After being in a heightened state of anxiety for most of the past ten days due to the 24/7 reporting on the approach and devastation surrounding Hurricane Isaac, I feel compelled to give my first person narrative as one who experienced Isaac first hand.
My 90 year old father and 84 year old mother have been 35 year residents of the State of Louisiana, living in the New Orleans metro area, approximately 25 miles from Slidell, Louisiana.
After losing a home in Arizona five years ago and political and quality of life issues there at the present time, after 45 years I have taken up residence with my elderly parents for both financial, and personal reasons as their part-time caretaker.
Which, at almost my retirement age with absolutely nothing left in savings to speak of, is no small task. I was mostly entertained over the weekend watching the reporting from the mainstream news media, especially the weather channel and Fox News.
One Fox report from Slidell, an area hard hit by the flooding which occurred, had a young, blond reporter wearing L.L. Bean hip waders, a powder blue (tight) t-shirt, manicure and spray tan standing in the middle of Old Town Slidell while the waters rushed by.
I hope she got her shots, but I guess her commander in chief was unaware that there are water moccasins in those waters, and those L.L. Bean hip waders weren't going to give her much protection in any event.
But such is the reporting on this major "natural" disaster.
The drama all began a week ago today, when the path of the hurricane was taking it's northwestern turn toward New Orleans.
Each and every hour the reporting confirmed the path, and those in the area started preparing for the worst. We were going to leave, as my parents had done for both Katrina, and Gustav before only this time my father was on thrice weekly dialysis, as he has congestive heart disease and has been in and out of the hospital at least a dozen times in the past year.
He has stabilized for the time being (this month), but we knew due to the severity of his condition, we couldn't go far so decided to "hunker down" for the duration, as one of my sisters who still lives in Arizona so aptly put it.
My other sister and brother-in-law, also long term Louisiana residents, decided to also do likewise since they, at least, did own a generator which my brother-in-law purchased during Katrina when he patrolled the neighborhoods with his neighbors during the month long power outages at that time.
He was born and raised in Pennsylvania, but became one of those dreaded gun-toting Southerners within a few short years of moving here.
My parents truly do not get out much anymore as both suffer from heart disease...my mother merely to the store and back, or to my father's dialysis appointments. Short trips, mostly, to places she is familiar. Due to also his debilitating arthritis, my father stopped driving years ago.
I went to three stores looking for "D" batteries since the entire community was out. None at Wal-Mart or Walgreens. I got the last two at the local Radio Shack.
Why is it that all flashlights require "D" batteries, anyway?
There were lines and lines at the gas pumps. And, surprise, surprise...only Supreme was available at $4.25 a gallon.
There were recurring messages here to report any and all "gouging" to a local enforcement agency. I just wonder how many reported those out of control gas prices...up over $1.25 a gallon from where it was a month ago around here.
Then the grocery stores.
When the power goes out, there is no electricity for those ovens and stoves, or crock pots. So I bought tuna, canned chicken, snack crackers, energy bars, water, bread and peanut butter.
My father is on a special diet due to his dialysis, so other than the peanut butter which was a no-no, I thought we were set for the long haul.
I decided to go to the local bookstore to get a book, just in case.
Walked in about 7:00 Monday night and all the shelves were covered with blue tarps and plastic wrap. The store was closing and wouldn't reopen until after the storm had passed.
We decided that as soon as the electricity went out here, we would all go to my sisters where there would be a room air conditioner.
Six of us in one room for the duration, since my niece had decided to stay at LSU and attend the Hurricane parties there. Of course, the real brunt of the storm had yet to come.
Tuesday passed, and we waited...as did everyone...there were no cars on the road, all who were leaving had left on Monday or Tuesday morning and there was an eery quiet that night as we waited for it to make landfall.
I was up until after midnight listening to the progression.
It hit around 12:30 and it was windy for an hour, and then silence again.
Isaac had gone back over the Gulf again, waiting... I slept on the floor that night since my parents house is surrounded by trees...pines, oaks, and number of other varieties. Huge trees that had also experienced both Katrina and Gustav during their ownership, and for which they merely got a new roof for Katrina.
But then they were not living where there was the most damage that time.
My father was a wood technologist, and bought this house in the late 1970's due to its brick construction, and an old 100 year oak on the property which he liked.
The builder had built the house for his son, who had died in an auto accident when they were looking for house to live in.
I, asthmatic that I am, had stayed in Arizona when they moved, but had visited since my children were babies almost annually until a divorce.
Living in Arizona, I had experienced our annual monsoons (now haboobs?) and flash flooding. The desert isn't used to quite so much rain, and there is nowhere for it to go in the parched ground which is the Arizona desert.
But this was unbelieveable.
Almost 24 straight hours of gusting winds, and pelting, horizontal rain. I had also been here during Gustav in 2008 (my mother had two heart attacks that year). The winds were much stronger then, but it only lasted about six or seven hours.
We were fortunate. We never lost power, although the neighborhood looked like a tornado had gone through it.
The rebuilding has started, although Slidell and the surrounding communities are still under water. And the heat now is unbearable, even to a former desert dweller who isn't used to the off the charts humidity which is also a result of the storm.
Traffic was backed up for miles on Friday, with all those who left returning to survey the damage to their property.
The Lakefront took a huge hit, and the rivers are swollen and overflowing, with a number of dams in danger of breaking.
Life goes on.
But the question I would have liked to ask those reporters, and photographers with all their equipment and spray tans, and the manufactured dramas in many instances...
Why is it that science can now create life in a test tube, created the nuclear bomb, put a man on the moon, and can seed clouds for agricultural purposes in order to make rain - but at this point we don't have the technology to redirect or stop a hurricane?
Or due to all the coincidence with this hurricane which occurred...not to be a conspiracy theorist or anything...but with the timing of this during the Republican convention (as with Gustav), seven years to the day after Katrina, and with all those out of work and with the oil companies continuing to use any excuse imaginable in order to continue to bleed the public dry at the gas pumps.
Maybe, just maybe, perhaps we have the technology to create these hurricanes for "economic" and political reasons?
Where is that female reporter in those hip waders, anyway?
I watched part of that convention...at least the end...and I have only one observation with all the hoopla and celebrating that went on.
As with the many here that suffered through Katrina, and seeing the literally hundreds of dollars per month my parents pay for their medications in order to survive, and what I have experienced personally in the years since Katrina...
No, we are not better off than we were four years ago...or even ten years ago...
This tragedy was definitely not a Katrina, Part II...the government did not fail the citizens of New Orleans THIS time.
But as an aside, in order to assist my parents and myself as an Arizona homeless refugee...
I'm working a temp position that pays me what I was making in 1982, with no benefits, the only position that I had been able to find, and which is not at all in my field of expertise (corporate law, and then subsequently leisure travel & tourism, which just about died with 9-11, and Katrina here).
And what's broken politically, can not be repaired as easily as the Louisianans will rebuild after Isaac...
Not by a long shot...
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Roberts Rules of Constitutional Obliteration
It has taken me over a week to process the latest desecration of the United States Constitution promulgated by no other than the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice John Roberts.
The Roberts Court I predict will go down as the most liberal Court in U.S. history.
And that's saying something.
Much has been made in the media of the decision reached by Justice Roberts on the most contentious provision contained within the 1,300 page "(Un)Affordable Care Act."
His holding in that respect defies any and all Rules of Law and the common law in this country, and wipes out any illusion that the Bill of Rights was written in order to protect individual Americans from federal (OR STATE) overstep.
Upholding this provision was not only overstep, it was crushing the American people under federal jack boots.
Now the "talking heads" on the cable news networks, who make their profits over sensationalized news and cases such as this one they can milk for weeks and years to come, are arguing whether this mandate is a "tax" as Justice Roberts defined it (is this man insane, or what?) or a penalty.
From Websters:
Definition of PENALTY
1: the suffering in person, rights, or property that is annexed by law or judicial decision to the commission of a crime or public offense
2: the suffering or the sum to be forfeited to which a person agrees to be subjected in case of nonfulfillment of stipulations
-------------------------------------------------
It is, no question, a penalty and not a "tax," or within Congress or the Supreme Court's taxing authority under our Constitution or those founders intent.
