2012 Run for the Political Roses

Although not a mainstream television watcher since pay television was mandated by Congressional decree throughout America, I have unfortunately been recently residing with relatives that unfortunately have become rather homebound in their declining years, and on and off been subject to some of the political entertainment shows carried on pay TV. Unfortunately also, it has affected somewhat my elderly relatives grasp of reality since this really is there primary contact with the real world.

Of course, those shows and all those crime dramas and unreal "reality" shows that are fed to the American public as a steady diet.

There have been so many debates at this point by the Republicans it seems there should have been a new reality series scheduled by the networks entitled "The Presidential GOP Debates: Run for the Roses," limiting them to 13 weeks. My eyes glazed over after the first one.

I spent my time during the second one imagining alternative occupations for those "candidates" after they leave office, if they ever do before retirement age. Few, I'm sure, will but here's what I came up with...

Mitt Romney - Used car salesman or croupier in Vegas

Newt Gingrich - Pilsbury doughboy stand-in or the new face on Monopoly for Mr. Moneybags, the banker. (Or Hallmark Card writer).

Rick Perry - Howdy Doody's new partner or calf roper and bull rider.

Michelle Bachman - New face for Oil of Olay or Cruise Line Director

Ron Paul - He's already an obstetrician and that fits, or Santa Claus (with padding)

As far as the other political party, we all know what Mr. Obama's true calling is: Motivational speaker or union organizer. I think most Americans know by now he is not nor was a Constitutional lawyer.

While all these people are traversing the country, spouting their political ideology, I wonder...just how did our political system get so very, very profitable for the cable entertainment news networks (MSNBC, CNN, FOX) and those candidates?

I mean, just how many staff members and assorted individuals affiliated with these continous elections can now list on their job resume "political strategist?"

I mean, do they give degrees in that now too?

Our elections are becoming mirror images of last week's finale of Survivor.

He who wins the game, wins the coveted rose.

Come hook or crook.

Iraq War Over? In Name Only, Perhaps

Contrary to what has been reported in the mainstream media, and especially the left wing Democrats on CNN, MSNBC and even those on that British Conservative station, Fox, the Iraq War is hardly over - nor is its reported "end" the result of Mr. Obama's stated campaign promises (except to promise what Bush had already agreed to before leaving office).

It was reported four short years ago that George Bush, during his last three months in office, quietly met with the "new" Iraqi government and agreed to a massive troop withdrawal beginning in 2010 and winding down by the first two weeks in December, 2011.

Which is exactly what has occurred, as agreed.

Just prior, of course, to the next presidential election in this country.

The mainstream media reported it, however, it appears the politicians in Washington hope and pray that Americans will buy this troop withdrawal as ending the War in the Middle East and crediting Mr. Obama for this massive coup.

Until, of course, there is another tragedy involving the U.S. in Iran, Pakistan, or wherever else the military decides it needs to go to bomb, and then rebuild.

The government contractors, of course, are still in Iraq and probably will be there for quite some time.

With, of course, military personnel still there also in order to not leave Iraq totally without a U.S. presence, and keep those government contractors and their safety as their primary priority now that the war is "over." With the convenient capture also of Osama bin Laden this year too (buried at sea in the Muslim tradition?) This has been quite a year for both Mr. Obama's party, and Mr. Bush's.

The AP also reported today in another article regarding a 662 Billion Appropriations Bill, not carried on the front pages or web alert pages:

"Highlighting a period of austerity and a winding down of decade-old conflicts, the bill is $27 billion less than Obama requested and $43 billion less than Congress gave the Pentagon. The bill also authorizes money for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and national security programs in the Energy Department.

Frustrated with delays and cost overruns with the troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft program, lawmakers planned to require the contractor, Lockheed Martin, to cover the expense of any extra costs on the next batch and future purchases of the aircraft. The Pentagon envisions buying 2,443 planes for the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, but the price could make it the most expensive program in military history — $1 trillion.

The legislation freezes $700 million for Pakistan until the defense secretary provides Congress a report on how Islamabad is countering the threat of improvised explosive devices."

You can read the entire article here:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iFsyaljotNCsnPSzq9tjRtOkPKZg?docId=e3c1b02ccc1a42b78e94120a4a2f53a5

It really shocked me that included in this article is a provision that in the event an American is involved in some terrorist plot (although it seems Washington's politicos are the greatest terrorists of all), they too can be detained indefinitely, and without bail or bond.

Isn't that fundamentally unconstitutional, since Mr. Obama has also consented to "allow" these type actions, with the exception of any actions instigated by al Qaida or its affiliates, to be heard in the civil courts, rather than military courts. So that terrorism and those individuals defense costs can be "privatized," I guess, against all that foreign oil money from the countries that these individuals really call their home.

I mean I could understand having "open" military trials for those so accused who are not Americans but somehow got a visa and entered from one of the more than 40 countries the Bush Administration afforded free pass visa waivers during his term of office, under those "free trade" agreements using foreigners as commerce now that "commerce" and "people" have been so ill defined progressively.

Not to mention "foreigners" or "foreign enemies."

But affording the civil courts for these trials when our national security was and is so poor that a 9-11 could have even happened here in the first place, knowing just how much ill will there is in that part of the world against America and the West due to our decade upon decade presence there, force feeding our Western ideas of "freedom" - a definition of freedom that those in this country doubt the founding fathers would recognize as the inherent freedoms they were speaking of when our Constitution was ratified.

Many of these Middle Eastern countries, it appears, have little formal military for defense of their country and its people, but rather seems they are instead personal armies for the protection of the various dictators who progressively have ruled many of those countries.

From reading most of the web comments on the reported story of the "end of the War in Iraq," I'm not the only American both skeptical, and also with a longer memory than most of the mainstream media types and politicos give Americans credit for.

I predict that there will be another huge national security incident during Mr. Obama's next term of office (you don't really believe that old Newt, or Mitt, or Ron Paul even will take the coveted presidential prize this election, do you?).

So then we can have a Republican win the next election, and the status quo will then continue simply under a "change of face and party."

Perhaps against all odds by Iran (we are again beating the drums over Iran and its development of nuclear weapons - apparently a gigantic threat to this country even given our massive military might, and all the money we have spent on national defense and toys, and Reagan's Star Wars program in the 1980's). Or Pakistan (still a threat to India, apparently, another former British possession).

I guess that is why today, "The End of the War in Iraq Day", there were no parades...

Barack Obama's 60 Minutes Interview: Politics As Usual

Although I rarely watch television, due to my present circumstances I was unfortunately exposed to the recent 60 Minutes interview with Barack Obama on national television last evening...

As a boomer, I keep wondering why a President of this country now has the time to conduct such interviews.

Although 60 Minutes has been around for a long time, I don't remember former presidents using the network as a forum in order to promote their agendas, or defend their political positions other than seizing the airwaves for one of those addresses that seem to also be getting more and more frequent.

During this interview, Mr. Obama had the audacity to claim that the problems in the banking industry that have been facilitated by BOTH political parties' unholy alliances with Wall Street, which now has a global focus rather than a national one, prior to the "financial reform" undertaken by Congress was not in any way "illegal," and postured, in a roundabout way, that if it were not for all the steps this Administration has undertaken in order to get financial reform addressed by Congress, these loan shark rates and terms would still be continuing...

Say what?

As one who was progressively stripped of her home and any and all property rights she had over her titled property, I found this excuse to be absolutely untrue and also one of the most arrogant statements made by a president ever.

Banks in the West, especially, were marketing loans which were not even based on the U.S. prime or currency, but on British LIBOR rates, a currency which is one and a half times that of America's piss poor dollar at this point.

Those loans are still being marketed throughout the country, and also to our kids for those outrageous student loans, last time I checked. In fact, this Administration has continued to promote refinancing and also re-education in order to get more and more Americans into those bogus loans, it appears...

And to state that the banks in this country, without such legislation and steps taken by this Administration, were not operating in a fraudulent and illegal manner is just too incredible to believe.

After all, we were created as a sovereign nation, and marketing financial products throughout the country which were not even based on our currency is and was not only illegal, but actually treasonous - and do not see anywhere in our Constitution that provides that our federal government was and is to coin and print money, and "value" it, with a created U.S. Treasury that was charged to so do, how this could be.

Unless it is a "global" free market that is the focus of this Administration, and this Congress, rather than a domestic one, regulating foreign ownership of America's key industries, and also its economy to protect America and Americans is supposed to be our federal government's focus. Not facilitating and encouraging a massive global takeover of our banking industries, and Americans homes and land, which appears to be the case more and more.

These "addresses" conducted on mainstream television are getting better and better with each one progressively...

And Mr. Obama has held himself out to be a Constitutional lawyer?

Just what IS going on at Harvard, I ask? And who is in charge of its law curriculum?

Are foreigners buying out our colleges and schools of higher learning even, at this point?

Penn State: Yellow Journalism and Deep Pockets

With all the "yellow journalism" and spins which have been reported regarding the Penn State sex scandal, it clearly has been evident that there is a "deep pockets" mentality and agenda behind the madness...

