read this simple fraction explanation and you'll see what I mean. If you have one (1) of something and there is five (5) of them overall, then you have one-fifth of the overall supply. If you have one (1)  of something and there is six (6) of them in the overall supply, then you have one sixth of the total supply. The amount you control is worth an amount smaller in the overall supply. When you hear about the cost of the dollar or how the dollar rates against a foreign currency, this is what they are talking about. Importing goods costs more because you have to use more of your money to pay for it. Second, because the value of the money you control is worth a smaller amount, you have to spend more of it to purchase goods and services. This is because businesses raise prices to be able to retain the same amount they are used to in order to make a profit at the level they need to continue to do business. This is called inflation. When you hear someone talk about "Buying Power" of money, this is what they are talking about.
 
The next thing they always try seems pretty logical, yet really is not a viable solution because it never takes fixed costs into account properly and it over values items which we cannot afford based on the revenues we have to work with. Certain things in any government budget just won't go down all that much when trying to reduce expenses by making cuts across the board. Things like the costs of housing prisoners cannot really be reduced. What are you going to do, Have less guards, or have less prisons to house the same number of prisoners? It is a silly proposition and it never works. Ever.
 
First, If the President or a Governor says to his staff "Reduce expenses by Ten Percent (10 %) in every department", they may make some changes, however they will never really make substantial change because they do not really control the purse strings. It sounds good on the News or in the newspaper, but makes very little difference because nothing is ever eliminated from the budget. You just end up with the same things at a smaller level.
 
Second, The Legislatures (or Congress) controls what is spent by appropriating funds to programs. If the head of State (The Governor or President for example) makes too many changes they then just re-write the legislation to make it a law to be enforced by the courts or take it away from the Head of Governments control. This is due to the influence afforded selected groups of people routinely called "special interests". You then run into the NIMBY effect. Everybody thinks we need a new prison or a new waste dump, as long as its NOT In My BackYard.
 
We would never have to cut the number of teachers, fire policemen, close fire stations or provide less Children's services if they had the guts to do one one thing right.
 
Every item in every budget should be assigned a priority in the budget just like you and I do. If we have less money, what do we do? We go to the movies less, We spend less money at Christmas, We take less expensive vacations, we buy cheaper goods instead of expensive ones. We don't reduce our spending across the board by ten percent, we eliminate expenses we cannot afford until we spend the required amount less. Here is what they ought to do , yet never will do, because of the influence of "Special Interests".
 
Lets say there are 2000 (two thousand) items in a State (or any Government) budget. There is probably more but lets say it is 2000. Put the highest priority items at the top and start with Number One (1) and then prioritize and number every one of them until everything in the budget is on the list, numbered One (1) through Two Thousand (2000) . Along with each item, list the cost of each item next to it. Now put the accountants to work and figure out how much real money we have coming in as close as we can figure it. Classify every budget expense as one of three things. One is a need (absolutely must have), next is a desire ( just would like to have), next is a want (Would like but could do without). Cut all wants first. If that is not enough, cut out the desires. If it gets bad enough, then you have to cut needs. If you absolutely must have all the needs, then you can raise taxes. Adjust each line item to the level on what is left to levels we can afford and if that is not enough, start with the last item on the list and eliminate it. Keep eliminating until you have your expenses at the same level as revenue. Understand , if we do this, we are going to eliminate things that would be nice to have, but cannot at this time afford to have. We may not be able to give block grants to build a new park or have some arcane study done concerning some state insect , but we would have teachers and etc at the level we have to have. I suspect if politicians would do this , we would never lay off a teacher or a firefighter or a Police Officer ever again. I also think if they would look at it like this, we wouldn't mind paying a little more in taxes, because we would know why it is necessary to raise them.
 
Politicians will never do this because they have forgot that their job is to represent us and not to do things that will ensure that they will get elected in the next election.
 
What do you think ?
 
Thankx for reading my rant ! 
 
bigmike
 
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/  
 
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.
 
 

Thursday, May 28, 2009

What's the big fat hairy deal about a guy, his wife and their eight kids anyway?

 
Hey man, I seem have a hard time understanding a lot of things.
 
I mean I get the facts of a situation, sometimes though , no matter how hard I try, I just don't and can't get the why.
 
Here's what I mean.
 
You ever watch Cops?
 
Is it just me or does the crook NEVER get away? My question is then, "Why do they run?", I mean do they think they are going to be faster than the radio and the helicopter? Are they going to be the first ones this year to successfully elude the police, baggy pants and all? Why didn't somebody tell them they needed to watch this show. I mean If you are a criminal or have criminal tendencies, you need to know that most of the time (what?? 95 %) When the cops start chasing you, you ain't getting away. Factually they probably know they can't get away, yet when faced with capture, they run? This is the part I don't get. All that is going to happen is not only will you be arrested, you will also be hot, tired and sweaty in the back seat of the car.
 
