Homosexuality Is The New Black

I foolishly thought equality was about leveling the playing field, not tipping it on end.

In yet another blatantly political and typically Democratic move Chicago’s Mayor Richard Daley is supporting a proposal to set aside a portion of city contracts and giving preferential treatment for those contracts to businesses owned by gays and lesbians.

“The City That Works” already has set asides for businesses owned by blacks, Hispanics, Asians and women. This would be yet another block of city business opportunities no longer made available to white, heterosexual businessmen.

When asked about the proposal submitted by openly gay Alderman Thomas Tunny of the 44th Ward, Mayor Dailey said “I think it’s good. It helps small businesses. It helps businesses grow in the city and that’s what we want.”

Far be it from me to correct the math of “da Mayor” that received 4 million votes in a city of 2.9 million people, but if you set aside business to benefit one group don’t you have an equal and opposite adverse effect on another? Of course you do!

As a lifelong Democrat, who knows how the vote goes, this Mayor understands that if he can keep the various minority communities on his side the white community will fall into place. Daley has already run against blacks, women and Hispanics, and successfully defeated them all. He also knows that he has a strong voting bloc in the gay community and while he may not have proposed this manifestly unfair business bias himself, he has very little choice in his public support of it. But please Mr. Mayor, don’t say this is to benefit small business or any business for that matter. It is exclusively to the benefit of your next reelection bid and patronage stranglehold. It is actually to the detriment of business and the city as well.

Chicago, like most major metropolitan areas, is currently suffering from the reduced revenues of economic recession. The 2009 budget for the city is a whopping $6 billion dollars. It included some belt-tightening in anticipation of the lean times ahead and also included an additional $52.5 million in new and increased taxes and fees. This is on top of the record $276.5 million in new and increased taxes and fees included in the 2008 budget. It is important to note that this budget does not include Cook County costs which are paid for directly by the county tax and spend machine.

The 2009 budget, when passed, contained 784 fewer layoffs than the year prior. However since its passage the mayor has put several city employee unions feet to the fire insisting on additional non-paid days off or else he would be forced to institute a wave of city worker layoffs.

In this climate of reduced business for city businesses and reduced revenue for the city itself are we sure that taking even more of the business that is left available to the general business community and setting it aside for yet another special interest group is the proper and fair thing to do? How can that be?

How is it possible that because you are homosexual your business is deemed more worthy to survive than a heterosexual owned business? And in a time of near budgetary crisis in the city, how is it possible that setting aside more of the city’s contracts, further diminishing the competitive bidding process and increasing costs, is a good thing?

Are the cost structures different at homosexual owned businesses that would require they get some special treatment to level the playing field? Have homosexual owned businesses been on the receiving end of years of prejudice that we need to make some sort of amends? I’m pretty sure I understand how we identify black, Hispanic, Asian and female owned businesses. How exactly is the city going to verify a homosexual owned business? Just the thought of that verification process could keep some city inspectors from sleeping at night.

This is a tragically unfair proposal and definitely not in the best interest of the city. I understand why the Mayor supports it. But it’s still a pretty low blow.

So to speak.

ObamaCare = Death and Taxes

The only things sure in life are death and taxes. ObamaCare increases both.

President Barack “Pants-On-Fire” Obama continued his dog and pony road show of nationalized health care with a stop to discuss his Medicare cutting health plan with members of AARP. Obviously hoping the seniors he encountered still had their deductive reasoning numbed from trying to install their digital TV converters; Obama gave them a well rehearsed histrionic explanation of his plan that was equally as confusing.

He attempted to assure those present that the massive cuts in Medicare that his ObamaCare plan calls for will in no way reduce the care provided. The current US House version of the plan calls for over $246 billion in Medicare spending cuts. Obama attempted to reassure his audience that this money could be cut by cutting out waste and limiting payments for governmentally deemed “unnecessary” hospital readmissions. But he may have lost their confidence when he followed that explanation up with a suggestion that seniors need to make plans for end-of-life care. He may as well have said funeral arrangements.

Seniors at this event and those previous have stated serious concerns about their right to choose what medical treatment will still be available to them. Things like orthopedic joint replacements, cardiac and other surgeries and advanced drug therapy are all slated for far greater governmental oversight, weighing the benefits of treatment against the overall life expectancy of patient. While it truly will come down to an actuary numbers game, Obama tried to comfort those attending by saying “Nobody is talking about cutting Medicare benefits”. Does that mean it won’t happen or just that nobody is talking about it? This attempted mollification is in direct conflict with his previous explanation that pain medicine may be the government mandated course of treatment for many seniors rather than expensive life-saving surgery.

The ObamaCare plan calls for reduced payments to doctors for Medicare patients and reducing or eliminating payments to hospitals for Medicare patients that must be readmitted after being sent home. It is reasonable to assume that doctors, who are in the business of providing healthcare, will be forced to limit their exposure to Medicare patients just to stay in business. It is also reasonable to assume that hospitals will be far less likely to allow senior patients back in after they have been discharged for fear of not getting paid at all. Even if “Nobody is talking about a reduction in Medicare benefits” the outcome of these cuts will have that exact effect.

The House plan also foolishly calls for barring private insurance companies from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions. The obvious effect this will have is a dramatic increase in insurance premiums and reduced benefits for everybody to cover these patients. It is just another example of how this administration plans to nationalize what was once private business.

For their part, the always liberal AARP is a strong supporter of Barack Obama and his smoke and mirrors health plan, which the White House has called a milestone. But AARP was also a strong supporter of the Clinton healthcare plan in the mid 1990’s and suffered a huge backlash from their members in that failed attempt. Once more details of this ObamaCare redistribution of healthcare are made clear they will likely suffer the same fate again.

The entire H.R. 3200 bill currently under consideration in the House is 1017 pages long. The President spoke only briefly to the AARP audience considering the massive implications this $1 trillion behemoth proposes. But it is fitting that he ended his comments with suggestions to seniors about aligning proper end-of-life care and living wills. This nationalized health plan does provide consultations aimed at reducing costs for people deemed to be near death.

ObamaCare – Where the death of seniors is always an appropriate option in redistributing healthcare to the poor.

Soylent Green anyone?

The Art Of Apology

We have become quite adept at the art of apology.

“I’m sorry”. It’s easy to say. It must be. We seem to say it all the time whether we mean it or not.

Other than as an expression of grief where it is not used as an apology at all, such as “I am so sorry” said to the grieving widow at a funeral, “I’m sorry” has limited impact at best. That’s because it has various meanings depending on the situation. There is usually a whole other part to the sentence:

“I’m sorry” – I got caught
“I’m sorry” – you are going to be mad at me for a while
“I’m sorry” – I may have to deal with the consequences of my actions
“I’m sorry” – this didn’t work out like I had planned

Usually these two magic words have far less to do with remorse than they do with limiting consequence. They are kind of the first step in an attempt at the healing process, but not necessarily a good first step. Many times when we say “I’m sorry” we are simply attempting to close a page on what happened without having to actually change anything.

Just a month ago the US Senate unanimously passed a resolution sponsored by Iowa’s Democrat Senator Tom Harkin, apologizing to blacks “on behalf of the people of the United States, for wrongs committed against them and their ancestors under slavery and Jim Crow laws”.

This is the most disingenuous type of apology of all.