Mr. Sandusky thus far has only admitted to "showering" and "snapping a towel" with underage boys, and I guess if this was a crime, then a good many parents of young children just might be guilty of child abuse or "crimes against children."

But maybe that is the point, or at least convincing the public that your local teacher, high school coach or priest just may be a sexual predator if he so much as "touches" your child, or engages in horseplay and showers with him.

There has been a widely publicized grand jury indictment circulating on the net.

Without so much as a date stamp on it.

This story has been in the news now for over three weeks, without an end in sight.

The Penn State Athletic Department and Administration has been purged of any and all who just might have had knowledge of a hearsay accusation made by one of the coaches, who was retained until just prior to their game against Nebraska, and after a head coach had been summarily dismissed.

Much has been reported about Joe Paterno's pension and retirement fund, and just how much he will stand to continue to earn even after his dismissal, and that his house was deeded to his wife several months ago, and that he has been diagnosed with cancer...

Although not a Pennsylvanian except by birth and a short couple years living in the East Coast mostly in Jersey thereafter, I may be disgusted by the amount of the pension and retirement plan for a public employee if even that is true, attempting to hijack the pension of an 84 year old man diagnosed with cancer at this point is even more despicable.

With all the unidentified "victims" now coming out of the woodwork, and the progression of this story although the accused has only been indicted, and not found guilty of any criminal charges, with civil suits already being initiated by the "victims" families, sounds to me like we have one of those "deep pockets" cases going on here...slinging enough mud around far and wide hoping that at least some of it will eventually stick for the prosecution of these civil cases.

The "deep pockets" civil lawyer style justice.

And the "deep pockets" which will be affected definitely will be those of the Pennsylvania taxpayers, and all American taxpayers in the end, since Penn State, it has been reported, receives one of the largest government grants of any university in the country.

THIS is American justice? Flinging mud everywhere when the criminal case has yet to be determined, and in this country the accused is SUPPOSE TO BE innocent until proven guilty by a jury of his peers, and not public pressure due to a media now that also has been sensationalized beyond measure?

I think not.

George Washington's Wisdom

While reading of the ongoing demonstrations throughout the country by the Occupy Wall Street protestors, it occurred to me that Wall Street, and those bankers are not the sole criminals but co-conspirators (although even the word conspiracy is being ill defined in this country) of the majority of politicians in Washington.

The continued desecration of this country and its founding principles has been, of course, a joint venture between the bankers and those in both mainstream political parties leadership, with the corporately "organized" Tea Party appearing once again without a clue as to just when and where this country began this freefall, or just how to shift gears at this point from the progressive globalism agendas.

It is Washington in bed with the European bankers and our continued alliances with them that has continued to bite this country in the butt, so to speak, and ballooned our national debt and compromised this country's sovereignty and national security in the process.

Let's hope that the masses who are now gaining strength begin to see the forest for the trees, and not their individual grievances, but the "globalism" versus "sovereign America" economic and foreign policies that have got us here.

Capitalizing on Gabby: Giffords Interview Poses Questions

As a former long term Arizonan of 45 years, I just could not bring myself to watch the entire much publicized interview with Gabrielle Giffords, the Congresswoman from Tucson who was shot ten long months ago by a gunman in a Tucson grocery store parking lot along with six others who perished in the incident.

Why?

It was far too personal, and painful for me personally...

Ms. Giffords was not my representative, but from a state that I hold dear to my heart and in which I grew up in long ago when times were different, and things were much simpler.

She, too, is a native and long term Arizonan from the second largest city in Arizona, in the still wild and wooly west (if you speak to any Easterner, that is, who has never been there for any length of time other than possibly for rehab).

I had seen snippets of the interview, which Diane Sawyer seemed to publicize on every ABC affiliated program and station in the nation the past several weeks.

Gabby is courageous, that much is evident.

And still very much healing...

What I found totally unbelieveable is that this interview comes on the heals of a book that she supposedly "wrote" with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly.

Ms. Giffords has come a long way, but is still having a great deal of trouble with her speech, although is remarkably improved from where she has been to where she is now. But capable of even corroborating on a book, while continuing her intensive therapy?

I highly doubt it.

Not to mention the fact that most of the entire segment seemed geared also toward extolling the virtues of the medical profession and her somewhat unusual therapy for her traumatic brain injuries at TIRR Medical Center in Houston, Texas (which also just so happens to be the home of her husband, a non-Arizonan).

In Ms. Giffords present condition, though again remarkable, I just wonder how much she understood and consented to this interview, given her still healing brain function, and seemed she was once again being used clearly for a political agenda.

It is, after all, less than a year until the next major election, and the Supreme Court today "advised" the public that it would be hearing the lawsuits which have occurred in light of the passage of ObamaCare, and that dreaded and unconstitutional "mandatory" provision contained within it.

Gaining public support and sympathy prior to the hearing of that case, seems to be also a focus of both the medical profession (who will benefit ultimately) and also the politicians who sold out the American people with the passage of that provision and those founding fathers.

Gabby Giffords did vote for that bill, although is receiving care that will and is far exceeding that which would be given to any "regular" American citizen under some of those "low cost" health care plans marketed through those "co-ops" Mr. Obama envisions.

And in states such as Arizona, most of the "native" citizens have been paying for many of those hospital research grants, and also operating costs through their state property taxes, in addition to the monies they contribute to their state through the income tax, and also at the federal levels.

Here's to Ms. Giffords full and complete recovery, whenever that may be...

But let's hope that Diane Sawyer, and those media types leave her alone until then...and the politicians, lawyers and the Supreme Court start arguing their case for ObamaCare on Constitutional grounds.

On which, there really aren't any...

The Jobless And Form 1040

From all reports in the mainstream media again this week, it appears that Washington's priorities are once again something that needs immediate attention and review.

Instead of televising Obama's speech at the UN General Assembly once again heralding the U.S.'s unconditional support for Israel during the debate over Palestine's bid for statehood, with the new jobless and foreclosure figures in perhaps domestic concerns might take a front seat, rather than back seat, to Israel and its national security concerns which have been ongoing, after all, since World War II...

I mean, as one who was alive during the '67 war over borders and boundaries, Israel has been in the news consistently ever since...as has the Middle East and our continued involvement there...

Also, all those debates and televised campaign stops could be delayed until oh, say, at least six months before the next election, rather than a year and a half....

It occurred to me as one who has been fundamentally affected by what is wrong in Washington once again this past week, that what may be needed is an emergency pow wow of the powers that be that addresses some needed changes to Form 1040 before next April 15th in light of the ever increasing jobless and homeless Americans.

Many of those affected who no longer have jobs or homes are now living with relatives, if they have family so far that have not been impacted to such an extent.

Many of those living with extended family are now dependent on them for a roof over their heads, or food on their plate (since, of course, even food stamps are not available to people unless it is based on "household" incomes, with even the minimal Social Security payments outside the maximums in income or assets which qualify many for the program.

I have had to take residence with my elderly parents during some months since leaving my home state of Arizona five years ago, when this economic tsunami/foreclosure mess started after having owned my own home for over twenty five years.

Or, rather, it actually owned me in the end.

Both have heart disease, one in advanced stages, are in their 80's and live on their minimal social security payments, and a small pension received for forty years of work in the non-profit sector primarily. Both are on special diets due to their heart disease, but they have had added expense feeding me also as another mouth to feed, although do attempt to do some of the things both of them are unable to do at their age, and with their health issues.

I am over the age of 25, needless to say, as are many young adults also in this situation due to the dearth of jobs in their fields (although some of those degrees given today are quite unbelieveable).

Perhaps what is needed is another dependency exemption without age limits?

Forget the sums that would be provided to help under unemployment.

I was informed this week that my former employer in the State of Colorado and is licensed to do business there, whom I had worked for four months before being unilaterally "laid off" for all intents and purposes, had advised unemployment that I had, instead, "resigned." After almost eight weeks of receiving absolutely nothing while this was "pending investigation." I'm wondering if those jobless figures based on the Unemployment Claims filing have any truth to them at all, if this is what is occurring to many who have filed for their "temporary assistance."

As one who formerly worked in employment and labor law, this was no "resignation" under any true definition of the word, but an "enforced separation."

This was an employer that has been in the local newspapers in the community in which I formerly was residing for failing to pay its employees consisently week after week, and who also was giving employees unpaid time off when their call volume was down.

There were only five individuals left in my training class of 80 when they finally got to me, of course, after I questioned laying off 350 people after hiring 600 only three months prior.

I guess it was that question that sealed my eventual fate. And I suppose an employer who is having trouble meeting its payroll, is going to use every excuse imaginable in order to skirt around having to shell out for that even lesser unemployment amount...and this was a center that had a contract for a major national cell phone carrier, at that.

Try telling your landlord that you can't make the rent payment, because your employer was having several slow days that week.

