Nov 18, 2008 | 10:21 PM
Category:
Political
There have been countless queries of what would Jesus, Ghandi, and other do in various ethical situations. I think in this day and age what we need more in Washington is a true "statesman>" And by that I mean that we need someone who is willing to rise above the party biases and make moves towards truly creating changes in the economic environment that will benefit everyone. And that is not to say a socialist view will make the cut. In regards to the Big Three automakers, this problem is especially vexing. By allowing them to go bankrupt, the nation risks allowing hundreds, perhaps thousands, of smaller suppliers and their companies to go belly up. Most large corporations have enough hard cash and materials that they can sell their way out of bankruptcy. Not so with small manufacturers, specialty suppliers or mom and pop companies that do contract work. So it's not so easy to simply let the Big Three slide. On the other hand, it is foolish to reward bad business practices to be rewarded. The idea that CEO's, higher administration and corporate boards should still make out like bandits in spite of their failure to achieve is the antithesis of what free enterprise is about. That's the one thing that liberals don't seem to grasp-freedom allows you permission to succeed or fail on your own recognizance. It is also problematic that the domestic auto industry has been plagued by the two pronged attack of expensive union contracts and burdensome legal demands and intervention created by the government. This has almost nationalized the auto industry without papers.
So what do we do?
First, let them go bankrupt. A wise executive would be on the phone to the heads of Nissan, Honda and Toyota talking about the opportunity to buy into the American market with a set American profile. Like it or not, there are still folks who are born into Chevy or Ford families. Create the situation where Congress butts out and allows the market to work. As the value of GM, Ford and Chrysler stock dips, help these other manufacturers to see this as a chance to broaden their market with already recognizable brands. Hopefully both President Bush and PE Obama are currently doing this behind the scenes.
By allowing this bankruptcy to proceed, this would negate overpriced American union contracts that have made American cars too costly for their reliability. When Honda can get higher quality for $42 per hour per employee cost while GM stumbles with $71 per hour per employee cost then there is something wrong with the system. Let this streamline and make American auto manufacturers return to their primary status as car makers. This would also cause some overpaid top brass to move onto other lines of business. A bankrupt company can't provide golden parachutes before they pay bills, so that would solve the bloodletting that some CEO's seem to do before they leave.
There is no good way to do this. Frankly, you shouldn't prop up support for products that aren't in demand. That is what we have been doing with corn via ethanol and with cars via bailouts. While there is not a good solution, someone has to be willing to make the hard decision to allow the markets to work. There's a reason why we don't have many farriers and wheelwrights anymore-their services aren't in demand. So why should taxpayers support companies who are too bloated and overcontrolled to make the moves they need to make in order to be profitable? This won't be popular with unions. It won't be popular on Wall Street, but if this truly is a "global economy" as the pundits claim, then it's time to really let it work. and believe me, I say this as someone who has a husband who is job hunting. This isn't a good situation. But I don't see throwing more money at it as being a win-win either.
Nov 16, 2008 | 6:20 PM
Category:
News
Story here
Remember all those union members that supported Barak Obama? I guess they weren't paying attention much when he said it would take EVERYONE participating to bail out the economy. The union reps attitudes are that they want to costly pension and retirement plans that have driven manufacturing out of the country and simply do not care if it drives the companies that employ them into Chapter 7. And for those of you who don't analyze what unions are saying, they are saying this-
We don't care because we don't have to care. We have been promised by the Federal Government that our pensions will be guaranteed. Never mind that the pension guarantee fund is broke. Never mind that there are perhaps a MILLION jobs on the line. Let's just all stick to that union code. And these were the proud supporters of our incoming president. The same folks who think that they are above the law, beyond the finance companies and that they don't have to handle any of their personal obligations just because Barak Obama was elected president. Well whoopie-freaking-do.