Is it worth all that ?
 
I think not.
 
So I get the fact that there is a TV show about a Guy and His wife and their 8 (Eight) kids. It is your not so basic Reality TV show and it is goofy as hell. Supposedly 9.8 million viewers tuned in last week (http://tlc.discovery.com/tv/jon-and-kate/jon-and-kate.html) because they are having marital issues and the burning questions in life are are all centered around are they going to stay together? Who is having an affair? Is he really a wus? Is she really a shrew? and so forth and so on until I want to puke......arrrrgghhh!!!
 
A couple of years ago my wife and I had :
 
Me, my wife, 2 Daughters, 2 Sons, 1 Son in Law, I Grandson, 2 dogs and 4 cats under one roof in one 5 bedroom house + also various friends of one of my sons for various lengths of time.
 
It was kind of like ME and HER Plus Twelve (sometimes Thirteen) !
 
So I get the fact that lots of folks are watching this show. OK, so many of you tune into this dramarama and live vicariously through the wickedness of the wife on this show and wish you could beat the crap out of your husband verbally, every day all day long like she does. The men , if any, who watch this are just clueless morons, who go though life saying Yes Dear at every opportunity, trying to figure out where it all went wrong.
 
What I don't get is the why? Why is this worthy of your time. Why do you care and what makes you want to know more every week?
 
That is what I don't get.
 
I would have already probably have been divorced, and been in jail because I would have smacked Dr. Phil in the mouth for talking trash to me about leaving this insanity, once I had divorced her.
 
Oh well. Can you imagine what the child support obligation would be? It would be cheaper to marry her lawyer, I think.
 
It had to have went something like this for the poor schmuck who is the Dad on this show when he was younger:
 
1.    See Hot Chick
2.    Date Hot Chick
3.    Make Hot Chick like me.
4.    Get Hot Chick to have sex with me (Dang , she won't do it without a wedding ring).
5.    Marry Hot chick so she will have sex with me.
6.    Hot chick gets pregnant.
7.    Oh crap, its eight babies. Are you friggin kiddin me? What the hell am I gonna do now?
8.    I know, start a TV show. That'll at least pay the friggin diaper bills.
 
 
Whatever.
 
Empty nesting looks pretty good right now I gotta tell ya !
 
Cue the credits, laugh until sides hurt, fade to black.
 
Thankx for reading my rant ! 
 
bigmike
 
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/  
 
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.
 
 

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Fox TV cancelled another good show, I am not surprised

Wrote this to Fox Television concerning the cancellation of Terminator : the Sarah Conner Chronicles. I know it won't do any good, but at least I get to vent.
 
If you like you can comment to them at askfox@fox.com
 
-bigmike
 
Fox,
 
I understand you cancelled this show (Terminator : the Sarah Conner Chronicles). I do not hold out any hope you will re-think it, rebrand it or sell it to another network. We only watch a couple of your shows anyway because most of them are crap. With most of them, when your promo comes on I cannot get to the mute button fast enough while I look for something else to watch. Seems like every time you have a good show or the potential for one you figure out a way to screw it up. My opinion? Bad move on your part. Only 5 million viewers? Give me a break, this has nothing to with ratings. This is just a money move, which no viewer respects nor cares about. We could care less that you could not figure out how to finance it, promote it or contain the costs. This was just dumb and is another dumb move in a long line of dumb moves that your programming continues to exhibit.
 
Instead of giving us pretty good TV to replace it with, you decide to go with more reality junk, which is cheaper to make? Whatever. I am stunned at how bad your schedule is and insulted at what you call good TV.
 
I'll still watch the shows that I like that are on FOX (House, Bones, Fringe, Family Guy) but the hour you opened up by cancelling Terminator is going to be taken up in my household by another network, as we can't stand the celebrity cooking,  reality , animation tripe you call programming. It just goes to show me that you guys are out of touch and do not understand the DVR/TiVo owning viewing public. This is another downhill FOX don't matter anymore move as far as I am concerned.
 