But more importantly, just what was the purpose of Justice Roberts defining it in such a manner, since there did have to be an ulterior motive here with such an outrageous ruling.
Well, the Supreme Court has, for literally decades, refused to hear cases involving taxation due to a decision either it made independently, or after passage of another of those back door bills, that it will not hear any cases involving taxation.
Since, of course, the federal income tax itself and its passage was by no means a popular move by that Congress so very long ago...
As long as the Supreme Court defines it as such, it never, ever again has to re-examine its own ruling on this provision.
By its own edict...
In other words, Roberts both ruled it a tax, and then protected this Court (and any future Court also) from ever having to hear any more cases with respect to that provision in ObamaCare ever again.
I still haven't figured out how the Supreme Court has the power anywhere in the Constitution to refuse to hear any case brought by an American citizen, but it does so rather regularly.
This, in an of itself, is a demonstration of the high regard the Court holds for itself as the Court of last resort.
And it is still unclear to me just who the appealing parties were in this case, since it was announced that it was brought by several of the states (who also stand to gain revenue from this ruling, revenue which they can now use elsewhere in their states for more and more unconstitutional functions when they cut many of their also state funded programs).
From what I read in briefly having a chance to read the Supreme Court opinion in full before it was yanked from the web, it was brought by a "corporate" entity I had never heard of (and additional appellees).
This was not just a wacko ruling, it was a wacko ruling that had a further political purpose as its objective.
Which makes the Roberts Court one of the most liberal and political courts ever in this country.
I wonder just how much stock Justice Roberts has in the insurance and health care sector?
Since it is clear that most of those in Washington who hold all those insurance, hospital and pharma stocks will be making a killing on this ruling - and Mr. Romney is also no exception.
They all should be ashamed...as this provision actually was the most contentious, and yet most important provision within that 1,300 page bill.
Make no mistake about it....
It set a "precedent" like no other ruling before it...that the federal government's power is absolute with respect to using any means necessary to pass any old legislation it wishes...
And the first order of business in this country for any new Congress should be re-examining the law school curriculum in this country, particularly those Ivy League schools on the East Coast...
Since the amount they are charging for tuition for such a legal education as obviously Mr. Roberts must have received seems like highway robbery...or money down the drain.
I hope Mr. Roberts paid for that education, and not his parents...
And if the penalty was upheld as a tax, then it would stand to reason that the mandate to provide health insurance for individual Americans and that cost is also a tax, and all dollars paid by Americans for their own health care should then be fully deductible on their federal and state income taxes.
You can't have it both ways...
The Roberts Court I predict will go down as the most liberal Court in U.S. history.
And that's saying something.
Much has been made in the media of the decision reached by Justice Roberts on the most contentious provision contained within the 1,300 page "(Un)Affordable Care Act."
His holding in that respect defies any and all Rules of Law and the common law in this country, and wipes out any illusion that the Bill of Rights was written in order to protect individual Americans from federal (OR STATE) overstep.
Upholding this provision was not only overstep, it was crushing the American people under federal jack boots.
Now the "talking heads" on the cable news networks, who make their profits over sensationalized news and cases such as this one they can milk for weeks and years to come, are arguing whether this mandate is a "tax" as Justice Roberts defined it (is this man insane, or what?) or a penalty.
From Websters:
Definition of PENALTY
1: the suffering in person, rights, or property that is annexed by law or judicial decision to the commission of a crime or public offense
2: the suffering or the sum to be forfeited to which a person agrees to be subjected in case of nonfulfillment of stipulations
-------------------------------------------------
It is, no question, a penalty and not a "tax," or within Congress or the Supreme Court's taxing authority under our Constitution or those founders intent.
But more importantly, just what was the purpose of Justice Roberts defining it in such a manner, since there did have to be an ulterior motive here with such an outrageous ruling.
Well, the Supreme Court has, for literally decades, refused to hear cases involving taxation due to a decision either it made independently, or after passage of another of those back door bills, that it will not hear any cases involving taxation.
Since, of course, the federal income tax itself and its passage was by no means a popular move by that Congress so very long ago...
As long as the Supreme Court defines it as such, it never, ever again has to re-examine its own ruling on this provision.
By its own edict...
In other words, Roberts both ruled it a tax, and then protected this Court (and any future Court also) from ever having to hear any more cases with respect to that provision in ObamaCare ever again.
I still haven't figured out how the Supreme Court has the power anywhere in the Constitution to refuse to hear any case brought by an American citizen, but it does so rather regularly.
This, in an of itself, is a demonstration of the high regard the Court holds for itself as the Court of last resort.
And it is still unclear to me just who the appealing parties were in this case, since it was announced that it was brought by several of the states (who also stand to gain revenue from this ruling, revenue which they can now use elsewhere in their states for more and more unconstitutional functions when they cut many of their also state funded programs).
From what I read in briefly having a chance to read the Supreme Court opinion in full before it was yanked from the web, it was brought by a "corporate" entity I had never heard of (and additional appellees).
This was not just a wacko ruling, it was a wacko ruling that had a further political purpose as its objective.
Which makes the Roberts Court one of the most liberal and political courts ever in this country.
I wonder just how much stock Justice Roberts has in the insurance and health care sector?
Since it is clear that most of those in Washington who hold all those insurance, hospital and pharma stocks will be making a killing on this ruling - and Mr. Romney is also no exception.
They all should be ashamed...as this provision actually was the most contentious, and yet most important provision within that 1,300 page bill.
Make no mistake about it....
It set a "precedent" like no other ruling before it...that the federal government's power is absolute with respect to using any means necessary to pass any old legislation it wishes...
And the first order of business in this country for any new Congress should be re-examining the law school curriculum in this country, particularly those Ivy League schools on the East Coast...
Since the amount they are charging for tuition for such a legal education as obviously Mr. Roberts must have received seems like highway robbery...or money down the drain.
I hope Mr. Roberts paid for that education, and not his parents...
And if the penalty was upheld as a tax, then it would stand to reason that the mandate to provide health insurance for individual Americans and that cost is also a tax, and all dollars paid by Americans for their own health care should then be fully deductible on their federal and state income taxes.
You can't have it both ways...
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Trayvon Martin Media Blitz Goes On...and On...
This week's mainstream media news has been dominated by two sagas that have gone on...and on...
The arrest and continuing investigation in the death of Trayvon Martin, and the goings on in Colombia that has led to the resignations of several of Mr. Obama's Secret Service detail.
No surprise this is an election year. With these two cases also politically reported, for the most part, on all national cable and news stations.
The media spins and politicalization of the Trayvon Martin case is being used to propagandize and challenge American's Second Amendment rights, and also a law passed in the Florida legislature upholding the common law and a citizens right to bear arms and protect his life and property.
This case continues to be one of the fact that there were no clear eyewitnesses to what occurred, and only telephone conversations with both a girlfriend, and the 911 operators prior to the death of Mr. Martin. It is also being used to facilitate the "hate crimes" legislation recently passed by the federal government - a law which makes basic human emotions when committing a crime also a crime in and of itself.
Not merely motivation at this point, but a crime for any American to have any ill feelings or act upon those feelings in any manner whatsoever a federal crime.
No matter what the origins or "mitigating circumstances" for that emotion might "justifiably" be.
I mean hate is wrong in and of itself. Humans definitely MUST NOT hate anything or anyone. Although God was a little partial in his wisdom as far as his tolerance levels. He definitely did have a bottom line.
It is a criminal matter to hate based upon gender, race or sexual preference. Of course, legislating emotions is now also within the purview of "the State."
Not simply any crimes which may be committed upon those emotions as evidence of motivation.
The handling of this case also bears a great deal of scrutiny and questioning.
The Fifth Amendment provides:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Where is the Grand Jury indictment here?
Well, the prosecutor decided to petition the court in order to have a "bench indictment" issued in this case, bypassing the Grand Jury (or people) of the State of Florida.
Of course, this will also drag out the case for months, or possibly years...since all those motions and bail hearings and other legal maneuvers can now be ruled upon and sanctioned merely by a judge. When a Grand Jury would be charged with determining whether or not there was enough evidence to even bring Mr. Zimmerman to trial, thus saving the taxpayers the costs of a trial if it was determined by the Grand Jury that there wasn't.