I mean, if those in Washington are actually working at this point, rather than two-thirds of them attending fund raising events, and making campaign speeches, or are hard at work rewriting that tax code so that at least the instruction manual for completing a 1040 doesn't weigh more than a pound or two, rather than the ten to fifteen it does now, maybe this little problem has already been taken into account in some of those backroom meetings - what to do about those now jobless dependents?

I hope I hear something on CNN or Fox about it soon...because my elderly parents could certainly use a tax break so that at least they don't have to pay more taxes on that Social Security they had been receiving...

Which also looks as if it too is going to be reduced, for again "budgetary reasons."

While the war, of course, continues...and the insourcing and outsourcing for the "global good."

Banks Issue Flurry Of Default Notices to Homeowners in August

It was reported in the mainstream media that the banks have begun issuing a flurry of default notices to homeowners in August.

So much for the pleas by the President to arrange to work out refinances or better lending terms with the literally thousands of homeowners still who are facing foreclosure, especially in the Southwest, West and Florida, after the latest Washington manipulated boom and bust cycle in which many homeowners were forced into refinances under those "teaser" loans, or even British banking rate terms such as the LIBOR London interest rates.

I guess the time for understanding, or even compassion or integrity has passed.

Gee, I wonder if this has anything to do with Obama's proposal to turn bankers into landlords, and let them "lease out" those properties they are ready to foreclose on to the homeowner who has been scammed out of his property by this boom and bust wave, and the increasing costs of ownership which have also rise far above the cost of living, including in those states with all those property taxes.I wonder just why those banks would be now moving more quickly to initiate those foreclosure actions - to threaten those homeowners into those "lease" agreements, whatever THEIR terms might be?

This should really stimulate the home buying market for those few still in the market to buy into these "New Age progressive" loans and loan terms...

No New Jobs In August: How Many Were Lost?

As a baby boomer who has been seeking employment for the better part of six months currently, after working several months for a call center for a major cell phone carrier and then being subsequently "laid off" from there, I found the current jobs report again missed the mark on just what is occurring in the job market as a whole.

I have worked most of my adolescent and adult life in various industries and professions.

My first jobs were "starter" positions.

The first while in high school after my father's 1970's layoff was working for a major hamburger chain based out of Texas running their sales figures daily and crunching numbers.

The second after graduation was working for a "Million Dollar Roundtable" whole life insurance agent whose clientele consisted of many professional basketball players and consisted of doing all his clerical work, running his car to the car wash and picking up his laundry when needed, and combing the obituaries in order to obtain information on the recently deceased's widows in order to then cold call to sell them on whole life policies for my employer.

It lasted about six months until I could not stomach the invasion of their privacy and grief to continue making those calls.

I then worked for a bank again crunching numbers, and then for a major credit card company typing letters eight hours a day to cardholders, and eventually working for one of the Directors of their Western Regional Operating Center.

A company whose credit cards were and are a status symbol of sorts for the wealthier Americans.

Consequently, I have no problem even with my illustrious resume of positions I have held since that time (a corporate paralegal, and after a divorce a travel consultant) with doing what is now considered "menial work."

In fact, I recently worked for one of those dreaded "call centers" for a time, making not a whole lot of money in order to simply pay for my weekly rental room, and gas.

I've submitted at this point dozens and dozens of applications (an hour each to complete), and signed up at one of the local employment agencies in the area.

I've gone on interviews for movie theatre positions for minimum wage, and a government contractor and another call center for "technical" support where I was made to complete a IQ test for a position that simply required me to contact subcontractor technical support representatives to repair computers for governmental agencies and others from a list of "approved" vendors.

What the IQ test had to do with that one, I guess I'll never know since I must not have passed since that position was filled with another that suited the position a little better, or whose IQ test I assume was higher than mine.

I've even meet with the small business counselors in the area for an idea I have had for many years due to the declining health and hospitalizations of both of my elderly parents, but alas, was informed there simply is no money for new start ups in this piss poor economy.

The job situation has not improved except for the tech industries, and medical support positions I was also informed.

Or computer programmers (although I did have and maintained my own website based small retail business for over three years), but am not an "expert" in computer troubleshooting or programming.

I did get a solicitation recently from AARP to sign up for their resume classes through an online tutor at no cost, whose offices were in Washington.

Since tax credits are being given to employers who focus their efforts on hiring the returning military, Latinos, and those under 40, I just wonder why AARP is not fighting for the boomers and the discriminatory practices against generational Americans, or the under 65 or 70 crowd, which are being facilitated by Washington's apparent existing "jobs" agenda, rather than sending solicitation letters.

I hope during the summer break, those in Washington spent some of that time visiting the local job center offices.

To enlighten them as to just why those August job figures were so dismal.

And why the American economy IS NOT rebounding with this progressive depression.

Libyan Lunancy: Media Misses The Mark On Rebellion

With all the reporting this past week prior to Irene's arrival superceding it, much has been reported in the media regarding the recent events in Libya.

Most of the reporting, for the most part has been favorable to the rebels which have gained control of most of Tripoli, forcing Mr. Kaddafy into hiding somewhere with the city.

Photographs were taken and broadcast of the revelry, and of the homes and compounds which were owned by the Kaddafy family prior to their escape.

Of course, at this point it has been stressed that the U.S. is affording the U.N. forces and NATO to take the lead in support for the rebels.

France in particular from what has been reported, keeping the Brits and their involvement from public scrutiny due to the recent events in London, I would suspect.

But much has also been alluded to by the press, apparently at the behest of Washington, such as just how at some point it may be necessary for U.S. troops to go into Libya to restore order and begin rebuilding Tripoli.

Sort of what happened with Iraq, if you recall.

On the pretense of finding bin Laden in that instance.

Which country eight years later we are still rebuilding.

Also what has been left out is that several years ago, according to reports from the foreign press, Kaddafy moved many of the leaders of his regime out of Tripoli, and into outlying areas in order to conduct the existing government's business.

So much of the leadership of Libya isn't even in Tripoli, from those reports.

Two short years ago, it appeared the Brits placed great pressure on Scotland in order to secure the release of the Lockerbie bomber, perhaps setting the stage for this rebellion, and in order to also gain U.S. support for the allied forces mission to have Mr. Kaddafy, Libya and their citizens "get with the program" of their vision of global world government.

The banks in Libya, after all, are state owned and there is only minority ownership afforded any foreign bank operating in Libya under the Kaddafy regime. The state retains 51% ownership of any and all foreign banks there at the present time under their form of government.

Which most likely annoys those globalists within NATO and the U.N. who perhaps don't feel their control or ownership shares are enough.

Libya has always been a thorn in the Brits and U.S. side. Another country rich in oil and oil reserves, yet for the most part there is little else.

All the wealth then, is owned by the state through those oil reserves and their banking system.

Watch to see what kind of "democracy" eventually comes out of Libya.

Whether there will be a "Congress" of states and three distinct branches, or another Parliament.

To see who is really calling the shots here.

And whether, either prior to or after the U.S. elections, there is a move by Washingto to send in our troops to either restore order, or rebuild a "new" Tripoli.

The way things are going, within a generation there may be few able bodied U.S. males left in this country.

The Obama Solution: Lenders As Landlords

This past week there was a news report released by the mainstream media that Barack Obama has arrived at a solution to "solve" the mortgage crisis and foreclosure mess, especially in the hardest hit states of Arizona and Florida, by turning Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the mortgagee on a great many of those properties, into landlords.

It was also reported that input into this proposal by the public would be accepted until September.

Instead of actually addressing the true problems and just why the housing market isn't rebounding with the public expressing their free market dissatisfaction with the manner in which most of those properties are sold, with overly restrictive terms and conditions on those loans, and at usurous rates at that, the Obama Administration's agenda appears to be to corner the market on private land and home ownership in this country.

Or shift those properties over to all those investment groups so that all land is eventually "corporately" owned, and "managed".




The greed of the banks and the foreclosure industry at this point is truly incredible.

And make no mistake about it, in both Arizona and Florida the foreclosure industry is very big business, and both states have a very long and illustrous history of land and real estate fraud.

Just imagine all those LLCs and limited partnerships of doctors, lawyers and other high income individuals who will eventually purchase those bargain basement mortgages on entire developments if this "suggestion" becomes law.

Gone will be all private land ownership in this country eventually, as has been the agenda it appears with the progressive agendas of placing management companies and lawyers in charge already of large developments under those covenants already sold with homes in which "homeowners associations" throughout the nation have become the norm. Where the freedom to even paint your home the color you wish, or make improvements now involves a "corporate" or "committee" decision of your neighbors, or the non-owner management companies.

I wonder, just why are Americans turned off at this point with purchasing a property only to find out they truly have no "ownership" rights to speak of in any manner whatsoever.

And just why was this "announcement" buried by most news readers and reporters, when it has such monumental impact with respect to its "legality?"

And all appearances to the contrary, the Democratic Party is clearly as "corporately" focused as Mr. Romney's definition of "people," only this time fundamental private property rights and ownership rights are the targets to this Administration.

Placing them now under banker's control as the "landlords."

So THIS is where all that stimulus money will eventually be spent? Purchasing all the land and homes of Americans also now affected by failed governmental policies who have lost their jobs, and will now be losing their homes to the banker landlords?

