I HAVE A SPECIAL REQUEST FOR LOYAL READERS. … I'D LIKE TO EXPAND THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ENTERPRISE.
THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS TO ASK EVERY ONE OF YOU TO CREATE A SIZABLE LIST OF YOUR FRIENDS/CONTACTS & FORWARD IT TO THEM--
EVERY WEEK.--50? 75? 100? more readers. AND, ALSO ask them to share it with their FRIENDS & contacts.
(Sort of like the old fashioned "chain letter," but with no penalty for not sending it on.
The only PRIZE for reading it, is that it will make them think.)
That is a lot more effective than me adding a bunch of names to my mailing list. People who know you will at least look at it and probably read it because it came from you. Chances are, many of them already share a lot of your views on things, and might enjoy it. The ones who don't want to get it, will tell you to stop sending it, or simply delete it.
STATE OF THE UNION: TAKING CREDIT FOR THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN SPITE OF HIS MISTAKES
If by some chance you watched the State of the Union, it was perhaps the least contentious one I can recall. It is a perfect example of Barack Obama at his best (worst). Parts of it made me thought I was watching the movie Groundhog Day, ion which the same things happen over and over and over…like phrases, claims and lies in prof SOTUs.
He clearly practices self-delusion to the extent that he probably believes all of the good economic things happening are because of him. They are not. They are the economy's natural tendency to rebound eventually from a severe downturn, even with a fool in the White House. I wonder what he says now that the most recent quarter dropped back to 2.6% growth,proving the 5% quarter to be an aberration--not a robust recovery?
Obama's desire to tax and spend remains unabated. Anyone who dares ask how to pay all of his wonderful pipe dreams is vilified. The fact remains that his plans are as delusional as he is. IF he were to suspend so many of the "freebies" and "giveaways" he has instigated, it might start to pay for the few worthwhile programs he mentions in his long wish list.
As far as foreign affairs, his delusion borders on lunacy, if he thinks he can talk, negotiate, cajole or charm America's enemies and rogue factions into acting responsibly. I didn't vet this list careful, however it appears to a decent list of actual events. Can you say the words, "Radical Islamic Terrorist?" The President cannot, because he is part of them, in spirit, by culture, by upbringing and in fact. It is only too bad we cannot ship him and his family over there to live in one of those many countries he so deeply aligns with. (I have nothing against Muslims. I know a few, and they seem to be fine people. They are not "radical islamists," however!
CHECK OUT WHAT SEN. ROB PORTMAN HAS TO SAY ABOUT OBAMA'S MISINFORMATION
EUROPE IS "INFECTED" WITH RADICAL ISLAM EXTREMISTS… AND THE US IS GETTING THERE.
Why won't our president and his administration admit it and face it, unless he is a "sympathizer"?
WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? THIS SUMS IT UP PRETTY WELL.
Quotes of the week form WSJ: “You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists.” The audience of military and intelligence professionals applauded. Officials, he continued, are “paralyzed” by the complexity of the problems connected to militant Islam, and so do little, reasoning that “passivity is less likely to provoke our enemies.”
These statements come on the heels of the criticisms from President Obama’s own former secretaries of defense. Robert Gates, in “Duty,” published in January 2014, wrote of a White House-centric foreign policy developed by aides and staffers who are too green or too merely political. One day in a meeting the thought occurred that Mr. Obama “doesn’t trust” the military, “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his.” That’s pretty damning. Leon Panetta , in his 2014 memoir, “Worthy Fights,” said Mr. Obama “avoids the battle, complains, and misses opportunities.”
TAKE THE 2+ MINUTES TO WATCH THIS "PROPOSED WALK FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA"--JUST TO REMIND HIM ABOUT THE USA AND GOD!
THERE IS BUT ONE SOLUTION SET TO AMERICA'S DEFICIT AND DEBT PROBLEM. IT HAS THREE PARTS TO IT.
1. CUT EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND ESPECIALLY WASTEFUL SPENDING (AND FRAUD). SHRINK THE GOVERNMENT & REQUIRE BALANCED BUDGETS. (Check what OH Gov. John Kasich has been criss-crossing the country encouraging: A Constitutional Balanced Budget amendment!)
