Friday, September 4, 2009

L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés


"Hell is full of good intentions"

By now you know I can't pass up the chance to take a deeper look at our English and its evolution. (Why 'our' English? Because a British friend of mine would publicly crucify me on my own blog if I tried to get away with assuming that British English and American English were the same thing. I would find myself on the "defence" for the indefensible.) You shouldn't be surprised then to learn the familiar proverb 'the road to hell is full of good intentions' has a simpler beginning; or that it is French in origin. History is replete with these adaptations.

So why the proverb? Because I believe that many Americans today are operating on the basis of good intentions gone bad. I know that isn't the case when it comes to the leadership, but my 'good intention' is to give the many the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps I will avoid that trip.

The anecdote goes that Benjamin Franklin, upon leaving Independence Hall at the close of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, was asked what form of government he had given us. His reply was "A Republic, if you can keep it." Those words ring truer today than at any time in our history.

I hear a lot about compromise these days. Every time I hear how the Republicans lost so they should compromise it reminds me of the time I stood alone on a vote. I argued my position as best I could but, in the end, I was the lone vote in opposition. Everyone else was upset with me for not agreeing with them and, truth be told, I was floored by their response. Somehow my business partners (it was a vote on the direction the company was to take) were of the opinion that, because they were in the majority, I should compromise my position so that the vote could be unanimous. It was an enlightening experience.

My point is this: some things you just can't compromise on no matter what. Worse, compromise just for the sake of compromise is just plain ignorant.

This country was founded as a representative Republic (a representative democracy in the form of a constitutional republic) not a direct democracy. The answer to why is straightforward: to prevent a tyranny of the majority. The powers of the federal government were enumerated. The federal government itself was broken into a triumvirate and specific checks and balances were put in place. The point of all this was to protect individual liberty and the rights of property. The United States of America is supposed to be a nation of laws, not of men.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Glenn Beck / FOX News under attack

It has been brought to my attention that a group called ColorOfChange.org has decided that Glenn Beck is using his platform on the FOX News channel to 'race bait'. Having decided this, they are asking the denizens of their website to petition companies advertising on the Glenn Beck show to withdraw their sponsorship.

Below is the letter ColorOfChange.org is sending to companies advertising on Glenn's show.

To President/CEO & Board:

I want to alert you to the fact that Glenn Beck--whose show you sponsor on FOX--is using his platform to make outlandish accusations about the President and to advance baseless theories that prey on race-based fears.

He is claiming that President Obama is a "racist," that he has a "deep-seated hatred for white people," and that he is attempting to use our government to deliver "Obama-brand reparations." The claims are ludicrous, and the rhetoric is racially divisive and pollutes our public discourse.

I presume your company does not want to enable such rhetoric, nor have your products or services associated with the kind of views and tactics espoused by Beck. I urge you to immediately cease all advertising on the Glenn Beck Program on the FOX News Channel.

Sincerely,

[Your name]
I propose that we counter this campaign with one of our own. Below is the letter that I am sending to the companies advertising on the Glenn Beck show.

To Whom It May Concern:

My name is [your name]. I am a loyal fan of the Glenn Beck show on the FOX News channel and I want to thank you for your company's ongoing sponsorship.

I am sending this letter of support because it has recently come to my attention that an organization called ColorOfChange.org has mounted a personal attack on Glenn Beck. It is my understanding that they have contacted your company in an effort to have you withdraw your company's sponsorship of Glenn Beck, his show and the FOX News channel in general.

As any regular viewer of the Glenn Beck show knows, the host is irreverent, entertaining, informative, and makes every attempt to be factual in his presentation. It is also my understanding that the Glenn Beck show is number one in viewership in its time slot and that that viewership is growing by the day.

Again, I want to thank you for your company's sponsorship of the Glenn Beck show.

Respectfully,

[your name]
[city, state]
Please add your voice to the list. Copy the letter (or write your own!) and email it to the companies that advertise on the FOX News channel during the Glenn Beck show. Oh, and don't forget to add your name, city and state in the proper places!