Nov 13, 2008 | 6:31 PM
Category:
News
Folks, Washington is playing us again. While we are taxed to the max to payout AIG's woes, they are giving themselves bonuses and hiding at luxury resorts. Excuse me if I do not share their levity. Maybe it is because I am one of the people who works like crazy, pays taxes and tries to do right by others and we seem to get screwed over every time. Here's a clue-it doesn't matter any more who you vote for because it's THEM -the government idiots-against US-the people. I am tired tired tired of having taxes taken out of my check to pay to support those who won't work. I am also tired of executives of corporations and foreign investors raiding companies for their assets, working their employees nearly to death and then complaining about productivity. Frankly, the Harvard Business School model that wants to skim the cream off the top for administrators, pay out dividends to stockholders, placate union members and then screw over the workers who show up and do their jobs without much in the way of support has got to go. I am sick of what this nation has become-a society of navel gazing sycophants more involved in their cell phones and Ipods than the real world. If I thought for one minute that this much purported "change" would really change things, maybe I could reconcile myself to it, but all I have seen from the markets, from the agendas posted on Obama's website and from the DNC ruling class in general is that they are going to let their pet lobbyists get away with what they can steal and allow the unions to gouge corporations and leave the rest of us holding the bag. Excuse me, but I am bitter and I am angry and I don't think I am alone. It may be just a fun game to those who play the social safety net card, but at 52 or 54 or 58, it's damned hard to start over.
I simply can't take it anymore.
Nov 12, 2008 | 10:11 PM
Category:
Political
From the change.gov website:"When I first learned of Barack Obama, I was encouraged by his thoughts
[on] ending the power of lobbyists and the negative effect of the
revolving door on the White House. I'd like to see an agenda that
focuses on promoting transparency and getting people into government
who sincerely want to serve the interests of the nation over their own
careers."From the AP WireWASHINGTON - Aides to
President-elect Obama, who said lobbyists would not work in his White
House, said Tuesday that lobbyists could serve in his transition so
long as their activities do not involve areas of policy they have tried
to influence in the past year.
So boys and girls, is this "change" we can believe in or is this the same old thing all over again? Hey, I am in agreement with the original statement. The "revolving door" of financial aid and interference by lobbyists has to go-it has and is crippling our government. But what does that mean? Does it mean that lobbyists should not be involved at all or that they can be involved when it in the best interest of the executive branch and Congress? Once again we are confronted by a president who says one thing and does another. The media and DNC were all over the Republicans when this happened, so why the deafening silence now? And this is just another example of some people not knowing what the definition of is, is. People, at some point you are going to look in the mirror and know you have been had. And it's going to be a sadder but wiser voter who staggers to the line in 2010.
Nov 12, 2008 | 9:55 PM
Category:
Political
So here we are after an historic election. Many people decided to make it historic as is their right. But what is troubling is the media's unevenness and flat out unwillingness to give Americans all of the news. There are many different ways to lie, but one of the most effective is to just give part of the truth. The media had no rules or limits on their dissection of Palin, McCain, their families, their histories and even items covered by privacy laws. But maybe that is the role of media. Do you feel that Pres. Elect Obama had the same sort of analysis of his history, his family or his associates? Or instead, did the media choose to build up this candidate, now president elect, in order to make Americans do something that they felt was right for the country, no matter what? There's a certain smugness and self-congratulatory nature of the media. And paired with that are some lingering doubts which only now, a week after the election, are coming into play. There are concerns that Pres. Elect Obama views himself as the reincarnation of FDR, but in doing so he only sees the social programs wrought by New Dealers, not the unnecessary prolonging of the Depression through a procession of taxes that removed working capital from the system to the detriment of workers across the board. I am extremely concerned because there seems to be no end in sight. And while in a crisis one would hope an incoming executive would seek out those people who were innovative and who knew how to implement change REGARDLESS OF THEIR PARTY AFFILIATION, he has loaded his potential cabinet and panel of economic experts with more of the same people that have sought handouts from government for decades. Read on and see what can happen if someone sacrifices jobs for international payouts and political paybacks. Is it really a good idea to tax Americans more and then pay that money out in the form of bribery or tribute to other nations? Does it make sense to scuttle our own economy at all costs?
Story hereExcerpt:
"...With one hand the New Dealers gave, spending to stimulate
the economy. In fact, they put through the same kinds of
infrastructure projects that Obama and congressional Democrats
are considering today.