2. RAISE SOME TAXES BY CLOSING SPECIAL-INTEREST "LOOPHOLES." REVAMP AND SIMPLIFY THE TAX CODE OVERALL
3. CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR (NOT THE GOVERNMENT)) WHERE WEALTH IS CREATED (Government can raise money by taxes and fees from those who create wealth.. (Doing this will create wealth and profits which will cycle through the economy multiple times, paying taxes each time, and raising Federal (and state and local) tax revenues without a single tax rate increase. That also means CUT (DON'T RAISE) the tax rate on Capital Gains, because that encourages investors to also cycle their capital through the economy more often, leading to growth and taxes each time. Check the data yourself : every time the Capital Gains tax rate was raised, government tax revenue went DOWN, and when it was lowered, government tax revenue went UP…just the opposite of what we are being told.
YOU SIMPLY WILL NOT BELIEVE THIS ONE EITHER…IS THIS THE FUTURE?
Developed in Israel, and available in the next year or so.
FINALLY, I GET A LOT OF THINGS AND DON'T HAVE TIME TO VET THEM ALL, I POSTED THIS ONE AMAZING LIST BELOW.
I THINK IT IS ALL ACCURATE, BUT CAN'T VOUCH FOR EVERY STATEMENT.
MEANWHILE…HAVE A WONDERFUL GROUNDHOG DAY
JOHN
WHICH OF THESE ARE FACTUAL? ALL OF THEM! CAN YOU RADICAL ISLAM" MR. OBAMA? (WHY NOT?)
What more needs to be said?
The Shoe Bomber was a Muslim The Beltway Snipers were Muslims The Fort Hood Shooter was a Muslim The underwear Bomber was a Muslim The U-S.S. Cole Bombers were Muslims The Madrid Train Bombers were Muslims The Bafi Nightclub Bombers were Muslims The London Subway Bombers were Muslims The Moscow Theatre Attackers were Muslims The Boston Marathon Bombers were Muslims The Pan-Am flight #93 Bombers were Muslims The Air France Entebbe Hijackers were Muslims The Iranian Embassy Takeover, was by Muslims The Beirut U.S. Embassy bombers were Muslims The Libyan U.S. Embassy Attack was by Musiims The Buenos Aires Suicide Bombers were Muslims The Israeli Olympic Team Attackers were Muslims The Kenyan U.S, Embassy Bombers were Muslims The Saudi, Khobar Towers Bombers were Muslims The Beirut Marine Barracks bombers were Muslims The Besian Russian School Attackers were Muslims The first World Trade Center Bombers were Muslims The Bombay & Mumbai India Attackers were Muslims The Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijackers were Muslims The September 11th 2001 Airline Hijackers were Muslims The Paris Gunmen were Muslims The Paris Grocery Store Murders were Muslims
Buddhists living with Hindus = No Problem Hindus living with Christians = No Problem Hindus living with Jews = No Problem Christians living with Shintos = No Problem Shintos living with Confucians = No Problem Confusians living with Baha'is = No Problem Baha'is living with Jews = No Problem Jews living with Atheists = No Problem Atheists living with Buddhists = No Problem Buddhists living with Sikhs = No Problem Sikhs living with Hindus = No Problem Hindus living with Baha'is = No Problem Baha'is living with Christians = No Problem Christians living with Jews = No Problem Jews living with Buddhists = No Problem Buddhists living with Shintos = No Problem Shintos living with Atheists = No Problem Atheists living with Confucians = No Problem Confusians living with Hindus = No Problem However... Muslims living with Hindus = Problem Muslims living with Buddhists = Problem Muslims living with Christians = Problem Muslims living with Jews = Problem Muslims living with Sikhs = Problem Muslims living with Baha'is = Problem Muslims living with Shintos = Problem Muslims living with Atheists = Problem MUSLIMS LIVING WITH MUSLIMS = BIG PROBLEM
SO THIS LEADS TO They’re not happy in Gaza They're not happy in Egypt They're not happy in Libya They're not happy in Morocco They're not happy in Iran They're not happy in Iraq They're not happy in Yemen They're not happy in Afghanistan They're not happy in Pakistan They're not happy in Syria They're not happy in Lebanon They're not happy in Nigeria They're not happy in Kenya They're not happy in Sudan
SO WHERE ARE THEY HAPPY? They're happy in Australia They're happy in England They're happy in Belgium They're happy in France They're happy in Italy They're happy in Germany They're happy in Sweden They're happy in the USA & Canada They're happy in Norway & India They're happy in almost every country that is not Islamic!