Friday, August 7, 2009

Letter to the White House

To Whom It May Concern:

I, [your name], am fervently against Health Care Reform as currently proposed by both President Obama and the Leadership in the Congress of these United States.

While many of the Legislators in Congress profess to finding it too difficult or onerous to read legislation before voting on it, I have read the bill known as "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009" and find it objectionable to say the least.

With that in mind, I want to declare that I have expressed my position both privately and publicly. I shall continue to express my position at every opportunity - public and private - in person, on the telephone, in letters and emails, on my blog and in any other way I damn well please. This is my right as a citizen of the United States of America.

At every opportunity I shall quote from "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009" and any other unscrupulous Legislation in an effort to show it for what it truly is - garbage. I shall always endeavor to use facts in my prosecution both of this battle and the overall war against the socialization of these United States. This is my duty to the Constitution of the United States of America.

I shall work against any elected representative who supports or votes for this or any other similarly offensive Legislation – Health Care related or not. I shall do this in the interest of my community, my state, and the nation at large. This is my responsibility as a citizen of the United States of America

Finally, I remind you that, as an elected representative, you are there to serve The People, not the other way around. You work for us. Don't ever forget that.

[your name]
[city, state]

Monday, March 30, 2009

open letter to Greta Van Susteren

to OnTheRecord@foxnews.com
date Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:41 AM
subject Secretary Clinton Interview

I am, to say the least, disappointed. Greta allowed Secretary Clinton say her piece and never once challenged what she said. In fact, Greta tossed more than one softball. First she said "and then the guns come back across the border" and later allowed how her ATF 'sources' have "told us these weapons, these automatic weapons that go right through these -- you know, right through police officers here, are coming from the United States." I wouldn't have believed Greta would allow herself to be used as a propaganda outlet.


To keep it simple: (1) automatic weapons are not available "over-the-counter" in the United States (National Firearms Act, 1934); (2) so forget the possibility of purchasing more than one for transfer to Mexico. As completely regulated Title II weapons, FBI background checks are necessary if you even dream of a "machine gun". Check the law.

If you think the alphabet soup of government agencies (ATF, FBI, whatever) would fail to arrest any purchaser or seller who was identified in connection with a single verified serial number (let alone any number greater than one) connected to a Title II weapon, you are dreaming. If this administration could connect even one illegal automatic weapon found in Mexico to a licensed gun dealer here in the United States we would be hearing about it loudly and continuously.

Greta, as a lawyer, you know full well that words matter. That means blatant propaganda must be challenged outright, not let slip by (as if, perhaps, the interviewer wasn't prepared for the answer - or worse, was prompting for one?). When I hear someone say that automatic weapons are being purchased over-the-counter and smuggled into Mexico then I know that person is lying ex facie. What galls me most is your is apparent willingness to accept such statements as fact without verifying them.

It is apparent that nothing has changed where certain liberal policies are concerned and what this administration's position on gun control will be in the long run.

Respectfully,

Ne Plus (**********)
El Paso, TX
915-***-****

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

the real thing

Well, by now everyone has see the video of MEP Daniel Hannan reaming PM Gordon Brown a new one. The irony is that, by changing the name from "Gordon Brown" to "Barak Obama" (okay, perhaps the English accent should be a Southern one), the speech could have been given by any one of a number of Conservative members of Congress.

I expect we will see big things from MEP Hannan in the future. Maybe, if they're lucky, the U.K. has found a future Prime Minister.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Start Each Day With A Positive Outlook

Another one of those emails from my mother:

How to start each day with a positive outlook
  1. Open a new file on your computer
  2. Save it as 'Barak Obama'
  3. Send it to the Recycle Bin
  4. Empty the Recycle Bin
  5. Your PC will ask you: "Do you really want to get rid of 'Barak Obama'?
  6. Click firmly on 'YES'

Feel better? GOOD! Tomorrow we'll do Nancy Pelosi.

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Where now is our last best hope on Earth?

I am so very glad to know that someone other than American conservatives noticed! I was truly afraid that the world was enthralled.