I understand and can empathize with Mr. Martin's parents...truly...to loose a child in such a way in any circumstances must be devastating for them.
But we have a Constitutional process here that, for all intents and purposes, is being ignored which is also feeding the media frenzy, not to negate the efforts of Mr. Sharpton also to get his face time before the cameras, rather than simply calling for the "will of the people" in the proscribed manner to be carried out here.
And I continue to wonder...just why is it that so many of these highly publicized and high profile crimes or incidents seem to happen in Florida?
As far as the second story, what happened in Colombia obviously isn't going to remain in Colombia.
Nor should it.
I just wonder why Mr. Obama was in Colombia to begin with...since we do have a Secretary of State and ambassadors to handle all those global conferences that seem to increase by the year.
Tune in next week.
I'm sure it will be more of the same.
No surprise this is an election year. With these two cases also politically reported, for the most part, on all national cable and news stations.
The media spins and politicalization of the Trayvon Martin case is being used to propagandize and challenge American's Second Amendment rights, and also a law passed in the Florida legislature upholding the common law and a citizens right to bear arms and protect his life and property.
This case continues to be one of the fact that there were no clear eyewitnesses to what occurred, and only telephone conversations with both a girlfriend, and the 911 operators prior to the death of Mr. Martin. It is also being used to facilitate the "hate crimes" legislation recently passed by the federal government - a law which makes basic human emotions when committing a crime also a crime in and of itself.
Not merely motivation at this point, but a crime for any American to have any ill feelings or act upon those feelings in any manner whatsoever a federal crime.
No matter what the origins or "mitigating circumstances" for that emotion might "justifiably" be.
I mean hate is wrong in and of itself. Humans definitely MUST NOT hate anything or anyone. Although God was a little partial in his wisdom as far as his tolerance levels. He definitely did have a bottom line.
It is a criminal matter to hate based upon gender, race or sexual preference. Of course, legislating emotions is now also within the purview of "the State."
Not simply any crimes which may be committed upon those emotions as evidence of motivation.
The handling of this case also bears a great deal of scrutiny and questioning.
The Fifth Amendment provides:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Where is the Grand Jury indictment here?
Well, the prosecutor decided to petition the court in order to have a "bench indictment" issued in this case, bypassing the Grand Jury (or people) of the State of Florida.
Of course, this will also drag out the case for months, or possibly years...since all those motions and bail hearings and other legal maneuvers can now be ruled upon and sanctioned merely by a judge. When a Grand Jury would be charged with determining whether or not there was enough evidence to even bring Mr. Zimmerman to trial, thus saving the taxpayers the costs of a trial if it was determined by the Grand Jury that there wasn't.
I understand and can empathize with Mr. Martin's parents...truly...to loose a child in such a way in any circumstances must be devastating for them.
But we have a Constitutional process here that, for all intents and purposes, is being ignored which is also feeding the media frenzy, not to negate the efforts of Mr. Sharpton also to get his face time before the cameras, rather than simply calling for the "will of the people" in the proscribed manner to be carried out here.
And I continue to wonder...just why is it that so many of these highly publicized and high profile crimes or incidents seem to happen in Florida?
As far as the second story, what happened in Colombia obviously isn't going to remain in Colombia.
Nor should it.
I just wonder why Mr. Obama was in Colombia to begin with...since we do have a Secretary of State and ambassadors to handle all those global conferences that seem to increase by the year.
Tune in next week.
I'm sure it will be more of the same.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Yada, Yada, Yada: Truth vs. Political Fiction
Recently I had a few moments to watch some of the prime time election coverage on two of the major broadcasting stations (Fox and MSNBC), although have attempted to insulate myself as much as possible from the coverage, such as it is.
Unfortunately, I am one of the literally millions out of steady work, or working part time or for far less than my resume would justify in this progressive, unconstitutional America we now live in.
With all the spins as one who has been majorly impacted also progressively, I'd like to add my truth as opposed to the fiction that has been the mainstay of our media low these many years, and never more so than in the past three to four decades.
The Republicans are offering up more of the same this election cycle.
More fascism in the form of corporatism.
All major contenders from that side of the two party aisle hold those beliefs when it boils right down to it in one form or another.
Even Dr. Paul with his positions of a "private" banking system in this country ala the Federal Reserve.
Which was, of course, created by Congress back in 1913 so how it could be "private" rather than publicly governmentally created, I'll never quite understand.
And this is a major position of his, and it would seem all Republicans for the total lack of accountability and control which has been exerted over the Fed's policies.
I'm experiencing a sense of deja vue this election cycle.
Even the candidates appearances look similar to the last cycle. Newt Gingrich and Calista physically could be John McCain and Cindy visually.
Mitt could be Mitt from last election.
Ron Paul could be Ron Paul from last election.
The only deviation from the script is Rick Santorum. Who could not be Mike Huckabee. But Huckabee got another gig on Fox and he isn't in reruns quite yet.
As far as the Democrats - well, let's just say that this is a rerun from last election cycle.
Mr. Obama is criss-crossing the country trying to get re-elected, and seems he is making more and more of those public news conference speeches such as the one he made at the Daimler plant in North Carolina today.
Was an interesting speech, if I do say so myself.
In it were rerun positions insofar as developing "new energy sources" and explaining away the huge spikes in gasoline prices Americans are now facing, on top of their homelessness and joblessness which was bad last election cycle, but has considerably worsened the past four years with more and more finding themselves "outsourced" or "insourced" or just plain not needed anymore.
He referenced that the United States has "2% of the world's oil, and uses 20%."
Prices are based on supply and demand, or so it was represented.
I wonder if this war actually did end, and we truly did stop our involvement in the Middle East which has gone on now for over 3 decades, if that demand would lessen.
I mean, how much oil does your average Humvee or tanker use in a week over there? Or jet fuel for those drones or fighters? Or fuel for all those ships at sea in foreign ports?
I wonder what the figures are for oil consumption for the British - the "owners" of the huge major oil company in which that billion dollar settlement for the Gulf oil spill was recently announced. Which costs of settlement, of course, will be paid by the American people once again at the pump.
Oil which is refined in Britain, and then sold back to the American people at higher prices as a result.
How much of our oil do foreign governments or foreign domiciled companies own, I wonder? How much of that precious 2%?
Also stated during this campaign stop was the huge increase in the number of cars in China now requiring fuel, and more excuses about just why we continue to remain in the Middle East for this "new" reason.
Since so many Americans have lost their jobs due to most of our manufacturing base being absorbed by China and thus raising the economies of their country's population, I guess I don't wonder much why China would need so much oil for all those new cars they are buying.
They've actually got our jobs and money, for the most part so that they can afford those cars.
But this was left out of Mr. Obama's speech.
Slams were taken at the "Republicans" who are now supporting entering another conflict in Syria, which were recently made by Mr. McCain, the senator from my former home state.
We certainly do like using that war card also each and every election.
For ones we are currently involved in, or those which we can manufacture for the future to keep all those members of the military busy for decades to come.
Somehow also tying it into protecting America from those terrorists who apparently don't like us being in their country for well on three decades and counting.
Yada, yada, yada...and so it goes...
I had been away for a few hours each day working at the only job which I could find which hardly suits my resume, but with gas now at almost $4.00 a gallon (my father remembers gas at .28 a gallon, and I when I started driving .33) I had to do what I could just to afford the gas I currently need to keep looking.
I'm helping one of those major retailers move from its old location to a new strip mall location off the interstate. It will remain nameless due to a confidentiality agreement I was requested to sign prior to being offered the job moving boxes and boxes of merchandise and stocking shelves.
My hours were recently cut, however, due to "over-scheduling."
So far I haven't seen a single item which will be sold at this particular retailer that has been American made.
All so far bear the stamp, "made in China."
And who ultimately owns this major retailer?
Bain Capital (aka Mitt Romney).
As I said...yada, yada, yada
Unfortunately, I am one of the literally millions out of steady work, or working part time or for far less than my resume would justify in this progressive, unconstitutional America we now live in.
With all the spins as one who has been majorly impacted also progressively, I'd like to add my truth as opposed to the fiction that has been the mainstay of our media low these many years, and never more so than in the past three to four decades.