When many of those banks who offered those Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae loans are controlled by foreigners through their stock ownership?

Outrageous.


If you agree that this is outside the intent for private property ownership, with banks not as lenders but as landlords, contact the Federal Housing Financial Administration at FHFAinfo@FHFA.gov.

Washington Taking Direction From Madison Avenue: "Super" Committees?

It appears that Washington must have a Madison Avenue mentality, more than a Constitutional one, with respect to its understanding of our American form of government.

In the wake of the "budget deficit" talks and moves to raise the U.S. debt ceiling, justifiably or not (given that there are no offset credits against that deficit for all the outsourcing, and foreign aid we continue to give foreign governments at the cost of the American public), now we have a Super Committee of legislators whose sole job is to study the problem and come up with a bi-partisan solution.

Rather than letting this old dog simply die its legitimate death.

Super sizing and the Super Bowl appears to be the marketing strategy in order to sell whatever comes out of this committee to the MacDonald's and football crowd.

New York and California are complaining through their state legislators about unfair representation on this committee, noting that due to their larger populations, they should even have more Senators than their Constitutional two.

Not mentioning that perhaps about 1/4 of their population might not even be "legal" Americans, simply tourists or transient workers on visa waivers. Or Mexicans. Or Canadians. Or maybe part time residents of Arizona, Florida or other SunBelt states, thus only "part time" non-residents residents.

Making the same mistakes and trouble in those states through their vacationer status at this point progressively as they created in their own "home" states.

When the Senators, after all, are merely there to represent the state governments, not the people actually at all since the House of Representatives, by that Constitution, is supposed to be the "people's house" representing ONLY those citizens living in their legislative district.

But, of course, campaign finance laws have also afforded "corporate" out of state special interest groups to totally undermine representation in the House, making the House of Representatives more the House of Misrepresentatives.

I wonder, just whose idea was this? And just where is it Constitutionally permissible?

Super egos, I'm sure, will insure that that information will be kept from the public, in the interests of "national insecurity" maybe?

The Submission Question: Larger Questions on Bachmann Loom

It has been interesting to this Independent the media attention which has been given over Michelle Bachmann's "surprise" question during the Iowa Republican debate.

I mean, was this question REALLY relevant, and just why does there seem to be such media over analysis which continues almost a week after those debates?

Ms. Bachmann, I'm sure, would be more than happy to move on to some really important matters, and I watched her deflect this question at least a dozen times restating her position and beliefs, and reiterating her candidacy based upon so-called "conservative" positions.

Tonight, I even watched as Fox's "anchor" Laura Ingalls once again analyzed Ms. Bachmann's response supposedly "supporting" it, while bringing in Fox's oft used "foil," Bernie Goldberg to attempt to poke holes in Ms. Bachmann's definition of submission, and "respect."

What is so very funny is that it is rather ludicrous to believe that any candidate that runs for public office, not to mention the presidency, would not be influenced by their spouse at times during critical moments.

I mean, Reagan was. So was Jimmy Carter. Both Nancy Reagan and Rosalyn Carter were very influential over their husbands. As is, I'm sure, Michelle Obama on "policy" decisions and positions when push comes to shove.

So why this focus just because this candidate happens to be a woman?

Family of origin influence also is in the psychological makeup of everyone on this planet, for good or ill.

Her husband will be under the magnifying glass, but really should he be?

I don't think Jimmy Carter's brother's travails and some of his antics actually affected Mr. Carter in any adverse way, even his association with "Billy Beer."

And contrary to Mr. Goldberg's positions, to most Christians respect definitely is part of the definition of submission, meaning that most women marry a man they do admire and respect, and in most domestic decisions are to submit to their husband's opinions and judgment, but political matters are not domestic issues between a husband and wife, and a man is also called to respect and cherish his wife.

Having advised and counseled her to pursue a career choice that she maybe hadn't considered, a wise Christian man would leave her to her greater knowledge and experience outside his own area of expertise.

But Mr. Goldberg just may not have that basic understanding if he is not a Christian, and has taken public issue with even those of his own faith for perhaps his own "political" reasons.

The questions on Ms. Bachmann's positions, to this Independent, are many and much more relevant to her candidacy than her definitions of marriage (an institution, actually, with an over 3,000 year history and in which gays also did exist at the time of the signing of the Constitution, but in which time even marriage between a man and woman was defined in this country according to the "common law," which is unchanging for the most part. You know, those "God given" unalienable rights those founders spoke of, which were not to be interfered with by government).

Questions about her stances on Iran, for example, as indeed a "threat" to the United States.

My question: Does this mean you view Iran as as much of a threat in the same vein as the Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon Administrations and Congresses did Viet Nam? I mean, did we not learn our lesson then about offensive, rather than defensive, wars on foreign soil?

Questions about her stances on Israel, also.

My question: Your bio states that you once lived in a kibbutz in Israel. Would that mean that you would continue to sacrifice the lives of your fellow Christians and Americans for the sake of Israel, when of course Christ came to Earth in order to warn the Israelites that if they did continue in their "legalism," with respect to Old Testament scriptural interpretation, they would eventually lose the Temple and the covenant would be broken?

Rather, would you refuse to involve U.S. troops in any further Middle East wars in order to protect American lives outside any true offensive attack on THIS country by a foreign enemy or army? What about the threat of true "terrorists," economic and/or criminal, even a little closer to home, rather than across two continents?

What about your positions on unrestricted and unlimited immigration, as has increased since the Reagan years, in the interests of "diversity" and our own open borders? What about all the outsourcing that has cost so many Americans their former jobs and livelihoods in order to bulk up the global economy and build up the global profits of foreign citizens and governments at the American people's ultimate expense?

Questions about her stances on taxation, of course, as a former tax lawyer.

What is your position on the 16th Amendment, and the Constitutional provisions and intent for higher taxation for "property" owners (corporate or individual), as opposed to those who are paying those taxes for the land holders and corporations where their tax bites are then passed down to the public? What about states that also have an income tax on top of the federal income tax, what is your position there?

Questions about her claims to be a "tea party" believer, without much of an understanding of just what that tea party was all about, especially with respect to global trade.

Ms. Bachmann, as with Mr. Perry (who apparently has written a book, even) "talk the talk" but don't seem to have much of a record of "walking the walk" with respect to Constitutional positions and just where this country has lost its way and is now under global corporate control, rather than Constitutional government.

I would be interested in hearing answers to THOSE questions.

But I think I already know the answers.

The Constitution is in this election season, and most of those candidates are going to do their damnest, once again during election time, to make you believe they have read it.

Or at least have a fundamental understanding of it.

But after election time, of course, will not submit.

The Iowa Straw Poll: Been There, Done That

This week the mainstream media's primary focus has been on the Iowa Straw Poll which will be conducted in Ames, Iowa tomorrow, so as one who attended the last straw poll during the last presidential election cycle, let me just say that this Republican Party fundraiser is nothing more than that...

A fundraiser.

Not at all an indication of just where and what level of support most of those "candidates" for the Republican nomination lies.

First of all, during the one I attended four years ago, the cost to attend and cast your "vote" was $75 per person, or $150 per couple, and all the proceeds were earmarked for the corporate Republican Party's benefit. Most all of the candidates advertise in the local Iowa papers attempting to trump up attendance and support for this nonevent.

And last election cycle, Mr. Romney was the most well organized of all, even paying the cost of those tickets for those who committed to attend in advance, providing them with "Romney" tee-shirts and a free western style barbeque prior to the speechifying, and during the voting and subsequent ballot count. He even provided buses to and from the campus for those that wished to reserve a seat.

Upon arrival, the Romney contingent in their campaign provided golf carts which raced enmass to the buses as they arrived in order to escort them to Romney Central, and past any and all of those "other" Republican candidates, or their supporters.

In fact, the eventual winner of the nomination didn't even attend this event, and as has been suspected by most former Republicans cum Independents, the actual serious candidate that has the corporate support of the movers and shakers within that party, and their campaign backers, has already been selected, to be announced after Super Tuesday.

The "dark horse" candidate which will enter late, in order to "save the day" for the party and the nation running his campaign on a shoestring budget, or the Evangelical vote.

In other words, with Rick Perry's noncandidacy at this point, while being heralded as the write in candidate, look forward to another candidate from the erstwhile "Republican" Party to rerun the Bush years from the Bush state, with the Bush agenda and Bush constituents.

And don't look for "change" once again to be a campaign slogan for either Mr. Obama, or Bush III.

Rather, more of the same.

Or, "second verse, same as the first" only much, much worse.

After all, hitting bottom only applies to "people" not "governmental special interest corporations."

No matter how Mr. Romney or the Republican Party or Democratic Party (those labor unions, and THEIR other "corporate" backers) defines "people."

Standard and Poors Rating Makes Americans Even Poorer

With the announcement of the downgrade in the U.S. credit rating by Standard & Poors, the globally focused arbiter of credit rankings of most of the developed and even undeveloped nations of the world, of course Wall Street today took a huge dive, causing many an American, I would imagine, to head for the medicine cabinet and their Pepto Bismol.