London Daily Mail
10th November 2008
The night we waved goodbye to America...
our last best hope on Earth
Peter Hitchens

Anyone would think we had just elected a hip, skinny and youthful replacement for God, with a plan to modernise Heaven and Hell – or that at the very least John Lennon had come back from the dead.

The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something.

I really don’t see how the Obama devotees can ever in future mock the Moonies, the Scientologists or people who claim to have been abducted in flying saucers. This is a cult like the one which grew up around Princess Diana, bereft of reason and hostile to facts.

It already has all the signs of such a thing. The newspapers which recorded Obama’s victory have become valuable relics. You may buy Obama picture books and Obama calendars and if there isn’t yet a children’s picture version of his story, there soon will be.

Proper books, recording his sordid associates, his cowardly voting record, his astonishingly militant commitment to unrestricted abortion and his blundering trip to Africa, are little-read and hard to find.

If you can believe that this undistinguished and conventionally Left-wing machine politician is a sort of secular saviour, then you can believe anything. He plainly doesn’t believe it himself. His cliche-stuffed, PC clunker of an acceptance speech suffered badly from nerves. It was what you would expect from someone who knew he’d promised too much and that from now on the easy bit was over.

He needn’t worry too much. From now on, the rough boys and girls of America’s Democratic Party apparatus, many recycled from Bill Clinton’s stained and crumpled entourage, will crowd round him, to collect the rich spoils of his victory and also tell him what to do, which is what he is used to.

Just look at his sermon by the shores of Lake Michigan. He really did talk about a ‘new dawn’, and a ‘timeless creed’ (which was ‘yes, we can’). He proclaimed that ‘change has come’. He revealed that, despite having edited the Harvard Law Review, he doesn’t know what ‘enormity’ means. He reached depths of oratorical drivel never even plumbed by our own Mr Blair, burbling about putting our hands on the arc of history (or was it the ark of history?) and bending it once more toward the hope of a better day (Don’t try this at home).

I am not making this up. No wonder that awful old hack Jesse Jackson sobbed as he watched. How he must wish he, too, could get away with this sort of stuff.

And it was interesting how the President-elect failed to lift his admiring audience by repeated – but rather hesitant – invocations of the brainless slogan he was forced by his minders to adopt against his will – ‘Yes, we can’. They were supposed to thunder ‘Yes, we can!’ back at him, but they just wouldn’t join in. No wonder. Yes we can what exactly? Go home and keep a close eye on the tax rate, is my advice. He’d have been better off bursting into ‘I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony’ which contains roughly the same message and might have attracted some valuable commercial sponsorship.

Perhaps, being a Chicago crowd, they knew some of the things that 52.5 per cent of America prefers not to know. They know Obama is the obedient servant of one of the most squalid and unshakeable political machines in America. They know that one of his alarmingly close associates, a state-subsidised slum landlord called Tony Rezko, has been convicted on fraud and corruption charges.

They also know the US is just as segregated as it was before Martin Luther King – in schools, streets, neighbourhoods, holidays, even in its TV-watching habits and its choice of fast-food joint. The difference is that it is now done by unspoken agreement rather than by law.

If Mr Obama’s election had threatened any of that, his feel-good white supporters would have scuttled off and voted for John McCain, or practically anyone. But it doesn’t. Mr Obama, thanks mainly to the now-departed grandmother he alternately praised as a saint and denounced as a racial bigot, has the huge advantages of an expensive private education. He did not have to grow up in the badlands of useless schools, shattered families and gangs which are the lot of so many young black men of his generation.

If the nonsensical claims made for this election were true, then every positive discrimination programme aimed at helping black people into jobs they otherwise wouldn’t get should be abandoned forthwith. Nothing of the kind will happen. On the contrary, there will probably be more of them.

And if those who voted for Obama were all proving their anti-racist nobility, that presumably means that those many millions who didn’t vote for him were proving themselves to be hopeless bigots. This is obviously untrue.