To apologize for something done by somebody else is tantamount to saying “I wouldn’t have done that”. It is an attempt to elevate oneself above the person or group that perpetrated the offense. It has absolutely no other meaning or relevance. It is as if the United States Senate apologized to the Vatican for the crucifixion of Jesus.

Quite frankly, the black community should be offended by this blatant attempt to pander their political support and pat them on the head like good little boys and girls. Senator Harkin said he was surprised that this had not been done 100 years ago. Well Senator, perhaps it is because 100 years ago our politicians were less pathetic.

6000 American lives were lost and $6 billion dollars was spent fighting over the issue of slavery. Over 360,000 of those killed were union solders, fighting against slavery. Over 99% of them were white. The war tore families’ apart and pitted brother against brother. The psychological damage and permanent physical disabilities caused by injuries is beyond measure. An American President was assassinated, not because of the end of slavery but because he was proposing voting rights for the freed slaves. If that is not enough of a commitment by the United States to those held as slaves then I doubt a meaningless bill 200 years later will have much impact.

Which brings us to this week at a picnic table set up just outside the oval office where the I’m sorriest President in the nation’s history will hold an apology-laden beer fest with the history of racial inequities once again the main topic of discussion. But please, look closely at the attendees of this photo op mea culpa-thon. It will be a black President of the United States and a black director of one of America’s most prestigious universities talking about how blacks have been held back to a white rank and file police officer.

The script to this absurd display is already written. The President will do what he does best, apologize. The white cop will explain that he was just doing his job and may even explain that he was taking the crazed professor into custody for his own protection. Professor Gates will do what he does best; prattle on about how the white man has been the black man’s problem for the past 200 years. He will also be dreaming of where to spend the royalty money from the book he will no doubt write about his harrowing experience.

Senator Harkin, I cannot apologize for slavery. It was a hideous practice but not one that I ever engaged in. But I sure am sorry to see we have come to this.

Money Changes Everything

“Money can’t buy me love” - The Beatles

“But it does allow one to rent for the evening” - Big Frick

How many times have we heard it, the bible says money is the root of all evil? Folks quote it like they are seminary scholars. But if these biblical faux-fessors actually read the Good Book they would see that 1 Timothy 6:10 actually says “for the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil”. Big difference.

The evil comes not in the possession of money or even the striving for money. It comes in what you are willing to do for it and what you are willing to do with it. There is nothing inherently evil in having money or in enjoying the fruits of your labors. That’s capitalism. Certainly there are those whose sole purpose in life is to amass a greater fortune at any cost simply for the status that it provides. There are stories of exceedingly wealthy misers who pinched pennies with no regard for those less fortunate. John Paul Getty installed pay phones in his palatial home for guests to use and John Elwes the British Member of Parliament and inspiration for Dickens’ Ebenezer Scrooge reportedly went to bed when darkness came to save money and candles, wore old tattered clothes rather than spend money on new and would set out to kill the birds on his farms because they would steal his hay to build their nests. But some of the wealthiest capitalists on the planet are also some of the most magnanimous. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are two prime examples of this having given away hundreds of millions of dollars to various charities and people in need.

It is not new for the poor to want to be rich and the rich to want to be richer. That drive for the creature comforts money provides is as old as the idea of money itself. But having money today seems to be the biggest crime one can commit against humanity. The wealthy are becoming “enemies of the state” with full support of that impression developed and fostered by the Democrats.

Bankers make too much money, CEO’s make too much money, Wall Street traders make too much money, so naturally Congress, set to strike while the iron is hot, is looking to set limits on private citizen’s income being paid by their employers. The fact is, if you want to really level the playing field everybody should be paid like most of these wealthy Americans are paid. No, I am not suggesting everybody be paid as much. Simply that everybody be paid in the same manner, incentivized pay structures for everyone.

The latest pay flap involves a Citi Bank energy trader who is now owed $100 million in contractually obligated incentivized pay. Is it too much to pay him? I don’t know. How much did he make Citi Bank? Oprah Winfrey is slated to make $250 million this year alone. Nobody in Congress is looking to have her pay slashed. And that is how it should be. Oprah is actually paid on an incentivized pay structure based on revenues her name can generate for advertisers. So why is it when an incentivized pay package is set up in business it is considered evil? All the recipient is doing is making a ton of money for his employer. If Citi Bank owes this guy $100 million it’s because he made them plenty.

Why not set it up so everybody is paid by what they actually do rather than by what they promise to do or what they are supposed to be capable of doing?

In non-union manufacturing facilities where the employees are paid not only by their own piecework output but the overall output of the line, it is almost unnecessary to have supervisors checking production levels. Workers whose paycheck are dependent on the performance of other workers are far more inclined to make sure everybody is doing their job correctly and at the proper pace.

Imagine going into a retail store where everybody is paid by the store’s sales. I’m guessing you wouldn’t have to wait long for some help provided by somebody who actually knew what the hell they were talking about. How about paying road maintenance crews by the foot rather than by the hour? You won’t see one guy with a shovel and four guys watching him, tying up traffic up for days to cold patch pot holes. How about paying union members by productivity? I’m guessing cars would be flying off the assembly lines in Detroit and new buildings would go up in half the time.

And how about paying our politicians by delivering on their promises rather than just making them. In business some draw against commission salesmen can actually end up owing the company money for poor performance. I think the same should hold true for elected officials.

You want to give the country a new health care plan? Great! It gives Americans less choice, less care and costs over a trillion dollars. Sorry Barack, Nancy, Harry and Barney. You’re going to be working for free for a long time.

These huge paychecks we read about are all based on incentive programs. Rather than taking away incentives for a job well done we should be taking a lesson.

Experience

Experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want.

It seems pretty obvious that a lot of folks had to settle for experience in the Cambridge Police arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates because they sure didn’t get what they wanted.

Jesse Jackson and Al “Jheri Curl” Sharpton didn’t get a chance to fire up their private jets and wing their way to the aid of a poor downtrodden black guy. They didn’t get the chance to stand in front of clicking cameras and live news crews to dredge up 200 years of black oppression while ignoring the fact that the alleged victim of the racist police overreaction is a very highly paid professor at an Ivy League school.

Professor Gates didn’t get what he wanted. Even with all the wall to wall coverage of this incident he has not gotten the sympathy he was looking for. Noticeable by their absence are the testimonials from colleagues about his irreplaceable contribution to education at Harvard or the “man in the street” interviews with his neighbors bemoaning the cruel treatment of a model neighbor and pillar in the community. Nor does it appear that he will get a chance to tearfully recall in civil court the psychological damage done to him by this incident, insisting that the monetary settlement he is suing the Cambridge Police for has actually nothing to do with the money. He also hasn’t gotten the widespread support he was looking for from anybody outside a small circle in the black community. While he has received apologies from the university and the first black Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, neither of whom had anything to do with the incident so their apologies are meaningless, he did not receive the apology he had asked for from the arresting Sergeant James Crowley.

Gates has said he is looking to just move on rather than continue to be a distraction to the pending ObamaCare health insurance push. He also called this a teaching experience and wished that the Cambridge Police Department would use this incident as a lesson. In other words he is the teacher and they are students, which is strange coming from the guy who was in the handcuffs.