In fact, in one of the local papers today there was an editorial cartoon which illustrated two baby boomers standing next to each other with one reading the headlines and commenting to the other, "There goes our retirement savings. At this rate, we'll have to have multiple jobs until we're 90!...with the next panel paning back showing the very same individuals standing in the unemployment line with the other one responding, "I admire your optimism..."

This latest news is once again being used by both political parties to continue to spin those plates in the air, even now many placing the "blame" on the Tea Party while using this latest crisis, of course, for their own election ends - including those claimed "Tea Party" candidates. We've got a third party, alright, but simply another to bring into this three ring circus.

Standard & Poors, whose roots harken back to the 1800's, is now headed by a gentleman who was born in Jakarta, India.

So I guess this downgrading could have been predicted by those in Washington.

I mean, India does have a great deal of our IT jobs, and was also formerly a British holding, which has had off and on conflicts with Pakistan, the country which bin Laden sought refuge and was killed by those Navy Seals, and the country in which Ms. Bhuto was killed a few years back after her extended exile, and who was also educated in Britain...Hmmm...

Not that I believe there is any truly political motive or bias and media spinning going on here...but...

I wonder, since our deficit is merely a paper debt to the Europeans funding our Federal Reserve, without any offsets, just who has been doing the bookkeeping for Washington all these many years?

I'm sure many of those foreign bankers are now scamming some of those rock bottom stocks also right about now, further being given an opportunity to facilitate a "corporate" takeover.

Another boomer and friend recently wrote me who also has a history similar to my own, and is now on the unemployment line.

Worked for over 20 years in the legal profession, about ten more in the travel industry, early in their career in banking and insurance, with also some work in the health care field thrown in for good measure and further diversifying their career portfolio.

All of those employers, of course, paid unemployment on their workforces behalf all those years he was working.

Got his first unemployment check today after working at an hourly position for less than six months before he was eventually laid off from there after a "ramp up."

He is now living high off the hog on $90 per week, less taxes.

While listening to the news hearing that his mortgage interest rates just might increase, and his retirement funds, or what he has left after using it during his unemployment which is basically gone, is now worth even less.

And is pretty much resigned to the fact that all those 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 dollars withheld from his paycheck for Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid most likely he will never, ever see.

Not with the dollar and America being downsized and downgraded.

And just think, with that great American invention, the computer and international online banking, those foreign moneylenders and bankers don't even have to pay for that expensive paper or ink anymore in actually printing our currency.

Deficit Debunked: An Independent's View

With much political staging and politicking occurring in the mainstream media over this debt "crisis" and call for raising America's debt ceiling, since there has been so many solutions put on the table by both mainstream political parties that calls for Americans to sacrifice for the "greater" good, or those two parties political agendas, I felt some real viable solutions to this crisis by an Independent also deserves a little consideration.

As one that is not affiliated with either of the mainstream political parties, here are some of my solutions to this reported "crisis," which is interesting in and of itself since it does appear we do need one of these "crises" just prior to each and every presidential election year.

The last one, of course, was the "big bank bailout" and also the continuing mortgage crisis, and joblessness.

Which has merely intensified under the Democrats and Republicans holding office in Congress.

Here are some of mine, that don't involve Americans undue sacrifice, are Constitutional, and at least have a degree of rationality to them, given that all those ideas of "cutting" the social programs that Americans are obligated by law to pay, and have paid for also literally decades (such as Social Security, and Medicaid) since those programs were created "by law," Congress is legally obligated to fund and continue for at least the living Americans at this point.

It does appear that at least Social Security has become nothing more than a federally sanctioned money laundering operation, since Congress continues to dip into all those sums contributed by the boomers, especially, for their own special interests.

Especially if they are going to continue to fund or appropriate monies to foreigners and foreign interests, and taxing Americans for them, again sacrificing Americans for the "global" good.

1. Call in those foreign aid loans which have remained unpaid for literally generation after generation, and extend no new loans to foreign countries or foreign governments. It is amazing that after all this "raising the debt ceiling" talk, no one has even once mentioned where it is eventually going to go. Much of it, as in the past, not even to Americans or for Americans benefit.

2. Renegotiate those interest rates and terms with the European bankers who control the world's economy, now that they are not even having to provide much of that expensive paper and ink in order to print our currency what with internet banking and such, another invention of America that the European bankers have since used in order to up their profits on the backs of Americans.

3. Recall all our troops based in foreign countries protecting Europe or Israel most of all, and shrink our defense budget now that even our defensive systems have been computerized due to those expensive space programs also all the years since Kennedy, and Reagan's "Star Wars" programs. We can use our standing army to protect our own country and its borders instead - what a concept!

4. Slash the salaries of all those in Congress, especially, to a salary that is commensurate with that of the "middle class" American, and not that of the upper third.

That's a start, and there is so much more that could be done to rewind and trim the fat from those budgets instead of making it the Americans, and not the politicians or foreign governments and countries, who are once again asked to sacrifice when Americans have already sacrificed their homes, jobs and even their children for literally decades in the name of the "global good."

And finally, hire some American economists to work with Congress, rather than those global ones.

Murdoch Mayhem: Who Scripted This PR Stunt?

It has been interesting reading the mainstream media coverage of the recent events in London with respect to the Rupert Murdoch affair, and once again just how much publicity and almot stage maneuvering has gone on since these "hacking" incidents were first being investigated by Britain's Parliament.

I've seen more British newscasters and commentators now on Fox carrying "live" coverage and also their spins on this "questioning" to last me for many, many months.

As with so many of these "public" and publicity seeking proceedings and distractions from the primarily British globalist agenda of once again conquering this country from within with its "divide and conquer" strategy with these Republican/Democratic Congressional staged catfights, I wonder if there has been a stage manager involved in this one.

Don't count on MSNBC (Bill Gates' station) for any truth in reporting also, since one of their anchors tried to make the distinction between Mr. Murdoch's U.S. holdings as being an "American" corporation, which of course Mr. Murdoch purchased after his "rushed" citizenship application in order to buy up a great deal of America's news reporting agencies and Hollowood studios.

With this anchor also leaving out that although Newscorp is technically an American corporation, it is clearly merely a global subsidiary of Mr. Murdoch's worldwide propaganda machine. As Microsoft NBC is merely an arm of Bill Gate's globalism and political beliefs, so is Fox and so very many others.

Once again, we have a "questioning" that simply seems an attempt to place Mr. Murdoch before the worldwide audience, and then cleverly craft his image for the average Joe in this country through all the huge publicity it entails.

I mean, there is already reporting in many of those mainstream media of Mr. Murdoch's memory difficulties, buck passing, and son who has been called upon to fill in so many of the details on this "hacking" story - including the highly publicized hacking of victims of 9-11.

With the media crediting his performance, and also attempts to gain sympathy due to both the extent of his media empire, and also his older age with those memory lapses.

I wonder if anyone at this point has attempted to trademark "9-11" as Disney did the Team 6 of the Navy Seals after the bin Laden "capture." I mean, it does come up in all these national security proceedings, and now it has spread to both sides of the Atlantic in even this one.

The attempted "pie in the face" farce also again made me wonder if there was a rehearsal before this televised event.

I mean, Mrs. Murdoch is really THAT quick on her feet? The media branded "tiger" wife of this mogul who fought for a share of his empire for her children as the "third" Mrs. Murdoch as was also widely reported?

And Chinese, who married her first husband after having an affair who then divorced him after obtaining her U.S. green card?

Who scripted this?

Stay tuned.

I would imagine with Mr. Murdoch's long history of "sensationalized" and exploitive journalism, it will keep getting better and better.

I just wonder when the bill will be introduced in Congress, citing this incident, calling for more "regulation" of the internet so that more and more Americans can be targeted for disagreeing with both Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Gates' political ideology.

Of course, in the name of "terrorism" and in order to "protect" the privacy of Americans so that such bold transgressions on our U.S. Constitution never, ever happen again?

Maybe this will be another one of those "issues" and distractions most of those globalists will run on in the 2012 elections, again twisting and turning that Constitution and it's intent so that it is even more unrecognizeable.

Maybe INS and our Congress's time would be better spent once again addressing just how many foreign opportunists are applying for citizenship, without having even a basic understanding of the system of government under which our country was founded.

It doesn't appear Mr. Murdoch, or Mr. Gates have.

And at least Mr. Gates SHOULD know better, and maybe spent just a little more time in history class rather than in developing all that software and those "firewall" programs that Murdoch and his cronies found so easy to breach and so irresistable?

I just wonder, did the hacker once work for Bill Gates over there in foggy London town?

The Casey Anthony Case: Disturbing Questions Remain

Since the mainstream media frenzy has continued almost a week after the jury rendered its verdict in the Casey Anthony trial and subsequent sentencing, with no fewer than a dozen prime time cable news programs dedicated to dissecting this case and its three year investigation, I thought I would also set forth my post mortem on this highly publicized Florida case (which seems to be one state that has had more than its share) and the questions I and many have remaining which have not been satisfactorly answered.