For whatever it is worth, here is our take of your shows in our house:
 
  • Are you smarter than a 5th grader? Good for one show novelty and then boring. Dumb show. Foxworthy is good but the show sucks.
  • Bones? Great show. We watch this one.
  • The Cleveland Show? You are kidding right? NO way. A boring character with his own show. I smell flop. Immediately and painful. Junk.
  • Cops? Only when nothing else interesting is on, and then can't watch a whole episode.
  • Dollhouse? No thank you. Junk.
  • Don't forget the lyrics? I forgot to watch. Junk. Insulting.
  • Family Guy? Irreverent and funny. Watch every so often.
  • Fringe? Great show. Watch every week. Take this one away and lose another hour in my household.
  • Glee? This has to be the goofiest concept ever. You actually think this is what we want? I hope this one dies quickly.
  • Hells Kitchen? I wish I knew this "chef", what's his name, so I could smack him in the mouth. If he talked to me like he does to those idiots he insults, I'd cut him with one of his own knives. What a crappy show. This could be called dereliction of programming. Cannot express adequately how much we dislike this guy, his show(s) and we would never eat at one of his restaurants.
  • Hole in the wall? Hole in the schedule. No friggin way.
  • House? Best show on TV. Can't wait to see how you eventually screw this one up.
  • King of the Hill? Must be a small hill. Glad its gone.
  • Kitchen Nightmares? See Hells kitchen. I can't hate this guy enough. A re-run of Gunsmoke would be better.
  • Lie to me? You ALREADY did when you said this was actually a TV show. JUNK. CRAP. USELESS.
  • Mad TV ? When I was 12 maybe.
  • Mental? You already are because you think this is good TV.
  • The Moment of Truth?, Uh, No. Maybe you should Lie to me.
  • Osbournes re-loaded? Amazingly bad. A real stinker. Better than a test pattern and that's all.
  • Prison Break? Uggh. Couldn't care less. Wish they would get shot.
  • Secret Millionaire? Secret garbage television. Sponsors really give you money for ad time for this crap?
  • Sit down, Shut Up? ...and go away. Fast.
  • Terminator? You cancelled it, was good TV and you decided that two kitchen shows were better. Who's running this network? Are monkeys throwing darts at a board?
  • TalkShow? See Sit Down and Shut Up.
  • 'til Death. Hopefully soon.
 
Your new shows?
  • Brothers? You are mental. More crap.
  • Human Target. Maybe. Wait and see.
  • More to Love? No. There isn't.
  • Past Life? maybe. Time will tell. Hope it is better than the promos. Probably not.
  • Sons of Tucson ? Maybe a show about Hells angels would be better, got to be funnier.
  • Wanda Sykes? Maybe. Only if she is funny. That only happens every so often. Probably not.
 
Your continuing series?
  • American Idol ? Only if Simon Cowell were to die (or leave the show). Fat chance. Can't help it the lemmings love this one. Makes no sense. Otherwise we can't stand it.
  • American Dad? How much animation do you think we can take ? NO.
  • Americas most wanted? Occasionally. See Cops.
  • So you think you can dance? So you think you can program? Uuugghh. Looks bad, smells bad, tastes bad, Is bad.
and as Far as 24 goes- Never watched one minute. Tripe, junk, stupid premise. Total turn off.
 
Anyway, you used to get 5 hours a week or so in my house and now you get no more than 4, because the rest of your schedule is drivel and is painful to watch and is money based (what it costs to produce) versus what is good to watch.
 
Obviously you don't care, so its a good thing I at least get to vent in email format.
Thankx for reading my rant ! 
 
bigmike
 
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/  
 
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.
 

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Where's the Beef ?

 
The Intellectuals are intellectually lazy, in an intellectually lazy sort of way. Once again and Just like usual. How do they get the title intellectual anyway? They seem stupid and ignorant to me.
 

In the past few weeks the California beauty queen, Carrie Prejean has been absolutely excoriated (excoriate - condemn: express strong disapproval of; "We condemn the racism in South Africa"; "These ideas were reprobated" ) in the press and in public opinion because she didn’t answer a question from a blowhard blogger (Perez Hilton), the way he thought it should have been answered.

 

I find the debate to be overly silly and "kiss me you fool" dramatic in a William Shatner sort of way and charged with made up, over the top , who cares so called tension , but also find it to be perfect example and a telling indicator of why the media is biased against a conservative point of view.

 

I also think that Perez Hilton (Hilton, whose real name is Mario Lavandeira, best known as a so called celebrity blogger who has branched off into gay rights advocacy) to be a pretty fine example of a blathering bleeding heart liberal idiot, whose fifteen minutes of fame was over 90 minutes ago, who should just shut up and go away already. I would go so far as to say he is a non-issue, a non celebrity, and shouldn't have even been there in the first place. For crying out loud, this clown runs a gay themed celebrity gossip web site. What exactly qualifies him to be a judge of a female beauty pageant anyway? Hell he doesn't even like women in the first place !(I digress.)

 

Hilton asked Miss California's Carrie Prejean her thoughts on legalizing gay marriage during the Miss USA 2009 pageant, which aired live on NBC. The quote attributed to him was “"Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage," he said.”Do you think every state should follow suit, why or why not." Her answers to his question, while not elegant and certainly not spoken all that effectively, were nonetheless forthright and fully considered.