President Barack Hussein Obama didn’t get what he wanted. He was looking to rally support for his long time friend but instead got an earful from police unions and associations around the country. The firestorm has been so one sided in public support of the arresting police officers that the President was forced to apologize for his baseless comments to all those that actually knew the facts. But more importantly Obama was not able to keep from showing his true colors when it comes to issues of race. He has been successful for years avoiding anything racial, but now that he has been elected as president of all the people he has shown, as George Orwell displayed in his classic book Animal Farm, that all of us are equal but some of us are more equal.

We will have to see if Sgt. Crowley gets what he wants. All he has asked for from the President is to get the media off his lawn. It was reported that Crowley was the one to suggest the meeting at the White House for a beer with Obama and Gates. While I am assuming that Crowley was not one of the three people in Cambridge that voted Republican in the last election, I also doubt seriously that it was his idea for the chummy meeting. This “couple a beers” meeting has spin control written all over it. But as a friend of mine jokingly queried, it does lead to some interesting conversations as to what kind of beer each will drink.

Everybody involved got some experience but I doubt anybody actually learned anything from this.

I think it’s safe to say that Gates can’t be taught anything because he is not responsible for anything he does. It is and always will be somebody else’s fault and if he can make it racial, all the better.

Sgt. Crowley didn’t learn anything. As a veteran police officer I am certain he has dealt with pompous jerks before and working in Cambridge I am sure many of them have been from Harvard.

As for Barack Obama, he has been warned repeatedly about going off the script. He knew better than to speak his mind and show his racist attitude, well learned from years of tutelage by Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

And the American people, well we will just have to wait and see.

A Presidential Racist

Stupid police in a nation of cowards.

The President decided to jump into the fray of the poor black professor who was arrested by the mean-spirited white policemen in Cambridge, Mass. While admitting he didn’t know if race actually played a part in the arrest, Obama did make the presidential proclamation that the police “acted stupidly”. Then, putting it into crystal clear perspective, the Chosen One admitted that he was able to make this demeaning assessment of the police without knowing the facts of the case. Admittedly, I am depending on the press reports of the President’s comments as I chose not to watch his network love-fest, fee free infomercial on ObamaCare last night. My sock drawer needed my immediate attention.

Unfortunately the President omitted one key fact from his comments. That being he is a close personal friend of this black radical Harvard professor. I guess it’s comforting to know that this President of Hope and Change is close personal friends with both black and white radical professors as in Bill Ayers and Henry Louis Gates as well as a black radical pastor, a black radical Attorney General and a Hispanic radical judge . On second thought, comforting may not be the correct word.

The only reason this is even news is because the professor is black and the police are white. Henry Louis Gates is the director of Harvard University’s Du Bois Institute of African and American Research. As such, professor Gates should be familiar with the overwhelming statistics of black on black crime and black on white crime. But as this is a research institute at a major Ivy League University actual statistics are viewed merely as irrelevant obstacles.

The incident began when a white woman noticed two black men forcing their way into the front door of a home. Had this happened in a black neighborhood, where young black men are gunned down daily by other young black men, at high noon, in front of hundreds of witnesses but when police arrive no one saw anything, the incident would have most likely gone unreported. But as this was in an area where folks show their displeasure with possible home invasions, police were called.

Police reports show that when officers arrived Gates was in the house with the other man. When police asked this learned professional racist for identification to prove he belonged there, instead of understanding how his entrance may have looked to passersby and simply providing his ID thus ending the incident, professor Gates became belligerent and argumentative, insisting on causing a racially motivated confrontation. He told the officers they had not heard the last of him and demanded to know their names and badge numbers, which seems like a strange request from a collage professor as both are always clearly displayed on the officer’s chest. Gates did end up getting arrested. Not for breaking and entering but for disorderly conduct after angrily following the exiting officers from the house to continue his discordant racial tirade on the front porch.

The charges have since been dropped by the District Attorney due to political considerations rather than any legal ones.

I was stopped several weeks ago exiting a building by an Asian and a black police officer. They asked me my name and requested my ID. I provided what they asked for, they said thank you and I went on my way. The entire incident lasted all of about a minute. It never dawned on me that these officers were racially motivated as I was the only white guy amongst us three. I knew I did nothing wrong and simply assumed the officers were investigating some poor guy that looked similar to me. They asked, I obliged, we moved on. That seemed to me to be the logical thing to do in that situation and I’m not even a Harvard professor.

Was this Cambridge confrontation racially motivated? Yes. But it was racially motivated by the black guy not the white cops. Were the President’s comments racially motivated? Yes, but once again not by anything the white cops did. Hell, he admitted he didn’t even know the facts. The Right Reverend Jeremiah Wright must be so proud of his protégé right now that he is grinning from ear to ear.

If I was a Cambridge police officer Professor Gates would not have to worry about me ever showing up at his address again, regardless of the circumstances. But he can be assured that the officers in Cambridge will continue to protect his life and property by putting their own lives on the line, just as they thought they might be doing the night they showed up for the possible breaking and entering call at his house.

The professional Cambridge police officers did exactly what one would expect them to do. Unfortunately so did the Director of Harvard’s Institute of African and American Research and the 20 plus year member of Reverend Wright’s flock.

Sleepless Nights

I hope they never sleep again.

I hope every politician that voted in favor of the appalling, murderous practice of abortion and every doctor that ever performed one will lay awake every night for the rest of their lives, their minds racing with the thoughts of the abhorrent cruelty of their actions. Particularly now with the publication of new research that proves that these unborn babies have memories and feelings.

Doctors in the Netherlands have reported their studies on the advanced neurological development of unborn babies between 30 and 38 weeks of gestation. Their studies concluded what many of us already firmly believed. That these unborn infants are capable of thought and feeling. Their nervous system is far advanced over what many previously believed and their brain is actually capable of learning.

Led by an obstetrician Dr. Jan Nijhuis, doctors tested these in utero babies with very low sound wave vibrations. The babies were subjected to the sound waves and doctors recorded their reactions using ultrasound. They found that at first these unborn babies were startled by the sound and showed visible reactions to it. But after the sound was repeated 13 or 14 times at regular 30 second intervals the babies became accustomed to the sound waves and stopped reacting. Almost as if they came to realize that the sound was not going to hurt them. They went on to discover that if this test was repeated on the same baby, he or she would become accustomed to the sounds much quicker than they did the first time. Even if the tests were conducted 3 or 4 weeks apart the baby remembered. It was previously thought that this habituate type of memory only lasted a few hours to 24 hours long. This test proved that theory completely wrong.

It also proved that because the nervous system is that far developed these little babies can feel pain and fear. These are second trimester babies capable of being legally aborted by a 16 year old without parental approval at any Planned Parenthood facility in country.

Dr. Nijhuis stated that even though it is thought that babies younger than 30 weeks of gestation are not capable of similar habituate memory, it could be that doctors have not tested them using the right type of stimulus. He plans to continue to his research and expand it to younger babies refining the testing protocol.

The information the doctor has published so far should be enough to cause every doctor that took a Hippocratic Oath to cease performing abortions. It proves emphatically that we simply do not know enough about developing babies to justify randomly tearing them limb from limb, and worse yet the gruesome practice of late term abortion should be outlawed immediately. Regardless of how strongly our “Healthcare for Everyone” President supports it.