The Republicans are offering up more of the same this election cycle.
More fascism in the form of corporatism.
All major contenders from that side of the two party aisle hold those beliefs when it boils right down to it in one form or another.
Even Dr. Paul with his positions of a "private" banking system in this country ala the Federal Reserve.
Which was, of course, created by Congress back in 1913 so how it could be "private" rather than publicly governmentally created, I'll never quite understand.
And this is a major position of his, and it would seem all Republicans for the total lack of accountability and control which has been exerted over the Fed's policies.
I'm experiencing a sense of deja vue this election cycle.
Even the candidates appearances look similar to the last cycle. Newt Gingrich and Calista physically could be John McCain and Cindy visually.
Mitt could be Mitt from last election.
Ron Paul could be Ron Paul from last election.
The only deviation from the script is Rick Santorum. Who could not be Mike Huckabee. But Huckabee got another gig on Fox and he isn't in reruns quite yet.
As far as the Democrats - well, let's just say that this is a rerun from last election cycle.
Mr. Obama is criss-crossing the country trying to get re-elected, and seems he is making more and more of those public news conference speeches such as the one he made at the Daimler plant in North Carolina today.
Was an interesting speech, if I do say so myself.
In it were rerun positions insofar as developing "new energy sources" and explaining away the huge spikes in gasoline prices Americans are now facing, on top of their homelessness and joblessness which was bad last election cycle, but has considerably worsened the past four years with more and more finding themselves "outsourced" or "insourced" or just plain not needed anymore.
He referenced that the United States has "2% of the world's oil, and uses 20%."
Prices are based on supply and demand, or so it was represented.
I wonder if this war actually did end, and we truly did stop our involvement in the Middle East which has gone on now for over 3 decades, if that demand would lessen.
I mean, how much oil does your average Humvee or tanker use in a week over there? Or jet fuel for those drones or fighters? Or fuel for all those ships at sea in foreign ports?
I wonder what the figures are for oil consumption for the British - the "owners" of the huge major oil company in which that billion dollar settlement for the Gulf oil spill was recently announced. Which costs of settlement, of course, will be paid by the American people once again at the pump.
Oil which is refined in Britain, and then sold back to the American people at higher prices as a result.
How much of our oil do foreign governments or foreign domiciled companies own, I wonder? How much of that precious 2%?
Also stated during this campaign stop was the huge increase in the number of cars in China now requiring fuel, and more excuses about just why we continue to remain in the Middle East for this "new" reason.
Since so many Americans have lost their jobs due to most of our manufacturing base being absorbed by China and thus raising the economies of their country's population, I guess I don't wonder much why China would need so much oil for all those new cars they are buying.
They've actually got our jobs and money, for the most part so that they can afford those cars.
But this was left out of Mr. Obama's speech.
Slams were taken at the "Republicans" who are now supporting entering another conflict in Syria, which were recently made by Mr. McCain, the senator from my former home state.
We certainly do like using that war card also each and every election.
For ones we are currently involved in, or those which we can manufacture for the future to keep all those members of the military busy for decades to come.
Somehow also tying it into protecting America from those terrorists who apparently don't like us being in their country for well on three decades and counting.
Yada, yada, yada...and so it goes...
I had been away for a few hours each day working at the only job which I could find which hardly suits my resume, but with gas now at almost $4.00 a gallon (my father remembers gas at .28 a gallon, and I when I started driving .33) I had to do what I could just to afford the gas I currently need to keep looking.
I'm helping one of those major retailers move from its old location to a new strip mall location off the interstate. It will remain nameless due to a confidentiality agreement I was requested to sign prior to being offered the job moving boxes and boxes of merchandise and stocking shelves.
My hours were recently cut, however, due to "over-scheduling."
So far I haven't seen a single item which will be sold at this particular retailer that has been American made.
All so far bear the stamp, "made in China."
And who ultimately owns this major retailer?
Bain Capital (aka Mitt Romney).
As I said...yada, yada, yada
Monday, February 6, 2012
First Person Perspective: Why Americans Are Unemployed
Due to all the massive spins which continue to be bantered around among Mr. Obama, the challengers, and the mainstream media, as one of those currently unemployed, I thought I would address this situation from a better, more clearer, perspective.
As one formerly in the middle class for a good part of my life, but who is at over 50 no longer from a personal perspective just what has transpired to place me in this position post 9-11 and our current economy.
My former home was for most of my life in Arizona. It is no longer, and has not been since the National Guard was called out to help secure the border in 2006 during the Iraqi War and subsequent surge when, according to media sources, then President Bush was offering border agents extra pay and bonuses if they would go overseas to secure Iraq's borders, rather than our own.
An initial move to the Midwest proved to be futile, since as an asthmatic during the summer months it was rather difficult to breathe during planting season and was a much harder adjustment at over 50 than it had been when I had lived there a short time during a spouse's graduate studies many years ago.
So I headed South, where I have extended family only to be then caught there during one of the major hurricanes in 2008, and living in weekly rental rooms at that point. Whatever the amount of equity I got out of my home upon an enforced sale, was pretty much gone after the medical bills and living expenses while I was then recovering and added expenses of then subsequent moves. This was my second move in less than a year.
It took over a year to even start to feel a bit better, and another move back West (not to Arizona, however) where I could recuperate until my lungs healed. I am deathly allergic to mold and when all those roofs were pulled up to replace, the mold which had grown out of control after the hurricane was then released in the air, and I got the mother of all lung infections.
While West and recuperating, on my good days I attempted to seek help from the Social Security office.
But since I wasn't old enough to claim my benefits, and wasn't injured to the point where they could determine it would be "permanent," nor missing a limb, I was shown the door and advised I could hire a lawyer and challenge their decision in front of a government Administrative Law Judge. That would take about a year, I was told, to go through the "process."
I continued to deplete whatever savings I had left while I continued to heal, and then found a job after nine months of looking sporadically when I could in a call center during a ramp up. A third party provider for a major cell phone carrier.
I was there all of four months before there was a massive layoff of almost all the people who were hired during that ramp up due to a slowed economy.
Especially the older workers (over 35), and any and all where drug testing, or misdemeanor offenses could then be used to whittle down the workforce (even though drug testing and background checks were undertaken upon filling out those lengthy application forms).
In the state where I was working, medical marijuana use with THC in the bloodstream during the testing period was a cause for immediate dismissal. So were juvenile possession and misdemeanor criminal offenses, although in some people's cases occurred decades before, or even misdemeanor traffic offenses. The older, of course, you got the more likely it was that at one point in your life due to the shear number of laws on the books there was something there that could be used.
Especially since in most states at this point, there are no statutory expungements for criminal offenses, even misdemeanors. With progressively also more and more victimless civil offenses now classified as criminal.
This was not a right to work state, but as of yet this center was not unionized.
But as one who formerly worked in that field, I can certainly see that day coming fairly quickly, which may be why most call centers are now "outsourced."
There may be a reason at some of those locations they are jobs Americans don't want, or can't have for just such hiring practices.
Of course, the working conditions there left much to be desired from a labor/management perspective, and from what I understand there have been lawsuits which filed over failure to pay employees for time worked, and also mandatory overtime not paid.
My time came for the boot primarily because I believe I asked far too many questions for their comfort as having worked in the labor relations field for many years. Or maybe because I was one of those "older" workers targeted anyway since my style of customer service was foreign to their management.
During my training I was warned not to become a "target" by the instructors, in failing to follow the dress code or grievance procedures, which procedures were similar to those in the military - using the "chain of command" verbiage to explain them to the new hires. Meeting with anyone in Human Resources was the last step in the chain.
Although it wasn't my real choice of job to begin with, but one taken out of shear desperation and necessity. For a little over minimum wage, after over twenty five years banking, legal and travel industry experience.
I moved again, due to the inability to get work to a state that had a little better unemployment rate.
I signed up with two or three local job centers and completed all their testing.
It is not that I am not computer savvy, having owned and managed my own website based small business for several years, and having also taken continuing education classes through the years.