And who do they blame? Not Islam. Not their leadership. Not themselves.
THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN!
And they want to change the countries they're happy in, to be like the countries they came from where they were unhappy! Islamic Jihad: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION ISIS: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Al-Qaeda: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Taliban: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Hamas: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Hezbollah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Boko Haram: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Al-Nusra: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Abu Sayyaf: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Al-Badr: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Muslim Brotherhood: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Lashkar-e-Taiba: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Palestine Liberation Front: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Ansaru: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Jemaah Islamiyah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Abdullah Azzam Brigades: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION AND A LOT MORE!
I HAVE A SPECIAL REQUEST FOR LOYAL READERS. … I'D LIKE TO EXPAND THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ENTERPRISE.
THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS TO ASK EVERY ONE OF YOU TO CREATE A SIZABLE LIST OF YOUR FRIENDS/CONTACTS & FORWARD IT TO THEM--
EVERY WEEK.--50? 75? 100? more readers. AND, ALSO ask them to share it with their FRIENDS & contacts.
(Sort of like the old fashioned "chain letter," but with no penalty for not sending it on, and the onlY PRIZE for reading it, is that it will make them think.)
That is a lot more effective than me adding a bunch of names to my mailing list. People who know you will at least look at it and probably read it because it came from you. Chances are, many of them already share a lot of your views on things, and might enjoy it. The ones who don't want to get it, will tell you to stop sending it, or simply delete it.
STATE OF THE UNION: TAKING CREDIT FOR THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN SPITE OF HIS MISTAKES
If by some chance you watched the State of the Union, it was perhaps the least contentious one I can recall. It is a perfect example of Barack Obama at his best (worst).
He clearly practices self-delusion to the extent that he probably believes all of the good economic things happening are because of him. They are not. They are the economy's natural tendency to rebound eventually from a severe downturn, even with a fool in the White House.
His desire to tax and spend remains unabated. Anyone who dares ask how to pay all of his wonderful pipe dreams is vilified. The fact remains that his plans are as delusional as he is. IF he were to suspend so many of the "freebies" and "giveaways" he has instigated, it might start to pay for the few worthwhile programs he mentions in his long wish list.
As far as foreign affairs, his delusion borders on lunacy, if he thinks he can talk, negotiate, cajole or charm America's enemies and rogue factions into acting responsibly. I didn't vet this list careful, however it appears to a decent list of actual events. Can you say the words, "Radical Islamic Terrorist?" The President cannot, because he is part of them, in spirit, by culture, by upbringing and in fact. It is only too bad we cannot ship him and his family over there to live in one of those many countries he so deeply aligns with. (I have nothing against Muslims. I know a few, and they seem to be fine people. They are not "radical islamists," however!
CHECK OUT WHAT SEN. ROB PORTMAN HAS TO SAY ABOUT OBAMA'S MISINFORMATION
THERE IS BUT ONE SOLUTION SET TO AMERICA'S DEFICIT AND DEBT PROBLEM. IT HAS THREE PARTS TO IT.
1. CUT EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND ESPECIALLY WASTEFUL SPENDING (AND FRAUD). SHRINK THE GOVERNMENT & REQUIRE BALANCED BUDGETS. (Check what OH Gov. John Kasich has been criss-crossing the country encouraging: A Constitutional Balanced Budget amendment!)
2. RAISE SOME TAXES BY CLOSING SPECIAL-INTEREST "LOOPHOLES." REVAMP AND SIMPLIFY THE TAX CODE OVERALL
3. CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR (NOT THE GOVERNMENT)) WHERE WEALTH IS CREATED (Government can raise money by taxes and fees from those who create wealth.. (Doing this will create wealth and profits which will cycle through the economy multiple times, paying taxes each time, and raising Federal (and state and local) tax revenues without a single tax rate increase. That also means CUT (DON'T RAISE) the tax rate on Capital Gains, because that encourages investors to also cycle their capital through the economy more often, leading to growth and taxes each time. Check the data yourself : every time the Capital Gains tax rate was raised, government tax revenue went DOWN, and when it was lowered, government tax revenue went UP…just the opposite of what we are being told.
YOU SIMPLY WILL NOT BELIEVE THIS ONE EITHER…IS THIS THE FUTURE?
Developed in Israel, and available in the next year or so.
WHICH OF THESE ARE FACTUAL? ALL OF THEM! CAN YOU RADICAL ISLAM" MR. OBAMA? (WHY NOT?)