But while this should be seen as proof that abortion is the murder of a living, thinking, feeling baby, pro-abortion activists are already claiming that the doctors research can be used as a means of identifying developmentally disabled babies, who display less ability with habituate memory, so they can be easily identified for subsequent abortion.

And now our President wants to include this infanticide as part of his ObamaCare health insurance program.

We cannot allow this to continue.

Back To The Future Of Change

You asked for it, you got it!

Change Baby, Change!

The Democrats continue their assault on common sense by finding new and interesting ways to damn financially successful Americans as elite fat cats worthy of having their treasures plundered.

Program after program, from Congresses near trillion dollar non-stimulating spending spree to the untenable bureaucratic nightmare of ObamaCare universal health insurance, is all allegedly going to be funded by increased taxes and decreased tax deductions on the wicked well-heeled. Barack Obama and his faithful minions are amazingly able to speak with straight faces as they explain how the money earned by hard working, people employing, small business men and women is the rightful bounty of the unwashed masses.

Pay no mind that some of these supposed ne’er-do-wells have risked everything they own to succeed in business. Don’t give a second thought to the fact that most have spent years toiling and sacrificing to amass their fortunes. Don’t even concern yourself with the reality that for many of these small business owners much of their total income reported to the IRS as income is actually their Sub S business revenues used to employ other people who are happy to have a job.

The Democrats are going back to the same well worn well they always go to but this time there could be dire consequences associated with their socialistic wealth redistribution money grab.

Historically wealthier Americans have been considered Republican voters. In 1995 of the 25 most affluent districts in America Democrats represented only 5. Today in those same 25 districts Democrats represent 14. This is making at least some Democrats, particularly in those districts, more than a little worried about the fallout from their actions. And with good reason.

Back in 1993 then President Bill Clinton used a similar fraudulent strategy of increasing taxes on the upper tax brackets with the claim that the increase was necessary to reduce the federal deficit. The bill passed in 1993 and in 1994 the GOP swept through both houses of Congress like an Arkansas tornado through a trailer park. The Clinton tax hikes helped fuel the recession that began in 1999. Clinton was followed by President GW Bush who lowered tax rates, eased the recession, stimulated the economy and increased revenues to the IRS.

Democrats like then freshman House member Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky who cast the deciding vote in favor of the tax hike are still bitter after having been shown the door in the next election. “I never should have been asked to take that vote, ever” Margolies-Mezinsky said recently.

But the constant fallacious drubbing by Democrats on President Bush and the improvident promise of undefined change successfully numbed the memory of undecided voters and the Dem’s regained control. But the problem with being in power is that your hand is now on the rudder and steering this bloated ship of state is far more difficult than simply pointing an accusing finger.

21 Democrat freshmen and one sophomore Congress member submitted a letter last week opposing the Democrat led tax hikes and surtaxes. It said in part “Especially in a recession, we need to make sure not to kill the goose that will lay the golden eggs of our recovery.”

Even Obama has changed his tune on ObamaCare by claiming we need to have a bill passed by the end of the year, having moved the drop dead date back from yesterday. But be assured these 21 Democrat Congress members along with the rest of the Democrat House and Senate will be harangued on a daily basis to march in step to the tune of the Chosen One.

And with that, Obama may indeed bring about his promise of Change.

It just may happen to be in the majority party of Congress come the midterm elections.

Declaring a Class Jihad

Did I miss a memo?

When did we decide as a nation that it was understandable and more importantly excusable to have generation after generation living off the government teat, but that it is inexcusable and for all intents and purposes prosecutable, to take advantage of the opportunities afforded in this country and work your way into wealth?

When did the “pursuit of happiness” become the right to happiness at someone else’s expense? When did we as a nation decide Robin Hood was a suitable role model for government? Why am I asking questions I already know the answer to? It all started many years ago but it came to fruition on January 20, 2009.

Liberals in this country have been promising folks a bigger piece if the pie for as long as we have had liberals. But historically it was deemed by these left-minded Salvationists to be the responsibility of the wealthier members of society’s to ensure that the poor and less fortunate at least had the ingredients and an oven to bake their own pie. Not so anymore. Now if you want a bigger piece of the pie, or hell, the whole pie altogether, all you have to do is take it from someone who already baked one. Does the phrase from the classic nursery rhyme Henny Penny “Who will help me eat the bread” ring a bell?

Democrats have shifted the focus from the opportunities that are available to make our own lives better, onto the assets some people have and how allegedly unfair it is that everybody doesn’t have the same. To be sure, there are those in this country that have acquired their wealth in what was laughingly called the old fashioned way, they inherited it. But the truth is that the vast majority (almost 95%) earned their wealth the real old fashioned way, they worked for it. And even for those that came by their wealth through inheritance, somebody worked for that money.

I am not one of the fortunate. I was born with these incredible good looks and charming personality instead of a tidy dowry. I have worked to get myself into a comfortable place but nowhere near what one would call wealthy. It never dawned on me that just because someone had something I didn’t have meant I was automatically entitled to it. If I saw someone with something I wanted it inspired me to work harder so I could get it too. That is the backbone of our nation, the desire to improve our lives through hard work and innovation and make things better for our children. But not anymore.

Where is my incentive to get up early every morning and spend my days studying or working if the government is simply going to step in after the fact and take what I have worked for to give it to someone who didn’t? My question to the Obama administration is, if we are here to serve others, what the hell are the others here for?

The policy course being set by the Democrats is so socialist in its principles that even some Democrats are starting baulk. As stated in the Wall Street Journal - "There could come a time," said Rep. Michael McMahon, a freshman Democrat from New York City's borough of Staten Island, when Democrats are in open rebellion. "We will certainly see in the next few weeks where we are going."

To continually cite, as the Obama administration is doing, that these surtaxes and tax increases will effect only the top 1% of wage earners misses a very basic principle of economics. Every dollar taken from a taxpayer’s pocket, regardless of that taxpayer’s overall wealth, is taken out of the economy. Wealthy people buy things. Their spending creates jobs for people who are not wealthy but would like to be. If Congress takes billions of dollars out of these silk lined designer pockets, that’s a lot of products that are not going to be bought and a lot of jobs no longer needed to make those products.

You cannot win the war on poverty by instituting class warfare.

Good News Bad News

A man is at an economist’s office and the economist says “I have some good news and I have some bad news”.

That classic “doctor joke” opening line is pretty much how I see our current economic plight, but not nearly as funny. It’s more like – A horse walks into his 401K director’s office and the director says “Hey! What’s with the long face?”

As we proceed through another earnings season, so far the flurry of reports already made public give some hope that the worst is already behind us. Even though only a small fraction of companies set to report their quarterly earnings have reported thus far, a vast majority (71%) of those that did, beat Wall Street analyst’s expectations. That’s the good news.

But, now for the rest of the story.

The better than expected bottom lines are a direct result of businesses doing what businesses do during uncertain times, cut costs. Regardless of where the costs were or the benefit associated with the expense, cuts have been made across the board. Newspapers and television reporters are all too eager to expose some Wall Street investment CEO or Detroit automotive big wig that spent $20 grand on special toilet paper for his private potty, but the reality is that 99.99% of businesses have cut back on every conceivable expense from the CEO to mop bucket Joe.

The numbers being reflected are a direct result of this cost cutting. It has nothing to do with government stimulus or improving business conditions. The game has been whoever can cut the most cost out of their business wins. The problem is some of the costs cut will only help to delay or limit true recovery.