 

The quote attributed to her is "I think it's great Americans are able to choose one or the other," she said. "We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what in my country, in my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody there, but that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be, between a man and a woman."

 

Apparently, some people including Mr. Hilton were somehow offended by Miss Prejean’s answer. Their immediate reaction and then the continuing reaction from the crowd and by absentia the media was, to put it mildly, negative and somewhat spiteful. Boo - Hiss, (I hear cat scratch fever playing somewhere)

 

This is the interesting part.

 

Donald Trump, the owner of the pageant gets into the act because he has to decide if she can keep her crown (the "Beauty" award) because of some racy photos and he is pulled into the debate on her position towards gay marriage. Trump said he and other pageant officials had reviewed racy photos of Prejean and decided they were acceptable."We are in the 21st century. We have determined the pictures taken are fine," he said, adding that "in some cases the pictures were lovely." What the hell is a beauty award anyway? They apparently give them a crown of some sort, that rewards their genetics and chosen plastic surgeon. I don't get it. Moving on.

 

Intellectually, many of the negative voices that could be heard were busy with the “Another bubble head”, “Another victim of Rush Limbaugh school of Republican mind control”, “She is intolerant”, "She is a gay basher", "She is against gay rights" and etc and other misplaced eclectic diatribes. Because those intellectually lazy folks didn’t support her answer and did not really listen to her response, they immediately dismissed her right to have an opinion and dismissed her opinion as wrong.

 

The media then joined the cause and repeated how negative the perception was of her because her answer seemed to be out of touch with mainstream thought and how she must be a Christian Conservative (like that is somehow a bad thing) because liberals just don’t think like this. It went on and on and on and on and on , until finally , this is where we are at. They say because of her opinion, the media says, the common perception is that she is wrong, Hilton is right to be shocked and stunned and appalled and Trump should throw her out for the quote and for the photos (racy photos not disclosed to the pageant). Public opinion is said to be that she should be disqualified and should have to give up her crown and the intellectuals are absolutely in heaven. They have chosen their target because she does not agree with their liberal open-minded position and she is a gay bashing intolerant bigot who supposedly has an anti gay bias. She is raked over the coals for the next 2 or 3 weeks. Hallelujah !

 

What a load of crap ! I would have lost my cool and said a few curse words they would have had to bleep out, if it was me. To her credit she kept pretty calm and just expressed her opinion. No way I would have been that poised.

 

I should clear something up.

The intellectuals and the media "Allegedly" have open-minded liberal position(s).

Their stated opinion(s) however are not supported by the facts.

Factually, they actually are what they are complaining about.

 

Class,  it is time for a pop quiz !

 

For extra credit name the person(s) who made the following statement(s):

 

  • "I do not support gay marriage. Marriage has religious and social connotations, and I consider marriage to be between a man and a woman." (1)
  • "This is an issue that I think helps to describe who we are  [Marriage] connotes to so many people a religious and not just civil element, and that includes me." (2)
  • "My view is that we should try to disentangle what has historically been the issue of the word ‘marriage,' which has religious connotations to some people, from the civil rights that are given to couples, in terms of hospital visitation, in terms of whether or not they can transfer property or any of the other -- Social Security benefits and so forth." (3)

 

Do you know who said these things?

 

Was it : 

 

Rush Limbaugh?

Nope.

 

Nancy Grace?

Nope.

 

George Bush?

Nope.

 

James Carville?

Nope.

 

Mary Matlin?

Nope.

 

Bill Clinton?

Hell No.

 

Bill O'Reilly?

Nope.

 

Glen Beck?

Nope.

 

Ann Coulter?

Nope.

 

Sean Hannity?

Nope.

 

Dick Chaney?

Not even.

 

George Will?

Nope.

 

Al Gore?

Nope.

 

 

These are all quotes (exact quotes) spoken by our President, Commander in Chief, and Chief Left Leaning Bleeding Heart Liberal, the one, the only, Barrack Obama.

 

All of them reflect his current positions.

 

(Gasp ! Says its not true, bigmike, say its not true!)

 

1.                [from the Logo presidential debate]

2.                [source: cnn]

3.                [from the Logo presidential debate]

 

 

Trump said "It's the same answer the president of the United States gave; it's the same answer many people gave,”, "She gave an honorable answer; she gave an answer from her heart."

 

So, let’s see. Hmmmmm......This comes down to this then.

 

Her answer was honest, forthright and fully qualified and is her opinion.

Check.

 

Her right to that opinion is covered under the Constitution of the USA. (You know, that bothersome one about free speech and such?)

Check. 

 

I do not happen to agree with her.

Check.

 

Let em marry, who cares?

Check.

 

Why does it even matter?

Check.

 

Doesn't affect me one way or the other.