I was in Washington DC the night of the election. America’s beautiful capital has a sad secret. It is perhaps the most racially divided city in the world, with 15th Street – which runs due north from the White House – the unofficial frontier between black and white. But, like so much of America, it also now has a new division, and one which is in many ways much more important. I had attended an election-night party in a smart and liberal white area, but was staying the night less than a mile away on the edge of a suburb where Spanish is spoken as much as English, plus a smattering of tongues from such places as Ethiopia, Somalia and Afghanistan.

As I walked, I crossed another of Washington’s secret frontiers. There had been a few white people blowing car horns and shouting, as the result became clear. But among the Mexicans, Salvadorans and the other Third World nationalities, there was something like ecstasy.

They grasped the real significance of this moment. They knew it meant that America had finally switched sides in a global cultural war. Forget the Cold War, or even the Iraq War. The United States, having for the most part a deeply conservative people, had until now just about stood out against many of the mistakes which have ruined so much of the rest of the world.

Suspicious of welfare addiction, feeble justice and high taxes, totally committed to preserving its own national sovereignty, unabashedly Christian in a world part secular and part Muslim, suspicious of the Great Global Warming panic, it was unique.

These strengths had been fading for some time, mainly due to poorly controlled mass immigration and to the march of political correctness. They had also been weakened by the failure of America’s conservative party – the Republicans – to fight on the cultural and moral fronts.

They preferred to posture on the world stage. Scared of confronting Left-wing teachers and sexual revolutionaries at home, they could order soldiers to be brave on their behalf in far-off deserts. And now the US, like Britain before it, has begun the long slow descent into the Third World. How sad. Where now is our last best hope on Earth?

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

A Letter From a Granddad

I received this from my mother and thought it deserved posting:

Guess you heard that 68% of the youth vote went to Obama. My granddaughter called this morning to tell me she was one of them. I replied with this e-mail:


Dear Susan,

The election of Obama comes down to this. Your grandmother and I, your mother, and other productive, wage-earning tax payers will have their taxes increased and that means less income left over. Less income means we will have to cut back on basic purchases, gifts and handouts. That includes firing the Hispanic lady who cleans our house twice a month. She just lost her job. We can't afford her anymore.

What is the economic effect of Obama's election on you personally? Over the years, your grandmother and I have given you thousands of dollars in food, housing, cash, clothing, gifts, etc. By your vote, you have chosen another family over ours for help. So in the future, if you need assistance with your rent, money for gas, tires for your car, someone to bring you lunch, etc. ... call 202-456-1414. That's the telephone number for the Office of the President of the United States. I'm sure Mr. Obama will be happy to send a check from his personal or business accounts, as we have, or leave cash in an envelope taped to his front door for you, as we have.

It's like this. Those who vote for the President of the United States should consider what the impact of an election will be on the nation as a whole and not just be concerned with what they can get for themselves (welfare, stimulus checks, etc.). What Obama voters don't seem to realize is that the government's money comes from taxes collected from tax paying families. Raising taxes on productive people means they will have less money to spend on their families.

Congratulations on your choice. For future reference, you might attempt to add up all you've received from us, your mom, Mike's parents and others and compare it to what you expect to get over the next four years from Mr. Obama.

To congratulate Mr. Obama and to make sure you're on the list for handouts, write to:

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20500

Love you Susan, but call the number listed above when you need help.

Granddad

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Leaders of Black Community infer President Obama is a monkey

Considering the controversy and who is pushing it to the forefront, there is no other logical conclusion.

As I pointed out the other day, Sean Delonas was obviously making reference to the adage that, given a typewriter and enough time, even a monkey will produce the Encyclopaedia Britannica. That being the case (I have seen nothing that would convince me otherwise), it is apparent that the so-called leaders of the Black Community are grasping at straws.