What more needs to be said?
The Shoe Bomber was a Muslim The Beltway Snipers were Muslims The Fort Hood Shooter was a Muslim The underwear Bomber was a Muslim The U-S.S. Cole Bombers were Muslims The Madrid Train Bombers were Muslims The Bafi Nightclub Bombers were Muslims The London Subway Bombers were Muslims The Moscow Theatre Attackers were Muslims The Boston Marathon Bombers were Muslims The Pan-Am flight #93 Bombers were Muslims The Air France Entebbe Hijackers were Muslims The Iranian Embassy Takeover, was by Muslims The Beirut U.S. Embassy bombers were Muslims The Libyan U.S. Embassy Attack was by Musiims The Buenos Aires Suicide Bombers were Muslims The Israeli Olympic Team Attackers were Muslims The Kenyan U.S, Embassy Bombers were Muslims The Saudi, Khobar Towers Bombers were Muslims The Beirut Marine Barracks bombers were Muslims The Besian Russian School Attackers were Muslims The first World Trade Center Bombers were Muslims The Bombay & Mumbai India Attackers were Muslims The Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijackers were Muslims The September 11th 2001 Airline Hijackers were Muslims The Paris Gunmen were Muslims The Paris Grocery Store Murders were Muslims
Buddhists living with Hindus = No Problem Hindus living with Christians = No Problem Hindus living with Jews = No Problem Christians living with Shintos = No Problem Shintos living with Confucians = No Problem Confusians living with Baha'is = No Problem Baha'is living with Jews = No Problem Jews living with Atheists = No Problem Atheists living with Buddhists = No Problem Buddhists living with Sikhs = No Problem Sikhs living with Hindus = No Problem Hindus living with Baha'is = No Problem Baha'is living with Christians = No Problem Christians living with Jews = No Problem Jews living with Buddhists = No Problem Buddhists living with Shintos = No Problem Shintos living with Atheists = No Problem Atheists living with Confucians = No Problem Confusians living with Hindus = No Problem However... Muslims living with Hindus = Problem Muslims living with Buddhists = Problem Muslims living with Christians = Problem Muslims living with Jews = Problem Muslims living with Sikhs = Problem Muslims living with Baha'is = Problem Muslims living with Shintos = Problem Muslims living with Atheists = Problem MUSLIMS LIVING WITH MUSLIMS = BIG PROBLEM
SO THIS LEADS TO They’re not happy in Gaza They're not happy in Egypt They're not happy in Libya They're not happy in Morocco They're not happy in Iran They're not happy in Iraq They're not happy in Yemen They're not happy in Afghanistan They're not happy in Pakistan They're not happy in Syria They're not happy in Lebanon They're not happy in Nigeria They're not happy in Kenya They're not happy in Sudan
SO WHERE ARE THEY HAPPY? They're happy in Australia They're happy in England They're happy in Belgium They're happy in France They're happy in Italy They're happy in Germany They're happy in Sweden They're happy in the USA & Canada They're happy in Norway & India They're happy in almost every country that is not Islamic!
And who do they blame? Not Islam. Not their leadership. Not themselves.
THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN!
And they want to change the countries they're happy in, to be like the countries they came from where they were unhappy! Islamic Jihad: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION ISIS: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Al-Qaeda: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Taliban: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Hamas: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Hezbollah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Boko Haram: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Al-Nusra: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Abu Sayyaf: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Al-Badr: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Muslim Brotherhood: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Lashkar-e-Taiba: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Palestine Liberation Front: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Ansaru: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Jemaah Islamiyah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION Abdullah Azzam Brigades: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION AND A LOT MORE!
The 2016 Presidential campaign is already in the news. It seems that the fundamentals of choosing leadership are mostly or totally ignored during the nomination and subsequent election of a president. Maybe no one should be surprised when the candidates who emerge, and the one who gets elected, is ill prepared for what is arguably the most difficult leadership and management job on earth. To choose a president—a checklist is in order.
Presidential elections should be neither popularity contests nor political funding prizes (both of which they are to some extent). The president of the United States of America should have a set of characteristics (“qualifications?”) that can be defined and used as a measuring stick for candidates. This is especially true for the candidates who “throw their hat into the ring” in primary elections.