Check.

 

How gay marriage destroys the family is beyond me.

Check.

 

Rick Santorum started this crap and he should just shut the hell up. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum)

Check.

 

Being a beauty queen (with or without an opinion) affects me in no way.

Check. 

 

Her answer almost exactly duplicates the position stated by Barack Obama.

Check and double check.

Hell triple Check.

 

The so-called intellectuals, pounced upon her position and said because of it she is unqualified to be a beauty queen, that she is an intolerant gay bashing bigot.

Check. (No , really that is what they said, I'm not making it up !) 

Stupid, wrong and ignorant of the facts, but grudgingly I have to admit, Check.

It is their stupid position.

 

Barack Obama is a supporter of gay marriage.

Uh NO, not check.

He supports civil unions and new legislation, and does not now nor has ever supported gay marriage.

 

Obama first announced his opposition to the measure only in response to media inquiries. He said the nation should recognize lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans “with full equality under the law.” For example, Obama called the ballot measure (CA Prop. 8) “divisive and discriminatory” and concluded by congratulating “all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks.” Left unstated was that Obama has declined to endorse gay marriage, saying that civil unions would suffice to protect partners’ rights.

 

If you believe that Barack Obama’s position on this is much different than Ms. Prejean's, then I submit that you and people like you are just seeing and hearing what you want to see and hear without regard to the facts. It is disingenuous and is ignorant of the facts to suggest otherwise. Just because you do not like the forum or the facts does not mean you can change them. Factually, there are more similarities between Mr. Obama’s opinion and Ms. Prejean’s than differences. 

 

It is however intellectually lazy and politically expedient to see otherwise. 

 

To the media it just makes good copy without regard to right or wrong.

The fourth estate my fat hairy butt. What a bunch of incompetent nincompoops.

 

I find the drama interesting. I find the intellectuals' argument to be pure unadulterated Horses**t. Just like always and just like usual. As the old lady in the Wendy's commercial used to say "Where's the beef?" For them it is more about perception equals reality than it is about facts substantiated by positions. Liberals never met a fact they could not ignore. It is easier to have an opinion that is based on perceptions than it is to have a position based on the facts. Her opinion ,while almost exactly the same position expressed by our president is seen as intolerant and he is seen as a supporter of gay marriage. The intellectually lazy commentators and the media immediately broadened the context to include all things gay, but that was not the question and it was never discussed.  

 

As the old saying goes "Don't confuse me with the facts !".

 

Take a few minutes and look at the following references: It's not everything you can find, but it will point out to you exactly what the problem with the reporting is and how the perception of Obama is skewed so badly by the press.

 

Perez Hilton owes Ms. Prejean an apology. I hope she doesn't hold her breath waiting for one.

 

She should have just said "World Peace", smiled and said "Am I right?"

At least then it would met the perception of ..."Stupid beauty queen gives ignorant answer. Film at 11".

 

I never thought I would ever say this but "Way to go Donald !" (not that it matters at all).

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/civil_rights/

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Prejean+quote&aq=f&oq=

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/quotes/stars/carrie-prejean/

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=perez+Hilton+Prejean&aq=f&oq=

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Television/Story?id=7381893&page=1

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Donald+Trump+Prejean&aq=f&oq=

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1897637,00.html

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=obama+quote+gay+marriage&aq=f&oq=

http://equalitygiving.org/Barack-Obama-on-the-issues-Equality-Quotes-Gay-Rights

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

 

 

Thankx for reading my rant ! 

 
bigmike
 
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/  
 
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.

 

Monday, May 4, 2009

The Headline says "President Obama advised not to replace David Souter with judge"