Historically it has been all about the bottom line. How much money a company makes defines its ability to not only stay in business but to grow as well. The numbers being reported so far, while encouraging on the bottom line, are still anemic at best on the top line. How much business is the business doing. You can cut until there is nothing left but the CEO and a security guard, but sales and production drive a company. And if the sales are still not there then neither is the recovery.

The problem we face today is that businesses have cut back so much that it may be next to impossible to recover without some form of debt relief. Operations that were designed to run with 250 employees are now running with 30. That not only means a dramatic reduction in output but also an equally dramatic reduction in cost effectiveness. Materials do not flow through a production facility operating with 15 to 20% of its work force. In manufacturing environments the cost per piece to produce a product has gone up due to this decrease in flow dampening profitability. Inventory levels of raw materials, reduced as part of the cost cutting, further hamper productivity thus diminishing profits. In order for these manufacturing facilities to join in the recovery they will need to increase production and inventory levels. But as current sales continue to lag the money necessary to bring back employees and to buy increased inventory simply isn’t available.

Businesses have historically depended on credit to help them increase production. They borrow money to help get things started and pay the loans back after the products are sold and paid for by their customers. But in today’s environment credit is tight at best and non-existent in many cases. While clueless media types are quick to blame banks, the reality is that banks want to lend money. That’s their business. But banks already have their loan portfolios filled with business loans that are in default or are carrying increased risk. In this environment banks are far more likely to hold their money to cover potential losses on loans already granted than to use it to make more loans. The only hope for many of these businesses unable to get new credit lines will be bankruptcy protection.

While bankruptcy has historically been viewed as a negative, in this case it just might be a sign that the recovery is actually upon us. It won’t be easy and it won’t be pretty. This scenario leaves the distinct possibility of a rash of bankruptcies shuddering though various market sectors. As one company files for protection it forces many of its creditors into a position to file as well.

It’s a phase we must pass through, but we will survive.

Funny Funnies

I get a lot of e mail.

Every day my inbox is jammed with advice on the next stock set to take off like a rocket, countless deals on retail merchandise that I simply can’t live without, notifications that I may already have won my weight in gold or a lovely consolation prize like a plastic water bottle that fits on your belt when you jog (like that’s gonna happen), numerous comments from BigFrick.com readers from around the world, some of whom think I am witty and remarkably smart and others who think I may in fact be Satan’s spawn. And jokes. Lot’s and lot of jokes.

Many of the jokes are retreads; some of which may date back to World War II. A lot of them are worth a snicker if only for nostalgic reminiscence. I occasionally will copy and paste one of the better jokes and send it off to a close circle of friends. Most I read and delete, knowing full well that I will likely get the same joke sent to me by a flurry of other folks.

But on rare occasions I get a real belly laugher. Today was such a day.

I had planned to write today’s piece on the absurd ObamaCare health insurance plan working its way through the hall of Congress. But the joke I received today was better, at least in my opinion, than anything I could have written.

I salute whoever came up with this idea and take no credit for this fine piece of parody. I apologize to those faithful readers who are from outside America and have not seen the television commercial this joke parodies. Attempting to explain the joke or the television commercial would be useless. Suffice it to say this is a commercial from an insurance company named AFLAC. It takes place in a barber shop and stars Yogi Berra and his inimitable vocabulary.

Thumbs Up For Ben Stein

Nobody is ever going to mistake me for Roger Ebert.

I am just not a big movie guy. I find most of the current offerings from Hollywood to be nothing but rewarmed pabulum at best. The swarthy Johnny Depp as Frank Dillinger, no thanks. A remake of the classic novel the Bad Seed set to scary music and called The Orphan, I don’t think so. Transformers 3, Rocky 17 or a remake of the Honeymooners with an all black cast, not in this lifetime.

But I will give you a fairly new movie to see. You will probably have to dig through the bargain bin for it already. It is a movie by Ben Stein called Expelled.

In an effort of full disclosure I really like Ben Stein to begin with. I find his commentary and writings on current economic conditions to be firmly based in reality and his regular commentaries on life in general to be spot on correct and humorously poignant. His recent movie Expelled, while it did have a spattering of publicity, was for the most part hustled off the big screen in theaters and sent to DVD almost immediately upon release. I bought the movie as soon as it came out knowing nothing about its content other than it was from Ben Stein. I am pleased to say I consider the purchase to be money very well spent.

In Expelled, Stein attempts to open our eyes to the false sense of security we have when it comes to education and more importantly to the institutions of higher learning we have come to know and trust. He makes it abundantly clear that many of the great minds of what we laughingly call science leave much of their open-minded pursuit of truth and facts at the door when they enter many of our major universities.

Expelled concerns itself with the tragic consequences many very smart people have been subjected to for simply mentioning the possibility of intelligent design in the creation of life. In most cases these scholars are not proposing intelligent design as an answer, but only mentioning it as an alternate theory. But for many in academia the mere mention of a creator or that there is a theory that life is not a random act of providence is enough to fire and banish the offending colleague from anything related to higher education.

In one instance examined a very well respected professor mentioned intelligent design in a paper he wrote about the beginnings of life. The paper was peer reviewed and accepted, but after publication the professor was shunned by others in his department and terminated from the university where he worked.

Stein also gives ample opportunity to several leading authorities who dismiss intelligent design as shear insanity to explain their theories of how life came to be on this planet. Their fantastically nonsensical explanations are almost as profound as their smug beard stroking intellectual attitudes.

Having watched Expelled makes it easier to understand the story coming out of Texas where various special interest groups are attempting the Orwellian task of rewriting history. While the Texas Board of Education recently approved changes allowing new science standards that make room for creationist considerations regarding evolution there is heated debate over the new social studies text books.

Three reviewers of the new proposed K through 12 curriculums are favoring inclusion of the existing examples that the Bible, Christian faith and the civic virtues faith have played in the founding and early direction of America and the state of Texas. Three other reviewers, who were appointed by politically liberal board members, are favoring exclusion of those items and inclusion of more politically correct ideas, including an emphasis on the roll Hispanic and Native Americans played in the states foundation.

History is not politically correct and to attempt to make it so makes it worthless. We may not be able to prove beyond a doubt that God created life on this planet, but we can surely prove the role faith in Him has played in molding our nation and the state of Texas.

It is apparent to even a casual observer that while we have hallowed halls of higher learning, many of those strolling down those halls have a lot to learn.

Gay But Not Happy - Again

From the gay but not happy file.

A little story out of Salt Lake City caught my eye. It seems two gay men were walking home from a concert on July 9th and decided to cut through the Main Street Plaza adjoining and owned by the Salt Lake City Mormon Temple. It was there in the middle of the plaza that these two gay men decided they needed to take a little break from their stroll to share a hug and a little smooch on the cheek. It was at that time that security patrolling the plaza approached the two men and informed the pair that their homosexual signs of affection were deemed “inappropriate behavior” and asked the couple to leave.

I must admit I am not the least bit surprised that at that point the two men became argumentative and refused to vacate the premises. Guards were forced to handcuff the two unhappy but gay smitten smoochers and detain them until police arrived and cited the pair for trespassing.

Salt Lake City Police Sergeant Robin Snyder put the entire incident into perspective later when he told reporters “It doesn’t matter what they were asked to leave for. If they are asked to leave and don’t they are trespassing.”

