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.

 

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.

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.

 

I sent this letter to Wal-Mart the other day....

I hate complaining, I really do, BUT... these clowns really make me annoyed.

Surprisingly enough , no response.

Go figure.

 

 

Dear Wal-Mart,

 

Stop being so customer unfriendly and get in your stores to see what the affect the polices you put into practice has on your customers, not to mention your employees.

 

Here are five good ones. I could not believe this, all in one night, again. I hate to gripe, however I can't believe you want it to be this way. If you don't, do something about it.

 

1. Cigarettes are only available in one line. OK. I get that. Then you made that line 15 items or less. Smooth moronic stupid move. Now if you want groceries and intend to buy cigarettes, you have to stand in your long, slow lines twice.  If you don't really want to sell cigarettes, get out of the business. If you do want to sell them, dedicate one line for that item only (or drinks, gum, or end caps stuff whatever or a kiosk). However, to purposefully piss people off, and then blame it on the government is insane and a chickens*** way to do business.

 

2. This is a supercenter. Act like it. You have what? 25 check out lanes? I've never seen more than 6-7 open. Ridiculous long lines always. Frustrated cashiers. Pissed off customers (including me). Put some of those folks who are walking around doing nothing to work helping customers get out of your stores. Open check out lanes on demand. Be flexible and customer friendly. Trust me, in this location, you are not. When every line snakes out into the aisles, open more registers. Cross train everybody to be service oriented. You need help here. They don't get it.

 

3. A box of discounted DVD's and Cheap DVD's is a good idea. Putting it into a 5 foot wide by 5-foot deep box is stupid. No one less than 5 foot five can get into it. How can you sell them if you can't reach them? How can we see what is in the bottom? How many do you think you didn't sell, CAUSE YOU CAN"T GET TO THEM? Geez!!

 

4. Have you ever heard of pagers? They were invented 25 years ago. Or walkie talkies? Or cell phones? Do away with the extremely loud and very annoying overhead microphone system! It is not `cache to not be able to hold a conversation with someone right next to you because the loud ass speakers over your head go off every two minutes. It really makes me see RED!

 

5. No cashier ever gets all the security tags turned off. I don't even bother stopping at the front door anymore when your official mechanical voice tells me to. Screw it. Train your people, get better technology, fix the problem, whatever it takes, cause I'll make you chase me to my car every time until you do.

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

Rapping Flight Attendant

http://chickencrap.com/v.php?v=493

Check this out.

It is hilarious.

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.

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.31/2027 - Release Date: 03/27/09
18:51:00

The Pirate Bay Trial

 

See this link :

 

http://government.zdnet.com/?p=4368

 

and search google for Pirate bay Trial if you don't know the subject.

 

First, before all the PB supporters start with the shut - ups, just admit it . You and I know that file sharing is not generally viewed as a legal activity. Just because you may not agree with the law or the facts doesn't mean you can change them or ignore them because you don't like them. True, there are many legal activities associated with file sharing in its various permutations , however I think any reasonable person would conclude that downloading a full length movie (for example) for free is probably not legal in any sense. I think anyone who uses any of the popular P2P clients  (like Lime wire for example) already know that and just decide to take their chances with the legality.

 

The question however is one strictly related to legal culpability. The question is really better framed as criminal facilitation of the illegal act. In a legal sense the Prosecution is asking, Is TPB legally culpable for the act of pointing someone towards the actual destination without ever hosting the actual content? This is where the case is pretty tricky, legally. Arguments are going to be made on both sides that point to intent and profitability. They are being called a continuing criminal enterprise because they had the intent of breaking the law and intended to profit from their actions. Logistically, this is the prosecutions case to prove.

 

So is it legal to be the facilitator?

 

What if I went to the mother ship of all search engines , the mighty Google.com, and searched for filetype:bittorrent? If I found any torrent files due to a google search , is Google then liable for the conduct of the searcher, who actually commits the illegal act of downloading the file?

 

As of this morning I got 605,000 google results using this simple query. If I accessed any of the results with the intent of using a torrent client to download the content , and in the act of downloading I was caught by the authorities, could Google be charged as my co-conspirator?