With the other hand the New Dealers took away, by raising
tax rates -- just as the new president and Congress are likely to
do in 2009.
Especially damaging to the prospects of recovery were the
heavy levies of the second half of the 1930s, which, as Krugman
points out, were key in ``precipitating an economic relapse that
drove unemployment back into the double digits.'' President
Franklin D. Roosevelt specialized in persecuting the rich via
taxes, telling the upper class, point blank, that they had ``met
their master...
'...Laffer, Moore and Tanous chart the correlation between tax
cuts and growth in other countries as well. In Ireland,
unemployment began to drop following cuts in the personal income
tax. It rose again before falling dramatically as the Irish
government cut capital-gains taxes and then corporate taxes.
It's worth noting that Ireland was enduring Depression-level
rates of unemployment -- 16 percent to 17 percent -- at the
outset of its tax experiment and managed to get down to the five-
percent range even as the nation found its way to a budget
surplus.."
'
Nov 10, 2008 | 6:17 PM
Category:
Political
Is this what we have to look forward to? Even the most strident of liberal supporters should be highly disturbed at how our freedom of speech is being taken away. As someone who teaches art, expression is important. This is just one step on that slippery slope. "Truth Squads", "Broadcast Councils"-what more indications do you need that our freedoms are under assault?
Nov 9, 2008 | 7:21 PM
Category:
News
Story hereAt what point are the police and law enforcement officials going to get serious about tracking down these people. We have had three assaults on seniors in the southern sectors of Dallas. And what is worse, these are probably perpetrators already well known to the police. If someone knows who these people are, TELL THE POLICE!!!! They are getting money from seniors, assaulting them, making their senior years ones of terror rather than peace. If you know something about who is doing this and you are witholding information due to fear, or worse, due to your own petty greed, then I want you to know that you can contact the police anonymously. This worries me a great deal. My mom values her independence and I don't want to and really cannot be there all the time. There used to be respect for seniors-but now these greedy little pigs think nothing of stealing from old ladies and elderly men. Big ****ing cowards. At least try to steal from someone that will give you a real fight. I hope one of these old WWII vets puts a bullet into you.
Nov 9, 2008 | 5:31 PM
Category:
Political
Nov 8, 2008 | 11:19 AM
Category:
News
Story herePlease pay attention to this story because it is about a situation which should not be occurring and which could endanger younger kids in school. Since public schools have this mindless mandate that they must educate everyone, dogooders have made it their aim to allow anyone up to the age of 25 who wants to enroll in high school. I have frequently stated my support of Ninth Grade Centers simply because dumb little just turned 14 year old girls are absolute suckers for the 18 and 19 year old seniors. There have been many times that I have intercepted and turned over notes written by older male students inviting freshmen girls to afterschool, night or private parties at homes and apartments where some of these older students LIVE BY THEMSELVES. Note to parents: there are lots and lots of parents with way more money than sense that would rather pay for an 18 year old to live on their own than monitor that same kid's behavior. Drugs, sex, abuse, failure, crime are all incipient dangers, but too many parents just can't be bothered to PARENT. Likewise, there are far too many parents, mostly social status seeking moms, who think it's just PEACHY for their freshman daughter to date the senior varsity athletic star. Note to parents: in high school and really even in the early years of college, more than a two year gap in ages between dating partners is an invitation to abuse and exploitation.
How many stories about girls sending nasty photos on the cell phones and then getting them sent around school are we going to have to hear to make some sense out of this? Likewise, boys can be entrapped by provocative young women who want to use sex to secure their social standing. If you think this can't happen, listen to this story. A friend of ours had a son who was a star athlete at a well known local high school. Some freshman girl kept calling him, sending him notes, leaving presents in his car and generally offered him the moon-if you get my drift. Being a teenage boy, ruled by hormones rather than brains, he dated her, had sex with her. But then she became a burden. She would break into his emails, tried to demand he buy her costly gifts, threaten other friends until he simply couldn't deal with it so he broke up with her. Unfortunately for the kid, her daddy was a lawyer. They tried to sue for rape, but the various witnesses, notes and such saved this kid from having to go to jail and be labeled a sex offender for life. People, while there are still many innocent kids in our schools, there are also those who are allowed to run wild. Letting significantly older students in where they can work their experience on younger students is dangerous and should not happen. The state legislature needs to address this.