I had worked with some senior students at DeVry who developed my website in 2004, and also worked with me during the process so that I could subsequently maintain it for a product line of children's footwear I had developed before the economic and political roof caved in Arizona and throughout most of the nation in 2005-06 and as a single mom with teenagers working from home.
In over seven months, only one or two referrals for minimum wage positions in this "lower" unemployment rate state.
That's it.
I also started combing the ads and internet myself.
I went to one company that was looking for sales personnel for a cruise line packager. I had worked for a major vacation packager in Arizona prior to a layoff in '99 when they deemed the rent too high there, and moved to Coral Gables, Florida - another high humidity, hurricane prone state in which at that time I could not live with also an asthmatic daughter who would not have done well there (nor as a divorced mom, could move there without "court" permission, I was told, due to a shared custody arrangement with my ex for our minor children).
There I was informed that it would cost me $500 for their training materials, and then $200 to rent desk space at their offices annually. I was then to receive a 20% commission on my sales, from the 10% commission the company made from the cruise line company, and would be paid after the cruise line company was paid by the customer prior to their departure.
I figured on a $2,500 cruise (standard) at 10% commission for the agency, my 20% of 10% would be $50.00. I would get $50.00 for each cruise I sold. They would get the rest. Hours of calls, and hand holding until that ship finally departed (especially after this latest cruise line sinking) and I would receive $50.00.
Less taxes.
I got one call the other day from an agency I had basically written off.
It was a one day assignment, but the agency needed to know one important question first.
Did I have an IPhone, or smart phone capable of taking photographs, and then emailing them from my phone?
I, of course, at this point unable to really afford even your basic flip phone (although trouble shooted those IPhones for two months), had to tell her no, I did not.
But I did have access to a digital camera that I could download and then email.
That wasn't what the client wanted.
So sorry.
Wake up, Washington...and the state legislatures...there is much, much more to this than meets the eye.
Or those candidates can even begin to comprehend.
Or just maybe, they do know and not to be politically incorrect or anything...
But Obama, Mitt and Newt just may be like those little Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil monkeys (deaf, dumb, blind) I remember from childhood. (Of course, that children's analogy sure isn't used in "politically correct" America anymore)
Or maybe, in this stage managed political arena we now live in where politicians resemble more and more "B" movie actors...
The director(s) in global corporate America, simply don't give a ****...
People are now nothing more than commerce, after all...
As one formerly in the middle class for a good part of my life, but who is at over 50 no longer from a personal perspective just what has transpired to place me in this position post 9-11 and our current economy.
My former home was for most of my life in Arizona. It is no longer, and has not been since the National Guard was called out to help secure the border in 2006 during the Iraqi War and subsequent surge when, according to media sources, then President Bush was offering border agents extra pay and bonuses if they would go overseas to secure Iraq's borders, rather than our own.
An initial move to the Midwest proved to be futile, since as an asthmatic during the summer months it was rather difficult to breathe during planting season and was a much harder adjustment at over 50 than it had been when I had lived there a short time during a spouse's graduate studies many years ago.
So I headed South, where I have extended family only to be then caught there during one of the major hurricanes in 2008, and living in weekly rental rooms at that point. Whatever the amount of equity I got out of my home upon an enforced sale, was pretty much gone after the medical bills and living expenses while I was then recovering and added expenses of then subsequent moves. This was my second move in less than a year.
It took over a year to even start to feel a bit better, and another move back West (not to Arizona, however) where I could recuperate until my lungs healed. I am deathly allergic to mold and when all those roofs were pulled up to replace, the mold which had grown out of control after the hurricane was then released in the air, and I got the mother of all lung infections.
While West and recuperating, on my good days I attempted to seek help from the Social Security office.
But since I wasn't old enough to claim my benefits, and wasn't injured to the point where they could determine it would be "permanent," nor missing a limb, I was shown the door and advised I could hire a lawyer and challenge their decision in front of a government Administrative Law Judge. That would take about a year, I was told, to go through the "process."
I continued to deplete whatever savings I had left while I continued to heal, and then found a job after nine months of looking sporadically when I could in a call center during a ramp up. A third party provider for a major cell phone carrier.
I was there all of four months before there was a massive layoff of almost all the people who were hired during that ramp up due to a slowed economy.
Especially the older workers (over 35), and any and all where drug testing, or misdemeanor offenses could then be used to whittle down the workforce (even though drug testing and background checks were undertaken upon filling out those lengthy application forms).
In the state where I was working, medical marijuana use with THC in the bloodstream during the testing period was a cause for immediate dismissal. So were juvenile possession and misdemeanor criminal offenses, although in some people's cases occurred decades before, or even misdemeanor traffic offenses. The older, of course, you got the more likely it was that at one point in your life due to the shear number of laws on the books there was something there that could be used.
Especially since in most states at this point, there are no statutory expungements for criminal offenses, even misdemeanors. With progressively also more and more victimless civil offenses now classified as criminal.
This was not a right to work state, but as of yet this center was not unionized.
But as one who formerly worked in that field, I can certainly see that day coming fairly quickly, which may be why most call centers are now "outsourced."
There may be a reason at some of those locations they are jobs Americans don't want, or can't have for just such hiring practices.
Of course, the working conditions there left much to be desired from a labor/management perspective, and from what I understand there have been lawsuits which filed over failure to pay employees for time worked, and also mandatory overtime not paid.
My time came for the boot primarily because I believe I asked far too many questions for their comfort as having worked in the labor relations field for many years. Or maybe because I was one of those "older" workers targeted anyway since my style of customer service was foreign to their management.
During my training I was warned not to become a "target" by the instructors, in failing to follow the dress code or grievance procedures, which procedures were similar to those in the military - using the "chain of command" verbiage to explain them to the new hires. Meeting with anyone in Human Resources was the last step in the chain.
Although it wasn't my real choice of job to begin with, but one taken out of shear desperation and necessity. For a little over minimum wage, after over twenty five years banking, legal and travel industry experience.
I moved again, due to the inability to get work to a state that had a little better unemployment rate.
I signed up with two or three local job centers and completed all their testing.
It is not that I am not computer savvy, having owned and managed my own website based small business for several years, and having also taken continuing education classes through the years.
I had worked with some senior students at DeVry who developed my website in 2004, and also worked with me during the process so that I could subsequently maintain it for a product line of children's footwear I had developed before the economic and political roof caved in Arizona and throughout most of the nation in 2005-06 and as a single mom with teenagers working from home.
In over seven months, only one or two referrals for minimum wage positions in this "lower" unemployment rate state.
That's it.
I also started combing the ads and internet myself.
I went to one company that was looking for sales personnel for a cruise line packager. I had worked for a major vacation packager in Arizona prior to a layoff in '99 when they deemed the rent too high there, and moved to Coral Gables, Florida - another high humidity, hurricane prone state in which at that time I could not live with also an asthmatic daughter who would not have done well there (nor as a divorced mom, could move there without "court" permission, I was told, due to a shared custody arrangement with my ex for our minor children).
There I was informed that it would cost me $500 for their training materials, and then $200 to rent desk space at their offices annually. I was then to receive a 20% commission on my sales, from the 10% commission the company made from the cruise line company, and would be paid after the cruise line company was paid by the customer prior to their departure.
I figured on a $2,500 cruise (standard) at 10% commission for the agency, my 20% of 10% would be $50.00. I would get $50.00 for each cruise I sold. They would get the rest. Hours of calls, and hand holding until that ship finally departed (especially after this latest cruise line sinking) and I would receive $50.00.
Less taxes.
I got one call the other day from an agency I had basically written off.
It was a one day assignment, but the agency needed to know one important question first.
Did I have an IPhone, or smart phone capable of taking photographs, and then emailing them from my phone?
I, of course, at this point unable to really afford even your basic flip phone (although trouble shooted those IPhones for two months), had to tell her no, I did not.
But I did have access to a digital camera that I could download and then email.
That wasn't what the client wanted.
So sorry.
Wake up, Washington...and the state legislatures...there is much, much more to this than meets the eye.
Or those candidates can even begin to comprehend.
Or just maybe, they do know and not to be politically incorrect or anything...
But Obama, Mitt and Newt just may be like those little Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil monkeys (deaf, dumb, blind) I remember from childhood. (Of course, that children's analogy sure isn't used in "politically correct" America anymore)
Or maybe, in this stage managed political arena we now live in where politicians resemble more and more "B" movie actors...