From all that I have read and heard, it is obvious the individuals who believe they are the true leaders of the Black Community are in a pitched battle with President Obama for control of that community.
  • The Rev. Al Sharpton apparently believes that all references to monkeys are references to "african-americans" and, as such, are racist. I guess that makes a, ummm, clown out of him.
  • Benjamin Jealous, President of the NAACP, apparently thinks the cartoon is a call to arms; a call to assasinate President Obama. While I can sympathize with any disappointment in the segment of the electorate that did not vote for Barack Obama, I certainly don't think any police officers are going to run down to D.C. with their guns blazing because of this cartoon.
  • Director Spike Lee apparently believes that his call for a boycott of the NY Post will somehow impact the right-of-center paper. Yeah, right. My guess would be that the Post's circulation will, at a minimum, take a temporary "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" jump.

My guess (well, it has to be a guess since I am certainly not an insider when it comes to the Black Community) is that President Obama isn't 'left' enough for those who have heretofore been considered the leaders of the Black Community and this is their attempt to make themselves relevant. In the past they have always screamed "Racism!" to sieze the spotlight, but that is a little more difficult since our president is not white.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

somehow I missed the controversy

Apparently a number of people are upset about Sean Delonas' cartoon (at right). They seem to believe that his intention was to depict President Obama as the chimp.

In investigating this allegation, I printed this cartoon on an 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper and hung it on my wall. Even at that size and using a magnifying glass, I have been unable to find any indication of this alleged reference. No subtext, no overt reference, no nothing.

Without any direct reference, I guess I missed the controversy. To the best of my knowledge, the authors of the 'stimulus' bill (ya gotta love the pompous new name - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) are Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid and their minions. In fact, President Obama did not take credit for the bill, even when he had an opportunity to do so, in his op-ed piece on February 5th.

If anyone has a right to be upset with Mr. Delonas' cartoon, it is obviously the 28 Democrats who authored / sponsored the stimulus bill (11 in the House and 17 in the Senate; the 29th sponsor was an Independent). I believe that Mr. Delonas' statement was quite simple and straightforward: it only takes 29 monkeys playing with a computer to write a bill that can pass the 111th Congress.

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

rotation in office

This morning I was listening to Brian Sullivan and Dagen McDowell argue about President Obama's guidelines for executive compensation and the billions in bonuses paid in the various firms that received TARP funds. During the course of his tirade Brian mentioned term limits. His remark was in passing, but it reminded me of the issue – a frequent subject of debate in my family.

While I have always been in favor of term limits, I have also inevitably succumbed to the "people deserve to elect whomever they want to represent them" argument. No longer. It has reached the point where the logic of "they are all bad; other than my representative" is hurting us all. In fact, we passed that point years ago.

In 1947 the United States Congress passed the 22nd Amendment which sets a term limit for the President. It was ratified by the requisite number of states in 1951. The text of the Amendment reads as follows:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

In essence, the Amendment prohibits anyone from serving as President for more than 10 years (two elected four-year terms after succeeding to the Presidency for two years). Historically speaking, this Amendment only codifies what had been accepted convention, although some presidents did seek a third term.

In 1880 President Grant was the first to seek a third term, eschewing the two-term principle. Then, in 1912, Teddy Roosevelt sought election to a third term (although it would have been his second elected term and those two terms would have been non-consecutive). Finally, Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to a third term in 1940 and then a fourth term in 1944.

Although the practice of rotation in office, what we now call term limits, dates back to ancient Greece and was addressed in the Articles of Confederation, it was omitted from the U.S. Constitution. American culture of the day, however, perceived political power as corrupting and believed in civic duty. Essentially, these cultural beliefs proscribed returning incumbent representatives to office.

It seems American culture has changed since 1776, especially in the last 100 years.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

a home on the range

I believe I have a viable solution to the terrorism detainee issue. Since Guantánamo Bay is no longer an acceptable venue and no other country wants them, I have concluded that we should bring the detainees here - to El Paso. Well, to Fort Bliss at any rate. Why Fort Bliss? Well, there are several good reasons. Follow me on this.