Huh?
Oh yeah, this one makes a whole lotta sense and proves once again that our astute politicians are thinking about what is best for America at all times.
A sitting Supreme Court justice (David Souter) is retiring this year. One of nine of them.
The headline says " President Obama advised not to replace David Souter with judge".
You can read this story at :http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/05/04/2009-05-04_dems_court_outsider_tell_bam_not_to_pick_fed_judge_for_justice_souters_job.html
-Bigmike
Let me see if I can fathom this logic. Not sure I understand where these wackos are coming from now.
This position they are talking about is a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
Of the United States of America.
In the top Federal court.
Where cases are decided that ultimately set policy, decide laws, and interpret the Constitution.
Of the United States of America.
Nope, I can't see where this person would need any judicial experience (Pay attention kids this is what is called "sarcasm. Can you say Sarcasm? I knew that you could"). Do you?
How about we call my mechanic, who struggles with weighty issues such as how to best fix my brakes to be on the Supreme court? Or maybe we could see if the guy who drives the trash truck in my area would like a cushy federal job? Maybe we call on the guy who maintains the grass at the school across the street from my house? All these people are fairly smart, have great jobs now, have to make a real living and have real decisions to make every day. All of them seem to fit the goofy opinions of these so called professional politicians (Arlen Specter and Patrick Leahy to name two of them), and they seem to fit within the boundaries of their definitions of what they would like to see in the next appointed justice.
You know who they are right? Arlen Specter just changed parties from Republican to Democrat in order to be reelected and ride the Obama-Gravy train. Patrick Leahy is the liberal Democratic senator whose hobby is to be a fan of all things Batman. He was a bit player in the last Batman movie.
The two guys want a Supreme Court justice who has "done something other than wear a black robe for most of their lives." I don't necessarily disagree with that statement as their is plenty of precedence for this, in the nineteenth century and in common law from as early as 100 BC!!
Here is my question and is why I am concerned. With all that is happening in the world and in our country, do we really want to be guided in our collective Supreme Court judgments by people who have no real world experience at judging? I am not qualified to say definitively Yes or No , however it seems to me that if you have car repair to be done (and you cannot do it yourself), you call a mechanic. When you want to build a house do you call a plumber?
Lets see ...hmmmm. abortion case? Call the Gardner and have him decide. Immigration case? I know a fisherman in Alaska with an opinion. We have to decide the case on an enemy combatant, better call the DJ from the nightclub my kids go to.
These politicians would have you believe that a Supreme Court Justice doesn't need to be a judge. Or have experience as a judge. Or have a background similar to a judge.
And we are supposed to think politicians somehow understand what we need as a country. In the next breath they intimate that Hillary Clinton would be a great appointment. I am flummoxed. What planet are these guys from?
Right. OK.
Heck why not? We got the guy from the mailroom elected as the CEO didn't we?
The story gets goofier and goofier every day.
Thankx for reading my rant !
bigmike
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.

Friday, May 1, 2009

The economy and the shape it is in

I sent the following letter to my local newspaper yesterday to their OP-Ed editor. I know they won't print it because it is too wordy, much too opinionated, too involved and is controversial and isn't a 5 second sound bite, however I really don't care if they print it or not. Bluntly, I know most of my mailing list probably won't read this either, because it is actually a 3 page letter rather than a brief opinion and who has time for that? That's OK with me too.
 
I just wanted to say my piece and have it known that the talking heads and Katie Couric and Wolf Blitzer and CNN and all the rest of them are just flat wrong and they don't speak for me when they report most everything related to this mess. Hell you could say it is somewhat their fault for ignoring all the warning signs in the first place. It is the in-thing right now to report exclusively about what steps the government is supposedly taking to solve the crisis they let happen in the first place, yet nary a word is ever spoken about what "the little guy", the average income earner really cares about and what really caused this mess to begin with. Which one of the big three Financial news networks predicted this? (Hint - The answer is 0, none.) When is the last time you saw any one of them interview with some poor schmuck who got fired , lost his house, went into bankruptcy and has basically lost everything? The next question is when is the last time you saw a politician talking about how this crap really affects real people with kids, mortgages, car payments and kids in college?
 
Beats the hell out of me how the disconnect got so big between what is actually happening and what we are told is occurring.
 
-Bigmike 

Dear Sirs:

Somehow, I just don't get it. I must be a very stupid person. Current reporting makes it seem as if this economic mess we are is very complicated and is somehow difficult to explain, and in my view it is pretty easy to understand why we are in the shape we are in. In my view, the explanation is simple to define and how we got here is even easier to know. Yet even if you know why we are here it has little to nothing to do with resolving the problems. The issue is not how to fix the mess, it is however all about how to reorganize our priorities, to put reality in our expectations and how we as a nation should define going forward what is good for America in the first place. This mess however makes the Enron meltdown look like a kids T-ball game, just to put it in perspective.

Ask yourself a couple of basic questions.

How is it that a corporation can make millions of dollars per year and pay millions more in bonuses and then is justified in laying off thousands of people in their company in order to bump up the share price for the shareholders, even when the company just had a year of record sales and profits and the CEO personally made more money than he's ever made? Don’t the shareholders realize that at some point they could grow their own share price by investing directly in their own companies and make more profit by having a nimble, trained and staffed company, with a CEO that has their eye on the future and not on his own bankbook? At least they would realize it if it wasn’t the same 2000 people on every corporate board in every major company in America who are all seemingly more worried more about their own personal fortunes than anything else. There is no glass ceiling anymore, its an a** ceiling. Sarbanes Oxley is a joke and did not help at all and never will. It is still the same good old boys network running everything, and they still have all ten fingers in the till. In the same train of thought, Why is it that the media will report that a company laid off thousands of people, or closed a plant or sold a whole division and on that news alone the share of stock in that company gets a price bump? It is then spun, managed and reported to us that news just like this is somehow a positive outlook, that somehow this is a good thing? Bad news equals higher profits?