The director(s) in global corporate America, simply don't give a ****...
People are now nothing more than commerce, after all...
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Romney Exhibits Fascist Bent Over Felon Voting
The AP carried an article recently on the latest GOP debate, much of which is directed toward gaining ad revenues for the media, rather than highlighting any true positions of the GOP candidates that most Americans would deem worthy of watching at this point.
The latest "backbiting" argument which has been published has to do with a supposed fight between two of the Eastern GOP presidential candidates, Mitt (Used Car Salesman) Romney and Rick (Sweater Vest) Santorum. Over felon voting rights, no less.
Mr. Romney is attempting to portray Mr. Santorum as "soft" on crime, as one of those holier than thou candidates who believe any felony committed in this country is worthy of removing voting rights (not privileges) for Americans based upon their past conduct, even after they have served their sentence and paid their debt to society. Mr. Santorum believes in granting again those rights which were and are "God given" (something Mr. Romney seems to forget quite frequently) once the penalty has been paid.
If Mr. Romney was a Christian, isn't Mr. Santorum's position a little more Christ like (and Constitutional) than Mr. Romney's. I mean, redemption is inherently supposed to be a part of our criminal justice system, and with the penalties today for even minor felonies where no loss of life or personal injury is involved, shouldn't that punishment be sufficient, rather than life long punishments?
For murder or capital crimes involving loss of life, injury or property loss, I can see removing those rights while those individuals are repaying their debts to society, but that was not the position taken by Mr. Romney, nor is it a "legal" position in accordance with the common law and our Constitution (nor biblical).
So, it does seem Mr. Romney continues to exhibit his rather fascist understanding of the Constitution with respect to individual liberties and freedoms, more and more each one of these debates...unless those positions are also scripted in order to again sway this election back to the Democrats until the Republicans earn their "right" to hold the highest office in the land.
By the powers that be that put them there...which is becoming abundantly clear is not the American citizen voters at all...
The latest "backbiting" argument which has been published has to do with a supposed fight between two of the Eastern GOP presidential candidates, Mitt (Used Car Salesman) Romney and Rick (Sweater Vest) Santorum. Over felon voting rights, no less.
Mr. Romney is attempting to portray Mr. Santorum as "soft" on crime, as one of those holier than thou candidates who believe any felony committed in this country is worthy of removing voting rights (not privileges) for Americans based upon their past conduct, even after they have served their sentence and paid their debt to society. Mr. Santorum believes in granting again those rights which were and are "God given" (something Mr. Romney seems to forget quite frequently) once the penalty has been paid.
If Mr. Romney was a Christian, isn't Mr. Santorum's position a little more Christ like (and Constitutional) than Mr. Romney's. I mean, redemption is inherently supposed to be a part of our criminal justice system, and with the penalties today for even minor felonies where no loss of life or personal injury is involved, shouldn't that punishment be sufficient, rather than life long punishments?
For murder or capital crimes involving loss of life, injury or property loss, I can see removing those rights while those individuals are repaying their debts to society, but that was not the position taken by Mr. Romney, nor is it a "legal" position in accordance with the common law and our Constitution (nor biblical).
So, it does seem Mr. Romney continues to exhibit his rather fascist understanding of the Constitution with respect to individual liberties and freedoms, more and more each one of these debates...unless those positions are also scripted in order to again sway this election back to the Democrats until the Republicans earn their "right" to hold the highest office in the land.
By the powers that be that put them there...which is becoming abundantly clear is not the American citizen voters at all...
Thursday, December 22, 2011
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.
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.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
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...
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...
Monday, December 12, 2011
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?
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?
Thursday, November 24, 2011
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.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
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...
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...
Friday, September 2, 2011
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.
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.
Monday, August 15, 2011
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.
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.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
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.
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.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
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?
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?
Monday, July 4, 2011
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.
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.
Monday, June 20, 2011
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?
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?
Monday, June 6, 2011
Fox's Huckabee Hilarity: Facts vs. Spins
Last night I had a few moments to watch briefly several segments from Fox's newest addition to its "conservative" line up on the evening edition of "Huckabee." It was eye-opening, to say the least, as one who is and has always been an American Conservative.
"Governor" Huckabee was introduced (hasn't he left office?), and began the show with an ad and promotion for Gulf shrimp and wisting the Gulf coast this summer since the cleanup has been completed, and the beaches are open and the shrimp simply mouth-watering.
Interspersed with a few comic moments regarding all the ways you can cook or barbeque shrimp, were promptings to "visit the Gulf" and such.
Then the "political" commentary began.
"Governor" Huckabee then went on to lambast Washington on its providing funding to the tune of over a half million dollars to "study shrimp" and their exercise habits using shrimp confined to a hamster's wheel to see just how that might improve, apparently, the taste and fitness of this seafood. Now, don't get me wrong Washington does and has spent outrageously in those earmarks for ridiculous and frivolous expenditures.
But does any American truly believe that those earmarked sums actually did go to provide for the scientific study of shrimp and their exercise capabilities, or rather their friendly campaign donor and his needs instead under the guise of this "study?"
Later in the show, the "Governor" then ran a segment with an old country singer, Ray Stevens, doing a little ditty that demonstrated just how he and his family could get out of debt using Washington's methods for balancing the budgets and providing for its needs in its "administrative" costs.
One such line when referenced printing whatever what was needed and then went on to call these sums "Obama money" and then referenced all the global corporate bailouts, and stimulus monies which have been provided by merely Obama (Congress actually) for such economic expenditures.
What was left out, however, during all the hilarity and pans to the studio audience laughing their literal butts off was that it was George Bush, and not Obama, that started the "stimulus" and bailout money train.
Does Fox and Mr. Huckabee actually believe that Americans memories are truly that short, or that easily propagandized.
Amazing how these ex-NeoCon Republican "entertainment" and political entities continue to get jobs on Fox such as Mr. Huckabee, Mr. Rove, and the like.
Not American Conservatives in any respect, but simply representatives of Washington and their respective self-interests in the name of "fair and unbalanced" reporting. I mean, I just wonder how their positions would jive with our Constitution since Mr. Huckabee is a hawk or was last election, although a represented "Christian" ex-pastor.
Whose only true contribution to last race was his oft-quoted remark that "Jesus would not run for political office."
Definitely not in 21st century America, or as one of the "New Age" Global Republican branch of the Global Socialist Party.
He wrapped up the show with an interview with three young Americans (less than 35) who had suffered during this economic disaster in the U.S., and lost their businesses, or saw the end clearly coming for their particular small businesses. All turned their personal tragedies and disasters into golden eggs by founding new businesses (and where did they get the funding for them, I wonder, since small business loans are almost non-existent for start ups in this economy?) - and did not hold their hands out, as Governor Mike pointed out, during their loss and new ventures for public "golden egg" assistance.
I wonder if Governor Mike has visited the local unemployment offices, and seen that most all in those centers are over the age of his "buck up" and become productive examples? And it never was disclosed just where their assistance and sums for their new ventures came from, or even their moving costs to start businesses in other states or markets?
Maybe Governor Mike should just stick to his food segments.
Since it does appear those are the only pieces with even a shred of research, or truth rather than just more political spin doctoring.
"Governor" Huckabee was introduced (hasn't he left office?), and began the show with an ad and promotion for Gulf shrimp and wisting the Gulf coast this summer since the cleanup has been completed, and the beaches are open and the shrimp simply mouth-watering.
Interspersed with a few comic moments regarding all the ways you can cook or barbeque shrimp, were promptings to "visit the Gulf" and such.
Then the "political" commentary began.
"Governor" Huckabee then went on to lambast Washington on its providing funding to the tune of over a half million dollars to "study shrimp" and their exercise habits using shrimp confined to a hamster's wheel to see just how that might improve, apparently, the taste and fitness of this seafood. Now, don't get me wrong Washington does and has spent outrageously in those earmarks for ridiculous and frivolous expenditures.
But does any American truly believe that those earmarked sums actually did go to provide for the scientific study of shrimp and their exercise capabilities, or rather their friendly campaign donor and his needs instead under the guise of this "study?"