It all seems fairly plain to me, but it is not so plain to the gay community and their supporters in Salt Lake who felt that the pair’s rights had somehow been violated and decided to hold a protest across the street from the Mormon Temple. According to reports some 100 protesters, some of whom wearing brightly colored lipstick, gathered near the Main Street Plaza to share kisses on both the cheek and mouth in support of the two men. Security guards and later police were forced to step in and disband the “kiss off”, preventing the crowd from entering the plaza.

The two original lip smackers were present but decided not to participate in the kiss-a-thon with one later telling reporters “I just wanted to get the message out. We’re very flattered and proud.”

Is this just an isolated incident of two love struck homosexuals being unfairly targeted and treated by the Church of Latter Day Saints, or does this incident serve a greater purpose? Is it by some strange coincidence that this confrontation and the following protest is being held at the same time that Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has filed a lawsuit against the United States of America claiming the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996 and signed into law by Bill Clinton, is unconstitutional and denies federal benefits to gay couples legally married in Massachusetts?

If it is only by coincidence that the Mormon Church and the state of Massachusetts are entering into some fairly public struggles with the gay community at the same time then it is a strange coincidence indeed. But if it is not by coincidence then what is the one factor tying these two seemingly remote entities together? Does the name Mitt Romney ring a bell?

What may seem on the surface seem to be two unrelated incidents may in fact be an early foray into a well planned effort to politically damage the leading Republican candidate’s challenge of the Chosen One in the 2012 presidential election.

Romney is the past Governor of Massachusetts and is a member of the Mormon Church. He has publicly stated his support of the Defense of Marriage Act and as Governor took a stand against gay marriage.

Now, I’m not saying this is part of a greater plan on the part of Democrats or the gay community. But when it comes to politics I’m just not a big believer in coincidence.

The Deception Continues

The deception and misdirection continues.

How do you keep people from focusing on the results of your current actions? By keeping them focused on what was happening back when you were promising different results.

The latest assault on the previous administration is now hitting the news wires in the form of Congressional Democrat’s outrage at the lack of information shared by the CIA regarding secret plans to thwart al Qaeda. The operative words in the previous sentence are secret and plans.

After the 9-11 attacks, then President Bush authorized the CIA through a legal pronouncement known as a “finding” to proceed with an initiative to capture or kill al Qaeda operatives. After having identified al Qaeda as the perpetrators of the deadly attacks I find it not only logical but compulsory that the President and the CIA look at all options to bring this Muslim declared jihad back into the laps from which it came. But Democrats in Congress are now up in arms because funds were spent and possible training provided to carry out this initiative without prior Congressional approval. I only wish they were equally upset that al Qaeda carried out the attacks without first getting their consent.

The current CIA Director Leon Panetta repealed the initiative this past June and according to Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee acknowledged that the plan was not properly vetted with Congress. While I believe this long time political hack turned CIA Director may have played into the hands of his Democrat masters by claiming the program was improperly vetted, I see his actions as being purely politically motivated rather than a true infringement of the Constitutional right of Congress to be informed.

The first key is the wording used stated that Congress was not “properly” informed. It has previously been made abundantly clear that Congress was informed by the CIA that all options were on the table and were being considered. It is not incumbent upon the CIA to inform a committee of media loving Congress members as to the exact details of any planned initiative until such a time as a workable plan is actually formulated and a course of action decided. It is imperative that any plan such as this be kept top secret and obviously the more people informed, particularly people who love to talk about things they know very little about, the better chance for a leak of information to the press and therefore to our enemies as well. Furthermore, as has been made abundantly clear by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Congress members have a very convenient memory when it comes to information that might prove to be controversial after the fact.

This initiative was approved in 2001 and cancelled on June 23rd of 2009. No action regarding the plan was taken. To that end, some of the possible actions included in the original initiative were dismissed as unattainable in the planning stages long prior to the new administration and director taking over.

What we are witnessing now is the Democrats desperate efforts to misdirect the American public’s attention so as to defuse any backlash for the dismal results of their reckless and ineffective actions. We are now staring into the face of a $3 trillion deficit with absolutely no economic improvement to show for it. Our troops are being relieved in Iraq by well trained Iraqi troops proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Bush plan in Iraq worked exactly as promised. The new age of détente and diplomacy that was promised by Obama as the cure to all our international woes has done nothing to ease tensions in the Middle East or with such rouge nations as Iran and North Korea. If anything the situations there have gotten worse, once again proving the Bush policies were exactly what the situation mandated.

The Democrats ranting about the need for a “Truth Commission” regarding waterboarding and harsh interrogation techniques did not bring them the desired results and if anything began to seriously damage their credibility. You haven’t heard Nancy Pelosi mention waterboarding lately, have you?

This major brouhaha will run its course as well, with Congressional Democrats damning the Bush administration’s successful efforts to bring peace and safety back to our shores and an obedient Democratic hack Leon Panetta giving them all the ammo they need and further depleting our intelligence capabilities.

My only regret is that the CIA was unable to devise a satisfactory plan to bring some al Qaeda heads back on a pike.

I'll Tell You How........

“Who would do such a thing?” “How could something like this happen?”

These are the questions leading off most of the Chicago area television and radio news shows. They are being posed by the distraught family members of the dearly departed who were, at least at one time, resting in peace at the Burr Oak Cemetery in Chicago’s suburban town of Alsip.

Burr Oak Cemetery is a well known final destination for many of the black community in the Chicago area. Several high profile blacks are buried amongst the rolling hills and flowers of this well kept cemetery, including civil rights symbol Emmett Till, blues legend Dinah Washington and heavyweight boxing champion Ezzard Charles. But some who were laid to rest are no longer resting peacefully.

Four cemetery workers have been charged with digging up the graves and removing the decomposed bodies and bones of those buried there so they could resell the plots and pocket the cash. What started as a local investigation has now spread to the FBI who, at last count, figure the earthly remains of some 300 people were dug up and disposed of in a vacant lot behind the cemetery grounds.

Because this is a predominantly black cemetery the Reverend Jesse (No Tragedy Too Small To Get Some Face Time) Jackson was on site to hold a news conference, pulling grief stricken family members to the microphone to publicly air their pain. Jackson punctuated the anguish of the families by denouncing those involved and calling this piece of land “sacred ground”.

As the four people arrested for the crime are also black I fully expect Jackson to deflect the outrage currently directed at the actual perpetrators and redirected it toward the company owning this long established burying ground. Perpetua Holdings of Illinois, Inc. has owned the cemetery since 2001. It was they who became aware of the scam and notified police. Like many funeral related businesses Perpetua Holdings is an absentee owner, depending on their local managers and employees for the day to day operations. It was the manger and employees who were arrested.

30 to 40 FBI agents are currently sifting through debris and overgrown weeds in an adjoining vacant lot in an attempt to discern how many different sets of human remains were moved and identify them for reburial. It is estimated the perpetrators of this heinous act pocketed up to $300,000 in burial fees reusing these already occupied plots.

A well respected long time Chicago news anchor was on a local radio station discussing his personal opinion as to how this could happen. He said he felt this was an offshoot of the grand larceny and corruption involved in Illinois politics, from the Governor on down. While I find his theory intriguing, I must disagree.