I realize nobody really wants the detainees nearby, what with them being (alleged) terrorists and all, but they are still people and Fort Bliss makes perfect sense just on location alone. You see, Fort Bliss is in the high desert. This means the terrain and climate are similar to Iraq and Afghanistan and should help the detainees feel welcome and more at home. The second location related advantage is size. What most of you probably don't know is that Fort Bliss is at the tail end of the largest military reservation in the United States. Yup, that's right; the Fort Bliss part of that military reservation is bigger than the state of Rhode Island - something like 1 million acres of open high desert. That doesn't count White Sands Missile Range, Holloman Air Force Base or any of the myriad of smaller installations stretching from El Paso, Texas, up to Albuquerque, New Mexico. Let's just settle on saying it is really, Really, REALLY big.

While location alone is an excellent reason, when you consider the other advantages to housing the detainees (t)here, the move becomes a no-brainer.

First, Fort Bliss is home to the 978th Military Police Company. What more can you ask for? Built in guards with the training to do the job! Then there is the fact that the government is building a wall nearby. That's right, the border with Mexico is just a few miles away.

For facilities we can build what amounts to a village. Most of the world should view this as a most humane way to house the detainees. No prison walls, no cages, just regular Afghan style housing. Of course, we will need someplace to interview the detainees so I propose a "glass house" built in the middle of the village. Why glass? So that the dozens of human rights groups can watch the interviews! I suspect the ACLU, Human Rights Watch, the Center for American Progress, Amnesty International, Cage Prisoners, the United Nations, … and the ASPCA will all want to see all the interviews taking place and this would facilitate that supervision. No chance for torture there!

Now, we all know that it would be way too expensive to build a physical wall - a new prison as it were. It costs something like $425,500 per mile of standard 10-foot prison chain link fence topped by razor wire and that is when you are buying 2000 miles of it. Hardly worth the expense considering these enemy combatants will be abiding by the Geneva Convention. On the other hand, regardless of the cost of a virtual fence (know as an integrated surveillance system by those in the industry), when you are done with it you simply pick up the parts and take them away (Put them on the border with Mexico!). This truly minimizes the overall cost. As for effectiveness, proponents maintain the virtual fence is good enough to keep 95% of the illegal border crossers out, so it should be good enough to keep 95% of the captured enemy combatants in. The other 5% shouldn't be much of a problem. See, if we use the same system both to incarcerate the detainees and protect our southern border, (alleged) terrorists will have the same access to the U.S. whether they escape from Fort Bliss or come in from Mexico. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

Obviously we aren't locking these people up and it would be silly to make them sit around all day doing nothing. No, these people are doers just like our middle class. Also, television and radio are out of the question since they don't believe there is anything good that comes from our culture. (Can't you just see them clustered around a radio listening to Rush Limbaugh or a TV watching Rachael Ray? No, that just doesn't fit.) So, I propose we use them and their village to train the troops headed overseas. Don't laugh! Right now we are using El Pasoans to play the role of villagers and these folks would be, well, more authentic. Come to think of it, it would be even more authentic if we gave them weapons. Hmmm .. yes, I like that idea. Fair play; the American way.

Friday, January 23, 2009

"..duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly.."

I must admit I am somewhat disappointed. Though I have waited patiently for the past few days, I have yet to hear from the government about my new green job. However, in the spirit of the day I have decided to "seize gladly" my duty to help the economy. I will lay out my plan and I hope that many of you, as Americans, will understand "that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world" and follow suit.

First, let me say that my investment portfolio has suffered the same fate as the stock market - down around 40% in the past year. That's a significant hit and it is all ex-President Bush's fault. That being said, I believe I still have enough to make a significant difference to this economy.