Before I pose my questions, it has been interesting in just how many people are now coming out of the woodwork in order to capitalize on this case to be "reimbursed" for their costs, in addition to most of the cable news networks with their massive profits on this case, for their investigative work during the time Casey Anthony was leading law enforcement officials down blind alleys while the search for CAYLEE was expanding but just never seemed to be concentrated by any of those private and public investigative units less than a quarter mile from her home where little Caylee's body was eventually found.

I mean three long years ago, weren't those private companies representing that their services were being donated?

And just who was paying for her defense costs other than the Florida taxpayers?

Be that as it may, I guess the most glaring and obvious error to me was simply in the charges which were filed against her, which were never amended after her "arrest."

Instead of first degree murder charges, for which there was little evidence to begin with, or aggravated manslaughter, doesn't Florida have a statute that deals with negligent homicide? Or, since Ms. Anthony clearly admitted to lying to investigators about Caylee's whereabouts and had no idea where her child was after a full month, what about child abandonment or accessory to murder given the eventual discovery of her body six months later?

Why were those charges never amended to reflect at least charges which the prosecutor had a better chance of even proving, given the evidence he was relying on for a conviction?

I am once again wondering about not only America's criminal justice system and court procedures in capital offenses such as this one, but also the education of our lawyers which also seems to have been missed.

And given that Ms. Anthony will be free on Sunday, from my understanding although she was charged and arrested, wasn't she also then placed in a protective custody situation given the media coverage of this investigation where there were concerns for her safety within the prison population while she was awaiting trial? So in actually, has she really ever spent any real time in "jail?"

And what about those recorded "jailhouse tapes" where the family was recorded while she was in custody, but had as yet to be charged with a felony even. Just why were those tapes allowed into evidence to begin with, given that I'm sure there was no permission sought to release those tapes to the public and were also highly publicized by most of those cable news stations while the investigation was ongoing?

There is so much troubling in this case and its prosecution and defense, and its media coverage, that if I was one of those conspiracy theorists it seemed as if this "trial" resembled more than anything some of those "mock" trials that are held during most law students' studies.

Who is going to profit from this case, other than Ms. Anthony, for any of those exclusive interviews that have also been bantered about when she is released on Sunday, within a week of this highly publicized trial, by those whose post mortems are geared more toward upping the ante for these cable news networks for the lucky "winner" of that all important first person interview?

I wonder, will Barbara Walters or Diane Sawyer get that coveted prize?

And now the media is focused on the legal challenges to the judge's ruling on sealing the names of the jurors in this case, with civil rights lawyers and "corporate" lawyers representing the media flooding the courts with requests to have those jurors names released, basing their arguments that "it has always been done" that such names are a matter of public record.

And that "Constitutionally" this is a "right" to have those names made available.

For what purpose, any reasonable person would ask?

To harass those jurors, whose task involved hearing the evidence and facts as presented to them in order to make their determinations on the only charges which they were given?

Jurors are not public officials, they are private citizens who are merely serving in a public capacity so long as the jury is needed.

From that point on, after rendering their verdicts, they are private citizens and it should be they, and they alone, who agree through the courts to having their names made public "after the fact," in this writer's opinion.

It seems to me that the coverage lately has been to now target those jurors with all the media attention given those unhappy Americans with this verdict, whose behavior seemed more of the "vigilante" style of justice.

I even read an article about one unidentified juror who has since moved out of the state, and whose husband has related that this juror would rather go to prison than serve on another jury in a capital murder case.

Maybe this is the agenda after all.

Malign our jury system, so that the jury then falls out of favor in this country through mass media propaganda and those privatized prisons can then get a steady stream of inmates for profit fed through judge determined verdicts, with the state then acting as both prosecutor and jury for the accused.

With the one barrier then removed against governmental abuse, what with all the progressive laws which have occurred at both the state and federal levels which have no Constitutional basis whatsoever in so many areas it is astounding.

I mean I once served on a jury whose sole purpose appeared to me to "convict" the accused so that my former home state could then receive its federal grant monies for targeted offenses to continue to balance then its court budgets, and during which time a judge instructed the jury that they were precluded from even visiting the scene of the "crime" involved and needed to make our determination without such information, and only based upon the provided statute involved, and testimony of the accused - the only witness, although another individual was present at the time the offense occurred.
Seemed quite strange to me also that on my jury of six there were not one, not two, but four city/county officials on the jury panel even with only two of us "civilians."

Maybe instead of the names of jurors being provided, their occupations might be more enlightening in seeing just how many of those selected are not "peers" at all, but government employees.

The progression of this trial, and its media coverage which has been the prime time focus of more than one cable news station consistently in analyzing every facet of the case, has left me with the uneasy feeling that what went on in that courtroom had nothing to do with discovering the truth of this young toddler's disappearance and then claimed "murder", but a whole lot more.

Several Florida legislators are now proposing new legislation, based simply on the outcome of this case, in order to make it a criminal matter to NOT report a child missing based on this one case in which, to me, the proper charges against this woman were not even filed under which the prosecution had at least a good chance for a conviction.

I can now see now all those parents of ten year old runaways who run away from home after a spat with their parents, and who are then picked up by police then get brought up on charges of "failure to report."

Do you really think someone such as Casey Anthony would comply if there was such a law, based upon what actually occurred in this case?

I think not.

And I guess what is really most disturbing about this case is that nothing whatsoever makes sense from the outset of the investigation, then through the mock trial.

But I'm sure either Barbara or Diane will fill us in.

At least, the mainstream media version.

As a postscript: Not that it matters much at this point, but since Casey Anthony did admit to having been employed by Universal Studios, I couldn't help noticing that she also resembled some of those Snow Whites or princess characters hired by Disney at their theme parks.

Casey Anthony Acquitted: Media Frenzy Lives On

With yesterday's reported "surprise" decision of the jury in the acquittal of Casey Anthony on the charges of first degree murder, manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse, it has come as no surprise to this reader that the media frenzy which has been the hallmark of this case, continues.

After all, the media and talking heads on cable news set this entire trial up for such reactions by the entire manner in which the reporting of this case, its investigation and prosecution, progressed over the past three years.

What has completely amazed and shocked me was not the outcome of the trial and the jury's determination, since there was no conclusive evidence or eyewitnesses to just what had occurred brought forth during the weeks long trial, merely spectulation and supposition, but the reactions of the press and those legal analysts, lawyers and judges which has not abated but has been fed and accelerated.

People, again, who should know better.

After all, our entire justice system is grounded in affording juries in the jurisdiction in which the alleged acts occurred to make the determination insofar as the fate of the accused (although this trial was moved , also) based on the FACTS AND EVIDENCE presented - not emotional appeals, nor fabricated testimony or suppositions.

And this trial was full of them, so much so that the trial itself mimicked Ms. Anthony's behavior during the initial stages and investigation of her daughter's disappearance.

Circumstantial evidence, contrary to those talking heads and legal analysts, is not a firm enough basis in which to convict someone of premeditated, first degree murder. It didn't take a CSI DNA investigation, but simply tying in all those loose ends on the evidence, such as the duct tape, or the chloroform searches, to the suspect.

That didn't occur in any fundamental way in which a jury could find for guilt "within a reasonable doubt."

Mark Furhrmann, and other "lawyers" who have also weighed in with their outrage, in this former legal professional's opinion, should be disbarred.

After all, a jury of one's peers is the hallmark of our American judicial system, and it is THEY, not the lawyers or even the judges, who have had their say and have submitted their verdict.

For those that continue to bash this decision, and Ms. Anthony's perceived guilt, let it be said that after all the publicity this trial has engendered, I seriously doubt she will have a carefree lifestyle, or reap tremendous wealth hereafter on some book or TV movie which might be made. And if so, I believe her 15 minutes of fame will be short-lived, and will not last past the next high profile crime or news story.

Maybe she should speak to O.J. Simpson for enlightenment on just how well his life has gone after his high profile acquittal, since this trial was so very similar in both the media attention involved, and post mortems.

I hope Ms. Anthony gets the help she needs, and goes on to live a life of anonymity and eventually realizes just how lucky and fortunate that it was a jury verdict that was rendered due to the really poor investigative work of detectives after her daughter was reported missing (over six months to find this child's body, found a short distance from her parent's home?), and the leads and work of the prosecution (no fingerprints AT ALL on that duct tape?).

The jury has spoken.

America, CNN, FOX, Nancy Grace, Mr. Fuhrmann get a life and recognize America's justice system has been wrong based on circumstantial evidence in the past on many, many occasions, and as those founders believed "better one guilty man to go free, than one spend a day behind bars (not to mention pay the highest price under our criminal justice system).

The ultimate judge will have his due eventually, and already knows the truth, and will render HIS verdict.

The Casey Anthony Trial: High Political Legal Drama?

This past six weeks and so very similar to the O.J. Simpson murder trial, America and Americans have been force fed almost daily the high political drama and details of the disappearance of Caylee Anthony, and subsequent farce of a trial of the woman charged with murdering her young daughter, Casey Anthony, in a Florida courtroom and broadcast nationwide day after day.