And BTW, part of this came from the ADA wherein disabled students are required to be educated at the local district's expense until they are 21. Frankly, even some of the mentally disabled students who are older are a danger to younger students. Although they may be mentally challenged, they have the same hormones and can often act on them without the filter of reason. I am dealing with this now with a student who has mental problems but seems fixated on being as verbally provocative as possible. I can't get him removed because he knowns the limits. In the meantime, I fear for some of the girls that gravitate toward him. He's an 18 year old sophomore. And folks, this is an ongoing situation in far too many of our high schools.
Nov 7, 2008 | 10:41 PM
Category:
News
The hue and cry over the death of innocents due to a police chase involving a drunk driver ended up with the Dallas Police making a new policy that they would call off any chase that goes more than 20 mph over the speed limit. Last night, a drunk driver drove away from an attempted traffic stop and killed one man outright and wounded another. The police officer had to call off the chase per department policy. At what point are we going to stop blaming the police for incidents that happen as the result of criminal behavior by citizens? I realize that people could get hurt in a police chase, but people could also be hurt if they DIDN'T attempt to stop dangerous drivers. So at what point are we going to admit that drunk drivers are the problem and not the police?
Nov 5, 2008 | 6:45 PM
Category:
Political
The election is over and it pretty much turned out as the media said it would. So now I wonder-
-Will the media continue to simply fawn over every word from the White House, or will they be forced at some point to ask the hard questions?
-Will Joe Biden manage to make it through one term? He looks like a used car salesman to me. I am just not sure he can handle the job.
-Now that numbers will be down for readership and viewership, will the media shrink along with the rest of economy?
-Will the voter population get tired of the media controlling the message? It's become fairly clear that many people simply do not read or listen to the news. Instead they get a buffet of filtered news from their internet sources. If the Fairness Doctrine comes into play, can the Republicans use that to force websites such as The Daily Kos or Huffington to admit their egregious lies?
-While I understand this is a great and memorable day for many African Americans, I could really do without Bob Ray Sanders and John Wiley Price. Both of them, who have whines and threatened everyone that we must sympathize and "understand" the views of those who oppose us, seem ready to relegate those of us who simply could not agree with Obama's political stands to the general heading of racist. I am tired of it. I teach and deal with children and people from a wide range of backgrounds. I was raised to treat EVERYONE with courtesy and kindness. Yet because I fear that my husband's company may close due to corporate taxation and worry that what little we have in retirement accounts will be lost to some government programs to pay money to people who have either wasted their own money or not paid into the system-I am called racist. I am tired of it. I know that there were many many wonderful representatives of the African American community that could have been called upon to comment. The choice of these two men and the comments they spewed forth makes me seriously wonder at what President Obama means by "uniting America".
As it is, I will still stay conservative. If President Obama can do what he says and not destroy us, then maybe destiny was prudent. But I also know his supporters are impatient and I truly think if he doesn't make things happen magically and soon, they will drop support.
Nov 3, 2008 | 6:32 PM
Category:
Political
I was thinking about the elections and how having a Democrat in the White House along with Democrat control of the Congress could alter the landscape politically. And strangely enough, my mind wandered back to a Dr. Suess classic. Knowing his personal views, I am sure he's rolling in his grave over my musings, but here's what I came up with.
IF, Barak Obama wins the election, and
IF the Congress succeeds in the tightened oversight of the airwaves via local boards that are politically appointed or elected, and
IF conservatives lose a way to publicly air their greivances
DOES THAT MEAN CONSERVATISM IS GONE?
No.