Later in the show, the "Governor" then ran a segment with an old country singer, Ray Stevens, doing a little ditty that demonstrated just how he and his family could get out of debt using Washington's methods for balancing the budgets and providing for its needs in its "administrative" costs.
One such line when referenced printing whatever what was needed and then went on to call these sums "Obama money" and then referenced all the global corporate bailouts, and stimulus monies which have been provided by merely Obama (Congress actually) for such economic expenditures.
What was left out, however, during all the hilarity and pans to the studio audience laughing their literal butts off was that it was George Bush, and not Obama, that started the "stimulus" and bailout money train.
Does Fox and Mr. Huckabee actually believe that Americans memories are truly that short, or that easily propagandized.
Amazing how these ex-NeoCon Republican "entertainment" and political entities continue to get jobs on Fox such as Mr. Huckabee, Mr. Rove, and the like.
Not American Conservatives in any respect, but simply representatives of Washington and their respective self-interests in the name of "fair and unbalanced" reporting. I mean, I just wonder how their positions would jive with our Constitution since Mr. Huckabee is a hawk or was last election, although a represented "Christian" ex-pastor.
Whose only true contribution to last race was his oft-quoted remark that "Jesus would not run for political office."
Definitely not in 21st century America, or as one of the "New Age" Global Republican branch of the Global Socialist Party.
He wrapped up the show with an interview with three young Americans (less than 35) who had suffered during this economic disaster in the U.S., and lost their businesses, or saw the end clearly coming for their particular small businesses. All turned their personal tragedies and disasters into golden eggs by founding new businesses (and where did they get the funding for them, I wonder, since small business loans are almost non-existent for start ups in this economy?) - and did not hold their hands out, as Governor Mike pointed out, during their loss and new ventures for public "golden egg" assistance.
I wonder if Governor Mike has visited the local unemployment offices, and seen that most all in those centers are over the age of his "buck up" and become productive examples? And it never was disclosed just where their assistance and sums for their new ventures came from, or even their moving costs to start businesses in other states or markets?
Maybe Governor Mike should just stick to his food segments.
Since it does appear those are the only pieces with even a shred of research, or truth rather than just more political spin doctoring.
Friday, June 3, 2011
U.S. Jobs Report Is In: Bleak Prospects for Many
Well, the latest jobs report is in and the picture for the average American still seeking work in this depressive U.S. economy isn't pretty.
It was announced through the mainstream media that jobs are down over 9% since the last report.
Of course, you do need to double that figure since it is reported artificially lower than the true statistics, since those which are now unable to continue to collect unemployment, or have been denied benefits for whatever reason, or who owned their own businesses which have since gone under are not included in those statistics.
Recently, I had another of those "aha" moments those insurance companies (affiliated with the financial and banking sectors) advertise on most prime time and cable news stations.
As one who has a travel and hospitality certification from a now defunct travel school which was operated by American Express back in the 90's (who, I am sure, received government taxpayer grants for its operation, and in which my tuition was over $2,500 for my study), I recently stopped by a cruise line company affiliated with a Canadian website based travel company.
The franchisers of this retail operation had just recently opened, and were seeking sales and marketing representatives both at their retail location, and also mobile agents who worked from their home.
We discussed my background, having worked for over five years for a foreign domiciled vacation package retailer, in which eventually I moved from being one of their top sales agents to working in their yield management division and actually programming and developing packages for this company's U.S. market. I eventually left when this foreign domiciled company decided to move from its offices in Scottsdale, Arizona to Coral Gables, Florida for all non-reservation agent personnel for budgetary reasons.
Apparently, the rent in Scottsdale was too high although to many of us it was difficult to see where the rent in that particular part of Florida would not have been similar. Certainly, renegotiating their lease space or seeking cheaper digs would have been much more cost efficient, but then who was I to say?
The retail position this cruise company envisioned consisted of selling cruise packages under their banner with all the sales agents independent contractors, owning their own client base, as it were. Working at the franchise location merely consisted of paying a $500 up front "licensing" fee to this foreign based business and its U.S. franchisee. In addition, their share of any and all eventual bookings would be 60%, with the sales agent getting the remaining 40% (or 20% less U.S. taxes on that commission). These outrageous fees and costs, and low commission ratio was offset by all the access to the database and walk-in clients the retail agents would be receiving, and access to all the internet webinars which would be required to keep up to date on packages and promotions.
Although while I was there for over an hour not one individual came by or inquired about a future vacation.
The mobile agents (or those working from home) had it a little better.
Lower upfront costs (since the franchisee could not charge for desk space, apparently) of $200, and they then got to keep 70% of their commissions, with 30% going to the global parent company and franchisee. Although those not based at the company provided desks and computers would have to pay for their own marketing materials and such. Although, of course, could then write them off on their tax returns as independent contractors.
This is the new job scene.
Doesn't appear much research is also going into just what "new" jobs are actually out there, or just who is profiting off the backs of the unemployed. Including those selling their expertise in writing Facebook ads for the unemployed at $50 bucks and more a pop, who hang out at all those job center offices being funded by the many jobless too in the boomer and Gen X generation.
Since not a single individual in the job center office I visited recently searching on the 100 computers available was under 40.
Hope those statiticians and analysts start digging a little deeper into some of those "new jobs" created figures.
Fox recently had another propaganda piece on its pay station about some young man that held 50 jobs in 50 days.
One as a dietician.
Of course, with no education or certification as a dietician just wonder how he got THAT job?
Perhaps as a FOX employee researcher or "educator" whose real salary is provided by more public grants or stimulus monies?
It was announced through the mainstream media that jobs are down over 9% since the last report.
Of course, you do need to double that figure since it is reported artificially lower than the true statistics, since those which are now unable to continue to collect unemployment, or have been denied benefits for whatever reason, or who owned their own businesses which have since gone under are not included in those statistics.
Recently, I had another of those "aha" moments those insurance companies (affiliated with the financial and banking sectors) advertise on most prime time and cable news stations.
As one who has a travel and hospitality certification from a now defunct travel school which was operated by American Express back in the 90's (who, I am sure, received government taxpayer grants for its operation, and in which my tuition was over $2,500 for my study), I recently stopped by a cruise line company affiliated with a Canadian website based travel company.
The franchisers of this retail operation had just recently opened, and were seeking sales and marketing representatives both at their retail location, and also mobile agents who worked from their home.
We discussed my background, having worked for over five years for a foreign domiciled vacation package retailer, in which eventually I moved from being one of their top sales agents to working in their yield management division and actually programming and developing packages for this company's U.S. market. I eventually left when this foreign domiciled company decided to move from its offices in Scottsdale, Arizona to Coral Gables, Florida for all non-reservation agent personnel for budgetary reasons.
Apparently, the rent in Scottsdale was too high although to many of us it was difficult to see where the rent in that particular part of Florida would not have been similar. Certainly, renegotiating their lease space or seeking cheaper digs would have been much more cost efficient, but then who was I to say?
The retail position this cruise company envisioned consisted of selling cruise packages under their banner with all the sales agents independent contractors, owning their own client base, as it were. Working at the franchise location merely consisted of paying a $500 up front "licensing" fee to this foreign based business and its U.S. franchisee. In addition, their share of any and all eventual bookings would be 60%, with the sales agent getting the remaining 40% (or 20% less U.S. taxes on that commission). These outrageous fees and costs, and low commission ratio was offset by all the access to the database and walk-in clients the retail agents would be receiving, and access to all the internet webinars which would be required to keep up to date on packages and promotions.
Although while I was there for over an hour not one individual came by or inquired about a future vacation.
The mobile agents (or those working from home) had it a little better.
Lower upfront costs (since the franchisee could not charge for desk space, apparently) of $200, and they then got to keep 70% of their commissions, with 30% going to the global parent company and franchisee. Although those not based at the company provided desks and computers would have to pay for their own marketing materials and such. Although, of course, could then write them off on their tax returns as independent contractors.
This is the new job scene.
Doesn't appear much research is also going into just what "new" jobs are actually out there, or just who is profiting off the backs of the unemployed. Including those selling their expertise in writing Facebook ads for the unemployed at $50 bucks and more a pop, who hang out at all those job center offices being funded by the many jobless too in the boomer and Gen X generation.
