The Preamble to the Constitution
Friday, May 29, 2009
How to solve any State or Federal Budget crisis - Easy as Apple Pie
Thursday, May 28, 2009
What's the big fat hairy deal about a guy, his wife and their eight kids anyway?
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Fox TV cancelled another good show, I am not surprised
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Where's the Beef ?
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
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
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.
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?
Nope.
George Bush?
Nope.
James Carville?
Nope.
Mary Matlin?
Nope.
Bill Clinton?
Hell No.
Bill O'Reilly?
Nope.
Dick Chaney?
Not even.
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
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
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 !
Monday, May 4, 2009
The Headline says "President Obama advised not to replace David Souter with judge"
Friday, May 1, 2009
The economy and the shape it is in
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.