Sunday, October 24, 2010

"Morning Papers" - Its Origin

The Rooster

"Good Night, Moon" - this is a picture from inside the book. 60 years old.

I purchased a copy of it for a friend last month and it was the last book on the shelf.  

Some things never change.

The USA has lost its moral compass for the sake of a two party system. Is it really worth it?

During the Great Depression all kinds of shifts in political beliefs took place.  There was even a rise in Communism at that time.  There wasn't the internet or televisions in abundance.

I know people feel betrayed and much of what has passed as legislation seems counter intuitive.  The cry is 'Common Sense' rather than making 'Good Sense.'  

If there is anything I wish, it would be for the electorate to take a step back and realize what there vote means to them.  

No one should waste their vote on anger or impulse.  It needs to be right and for troubled times having a country with a consistent rudder is better than one that will cause us to drift off course into dangerous waters.  

All I ask is that people think about what they are doing.  Nothing more.  The voting booth is not a church pew.  Vote with clear minded interest in what we know to be the truth, not on guesses and empty rhetoric.  We are not floudering that badly and there is no reason to regret the vote of 2008.

The problems we inherited from Republicans can't be understated.

A failed economy that without the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 would have sent most if not all State budgets into bankruptcy.

The Housing Market is a disaster and we don't know when we will ever see the return of value to the American Dream again.

All our 'good jobs' have been outsourced leaving a virtual void in the USA to reclaim our economy without legislation from the Congress and a President that holds the country in his resolve.

 We have witnessed pure unadulterated greed consume the Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf Coast of the USA.  Yet with all that our economy remained fairly steady.

We have ended an unnecessary war in Iraq.  The venture into Afghanistan has revealed a deep corruption that has spawned global outrageous with the violence currently besetting the countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan.  If President Obama hadn't recommitted to ending the stronghold of al Qaeda in Afghanistan the truth would still not be known to us.

The government in DC was gutted by the Republicans and had to be refinanced so there could be effectiveness returned to it.  

The war in Mexico was somewhat a surprise to the USA and we had to commit troops of all things.  

President Obama has recommitted the USA to nuclear non-proliferation.

We are re-engaging the Middle East which will bring about change with the help of nation's leaders in the region.  

The strides made on the foreign front can't be equaled by the Bush/Cheney White House.

The country is on a steady path to improvement with Wall Street kicking and screaming all the way, but, we are getting through it and I can't imagine changing in mid-stream is a good idea.  We aren't all that bad off currently from the stand point it could be much, much worse without the majority Democrats that have provided significant change to the nation.

For God Sake, our troops are out of Iraq.  Doesn't that count for something?

I am concerned for my country, for many reasons.  But. Primarily for the reason there are people unqualified seeking power rather than governance.  I've never so worried about the USA.  I sincerely believe people are being frivolous with their decisions for the same of 'throwing out the old to bring in the new' with thoughtless abandon.

The electorate in some states seem to be blind to the manipulation of the propagandists.  I don't know why they seem to believe that being mindless is okay.

There are good ways to make decisions when it comes to election day.  Emotional decisions are rarely good ones when leadership is at stake.

I feel as though Americans need to come home again.

The Brits take on the 2010 elections. It speaks very poorly of the will of the electorate.

...1. North Dakota (click title to entry - thank you). John Hoeven is more than 40 points up against a bloke called Tracy in this very conservative state. The Republican candidate would probably still win if he was found dead in bed with an underage girl and a large amount of cocaine between now and polling day. Republican pick-up....

It is that kind of perspective that dominates a lot of conservative races in the USA.  The electorate is so tainted with their own ideas of what they want in DC there is no room for reason.

In Alaska, there is an election whereby the Republican candidates are either tainted with hate for Democrats without respect for the citizens enough to submit to interviews or the electorate was taken for granted and didn't believe she had a care to secure her re-election.  The ONLY candidate that actually has honored the voter with consistent messages of what is best for Alaska and is running against all odds at willing is the Democrat, McAdams.  He has run a sincere and clean campaign and never once wavered from his commitment to the electorate of Alaska, yet not enough people are putting their trust in him regardless of his loyalty, transparency and unwavering campaign.  It is that type of phenomena that works against the best interest of the country and every American should be concerned about it.

Scott McAdams has received an endorsement in the Anchorage Daily News.  This is NOT my imagination running away with me.

Scott McAdams: He's good for Alaska (click here)

Because I was elected at a young age to be a delegate to Alaska's Constitutional Convention, I've outlived most of our state's founders, leaving me with the responsibility of passing on to today's voters some of the values I carry from those days.