Sure, there are exceptions that prove the rule to be less than universal. Bill Clinton came from out of nowhere, however if measured against the following list, his success in the office would be less surprising. On the other hand, Barack Obama would be found to be poorly qualified and his performance has reflected that lack of qualifications, relying heavily on the one thing he is good at--oratory (too much).
In both Obama and Clinton’s cases, oratory and persuasive speaking skills, and in some cases, soaring rhetoric, drove their election. Not so with George W. Bush or his father George H. W. Bush—who of all recent past presidents came closest to fitting this list.
Some Presidential Qualifications—A Checklist (Remembering that finding all of these characteristics in a single person is rare.):
Integrity beyond reproach, held broadly in high regard—a “Good Person” (Character).
Strong Communications skills, both verbal (in public speaking) and written communications, & an Inspiring, and Persuasive Speaking style, personal presence & bearing.
Executive Experience in Management & Leadership of a sizable, complex entity (other than a political campaign) and the ability to lead under pressure with a “Cool Head and a Steady Hand” (Temperament)
GovernmentalPolicy & Operations knowledge and experience—Domestic and/or Foreign—preferably some of both & a Savvy Politician with the Judgement to compromise provincial or partisan positions for the greater (common) good.
A Proven Collaborator, able to work with others of different/opposing perspectives to find solutions & a Strong Negotiator, able to stand firm in difficult situations (foreign and domestic) and use Judgment on when to give in/or not.
Good Name Recognition and Reputation Capital based on past performance and personal history.
A Patriot! Who respects the Constitution.
Nothing on this list speaks about age, gender, culture, race, background or political ideology—or party affiliation. It is a daunting and demanding list, appropriate for a daunting and incredibly demanding position.
Colleagues of mine weighed in with a few different thoughts: "whether I think about my own experience as a citizen or read the literature on the history of the presidency, I come to the firm conclusion that the most important qualities of a president are CHARACTER, TEMPERAMENT and JUDGMENT." I agree with that, but while those are necessary, are they sufficient?
How to choose a leader for this daunting job is a challenge in that both "trait based" and "transactional based" leadership approaches have flaws. One relies too heavily on the named "traits," without adequate regard to how that leader goes about getting things done--or not. The other, "transactional" approach, focuses on getting things done /process, but can overlook serious deficiencies in how things get done—due to the traits such as character/integrity, and/or culture "fit."
Whichever theory of leadership you ascribe to be the best, both kinds are necessary, to be a truly successful leader. Now, how do we find that kind of president? I contend that it is important to start somewhere solid.
If the laundry list of candidates currently being mentioned is measured against this checklist, many of them fall off the list with lightning speed. That is as it should be. Typically Senators or Representatives lack executive experience (that Governors have) simply due to the nature of their past duties and successes. The presidency is an executive office, and in this regard governors have this experience and members of (typically) Congress do not (unless it was gained prior to running for office).
However, governors usually lack foreign policy insight and experience, which Senators have due greater exposure (in Committees) to national issues and especially foreign policy matters, which add to their expertise in a way that state-focused governors simply don't have.
Military officers and CEO’s often have proven leadership experience, but in one case it is “command leadership” (Follow orders, or else.) and in the other case it sometimes is leadership derived from “organizational position” (I’m the boss, so do what I say.)
Both of those leaders must make a large cultural adaptation when leading as the top executive of a governmental unit. The staff of a president may be compelled to follow orders, but most of the other people s/he must work with must be persuaded, or otherwise convinced to work with and support the president. This has, no doubt, confounded Barack Obama for all his time in the White House.
There is no job description that adequately can describe the presidency of the USA in a comprehensive manner. It is too immense, too complex, too situational—subject to myriad outside influence, and yes, influenced by public opinion and vulnerable to personal vendettas. In fact, one wonders why any human being would want such a job. But they do…in fact a surprising number of humans aspire to an enormously difficult, 24/7/365 pressure packed, thankless job that doesn’t even pay very well (on the surface anyway.)
How do we choose a president? Back to the start: to choose a president—a checklist. Before you choose your short list of aspiring presidential hopefuls, use the Checklist above, and rate each person on a 0 to 10 scale on each item, where 0 is “none” and 10 is “meets completely.”
Then add it up, and encourage the winners; dump the losers; and finally, as the race unfolds, choose whoever your "gut" says is the best one, cast your (one) vote, and support the candidate of your choice.