What I propose is the following:
  1. Withdraw all of the money in my (now reduced) IRAs and 401K. The logic behind this move is indisputable. For one thing, though I am presently unemployed, I fully expect to be working for the government as soon as Congress approves the new bailout plan. (I can only imagine that is the reason I haven’t heard about my new government job just yet. No money honey!) In the meantime, I will have cash on hand to pay the bills and, more importantly, spend.
  2. Pay the 10% penalty on the withdrawal amounts. Now we all know that, as a member of the middle class, we don’t pay enough taxes. If we did, we wouldn’t be in this pickle in the first place! Look at how robust the Federal Income was at the end of the Clinton presidency. I mean, we had a surplus!!! So, it is my responsibility – my duty to the nation – to pay more taxes. Since I don’t have a current income the only way I know how to accomplish this is to withdraw my retirement savings and pay the 10% penalty. Note: for those of you with a job, I suggest you not only withdraw all your retirement savings, but also ask your employer to double the amount of withholding from your paycheck. Next year, when you file your tax return, you can just tell the government to keep the extra as your contribution to the federal deficit. (I believe it is somewhere around $140K per individual right now. It should go up considerably by then. You owe!)
  3. Now, as for the remaining money. I suggest you run out and buy a car. Remember, nothing foreign. We need to support Detroit and the unions. Our fellow Americans are depending upon us! Oh, and no trade-ins! If you don’t have room for the new car, then advertise the old one in your local paper. This is another critical step. Our newspapers are going broke due to lack of advertising so it is our patriotic duty to help them and the union employees who work there.
  4. I bet you are still wondering why you can’t trade in your vehicle. Here is the deal: there are people out there who cannot get credit from the Big Banks. So, to get the credit market moving again, we are going to extend credit on all those who buy our used cars!!! Just think about it. It makes perfect sense. We can all take the part of a mini Freddie Mac – no credit check, no nothing. Trust. Trust in your fellow American. Hey, if you’re really lucky, you will be helping an undocumented immigrant get started.


Well, that’s it for now. I’m going to try really hard to think up some other ways we can help jump-start the economy. Remember, “..there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

the morning after

Okay, so here’s the thing…

I woke up this morning with joy in my heart and feeling all kinds of cheerful. I mean, the Anointed One {Hallelujah!!! Amen! (Insert choral music here.) Happy days are here again!} was sworn in yesterday and I just knew that, despite His {Hallelujah!!! Amen! (Insert choral music here.) Happy days are here again!} admonition to the contrary, all would be right with the world sometime around noon.

Sitting here, drinking my coffee, waiting for the phone to ring (I’ve had my resume out there for months now and I know I must be near the top of the call list.), I couldn’t help but be enthused by the image of the country working together (again? now?). Like oxen in yoke, my mind’s eye could see us pulling in the same direction under the watchful benevolence of our now harmonious government. Even those uninformed Republicans must see the light of a new day this morning. I bet they’ll compromise their positions and join in.

And there is so much to be done! So much neglect to undo. Windmills to build, an electrical grid to restructure, roads to asphalt (Oops, my mistake; I mean rubberize – or whatever they call it when you rip up old tires and cover a road with them.), bridges to repair, trees to plant, guns to confiscate and destroy and recycle into .. ummm .. bridges, rivers and lakes to clean and stock, a terrible dividing wall to tear down (and recycle into bridges) so our neighbors to the south can join us… The list is endless!

I wonder what kind of government job is being created for me. The idea of receiving a living wage; the promise of government healthcare; access to the Congressional retirement plan; they just make me want to be a productive member of this great experiment once again!

Everyone will have government healthcare and a living wage will be the standard from now on. (Hmmm... I’ll bet they stop calling it a living wage. I mean, why bother when everyone will be getting it – no need to differentiate! Yeah!!!) As for retirement, well, even if I find myself in the private sector there is always Social Security. At least President Obama {Hallelujah!!! Amen! (Insert choral music here.) Happy days are here again!} will see to it that Social Security doesn’t collapse like Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.

Oh, I can’t wait until noon!

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

and so it begins

I have, for quite some time, believed my voice was not needed; that it would be futile to add to the world wide cacophony that is the blogosphere. Today, however, as I watched President-elect Obama become President Obama and then listened to his speech, I realized I could no longer remain silent. Thus, with this post, I begin my journey into the realm of the blog. Please bear with me as I get my act together.

I hope, dear reader that you find what I have to say of interest. (For that matter, I hope somebody reads this! I hate talking to the shirts in my closet or, in this case, my monitor.) Whether I rant and rail, wax eloquent, search for humor or am just plain quixotic, I will try not to digress too far. On the other hand, expect a lively chase.

So thank you - for joining me here; for reading what I have to say; and for adding your two cents worth.