My friends were Democrats and Republicans. I include Democrats Bill Egan, Ernest Gruening and Bob Bartlett, as well as Republicans Wally Hickel, Bob Atwood and Jay Hammond. And Ted Stevens too.
In this year's election for U.S. Senate, there is one thing that's been said that I think all these men would agree with: It's about Alaska. That's Scott McAdams' slogan, his belief and his life story, and I support him. Here's why....

Ever hear of a Liberal Republican?

Jacob Javits, a New York Senator from 1957 to 1981.  He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and there is a convention center in New York City named after him.

He was regarded as a good legislator, first in the US House and later in the US Senate.

He felt any political party should reflect the true diversity of the USA.

Senator Javits is for real.  He was a staunch liberal while being a member of the Republican Party.  The Republican Party somewhere along the way lost its sense of belonging to the people and serve a plutocratic base.  

Senator Javits was a lawyer that always had a profession to fall back on should he not be successful politically, but, he was never unsuccessful in anything he tried in life.

The only reason Harry Reid is having problems is because after the 2008 elections he was demonized by the Murdoch Media Circus.

Then there is Harry Reid.  A devout Christian with enough understanding of life to know how to make decisions for citizens that acts in their best interest.

His career speaks for itself and the only problem Harry has is that his soft spoken personality is adverse to today's political scene.  I find him more conservative than most Democrats.  That is why he was elected first to Minority leader in 2005 and then Majority leader.  It was because he was able to work with Republicans better than some others.  

He is a good guy with a long history in government.  After he became a lawyer from George Washington University Law School he worked as a JD with the US Capitol Police.  At the age of 30 he began his political career wining in a race where he was placed as Lt. Governor.  He served until 1981, then became a US House Representative in 1983, and then a US Senator in 1987.  I like Harry Reid.  He is sincerely trying to act in the best interest of the people of his state as well as the country and he has been a good friend to the President. With the country facing monumental problems, I rather have faith in a leader that knows the ropes and has been through enough to make good decisions.

 Don't you find Sharon Angle a bit odd.  She has a horrible voting record in the Nevada State Legislature.  She frequently voted "No" to everyone else's "Yes."  Her nickname was "41 to Angle."  That should send up warning flags everywhere.  She has done some fairly bizarre things.  She was the only NO vote on a tax abatement sincerely needed to improve the quality of life to Nevada's citizens.  She stated she could not vote against her oath of office which requires taxes to be equitable.  The problem for her was that the commercial properties were to be taxed at 8% while the residential properties were to be taxed at 3%.  It doesn't sound as though she can discern the difference in incomes and vulnerabilities very well.  She should have debated the issue with her peers and come to a clear understanding that her oath does not preclude her from voting for the best interest of citizens SHE WAS TO SERVE.  She is favored by the Tea Party because she is intractable in her commitment to 'words' and 'promises' even if in a professional sense it is better for all that she act differently.  She has never served at the Federal level and has absolutely no experience in the foreign arena.  She is a Southern Christian with an intractable personality.  She is not a sincere decision maker, she is frequently alone in her ideas of what is best.  I think she is very risky as a candidate.

Small Businessman vs Real Estate Developer

Michael Arcuri is a New York born and breed Democrat.  He is seeking a return to the US House of Representatives.  It isn't as though he needs the power of his seat.  He attended SUNY and graduated from New York Law School and entered private practice in 1985.  Arcuri is a better choice for the USA House because he has no reason to there other than to serve the people of his district.  He can return to private practice if he cares to, but, his opponent is an entirely different matter.

This is a return visit for Hanna.  He failed to be elected in 2008, so he wants to try again to gain power at the federal level.  He has never served in government before.

Hanna is a mall builder.  He is going to go to Washington to appropriate monies to increase construction of commercial properties in New York State.  The construction industry is slowed because of the Real Estate bubble and he is out to manipulate the government to throw more money at his failing businesses.

...In addition to (click here) serving as Owner and President of Hanna Construction, Hanna is a partner in the Gabriel Group, LLC, which has owned and operated Forge Hill Estates in Ilion, NY, one of the premier apartment complexes in the Mohawk Valley, since 1992....

Michigan Governor's Race - An obvious choice between Wall Street and Main Street.



He sold a perfectly good company to a Wall Street company, made millions and never thought twice about removing jobs from Michigan's economy.  That doesn't sound like a person 'fit' to be Governor to me.

"The Can Do Kids"

After attending graduated from college with a BA in Economics, worked as a stockbroker for three years after her marriage in 1962 while her husband attended law school.