It can come without airwaves, without handpicked auditors and arbitrators of what is worthy of airing. It can come without the media, without the glitz of Eurotrash celebrities who push their agendas onto the backs of working people. It can come without shallow nominees who provide soundbite candidacy and not much more. Because Conservatism, capital C, has to do with saving, preserving and protecting our way of life. It is something that even the most radical among us is loathe to change, because once you have opened that can of worms, you end up having to buy a larger can. So don't be downhearted and don't doubt that this wheel of life will surely turn. And things may change faster than anyone realizes or predicts. Because although you may change programs, taxes, and faces, people do not change on their own. They change because of things going on within. And if you don't believe that, then you can read the experiences of any of several political captives to see that while their captors continued to press to control their thoughts, in our own minds, no matter where we are, we are still free to dream. Keep hope alive, no matter what tomorrow brings.
Nov 1, 2008 | 7:15 PM
Category:
Political
This post has been edited by an administrator
Neither candidate has produced much in the way of substance in regards to how they would handle various situations which are literally just over the horizon. While many cite McCain as a maverick, it is Obama's willingness to sit down with people who have claimed to hate us that is more of a problem. Israelis are looking to this election in fear because the media has been so dazzled by the American election that they have failed to note a wide array of provocative actions, especially on the part of Hamas in Palestine. Because of this, few Americans are aware that the ceasefire has never really been adhered to by Hamas and that active smuggling, spying and other terror operations are ongoing against the Israelis at the behest of Hamas. Remember, Obama is the candidate who simply wanted to sit down with the likes of Kim Jong-Il and Ahmadinejad and simply talk. Unfortunately, not all cultures are like western cultures. By some, capitulation or negotiation is seen as weakness. Vote wisely.
Story here
Here's what's going on in Israel:
"...The
defense establishment thwarted an attempt to smuggle military textile
goods to the Hamas organization in the Gaza Strip on Monday. Defense
Ministry administration workers were surprised to discover the
equipment under a surface during a routine check of a truck carrying
humanitarian aid to the Strip through the Kerem Shalom crossing. The
goods included coats, sweaters, hats, and camouflage fatigues.
Defense establishment officials said the equipment seized was not permitted to enter Gaza.
"There
is no reason why we should allow Hamas to bring in such equipment at
the expense of humanitarian aid intended for the Palestinian
population. We are now trying to investigate who sent this equipment.
"Hamas
doesn't care about hurting the Palestinian population in order to
promote its own interests. They choose to use the permits provided by
Israel for the entry of humanitarian equipment for the organization's
own needs," a security source said.
Nov 1, 2008 | 2:09 PM
Category:
News
Story here
I don't know about most people, but I don't think it is the place of a teacher to discuss sex roles, gender preferences or any other such topic with KINDERGARTNERS! I don't discuss them with the high school kids I teach. But this is just another wonderful example of how certain people with specific agendas will try to impact future decisions via indoctrination. If I were a parent, I would be livid. I would make sure that teacher didn't have a job. I would make that my quest. How about teaching them the alphabet, their phone numbers, how to get along without flooding the curriculum with someone's agenda.
Nov 1, 2008 | 12:37 PM
Category:
Political
I came across this blog at Chicagoboyz. It's an interesting and informative observation on why our economy is more consumption oriented than production oriented. It also makes some astute observations on why this happened and who affected the policies that created this climate change in America. Well worth the read. By the way, this particular blogsite is one that offers some no frills explanations about all things financial and economic.
Chicagoboyz
Excerpt"
...In 1950, America produced 51% of the GNP for entire world. Of that
production, roughly 70% took place in the eight states surrounding the
Great Lakes: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and New York.
The productive capability of this small area of earth staggers the
imagination. Virtually everything that rebuilt the industrial bases of
Europe and Japan came from those eight states. Cars, planes,
electronics, machine tools, consumer goods, generators, concrete - any
conceivable item manufactured by industrial humanity poured out this
tiny region and enriched the world. The region shone with widespread
prosperity. People migrated from the south and west to work in these
herculean engines of industry.
The wealth, power and economic dominance of the region at the time
cannot be overstated. Nothing like it has existed in human history.
Yet, a mere 30 years later, by 1980, we called that area the
“rustbelt” and it became synonymous with joblessness, collapsing
cities, high crime, failing schools and general hopelessness.
What the hell happened?..."