Since not a single individual in the job center office I visited recently searching on the 100 computers available was under 40.
Hope those statiticians and analysts start digging a little deeper into some of those "new jobs" created figures.
Fox recently had another propaganda piece on its pay station about some young man that held 50 jobs in 50 days.
One as a dietician.
Of course, with no education or certification as a dietician just wonder how he got THAT job?
Perhaps as a FOX employee researcher or "educator" whose real salary is provided by more public grants or stimulus monies?
Friday, May 13, 2011
The Decade In Review: Next War, Pakistan?
With the reported death of Osama bin Laden due to the heroic actions of the U.S. Navy Seals being credited for recent events in Pakistan, although questionable based upon the timing, methods and eventual disposition of the body of the claimed front man for the 9-11 attacks by more than a few Americans with the press and federal government once again ratcheting up the terrorism threats and reports of retaliation, perhaps it is time to step back and review just what has occurred in the 10 years since that horrendous day.
The Patriot Act once again is quietly being brought to the floor of Congress for passage without any real significant changes in the unconstitutional provisions contained within it in violation of the U.S. Constitution as I write and post these recent reports.
Our southern and northern borders remain for the most part unsecured, now 10 long years after 9-11 with the politicians using this issue in the 10 years since in order to build or remain in public office at the cost of literally thousands of additional American lives.
Foreigners, especially Canadians, have been given blanket security clearances and are training on U.S. shores in many military installations across the country, while dissenting Americans opposed to these ever expanding Middle Eastern wars are being targeted by Homeland Security in greater and greater numbers as more and more of these "degrees" are handed out through U.S. universities, and also by the military itself.
A Canadian can be posted and train at NORAD, I recently learned, while an American who attempts to enter those sacred grounds could be shot on sight.
And a Canadian military officer or member has no inherent loyalty oath to the Constitution, or to recognizing the Congress or President as their civilian commanders, even though most of the members of Congress and the President are now afforded to accept campaign contributions from who knows where rather than the "district" or even "country" in which they live and are to protect and defend primarily against foreigners, be they allies or enemies, as it detrimentally affects this nation or its citizenry.
During Bush's last 90 days in office, an "administrative order" was passed affording foreigners from over 35 countries "free pass" visa waivers which simply required 48 hour security checks in order to enter and visit or work in the United States.
More and more work visas are being also handed out to foreigners, even during this recession and post 9-11, and jobs are being handed out by those large global corporations based in the United States as the basis for the requests for those visas in that "no American can be found to do the job as opposed to the "specialized" skills and talents of those foreigners.
Many from former British colonies or territories such as India or Australia, in addition to those Canadians.
The propaganda on Fox, a U.S. pay cable station owned by a former Brit espousing British style conservatism, continues to confuse the issues and undermine our Constitution along with those stations and media publications also owned by the globalists who wish to return this country back to its pre-Revolutionary War status.
Another colony of the Brits, or under British rule and dominion through their extensive holdings in America and even our banks through the Federal Reserve.
This current administration and its loyal press appear to be once again beating the drums for a major offensive in Pakistan post these recent events, in addition to maintaining fronts in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and through its U.S. membership in the U.N., Libya.
While Scotty from American Idol this past week chose to sing an inspirational country-western song about faith, and those events ten long years ago, again on Fox - the national animal of the British who desperately need to use our U.S. troops in order to continue their quest for world economic dominion and control with the Middle Eastern countries being the sole holdouts to this massive global agenda in world socialism.
It appears our current leaders feel they are more "enlightened" and intelligent than those great men who gave their lives to establish this nation, as one unlike any other.
Seems we have come full circle in the short span of less than 300 years, and from all reports, most of the true "natives" are getting quite restless.
And the "change" that is needed appears will not be coming from either the Republicans, or the Democrats who continue to assist in selling this country and its people out to those whose true interests and loyalties lie elsewhere.
Misusing and attempting to marginalize all the "conspiracy theorists" who ask the important and vital questions at this point, and divert attention with weddings, death announcements, and political staged backbiting against those standing in the way of "progress."
Even our churches have been corrupted due to federal faith based grant monies, with strings attached by many of those huge, globally focused churches now also misrepresenting scripture, especially in the Christian faith, with respect to this political maneuvering.
At this point for many, even those gruesome pictures wouldn't answer the fundamental questions that keep nagging many and have for the past 10 years.
Mainly, this "changed" America under both mainstream political parties bears no resemblance to the nation those founders shed their blood to establish those many years ago.
A sovereign America conceived in individual liberty, and free of global wars and British world agendas.
The Patriot Act once again is quietly being brought to the floor of Congress for passage without any real significant changes in the unconstitutional provisions contained within it in violation of the U.S. Constitution as I write and post these recent reports.
Our southern and northern borders remain for the most part unsecured, now 10 long years after 9-11 with the politicians using this issue in the 10 years since in order to build or remain in public office at the cost of literally thousands of additional American lives.
Foreigners, especially Canadians, have been given blanket security clearances and are training on U.S. shores in many military installations across the country, while dissenting Americans opposed to these ever expanding Middle Eastern wars are being targeted by Homeland Security in greater and greater numbers as more and more of these "degrees" are handed out through U.S. universities, and also by the military itself.
A Canadian can be posted and train at NORAD, I recently learned, while an American who attempts to enter those sacred grounds could be shot on sight.
And a Canadian military officer or member has no inherent loyalty oath to the Constitution, or to recognizing the Congress or President as their civilian commanders, even though most of the members of Congress and the President are now afforded to accept campaign contributions from who knows where rather than the "district" or even "country" in which they live and are to protect and defend primarily against foreigners, be they allies or enemies, as it detrimentally affects this nation or its citizenry.
During Bush's last 90 days in office, an "administrative order" was passed affording foreigners from over 35 countries "free pass" visa waivers which simply required 48 hour security checks in order to enter and visit or work in the United States.
More and more work visas are being also handed out to foreigners, even during this recession and post 9-11, and jobs are being handed out by those large global corporations based in the United States as the basis for the requests for those visas in that "no American can be found to do the job as opposed to the "specialized" skills and talents of those foreigners.
Many from former British colonies or territories such as India or Australia, in addition to those Canadians.
The propaganda on Fox, a U.S. pay cable station owned by a former Brit espousing British style conservatism, continues to confuse the issues and undermine our Constitution along with those stations and media publications also owned by the globalists who wish to return this country back to its pre-Revolutionary War status.
Another colony of the Brits, or under British rule and dominion through their extensive holdings in America and even our banks through the Federal Reserve.
This current administration and its loyal press appear to be once again beating the drums for a major offensive in Pakistan post these recent events, in addition to maintaining fronts in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and through its U.S. membership in the U.N., Libya.
While Scotty from American Idol this past week chose to sing an inspirational country-western song about faith, and those events ten long years ago, again on Fox - the national animal of the British who desperately need to use our U.S. troops in order to continue their quest for world economic dominion and control with the Middle Eastern countries being the sole holdouts to this massive global agenda in world socialism.
It appears our current leaders feel they are more "enlightened" and intelligent than those great men who gave their lives to establish this nation, as one unlike any other.
Seems we have come full circle in the short span of less than 300 years, and from all reports, most of the true "natives" are getting quite restless.
And the "change" that is needed appears will not be coming from either the Republicans, or the Democrats who continue to assist in selling this country and its people out to those whose true interests and loyalties lie elsewhere.
Misusing and attempting to marginalize all the "conspiracy theorists" who ask the important and vital questions at this point, and divert attention with weddings, death announcements, and political staged backbiting against those standing in the way of "progress."
Even our churches have been corrupted due to federal faith based grant monies, with strings attached by many of those huge, globally focused churches now also misrepresenting scripture, especially in the Christian faith, with respect to this political maneuvering.
At this point for many, even those gruesome pictures wouldn't answer the fundamental questions that keep nagging many and have for the past 10 years.
Mainly, this "changed" America under both mainstream political parties bears no resemblance to the nation those founders shed their blood to establish those many years ago.
A sovereign America conceived in individual liberty, and free of global wars and British world agendas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