The families ask “How could this happen” the answer seems plain to me. We live in a country and society where 800,000 to a million babies are aborted every year. These are living, growing human babies snuffed out by a hideously cruel procedure. We have a President who has voted on numerous occasions to allow nearly full term babies to be partially delivered only to have a tool jammed into their skull and their brains scrambled like an egg. Once a society is willing to accept the murder of these most precious lives there is no level too low to sink.

The group BlackGenocide.org estimates the death toll of black babies in this country at somewhere around 13 million since 1973. That is more than 4 times the death toll caused by AIDS, cancer, violence, accidents and heart disease combined. Their web site quotes the late civil rights leader Erma Clardy Craven when she said “Several years ago, when 17,000 aborted babies were found in a dumpster outside a pathology lab in Los Angeles, California, some 12,000 to 15,000 were observed to be black.”

This tragic incident is not a black thing, or a white thing. It’s a greed thing. But when human life ceases to hold value in a society, as is the case with abortion, it is not difficult to understand how cemetery workers can disgrace dead bodies in their graves.

Speculating On Stupidity

Here we go again!

Political leaders on both sides of the big pond have once again begun to look for scapegoats in the lack of sufficient or immediate economic recovery. And once again their focus has turned to oil. Well, not so much oil, as those who make money speculating on oil.

UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy wrote an opinion in The Wall Street Journal that mirrors the sentiments of the clueless in the United States who believe oil speculators are the leading cause for the dramatic and volatile swings in oil prices.

To be sure, a massive influx or outflow of cash into or out of a commodity can play a part in the volatility of that commodity. But that holds true for all commodities not just oil. Some commodities are more susceptible to a higher volatility than others. Oil, for instance, has a higher volatility than copper, but both are driven by market conditions and demand. Watch the new home building forecasts and see what happens to copper futures.

I have no dog in this fight. While I do invest in oil stocks and ETF’s I am by no means a speculator. Commodity speculators are a rare breed and pretty smart cookies to boot. It doesn’t take much in the way of gray matter to figure out that since gasoline prices have dropped more folks are driving more miles. But speculators don’t look at the line in their local Amoco to figure out if oil is going up in demand. Their decisions are based on global forecasts and worldwide market trends. Commodities are global and so speculators must focus globally.

The massive run up in oil prices made a lot of people a lot of money. Conversely, the drop from over $140 per barrel to the low of $35 per barrel lost some folks more than their shirt. If speculators truly had the ability to control the commodities market you would probably see far less volatility and far fewer of them on the wrong side of the trade. Oil has since run back up to $73 per barrel and is now trading at around $63.

In every one of these cases, from the very high to the very low, each of these moves can be traced to the economic news coming out at the time.

The concern stated by the UK and French leaders and others is that oil plays a key role in the economic recovery. In what has become all too typical political rhetoric, Democrat Senator Byron Dorgan called for “curbing oil speculators looking to make a quick buck at the expense of American consumers.” The blatantly uninformed Senator Dorgan may know how to make a good sound bite but is completely sans common sense when it comes to commodity trading. Speculators are looking to make a buck by risking their own money, not the American publics. Risking the American public’s money is Congresses job.

It is estimated that a sustained 10% increase in oil prices can knock 0.4% out of any global economic recovery over a 12 month period. That is the last thing a commodity speculator wants to do. When it comes to oil and the economy one must first look at which is driving which. I am firmly in the IDS camp – It’s Demand Stupid.

As the economic indicators continue to improve, oil will continue to increase in value. Also, let us not forget that oil is trade in American dollars. As the US dollar slumps in value oil will conversely increase. The outrageous deficit spending undertaken by the US Congress, devaluing the US dollar has probably had far more to do with oil price volatility than speculators could ever dream of.

China is continuing with their unprecedented growth in both industrial and civilian areas. Millions upon millions of rural farmers have moved from their rice paddy to the big city and are now driving cars instead of ox carts. Iran, in the center of the oil producing Middle East is building nuclear weapons threatening stability in the entire region. Manufacturing forecasts for Asia, Europe and the US are all improving. And the oil related news goes on and on.

I am not looking for political leaders to be as savvy as oil speculators when it comes to what makes the price move. But for crying out loud, could you at least pick up a newspaper.

The Truth Is.............

The truth is that everything I am about to say is a lie.

That is pretty much what I took away from VP Joe Footinmouth’s recent foray onto the cable news channels and network news shows. Big Joe, it seems, is becoming the point man for the Obama administrations newest “The dog ate my homework” excuse-a-thon.

Amazingly the Veep was able to keep a straight face as he wound his fairy tale of blameless surprise to the receptive ears of the ABC (All Barack Channel) News. Having spent over a year describing the economic conditions as “the worst since the Great Depression” Joe now stated “The truth is, there was a misreading of just how bad an economy we inherited.” Footinmouth used the phrase “the truth is” numerous times, almost as if he was trying to get himself to believe it.

Just to make a quick counterpoint to the Vice President’s hand-washing economic description, the economy we have today is not the economy the Obama administration inherited. It’s worse. A lot worse.

Obama spent almost the entire last year of the campaign hammering away at how truly dismal the economy was and how he and his economic plan were the only salvation to avoid double digit unemployment and national economic ruin. The Chosen One touted his powerhouse roster of economic advisors including Wall Street icon Warren Buffet as being on board to help guide him through these murky waters. Are we to understand now that these economic guru’s misled or misread the economy? Are we to believe that Obama was somehow kept in the dark about the economy he was describing as catastrophic on a daily basis? Is Big Joe now telling us that Congress and the Obama administration passed a 1500 page, $787 billion “stimulus” bill without knowing what shape the economy was in? Perhaps my age is catching up with me but I thought I remembered something about a really bad economy being the reason for the stimulus.

The justification for the passage of the biggest government spending debacle in history was that without it the economy would continue to decline. The spending bill passed and the economy has continued to decline unabated. We needed it to keep unemployment from surpassing 8%. The current unemployment rate is 9.5% and rising. We needed it so that a myriad of “shovel ready projects” could get the immediate funding necessary to save jobs. Since its passage the country has lost an additional 2 million jobs and only a small fraction of the money (about 7%) has been made available.

Every ominous warning about this drunken sailor spending spree undertaken by the Obama administration is coming to pass with even more dire consequences than anticipated. The Congressional Budget Office warned prior to passage that only 20% of the money designated for “shovel ready projects” would be available prior to the close of the fiscal year. In fact it appears that number will be closer to 11%.

The so called stimulus has done nothing to improve the economy and if anything has made the economic forecast worse. Even in the face of improved manufacturing forecasts, companies are laying off workers rather than rehiring them out of fear of the impending multi-trillion dollar deficit. Liberals may be fooled into believing that government spending is paid by magic but businesses know the money has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is the taxpayers’ and businesses pockets. Less money in the consumer’s pocket means less spending on the businesses products and more taxes on the business means less money for payroll.

And how does the Obama administration justify the failure of this multi-trillion dollar debt and non-stimulating stimulus spending package? By avowing that they didn’t know the gun was loaded and now, in an act of incomprehensible ineptness, suggesting yet another untenable stimulus spending package is in order.

The truth is you cannot spend your way out of debt.

The truth is that the more money the government pulls out of the economy to pay for their spending spree the longer it will take to recover.