It seems to me that this kind of "bad news", defined as less capacity and less employees to do more work in less time at a reduced cost ("read move our operation to a cheaper foreign country"), should key the directors and the shareholders and even the general public that they have the wrong upper management in the first place. It seems to me that they ought to hold the CEO responsible for the problem and not the hourly staff. The CEO can hang on however for 10 years or more of poor results and can decimate a company’s capacity and then they have a contract that has to be bought out to get rid of him that eventually will cost that company millions and millions of dollars in order to change him out?

What about the common worker? What about Us? It’s a greased banana and don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. You have just been "right sized", or Outplaced, or were part of an RIF campaign, or were Efficiency placed. Your butt was just fired. C-YA wouldn't wanna be ya. Sucks to be you.

I know people who have 750-800 credit scores who run successful businesses, and the banks will not loan money to them right now for any reason. Why? Because they are afraid to, because they view it as their duty to protect the bank (read "protect their income" as corporate executives are almost always large shareholders of the institutions they manage and they benefit from higher share prices before anyone else does), and not their duty to protect their depositors, their communities or the people in it. Thank the FED and Ben Bernanke for that. Thankx a lot Mr. Greenspan. I appreciate it Warren. Way to go Mr. Gates. Keep pumping up the banks; somebody has to protect the billionaire’s money I guess. Irrational exuberance my fat hairy butt!

Are these people that stupid?

Or are we?

Was the current money crisis was caused by credit swaps or sub prime loans? By subordinated debentures? By packaged mortgage securities? My opinion is that anyone who thinks so is wrong! (and generally mistaken) and here is why I think so.

This crisis started because we are allowing our companies to not pay taxes due to tax loopholes big enough to launch the space shuttle through. It is because we are allowing our employers to grow their own bank accounts by merging with each other and then firing thousands of workers at once to manage their share price. Its because we allow analysts to predict what a company's earnings "should be" and then a company is expected to react to that news. It was caused because a company is allowed to have "Earnings Guidance calls" with reporters and analysts. Fannie mae and Freddie mac failed because the price of food went up, because ethanol increased the price of everything that is made with corn, oil and plastic by huge numbers. They failed because we sat idly by and watched our auto makers pay workers almost 100$ per hour (averaged including retirement benefits based on the average price of a car) and then we wonder and fret about why they lost money and cannot sell cars. They failed because the price of a gallon of gasoline doubled in 8-12 months and a fill up was 2-4 times as expensive at the end of the year as it was on the first day of the year. They failed because electricity, natural gas, jet fuel, diesel fuel and heating oil rose to levels never seen before while we did nothing but wring our hands, if we reacted at all. It failed because it was and is legal to raise the interest rate on your credit card to absurd rates and on your home loan to more than a 40% higher payment per month in less than one year. It failed because we allowed insurance companies to price their policies based on your credit score. This current crisis wasn't caused by a bank, it was caused by classic greed, and its name is Wall street greed and we stood idly by and let them do it.

The rules were made up by people lining their own pockets with our money. What sense does a 25 point different in a complicated credit score mean when it is based on obscure reasoning and then please consider and explain to me how it really does lead to fairly being charged thousands more dollars to buy a house or a car than your next door neighbor? You wonder why nobody is buying houses or cars right now? You wonder why credit card companies and banks are going under? Simple, the people they gave credit to, have lost their jobs. They are in foreclosure, their cars have been repossessed, their bank accounts are empty and most are contemplating some form of bankruptcy, suicide, divorce or all three.

And now to the rescue, our politicians are going to help us? Please explain how and when. By giving me a tax break that amounts to about $20 a week more on my paycheck? Gee thankx, thankx a lot. It was my money to begin with and it took you 15 months to give it back to me after I earned it? That will help a lot. I couldn't be more grateful. Does anyone else see how stupid this is? Global warming is something I should be worried about? Yeah right, I'll worry about this one after I burn all the couches and chairs and dinner tables to keep warm maybe. You think I am worrying mostly about how much my 401k declined? Not my biggest worry right now, I can assure you. I could care less what the price of a share of Ford, GM or Chrysler is right now as long as I can afford a gallon of gas to get to work, I'm good thanks. Heck, I care more about what a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk costs right now than an automakers share price. Hundreds of Thousands or more people have lost their jobs since January 2007 and many of them have now had to take work at less than one-half the salary they used to make or they still do not have jobs. You wonder why banks failed? Not me, I wonder how I'm going to eat and how I'm going to afford to get to work as I have to drive 3 times as far , to make half as much, on gas that is twice as expensive. You want me to feel concerned for a bank or an auto maker? Be real. You think I really care about a corporate bailout? Explain to me how a corporate bailout really helps me or my family or my community and I'll care. Until then, don't speak for me as I really couldn't care less. If my house can be foreclosed upon, all of them can fail for all I care. If my kids are starving, Chrysler can go belly up tomorrow as I can't buy their product anymore, anyhow.