Even on the 4th of July, this trial has overshadowed America's Independence Day celebrations, with no less than five or six lawyers or judges on many of the cable news stations analyzing body language, trial testimony and offering up their opionions, legal or otherwise, as far as the guilt or innocense of Ms. Anthony.

A brother weeping on the stand testifying about how hurt he was at not being informed of his sister's pregnancy.

A father who has been alleged to have abused his daughter, and whose personal life also has been the subject of speculation.

A mother who was at work at the time, but who was highly involved apparently in the raising of her grandchild and at times appeared to be more mother to Caylee than Casey.

Another overblown murder trial for the benefit of an increasingly intrusive media into America's courtrooms, since this is a Florida state murder trial and crime against the state, although is being broadcast not simply in this country nationwide, but even abroad for other nefarious purposes.

I mean crime is money to these media types, and a great profit generator.

Much also has been said about the "standing room only" lines to get one of those coveted seats in the courtroom. And even one member of the public was charged with contempt of court for not following the judicially determine courtroom decorum during this public drama.

The jury is now out, after receiving their rather lengthy jury instructions.

And before the jury is in, I'd like to add my opinion since the opinions of so many have been publicized by those who should know better, those in the legal profession who have used also this trial to build their broadcast careers most of all.

Much of my opinion is also based on supposition, which is hardly a legal standard but mine just might have a little more credence than some of the outlandish scenarios set forth by both the prosecution and defense in this case.

Ms. Anthony is guilty of involuntary manslaughter, if anything, since no direct physical evidence was ever presented which would render a capital murder charge even remotely possible.

But that doesn't mean that this particular jury will not so find, as publicized as this trial has become.

No charge of malicious intent or "malice aforethought" was ever set forth, or proven. No eyewitnesses. No physical evidence other than a "smell" or some duct tape found "around" the site Caylee's body was found.

Perhaps Ms. Anthony, as immature as her behavior was both before and after the events surround this charge, should never have been a mother to begin with.

Perhaps she had both an overbearing mother and father herself, and has issues of her own which truly need addressing if she is ever to mature, or become a mother again.

It certainly appeared that way due to the center stage her own father and mother have played in this drama.

I wonder if she was raised a Catholic, and thus the option of an early abortion, or birth control were simply out of the question.

Maybe she felt having this child might bring her closer to a mother and father whom she could never please, no matter how hard she tried.

As has occurred in many homes across America both in the past and presently in the increase also of single mothers and parents not simply due to divorce, but also family pressures.

And where has the father of this child also been? Contrary to the sexual abuse charges, neither father nor brother fathered Ms. Anthony's child, so just who and where is he?

However, none of the above would justify or explain away a child's death.

Most likely from the little I followed the trial and case in its earlier stages before my time and interests lie elsewhere, my conclusion is as follows:

Ms. Anthony found single parenting not to be what she envisioned as an unmarried, young 25 year old. Her mother worked, and could not help with the day to day care of her grandchild, and Ms. Anthony hardly made enough to support her and this child after she moved out of her parent's home.

She was unemployed for the most part, yet hardly had the free time then to also date as most girls her age do, if she had no backup during the days or evenings during the week.

An overindulged child herself with a working mother, and policeman father, she decided she wanted to party and searched the internet in order to find a way to make chloroform, a sleeping agent, so that her young daughter would sleep while she was out in the evenings and early morning.

She used too much, nor was she around to check on her daughter then to even see if she was still breathing after she left for the night. Perhaps her parents did not approve of her life style while living in their home.

Arriving home, she found her daughter dead or in a coma, and panicked placing her in the trunk of her car until she could figure out what to do, concocting story after story when her parents inquired about her daughter's whereabouts.

Finally, she dumped the body when she had the time to think things through, until her car was then towed and her parents had to pick it up from the tow lot, with Cindy Anthony then hoping against hope that her daughter's continued lies were truth, not wishing to believe the worst of her own daughter, and flesh and blood - or maybe feeling somewhat responsible also, due to the state of their relationship at the time of Caylee's disappearance.

The rest the nation then was made privy too, unwillingly or not, as the hot story of the moment unfolded and due to the adorable pictures of this young toddler, and the high drama itself of this dysfunctional family - again, not unlike many in this country with the growing number of absentee parents for whatever reason, but mostly economic.

Will Casey beat a capital murder charge due to all the hype this past six weeks?

I wouldn't bet on it.

This story has been so juicy, and so profitable for so very many.

I expect that a capital murder conviction will be returned, if only to give the lawyers at least ten to twenty more years to go through the appeals process.

While Ms. Anthony is, of course, in jail where she would most likely be anyway under an involuntary manslaughter charge in order for the state to then also, in the end, get their due on the expense of this six week exercise in American "justice."

But I may be as wrong as all those political analysts, "judges" and "lawyers" who followed and put their spins on this story for six very long weeks.

Happy Independence Day, America, just in case you forgot.

Social Security Fix: Give Me The Money

While the politicos in Washington begin grandstanding for the public and "votes" and campaign dollars, using the budget "crisis" and entitlement programs to foment their agendas in order to swing more dollars from that program instead to their campaign backers and PAC organizations through out state bundlers, high rollers, and corporate CEO's, much has been said about just how "broke" the Social Security program is in this country, and nebulous solutions proposed by many of the candidates selected by those who run the political system in this country.

Nothing much has been said about how to "legally" fix it.

Starting with: "Give me the money!"

Changing the rules in the middle of the game instead seems to be where most of these politicos stand.

In other words, I and many Americans, especially the boomers who have paid more into that program than any other generation before or since, would like our money back before any "fix" that defrauds middle Americans from their due upon retirement.

Returning those monies which have been withheld these many years, both those deductions made in those paychecks and also the sums contributed by those employers on behalf of those boomers in 2011 dollars, with interest, would be the "legal" remedy and cure for this claimed "broke" program.

Then the boomers could reinvest those dollars in any way they then chose.

And the program could be phased out for any and all that are born or hold their first "paid" jobs, not this random and illegal age of those under 55 which has been bantered about in the media by some. Where in the world did that figure (or age) come from, and just what is the "legal" basis for using 55 as the cutoff for those other Americans?

Interesting also that while Medicare was passed during the Johnson Administration due to the progressive higher and higher medical expenses when more and more hospitals were shifting from non-profit status, to for profit status, and during the height of the Viet Nam war when so much taxpayer money was being poured into that unconstitutional engagement, post 9-11 and our subsequent now even more unconstitutional engagement in the Middle East these "fixes" for these social programs are targeted at reducing those benefits in order to actually now shift more into EXPANDING our Middle Eastern engagements for those defense contractors and the military.

By unilaterally "changing" this program, is not this then an "ex post facto" law precluded by our Constitution for any and all that have paid ANYTHING at all into this program? Is this another of this Congress and Administration's ideas of "change" again at the American people and our Constitution's ultimate expense?

Or is this once again blowing smoke and diverting attention from all those receiving some of those monies using once again the federal government as nothing more than a money laundering operation for extra-Constitutional funding at the cost of this program?

The boomers were THE LARGEST generation ever, and if anything at this point there should be a surplus in that program, not deficit.

There is a true "legal" fix.

Too bad Congress simply would rather politicize this issue once again, Americans who will be receiving far more than the average American at their retirement through those federal and state civil service perks and benefits, at the cost of their fellow Americans and their "enforced" retirement, especially due to the amount of jobless in that particular age group at the present time.

New York's Gay Marriage Move: Politics as Usual

It was reported in the mainstream media that after several attempts to get a gay marriage bill passed in the New York legislature, the special interests have finally succeeded - again, diametrically opposed to the foundation of American government and the Constitution upon which it is based.

Marriage is a private contract, after all, and the government has no business "legalizing" or "sanctioning" any or all personal relationships, until of course they then dissolve for "breach of contract."

Appears there may be many lawyers and businesses representatives on the New York legislature, unaware of their Constitutional breach or aware but "frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

How many divorce lawyers also petitioned for this "new" law, since marriage is also, of course, an institution with its roots in not simply the "common law" upon which that Constitution is based, but also over 3,000 years of legal precedent.

Leave it to New York, that bastion of social unrest and their Wall Street and global corporate special interests to once again favor their economic welfare, over the foundational government created by those founders.

Along with those other six states which also have used our courts, and their special interests these past five or six years to forment their unlawful agendas.

Rather than address the unequal treatment under progressive laws which have been given to married couples, over those single individuals, heads of household and single parents, or long term cooperative living arrangements and regulatory agency "rules" such as Social Security which are not covered by powers of attorneys or state laws governing rights of inheritance.

This was a bold move, which I do feel will come back to haunt the gay community several years down the road.

They have now "invited" Big Brother into their domestic partnership, and custodial arrangements. And through those blood tests involved prior to issuing marriage licenses, even their own health records and personal information.

Be careful what you wish for.