The truth is that this administration left unchecked has the real possibility to not only delay economic recovery but collapse the economy all together.

That’s the truth, Joe.

Sarah Smile

Truthfully speaking I am nothing if not cynical. The problem is that I am usually correct.

I have found in most areas being cynical is almost a necessity, but none more so than when it comes to politics and the political players. Our public servants have discovered that in most cases rhetoric garners more positive press than actions. Talk is cheap but actions can cost you an election.

That is why I am so disappointed by the resignation of Sarah Palin from her position as Governor of Alaska.

Just a year ago this conservative bombshell was feared only by crooked Alaskan lawmakers and antler bearing wildlife. She burst onto the national stage as John McCain’s running mate and immediately struck the same level of fear into the hearts of liberal politicians and their equally narrow-minded base. Led by the constant drum beat of a liberal media that cast aside any hope of fairness and equality, Palin was hammered from day one for one reason and one reason only, she was a woman. And perish the thought an attractive conservative woman at that.

I am certain that there were times during the campaign that Sarah Palin wished she was back in wilds of her home state holding a jammed rifle and facing a pack of ravenous wolves rather than another so called interview with a member of the national media. The questions posed to her were insultingly stupid and no matter how she replied her answers were dissected and ridiculed to prove her unfit to hold the number two position.

We are now in the process of approving a Supreme Court Justice who claims that she is eminently more qualified than a white man to rule in our highest court simply because she has lived the life of a minority woman. Yet when it came to Sarah Palin, she was deemed completely unqualified, even though she had held the top executive position of our largest state, simply because she had lived the life of a conservative woman. I wonder what the reaction would have been had Palin said she was more qualified than Joe Footinmouth because she was a woman.

Even after the election heavy breathing reprobate news pros rummaged through expense reports and receipts to try to damn Palin for wearing Victoria Secret underpants and Foot Locker crew socks. Months after the election David Letterman saw fit to insinuate her teen-aged daughter would be having sex with a baseball player and said Palin looked like a slutty flight attendant. Yet the national news media for the most part remained silent. To be sure they covered the story with a certain feigned disapproval, but can you imagine what the reaction would have been if a conservative comic like Dennis Miller would have made similar remarks about Hillary Clinton or Biden’s wife Jill?

Palin has announced she is leaving to follow a higher political calling. Many have assumed that she means a 2012 presidential run. But I’m not so sure. Maybe Sarah Palin is just who she claims to be and decided she had put up with enough of the political meat-grinder and was now choosing to remove her family from the fray? If her intent was to run for President, than quitting was exactly the wrong thing to do. By the next election the country will be woefully aware of just how dangerous an inexperienced person can be as President. Having had less than one full term as Governor, Palin’s resume will not hold the necessary bullet points to dissuade those fears.

But maybe there is more to the story. Maybe Palin sees the weakness at the top of the Republican National Committee and is interested in filling that post. Or maybe she sees that a strong conservative woman can do much more to help the conservative movement by hooking up with a media outlet like Fox News than she can up in Alaska. Or maybe there is a radio talk show in her future.

Whatever she decides the most important thing Sarah Palin can do is remain Sarah Palin. I admire her for being one of the very few who is not afraid to take a tough position and more importantly
live up to the ideals she speaks so passionately about. She is the greatest threat there is to liberal rhetoric and faux equality; a strong woman with convictions and a lifestyle to back it up.

As for President Palin, I’m not so sure the country is ready for a strong and honest woman with that level of veracity. It makes too many folks uncomfortable when you start to talk about personal responsibility.

The King Is Dead

So, did anything happen while I was gone?

I took a week off to attend my granddaughter’s baptism and play grandpa to my grandson. I’m worn out and sore but infinitely grateful to have been reminded of what is most important in life and how truly blessed I am.

During my week long sabbatical much transpired that would make for good blog fodder. I’ll talk about some of it, like Sarah Palin deciding to resign as Governor of Alaska and Al Franken being installed as a US Senator later in the week. And I’ll explain a little deeper some of my feelings, like the fact that Republican Representative Mark Kirk can now take a long walk on a short pier if he thinks he is getting any reelection support from me, thanks to his dim-witted vote in favor of the even dimmer Waxman-Markey bill on climate change.

But having spent a few days in downtown Chicago and seeing an army of devoted fans wearing Michael Jackson tee shirts I’ll start off the week with a few thoughts on the death of the alleged King of Pop.

First off I have to admit that much of my confusion over the devastation some feel over Jackson’s death is an age thing. Michael Jackson was a pop star to my kids and his music was far more important to them than me. I appreciate the talent he showed back in the 80’s when he was still a black male who was perfect for the then burgeoning music video market.

America’s youth delighted as this little dynamo moved from being the focus of his brother’s group to a solo sensation. Michael’s sequenced glove, flood pants and moon walk made pop culture history. The Thriller video, complete with a creepy voice over by Vincent Price and special effects and production values surpassing many full length movie classics, was a mega-hit beyond anything that came before and will likely hold its place for many years to come.

We watched and listened because he was young and energetic and talented.

But as time passed we began watching for other reasons. The hyperbaric sleeping chamber, the chimp named Bubbles, the weird attraction to child stars like Emmanuel Lewis and McCaulay Caulkin, the crotch grabbing, baseball gear wearing, skin lightening and countless facial surgeries that only helped to feminize his appearance and force speculation about his sexuality and mental state. We began watching him less for his talent and more for the oddity he was becoming.

We watched as he was blackmailed by greedy parents claiming sexual abuse and as he turned from an iconic pop star into the punch line for countless jokes. We watched as he was interviewed at his Neverland Ranch showing off his collection of everything Peter Pan and explaining why it was OK for a grown man to sleep with children. We watched as this grown man showed how he climbed into the tree that he supposedly spent hours in for relaxation and inspiration. We gawked at the miniature train and veritable zoo of exotic animals that roamed the grounds. And we snickered at just how bizarre this grown man turning into who knows what had become.

And then some way somehow he genetically fathered two children. This person who was completely unstable on his own was now given custody and responsibility for raising kids and it began to get uncomfortable to watch anymore.

Then came the charges of yet another incident of sexual abuse with a minor. We stared as he moon-walked on the hood of his limo outside the courthouse and laughed as he showed up for the proceedings of this serious crime in his pajamas. The umbrellas to keep him from melting in the sun and the surgical masks to hide his disastrously reconstructed nose. Swinging his baby over the hotel balcony railing, dressing his children in full body veils and fleeing the United States for the more tolerant shores of Bahrain. We heard the reports of the outrageous spending and the financial disaster and bankruptcy of the business that was Michael Jackson. We watched because it had become a train wreck and it seemed impossible to turn away. It wasn’t funny anymore; it wasn’t entertaining or even interesting. It was just sad.

And now the final tragic page of this dreadful plunge from grace has played out. Perhaps we will never truly know all the details of the who and the why. I don’t think anybody was shocked, or even mildly surprised for that matter, to hear that copious quantities of very powerful drugs were involved. But for me the talent that was Michael Jackson died years ago only to be replaced with a sad circus sideshow.

Now what is left of his legacy will be picked through by the vultures and disseminated to the legions of those who still remember what used to be. There is still plenty of money to be made off the pelt of Michael Jackson. And have no doubt, many will try.

For me, I’ll just remember that his music made my kids happy. And that’s enough.