She worked as a journalist.  Palin was educated as a journalist, but, never read newspapers.  Her first successful run for office was at a member of the Marin Board of Supervisors and was the first woman president in her six year term.  While she served in government her spouse was a Worker Compensation Lawyer accepting many cases referred to him by unions.  His practice surrounded the working person.  It was in 1982 she was elected to the US House of Representatives where she served for five terms.  She must be doing something right.  in 1992, Senator Alan Cranston retired and she ran for his seat and won.  She was the first woman to serve as the Chair for the Envronment and Public Works Committee.  But that was enough for Boxer.  She was also selected as the Chair for the Select Committee on Ethics.  She was the ONLY Chair to precide over two committees at the same time.

Barbara Boxer has a very long HISTORY, both on a professional level and personal level of serving people.  It is in her DNA so to speak.  There is a wrong way and a right way to vote.  Please think before you cast your ballot in November.

Wall Street NOT Main Street

From a real estate receptionist to broker, to English teacher in Italy, to management trainee for AT&T on to Senior Vice President of their hardware and systems division, to assistant to the Lucent Chief Executive to formulate the companies stock offering at inception, rising to President of the global services division, and on to CEO of HP.  

Basically, she rode the 'Tech Bubble' until it burst.  Thereafter, she wasn't successful.  She caused enormous in-fighting in HP and brought about a merger that most see as a desperate effort to stem a failing HP.  The merger with Compaq created the largest personal computer manufacturer in regard to numbers shipped, but, that was due to a merger of two huge entities, it was a simple task.  She cost the general economy plenty of jobs with that merger and didn't really do anything to expand the market share so much as simply absorbed the two that already existed.  From that stand point she saved 'the name' HP.  Three years after the Tech Bubble collapsed she was unsuccessful in improving HP and she was forced to resign by the Board.

She has no proven record of success, except, for her ability to ride the Bubble until it burst.  Heck, anyone can do that.

Sarah Palin isn't quite the woman Christine O'Donnel is, however, she is very rough around the edges.

She is basically unsuccessful in her own life.  She was successful while a mayor in Wasilla, but, that was in support of the local culture.  When she ran for Vice President, she didn't even read newspapers one would expect from a potential Vice President.  She is unable to formulate real solutions for the real world, but, simply spouts rhetorical statements that align with voter focus.

She really creates her own reality to justify her life.  She has no real answers for the USA.  She lies along with most of the other Republicans in that the Bailout is President Obama's problem when in fact it occurred due to the irresponsible policies of Bush and the Republicans in deregulation of the banking industry.

Sarah Palin validates herself in the fact she is loved by many.  That isn't being a responsible representative to the people, that is being a Superstar.  She was unable to overcome her own inadequacies during her run for Vice President in 2008 so that she could still be an Alaskan governor.  She left after two years to pursue a chance at being her own millionaire or billionaire bring along her daughter and whomever else happens to be aligned with her success as a king maker.  

I don't believe she is dangerous as she continues to be unsuccessful.  I don't see her changing either.  She has molded herself into a corner and if she leaves that corner she loses her 'successful following.'  We are all familiar with devotees.  Well, Sarah has hers.  

Recently she stated, that if the GOP implodes than so be it.  Fine.  But she also stated, '...we believe in common sense and the individual.'  Yet, when it comes to her rhetoric she carries the flag of the Plutocratic Republicans.  She is believed to be more Libertarian than Republican in some circles and that will continue simply because she attracts those that see their world differently.  She has that effect on people that seek wealth over country.  She appears to be where many believe their best interests lie, but, that is only because so much of what is 'different' is actually 'unsophisticated.'  

But, to go back to 'the individual.'  That is a Democratic message.  The Burger Court.  So, Sarah is very confused.  She is not mired in policy, so much as 'fluid rhetoric.'  A candidate that is a problem solver has answers.  She doesn't have answers, she has rhetoric and theory.  

One of the issues that besets the USA with these candidates is that they don't follow The Rule of Law, they follow Their Beliefs about life and law.  There is a huge credibility gap with them.  They are UNABLE to separate themselves from policy that works for everyone.  They can't lead.  They are simply put, hapless.

..."The momentum is with us (click title to entry - thank you)  but now is not the time to let up. Now is the time where we dig deep," Palin told a crowd of Florida Republicans at an RNC fundraising rally in Orlando. "It ain't over till it's over. These last 10 days we can't be thinking that we got it in the bag, we can't get cocky about this yet."

In addition to key GOP fundraisers, Palin was joined by Republican candidates including Tea Party favorite, Senate candidate Marco Rubio.