HERE IS AN EARLY LIST, WITH A FEW OF MY REACTIONS & COMMENTS. Here is a site where you can really review an exhaustive list: http://2016.republican-candidates.org
Mitt Romney --good man--not again
Jeb Bush--mainstream's best--Bush name a minus?
Chris Christie--I like him, but is he too NJ for America?
Rand Paul--conservative mixed with Libertarian?
Marco Rubio--too green unless he's picked for VP slot
Ted Cruz--I don't like him; too self-serving, even if his policies are popular
Mike Huckabee--don't know how to react; I like him, and some of his policies
Rick Perry--no thanks…he's the old Rick with glasses
Scott Walker--good man, real long shot, but took on tough things in WI
Bobby Jindal--talks well, good ideas, but something is "off" with him
John Kasich--does the job, not an inspiring speaker but a smart, experiences, no-nonsense guy
Paul Ryan--more valuable in Congress
Susannah Martinez--don't know enough to say
Dr. Ben Carson--If we want a good, smart man who is clueless about government and politics
Condoleeza Rice--probably doesn't want to run, Bush ties an issue, but very smart, experienced, talented and checks two minority boxes
Somebody please take Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty, et. al. off the trail…they just muddy the water. If you can't get elected by the people who know you best in your own home place, why can you imagine the rest of America will choose you. Waste of time, money, etc.
HERE'S ANOTHER LIST WITH VER Y BRIEF NOTES:
I WISH SOMEONE HERE GOT MY BLOOD REALLY MOVING…BUT WHO? AND WHO CAN BEAT HILLARY?
IT'S BEEN A WHILE, CALL IT THE HOLIDAY ACTIVITY SYNDROME
And frustration pointing out the mistakes of our government leaders, especially our Imperial President. To kick off 2015, let's go back to looking at a wide variety of issues:
THERE'S A LOT OF CRAP ON TV THESE DAYS
I confess, I watch more TV than I used to. I have more time to do it, and there is more of it to watch. Sometimes, however, I rethink whether that is the best use of my time. (A good book takes longer to read, but can be far more rewarding and memorable). A lot of my TV time is watching sports--Football and Basketball games--but usually just my favorite teams. (Like the Ohio State Buckeyes!--Go Bucks!)
EVERY NOW AND THEN, A REALLY GOOD TV SHOW COMES ALONG--BUT USUALLY HAS A SHORT LIFE
Two recent examples, which are totally different kinds of shows, but share my vote for good, entertaining TV …and both just ended recently. THE NEWSROOM & LONGMIRE
One ended recently: the HBO show THE NEWSROOM, starring Jeff Daniels as a major network anchor, with an excellent supporting cast. It opened with an explosively good episode and closed with two more great hours of entertainment. Aaron Sorkin was the creator and wrote a lot of the episodes--and influenced many others--and while he and I have different political ideologies, I found the show provocative and compelling to watch. Since it dealt with "news," much of the content was very recently timely, news related. Its real victory was that it creates a very human interaction among various cast members in that setting. Anyone who has HBO and didn't watch it, can probably pick it up with the HBO On-Demand feature
The other was on a "lesser" cable channel (A & E) was LONGMIRE. It featured a lantern-jawed Wyoming sheriff, solving a variety of crimes and human issues, all set in the rugged state of Wyoming, and including Native American (Indian) reservations and their unique cultural and law-enforcement issues. It was dropped after three seasons--but recent reports say that Netflix might pick it up (part of the growing trend of regular programming on streaming video sites.
IF YOU HAVE TURNED ON THE NEWS ANYTIME LATELY: IS ANYBODY ELSE SICK OF DEMONSTRATIONS?
I am… I've gone from feeling sorry for the (primarily) black minorities to feeling sorry for everybody, including the police because the true "Racists" are the misguided minorities (and their leaders) who sustain and spread this unrest. (I suspect that it's the same groups that always do it, but I'm not sure.) Anytime a person like Al Sharpton is involved then I know it is likely to be a "rotten situation." Somebody needs to knock that man off his pedestal (and podium.) He has become the successor to Jesse Jackson as the biggest "shakedown artist" …a reverse racist, and extortionist.