Why The Boomers Are The Largest Segment of The Unemployed

This past week during the mainstream media coverage of the Weiner Saga and Casey Anthony highly publicized mock trial, there were mixed in reports on the continuing budget political in-fighting and fiasco, and an associated report on the boomers and how retirement for them may be postponed - until most of them are likely dead by 80.

What has been truly laughable about all of this is the fact that the boomers, more than any other generation before, have paid in more to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid than any prior generation, or the ones following.

Medicare, after all, was legislation that was established and included with the Social Security overhaul of 1965 under Lyndon Johnson. So anyone who began working prior to 1965 and who has not retired has contributed more really than those born before during the prior generations.

And the boomers, after all, are the largest generation and then subsequently had the fewest children due to the "discovery" of birth control in the 1960's. And also due to those "Zero Population Growth" wackos and their agendas who focused on U.S. birth rates, (thus also Roe and its ramifications which have even been expanded affording almost unrestricted late term abortions even which were not addressed by those Supremes since that decision was handed down in the early 70's) now instead support unlimited immigration and taking in all those war refugees from all the wars we have been unconstitutionally involved with since the 60's, in addition to then educating the "brightest" and most "promising" young people from other countries at U.S. taxpayer's expense, rather than our own youth in the name of "diversity."

I hope AARP and Betty White get the message, with all those flyers and advertisements that most boomers began receiving at 50. We most likely will not live long enough to enjoy all those cruises or have enough money to buy all those low cost term and whole life policies, or even those much ballyhooed Medicare supplements.

It has been interesting to see how both political parties continue to portray Social Security as a "broke" program, and bad mouth these taxpayer funded "entitlement" programs which involve these also ever expanding tax rates taken out of their pay before they even get what is left.

I mean, in my immediate family and my ex-spouse's, there have been several members that unfortunately passed on prior to reaching age 62, much less 65 or 80. Both my spouse's parents passed away at 36 and 54 respectively. An uncle of mine at 60. A brother-in-law's brother at 48.

All had contributed during their lifetimes to those programs, yet had received not one penny of those benefits for themselves.

Few qualify for Medicaid, since you do have to be under the poverty level in order to qualify with no real assets left. In other words, you are homeless and most likely in ill health as a result, but at least part of your prescriptions are paid.

While we then also create more and more sick veterans who will need treatment for those PTSD drugs and counseling, literally tens of thousands in the past ten years alone from both Iraq and Afghanistan. I heard there are now 5 million less men than women in this country now due to this war - I guess a statistic that just thrills the average male noncombatant, in order to also, too, make room for more foreigners and immigrants to repopulate and re-educate in the "new" American history being taught in our schools.

Also missed is the fact that in most unemployment offices throughout the country, the people on those computers searching for jobs (and for one legitimate listing are about six illegitimate ones used for the ad revenues those job postings generate) are those over 40.

Perhaps the reason so many boomers are having trouble finding work has nothing to do with all those articles written by those job center employees or their paid writers, portraying most boomers as "not tech savvy" enough for the new job market, or not flexible enough to work under people less than half their ages, in many cases, and unable to resist parenting all those up and coming CEOs and higher level management personnel or giving them in politically incorrect terms the benefit of their literally years and years of experience and training many times filling the positions which are now denied them.

Perhaps it is the fault of many of those "post application" questions which you are advised during the online application process are "voluntary?"

Like those tax credit questions.

Are you Hispanic? (A "no" on this one will get you another drop down box where you can fill in what ethnic group or race you are other than Hispanic).

Are you under 40? (Used to be "50 or over" for those tax credits - maybe this is why there are so many blond 20 somethings on FOX as political analysts, "lawyers" and commentators?)

Are you a veteran?

Are you on Social Security, Aid to Dependent Children, or any other form of state or federal low income subsidy?

If not, even with those all important key words and enhanced resumes, your application will go to the bottom of the pile, never to be seen by those Human Resources personnel who basically read applications sort of like the average citizen searches the Internet, using only the first page of the Goggle results in order to make their purchase, or get their information. And then soon, you too will qualify when you can answer "yes" to at least that government subsidy question, but the jobs you envision will not at all be one in which you have any prior experience, or training most likely but those created under those "jobs" bills in order to work for your lower welfare "work" subsidy.

Obama and the Democratic Party are now stating that perhaps the reason so many are not working is due to "technology," and the fact that so many jobs have gone the way of the dinosaur due to the tech sector's time saving gadgets. Time savings that are not "passed on" to the public, instead the expensive costs of those gadgets upping the costs for most goods and services.

Of course, this position has been mentioned while the 2012 elections are in full swing, in order to garner the votes of those unemployed and underemployed, and after signing all those appropriations bills for those grants that have fed this sector lo these many years, and their outsourcing and jobs killing agendas. Not to mention also the security risks with Americans personal and financial information in their databases waiting for the next huge "hacker" story, in order to feed the identity theft "new jobs" sector using crime itself as a job stimulus.

Gee, the boomers came to that conclusion over thirty years ago when all those monies started getting earmarked for the technology sector at the cost of almost every other sector (other than medicine, another heavily dependent on those devices and computers to streamline the delivery of healthcare, of course, at higher and higher costs).

Maybe it is due to the fact that even most of those technology jobs that even are left, have gone to India then progressively.

While most of the construction jobs, those there are on these shores and not in Afghanistan or Iraq, have gone to the Mexican illegals.

And manufacturing jobs to China.

I heard several members of Congress from Arizona, my former home state, also were sponsors of a bill to provide unemployment benefits to Americans whose jobs were lost due to "globalization."

Is this insanity, or what?

The Weiner Waggers, Palin's Revere and More

This week the mainstream news media is at it again, dominating the airwaves with sensationalized news stories, and propaganda geared more toward ratings, than anything that truly might interest the American public, in this writer's opinion.

First there are what I like to call the "Weiner Waggers" and their subversive journalism.

I'm sure this week's "Saturday Night Live" will be a hoot, and have a field day with this one.

Mr. Weiner is a American of the Jewish faith, married to a Middle Eastern young woman that just so happens to also work for Hillary Clinton, Bill's wife.

I'm sure there is some real bonding going on there between those two women on those taxpayer paid trips to all those foreign ports of call on behalf of the State Department.

Mr. Weiner was, of course, recently married.

I find it strange that this brouhaha occurred just as the public was in the midst of continuing to question and address the bin Laden "burial at sea" and details surrounding that heroic event.

In fact, seems almost to have been concocted so fast - this "news breaking story."

And the pronunciation of Mr. Weiner's name certainly seems to be either intentionally mispronounced also to flesh out this story, since I've yet to meet another whose name is spelled in such a way, especially of the Jewish faith, and pronounced "Weiner" (as in Oscar Mayer) rather than "Whiner" (as in childrens' tales of woe, or rhyming with beer stein-er).

The fact that it seems politician's infidelity is become the norm and seems to be used as a segway after or during horrific Constitutional violations, press reports out of Washington, or whatever to an increasingly outraged public with the goings on in Washington lo these many years also seems rather odd.

Maybe he just simply irritated the Jewish population with the selection of his bride, who is not Jewish from all reports and is of a different religious and ethnic persuasion.

Or maybe he is in on this latest hoax and diversion.

I mean, also from all reports he has sponsored bills for increasing visas also for foreign models to this country (as if we don't have enough American models, most on Fox it seems promoted to "political analysts" or "lawyer"), although who knows if that one is true, either.

And then there was Ms. Palin's version of the Paul Revere tale, with a lot of "shucks" and "by gollies" thrown in for good measure.

Darn those British for even thinking about "takin' away our guns," hence Mr. Revere's warning.

Nothing about that Declaration of Independence and just what the true "grievances" of those patriots were, or the fact that America had already pretty much declared their intent to break free of Britain due to also its history of governmental abuse, increasing taxation, and its partnering with its "favored subjects" in order to rob from the poor, and give to the rich to make them much, much richer with titles and baronies, giving away or demanding both their homes and land, and then even the fruits of their own labors as that 16th Amendment and the increasing eminent domain abuses for purely increased tax revenues demonstrate now in this country.

Not that simple little "indirect" tea tax.

Mimicing the Britain of the 18th century once again.

But, gosh, America it was simply those guns and arms the British wished to confiscate.

Thrown in to all of this was also the release of a report that indicated that Americans at the present time have the lowest taxes since the 1950's.

Federal, state, local or statutory?

No breakdown was provided.

I guess we are forgetting all the literally tens of thousands of laws that have been implemented since the 1950's that now mandate (such as ObamaCare intends to do) the purchase of its "favored subjects" products BY LAW OR ELSE you can simply pay a fine to the government, or be arrested if you do not now also budget whatever income you have left according to the U.S. Congress's will and edicts (or your own state, who gave the federal government back in 1913 power it was never, ever intended to have - at least without the consent of the governed in those "passed" amendments).

Those, by any stretch of the imagination, also count as "taxes" too.

But Ms. Palin's version is more exploitive, and inflammatory (and incorrect).

Gotta love the Washington press corp, cable news and those other "waggers."