The numbers these analyst idiots and our politicians ought to be focused on is the jobless number. Fix the jobless problem and you have just fixed everything else. If I have a job, I'll pay my mortgage, my credit cards, my bank loans etc and I might buy a car sometime in the near future. In the last 15 years I have bought 5 new cars. In the last three I have bought no cars at all, new or used. You do not have to "fix" anything else. Just quit screwing with my job! Stop rewarding CEO's who think they have to trim expenses by firing thousands of workers to make analysts happy so their share price doesn't drop, so they can reap the reward of a multi million dollar bonus! Stop rewarding the so-called banking titans that caused this mess in the first place with their endless buffet line of increased fees, fluffed up charges and "financial products" that no one (not even a lawyer) can understand. Just what is a future derivative anyway? A banker used to be an upper middle income job. How did it suddenly become a job that is worth millions of dollars a year plus bonus? I'd love to ask the average middle income earner how many credit card offers they got in the mail last year and know how in the heck did it become OK to charge me $2.00 to get a miniature statement from my own banks ATM machine?

In companies like the ones I just alluded to, the CEO’s of those firms have one common personality type. They think, for some strange reason that laying off thousands of people, constantly firing and constant criticism will shake up the place and make people more productive. What really happens when you constantly shake up the place is that the staff starts looking for a way to protect their job and then keeps their head down to try and stay out of the line of fire, with the end result that really very little effort is going towards getting any productive work done in the first place. For some years now corporate America has been chasing a share price at the expense of everything else. In the last 30 years, we have almost wiped totally out our ability to manufacture everything from tube socks to washing machines in our quest for the holy grail of lower costs and higher share prices.

Large retailers like Wal-Mart have contributed greatly to this idiocy for a long time and I’ve yet to hear anybody ask the one that is pretty obvious to ask. How are we going to be able to buy anything in this new "World Economy" , if we don’t have anywhere to work that pays a decent wage and if there are no companies or jobs left to be loyal to? What in fact are we supposed to be loyal to? A Brand? I can hear it now, "Yes maam, I’d like one TIDE t-shirt and two pairs of Viagra socks please". We will not be able soon to buy anything made in China because we won’t have any money to buy it with. Who are all these poor so called third world nations going to sell to if they can’t sell it to us?

To all the talking heads - Just stop the stupidity and please just stop yapping incessantly about the big picture. I can't even afford the gasoline to mow my lawn and you think we care about GM? Or Freddie Mae? It makes no sense. I never want to hear the words "Economic Stimulus package" again, as it is all smoke and mirrors and generally no one but a select few will ever be helped by it. My 90 pound dog makes a lot of "shovel ready" projects too, OK? My county got enough money to fix one two lane country road bridge in the backwater area of my county. Four workers might benefit from it. There is 13 % unemployment here, but one bridge in the middle of nowhere is the priority. Does this sound like stimulus to you?

Me? I must be stupid as I just don’t get it and Dilbert makes more and more sense every day.

It makes very little practical sense to fire the older workers because of higher wages, and then just hire more younger workers because of lower wages, because to do so makes the purchasing power of the money they are paid (the younger worker) worth less. Your earning power is less and because of that everything else then costs more in order for a company to hit the magical "compared to last year numbers" and your dollar doesn’t go anywhere as far as it used to.

See the thing is, we are in the middle of a fallacy that is a kids fractured story tale made up of a downward spiral and everything we are doing right now is managing that spiral downwards. We are doing nothing more than managing the decline, because less jobs = less money. Less money = less purchasing. Less purchasing = negative economic trend and means much lower tax revenues and lower tax revenues means reduced social services and slashed municipal budgets and guess who gets downsized? Firemen, Cops, teachers, sanitation workers and the like. Yeah that bridge will fix everything.

This is exactly where we are right now and it is not that hard to figure out.

The next crisis is called inflation and is what is coming next. If I can figure it out , anybody can.

Here is a word of advice. Even if you have to eat crap with a serving spoon at work right now, keep your job no matter what you do. You lose your job today and you are screwed. Another one at the same money is highly improbable. You better stay focused on keeping that paycheck coming right on in, if you have any sense at all. Can't pay your mortgage? I hear Sears has big cardboard boxes, because no one and I mean no one running any of the Fortune 1000 cares if you are homeless as long as their share price is not too badly damaged.

 

Thankx for reading my rant ! 
 
bigmike
 
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/  
 
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.