THE BEHAVIOR REWARDED IS THE BEHAVIOR REPEATED
As long as the blacks have a sympathetic 1/2-black president and a black attorney general, willing to bend every rule of law to help their constituents, (including unruly, law-breaking demonstrators), they will make some perceived gains; get some new rules and regulations passed. There's no doubts that blacks suffered mightily in America. In some instances they still do--less than before--but more than is right. A lot of it they bring on themselves too. The problem arises when "reverse discrimination/rascism" comes into play. Would any of the news media cover a big story of a black policeman who shot a 6-4, 290 lb. white man who stole something, then taunted and attacked the police officer so badly that he felt his life was threatened and had to shoot the man? It would be buried on page 7 of the Metro section of the paper, and never make it onto TV or Cable news, except locally, where it happened.
FOR EVERY ACTION, THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION (One of Isaac Newton's Laws of Physics)
However, when the advocacy goes "over the top," which is what it's doing right now, there will be a negative reaction--a backlash. There is a basic law of physics: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." That is not good for the longer term outcome. By ramping up welfare higher and higher, Barack Obama and his supporters are creating a 21st century form of slavery--indentured servitude kept in place by economic chains--not real ones. Obama et. al. become the "massa" and the "overseers" and they don't rule with a whip, but with a series of welfare check, creating a dependent underclass, subservient and angry.
PEOPLE WHO HAVE JOBS ARE PAYING THE DEMONSTRATORS WAY--INDIRECTLY
I have not checked the crime statistics shown below, but I believe they are largely correct. One reason so many people can demonstrate in the daytime is that they don't work for a living. If they did, they'd be at work. The popular excuse might be that they can't find a job; nobody would hire them. Maybe so. If they have a bad, resentful attitude, that's probably true. If they have little or no motivation to work, that's also probably true.
"BRING A MAN A FISH AND YOU FEED HIM TODAY [And soon he will become dependent on that]; TEACH HIM TO FISH AND HE CAN FEED HIMSELF FOR A LIFETIME"
The primary enabler that creates the underlying problem is that they can live on a broad range of government welfare programs, paid for by taxpayers who do work for a living, and make enough money that they don't have to go to work. Since many of these folks don't have the education or training to do much more than low wage jobs, welfare "pays better." That allows them to parade in the streets, making a spectacle of how abused and mistreated they are, and permitting--even endorsing--a criminal minority that loots, burns and terrorize law-biding citizens. And the sensationalism driven media is their PR arm…running to each demonstration with reporters and camera crews, and blasting it 24/7 all over the news.
STATISTICS TO PONDER
Black Americans are 12.6% of US population, yet they commit 32% of all rapes, 34% of all assaults, 55% of all robberies, and 49% of all Murders. 91% of murdered Black Americans are killed by other Black Americans. This is the BIG Problem. No wonder the Police seem biased, because criminality is biased.
For much more detail, read the following CITY Journal article:
THE POLICE HAVE A TERRIBLE DILEMMA
Police have a reputation--probably earned based on past practices--of being too quick to judge, punish, abuse and arrest blacks. Blacks earned it too, because of the statistically high crime rate. They have few good male role models growing up. They are unemployed at a rate 3-4 times the general population. Females who raise them often have numerous children with different fathers--and some openly encourage more and more childbearing--since it earns larger and larger welfare payments. Thus, psychology being what it is, since many more crimes are created by blacks, police naturally make assumptions about criminality and race. That leads to animosity, violence and in some cases death.
FERGUSON WAS DECIDED RIGHT (IT SEEMS), BUT THE TRUTH DIDN'T MATTER
Ironically, tragically, the Ferguson case was probably decided correctly. The grand jury concluded that Michael Brown was a belligerent criminal, who confronted the police officer in a life threatening manner, justifying the use of lethal force. Even multiple witnesses who were black gave testimony that supported the decision. So why demonstrate violently? Because it gets attention, sympathy and raises awareness of the actuality of the problem. Racism cuts both ways. It does harm both ways. It overwhelms common sense and rational thought. As long as influential leaders like Barack Obama align with minority leaders like Al Sharpton, this racial divide problem won't get better--it will get worse. It has since Obama has been president.
THE OTHER DEMONSTRATION--FOR A MUCH HIGHER MINIMUM WAGE--IS EQUALLY MISGUIDED
Would people like to make more money? Sure. Can they simply demand it? Not for very long. Why? Competition comes in a takes business--and jobs--away from anyone who is charging more than the market will bear. Just like the sadly misguided, volatile, demanding demonstrators vilifying the police for racial bias, these people demanding a $15 wage for fast food work will simply harm themselves. Have you ever heard the phrase "price yourself out of the market?"
HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER:
If you were a cop, and the reward for doing your job is like Ferguson and these other demonstrations, what would you do when encountering crimes involving black minorities? Did anybody say, "Look the other way?" That's human nature. "The behavior rewarded is the behavior repeated." and vice versa: "The behavior punished is the behavior avoided."
THE BOOMERANG EFFECT (What goes around, comes around)
If you run a franchise fast-food restaurant (or a big chain of them) and get saddled with nearly double the wage level, what would you do? Find a way to reduce the number of people and hours they work, and get more out of them when they are working. As soon as possible, change the way you do business to automate, let customers do more, and reduce employment costs back to the level they were--or close to that--and cover the rest by increasing prices. Who shops at these franchise restaurants? The very people demanding more money. That's who will pay more for their burgers and fries…and everything else where wage demands are granted (or legislated) in excess of what the market will bear.
WHAT KIND OF HOLIDAY SEASON, AND THE OUTLOOK FOR 2015?
It was a pretty good holiday season if measured by spending, but since gas prices are down, and seasonal hiring ticked up, competition was fierce, and consumers typically saved up to spend on holidays--especially Christmas gifts. However, if measured by retailer profitability, it will be a strange, mixed up economic season. Profits will be just so-so and not likely to match up with sales gains. 2015 should show another small increase in growth, from around 2-2.5% this year to perhaps 2.5-3%. That extra half point is meaningful. A good, but not great, 2015 is on the horizon.
iT'S A WHOLE NEW WORLD OUT THERE.
The economy is clearly picking up steam. Some hiring as increased. Many who have dropped out of the work force will never come back. They will be on welfare or disability rolls, and thus, there is little or no motivation to go back to work. Shopping patterns are changing--dramatically. More on-line buying. Smarter price shopping. A longer "Black Friday" turned into week long event, and had less impact than ever. Ditto Cyber Monday. There is less and less reason to go out and do everything just because retailers are pushing to get your money ahead of their competitors.
HABITS CHANGE SLOWLY, BUT THEY ARE CHANGING IN MANY WAYS
Buy on-line, pick up at stores is getting lots of hype, but only slowly picking up steam. Goods are arriving sporadically because of chaos among the entire West Coast ports. Labor troubles. Seasonal glut of goods. Too few trucks available to move the goods back East. Further change comes due to Free Shipping, from nearly everyone, and behemoth amazon. Prime (@$99/yr to belong) service has become a big factor. This year FedEx and UPS got smart and warned retailers to throttle back promises of instant delivery at the very last minute. They will both have good holiday seasons, regardless of how retailers do.
GREAT AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS--COMPANIES--ARE STRUGGLING
What do IBM, Walmart, McDonald's, and P & G have in common? All are American iconic companies, and all suffering from plateaued, flat sales and earnings, not just this year, but for multiple quarters in a row. Two of them are suffering from the effects of complexity--McDonald's and P & G. The latter is dropping HALF of its brands. McDonald's is nibbling around the edges while its problems continue. Walmart's size is now a problem when measuring growth--like Gulliver being attacked by the Lilliputians, it is being chipped away at by an army of smaller competitors. Amazon has the opposite problem:L growth continues, although it is slowing, but losses are growing. That is not good either.
THAT'S ENOUGH FOR NOW.
HAPPY 2015.
JOHN
A PARABLE OF SORTS--ON HOW AMERICA IS BEING LULLED INTO A DEVASTATING SITUATION BY BARACK OBAMA
CATCHING PIGS.. There was a chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab, the professor noticed one young man, an exchange student, who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt. The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install a new communist regime. In the midst of his story, he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked: "Do you know how to catch wild pigs?" The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line.
The young man said that it was no joke. "You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come every day to eat the free corn. "When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming. When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. "They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in the last side. "The pigs, which are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat that free corn again. You then slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd. Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity." The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening in America. The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income,tax exemptions, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc. while we continually lose our freedoms, just a little at a time. One should always remember two truths: There is no such thing as a free lunch, and you can never hire someone to provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself. If you see that all of this wonderful government "help" is a problem confronting the future of democracy in America, you might want to send this on to your friends. If you think the free ride is essential to your way of life, then you will probably delete this email. But, God help us all when the gates slam shut!
Quote for today:
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are now out numbered by those who vote for a living."
Recent Comments