 

What is I used Google to find illegal drugs? Or Kiddie Porn? What if I used them to buy illegal weapons and then went on a killing spree? Did they criminally facilitate the killing? This is where the case gets absurd.

 

TPB is only criminally liable if you also believe that information you can get from a standard library, used criminally, is the responsibility of the library to regulate its use.

 

See here is the rub, they are using a shaky poorly framed argument and have no end game strategy which sets TPB apart from every other operation who provides search results . If the Pirate Bay is guilty then so is every other search engine who does not specialize in this one type of file.

 

Every search engine that provides results to file searches , and then allows the user to click link to the material has committed the same offense that TPB is accused of in a legal sense. They facilitated finding the material, they intended to profit from the search by accepting Advertising money using a structured corporate decision making model and they knew that the links could lead to illegal activity.

 

Is this enough to convict TPB ? It shouldn’t be.

 

There is no search for truth or justice here.

 

The prosecutor says this is about money. The defendants apparently don’t have any large sums of money.

 

The stupid companies signed on to this think it is about precedent. They are going to deter this type of behavior by prosecuting TPB.

 

How stupid is this?

 

The only thing this will accomplish even if they win and TPB is convicted is to give current and future operators of torrent sites a road map of how to evade prosecution.  They will never collect a dime of any judgment even if they win.

 

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.

Enough of this, Enough is enough is enough !

This is an open letter to any and all of our elected representatives in Washington D.C. (and here at home too if it applies).

 

I've listened to President Obama and every other politician from both sides of the aisle tell us countless things since before the election that kind of boils down to these three key points :

• That we (the people) have to sacrifice in this fiscal emergency, in order to fix this mess.
• That we (the politicians) have to do things differently in order to get things done, in order to fix this mess.
• That we (everyone) must approach things in a way that never has been done before in order to see real change, in order to fix this mess.

I am wondering that if all of those statements (or any of them) are true and plausible , then why is it that the answers to the problems no matter what they may be are always the same tired old thing? The same old tried and true political doublespeak comes from both parties. The same tired rhetoric from every one on Capitol Hill. The exact same answers that Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan used are being re-hashed and given a different name, but they are doing the same things. Everybody is busy diving for cover and blaming each other, with both sides saying the other is wrong. One or two old timers in both parties are telling everybody who will listen within earshot that the other side has it all wrong.

 

I say Enough. Enough is Enough is Enough. Baloney, Fooie and spit is what I say. 9 days into the Presidency that was supposed to change the world and the best we can do is to posture, change executive orders that we don't like and gripe because we are in the minority? He may be left handed but it sure seems like most everything else is just about where we left off in December. You want to help me? Fix Jobs now. You want to help me? Buy back 30 % of every mortgage that is overvalued and out of reach. Let millions of people keep their homes. Tell the banks you'll give them 20 cents on the dollar for every mortgage they modify down from the rip me off pricing and then give them my so called tax break. New growth industry overnight. Lawyers would go nuts over this one. You want to help me? Give the bankruptcy judge the power to modify an existing mortgage to a fair one in this economy that makes sense to the average American. If you want to give out tax breaks, don't try to give it at tax time to a family of four barely surviving on 50,000 dollars a year in a double income household. This may help the balance sheets of the treasury, but come payday it don't mean squat to me or to anyone else. You can call it billions of dollars in tax breaks if you want to , but the fact is an extra $2.62 every week don't excite me a bit. Factually you are giving me my own money back and it took you 15 months to do it after I earned it. How's that going to help me? 

 

Will one of you people please tell the truth for once? Can any one of you please do the job you were elected to do and stop looking for one minute at the next election? You were not elected to be right or to beat the other party. You were not elected to begin re-inventing your party so you don't lose next time. You were not elected so you could find cover from tough issues come election time, so you can deny you are part of the problem. You are not there to put off making decisions about today's problems until you are re-elected. You are not there to be a chairman of a committee. You are not there to be powerful. You are not there to go on trips abroad. You are not there to run special elections and run special investigations. You did not get elected to be able to charge thousands of dollars in 5 years giving speeches to half drunk nitwits at a convention and enrich yourself.

 

You are there to serve me and everybody like me. You are there to fix what is broken, not to ensure your continued re-election, cycle after cycle. You are there to make a difference and to make sure America is prosperous and survives with all our freedoms intact for the next 200 years. If that's not why you are there, then you need to go away and go away quick, back to your law practice.

 

You want to radically change the life of the average American you talk so loftily about? You want to make life easier and better in this country? Good, so do I. Here is a radical thought. If you want to give me a tax break, Get out of my paycheck. You guys have taxed and taxed and taxed and came up with new ways to collect taxes so many inventive ways that you are literally taxed from birth to death and beyond and it never stops, and new taxes are applied every day. The latest iteration of this goofy philosophy is that you want to give a tax break to only those people who can prove they have a right to work here because they have a social security number? Tax breaks are a stupid idea whose time is well past because you have to have enormous sums of money in the first place in order to see any benefit from them at tax time. They do absolutely no good. They may sound pretty in speeches but it has never been proven that a tax break helps the average American in any substantial way, once he has spent his tax check.

 

Here is a better idea. Make everybody pay taxes fairly and make certain that every income earned no matter how it was made, is subject to taxation. Make gang bangers who sell drugs pay taxes. Make illegal aliens pay taxes. Make people who get paid cash pay taxes. Tax our 40-45 % of all Americans who never pay a dime of income tax, yet somehow get a tax refund check anyway. Make criminals pay taxes. Tax the Mafia, the Russian gangsters and the Yakuza all at once. Make them pay their fair share. Tax every hooker, pimp, burglar, drug buyer and seller and every one who buys pervert pornography, and make them feel my pain. The way it is right now, virtually none of the examples I've cited pay income taxes, yet they can live lavish lifestyles and then guess who supports them, by paying their share of taxes and then paying for their incarcerations?

 

The average American everybody talks about, that's who, and I for one am sick of it.

 

The problem as I see it, is that fundamentally the tax and tax break equation is all wrong. It is backwards. Instead of applying a tax rate to income, then allowing exclusions and loopholes and tax breaks and enterprise zones to eat the heart out the tax rate and then thinking of complicated and insane ways to give me a tax break, just get to work and adopt a strategy that taxes spending instead of income.

 

If you tax spending, I decide what I spend my money on and you always get your cut from everybody. No one can escape paying taxes with this strategy. Criminals, Gangbangers and drug dealers and illegal aliens have to eat don't they ? Good, when they buy food or eat a lavish dinner collect a tax on that. When a rich guy has a big pool built, tax it. When a supermodel has plastic surgery , that's right, tax it. Even if I am here illegally and don't have a single piece of legal ID at all, I still buy groceries and electricity and gasoline and alcohol and toilet paper don't I? Tax the tax if you want to, but do it so that everyone is treated equally under the law and I am not tax discriminated against because I choose to be law abiding and pay my taxes owed. Tax every good and every service without exception at an equitable rate no matter what it is and we can stop having this idiotic argument about who is right, because our problem is not that I need a tax break, our problem is that not all of us pay taxes.

 

See the two issues at play here are really pretty simple. It goes like this.

 

First, income taxes were invented. No one person , not one law firm, CPA or accountant, and no single agency understands the entire tax code. Lawyers and legislators have made it so unwieldy and cumbersome that it no longer works. There are so many exceptions to the code that people make a great high dollar income out of small sections of it by helping other folks to not pay taxes. It is broken. Accept this and move forward.

 

Second, as soon as everybody figured out that taxation was going to based on the theory of tax collection on income, the underground economy took off, and by some accounts it is actually bigger than the reported economy, depending upon who you believe. Everyone who works for cash figured this out a long, long time ago. Ask any waitress or waiter. You think they declare all their tips, just so you can take it from them ? This process allows and encourages people to lie in order to save money, and only punishes those too ignorant to hide their income.

 

Its not that hard to say out loud and If I can figure it out, all those Ivy league lawyers in Washington DC ought to be able to do it too.

 

I doubt there is any political will to even think about this. They are all too worried about being re-elected next time.

 

President Obama, Yeah, we can, but sadly, No we won't.

 

 

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.