"We've got to keep on working extremely hard. We've got to leave the dancing to the stars," Palin said, referencing her daughter Bristol, a contestant on Dancing With The Stars. "Soon we'll all be dancing, we'll all be celebrating."...
I understand all those words, but, they do not include policy statements and why that policy would work for the USA. 

Anti-Establsihment. I heard that description of Republcans today. Huh?

 Anti-Establishment candidate is a matter of pursuing an opposite policy. 

Okay.  But, opposite to what?  Because if it is opposite to Barak Obama that might be true, but, if it is in opposition to Wall Street to benefit Main Street that is absolutely not true.  
In the sincerest sense of the word, the Republicans are NOT Anti-Establishment, they are Pro-Establishment.

So, when any Republican states he is anti-establishment that isn't true.  They are anti-Democrat, but, not anti-establishment.  Not even close. 

Their platform is based in promoting plutocratic ideals.  That is not anti-establishment, that is about as establishment to the highest degree it gets.

Their social platform excludes civil rights for all Americans.  It impinges on liberty and limits 'the individual' to submit to establishment principles of Christian Fundamentalists.

"I'm you?" I don't think so. No joke, the woman is in her own orbit. I am not laughing.

 I've seen this before, but, never in my wildest imagination did I ever believe I would see such profound disconnect from mainstream society that reaches all the way to the USA Senate.

Let's get one thing straight, no psychiatrist is going to certify this woman.  Why?  Because she lives in a world created for her by her faith.  She is basically unsophisticated.  She is profoundly the person she presents herself to be.  She is a deeply devoted Christian without any recognition of the world greater than herself.

She is credulous when it comes to her faith.  She wavers in her belief of the Constitution and only follows aspects of it because her faith allows her to.  She is unsuccessful in her life because the 'belief system' she hold at the 'core' of her intelligence is based in faith rather than fact.  It is unusual for people that are educated to actually adhere so tightly to faithful beliefs without accepting the real world on its terms but it happens.  In communities across this country there are people that do not accept the reality of their life unless it is completely immersed in their own belief system.  
This is the reason why Roman Catholic legislators argue with the Pope or Bishops or Cardinals.  The legislators understand the USA is not composed of Christian Fundamentalists or Roman Catholic.  The USA is a melting pot that honors the separation of church an state.  But, for someone like Christine O'Donnell the reality of life is based in faith and not real world facts.  She doesn't accept the reality the law dictates unless it aligns with HER 'core belief system.'  It is why the Pope could never be President.  He is unable to move outside his core beliefs to allow 'the facts about reality' to exist even though he sees them as invalid.

In most psychiatric circles she would be regarded as being 'in her own orbit.'  Literally.  People that are engaged in that doctrine usually seek a profession such as the Catholic church provides in the way of a Priest or Nun or in other faiths as a minister.  The USA Constitution and the freedoms it applies to its citizens is alien to her.  She is unsuccessful in life except where people remain confused to her 'core beliefs.'  She is NOT you, nor does she understand YOU.  She isn't well balanced.  Sorry.  It is just the truth.  She may be certifiable and be eligible for Social Security Disability if she is unable to rise above her own limitations.

In her most recent debate, it was completely obvious the USA's Constitution is not safe in her care taking, but, indeed under threat.

Christine O'Donnel is 'contracted' into her own understandings of reality.  She will not permit any 'worldly' values to infiltrate

"...In documents filed (click title to entry - thank you) in response to O’Donnell’s complaint, the Institute enumerated several reasons why O’Donnell was fired. The group accused her of not following her supervisor’s instructions, failing to complete assignments and “repeated insubordination,” among other things. The Institute said that she continued to moonlight promoting Mel Gibson’s controversial film “The Passion of the Christ” “even though she was directed not to because it was not part of” the Institute’s mission...."
It's Sunday Night.

"Tea for Two" sung by Doris Day

Oh honey
Picture me upon your knee,
With tea for two and two for tea,
Just me for you and you for me, alone!
Nobody near us, to see us or hear us,
No friends or relations
on weekend vacations
We won't have it known, dear,
That we own a telephone, dear.

Day will break and I'm gonna wake
and start to bake a sugar cake
for you to take for all the boys to see.
We will raise a family,
a boy for you , and a girl for me,
Can't you see how happy we will be.

(Picture you upon my knee)
(tea for two and two for tea)
(me for you and you for me, alone!)
(Nobody near us, to see us or hear us,)
(No friends or relations on weekend vacations)
(We won't have it known, dear,)
(That we own a telephone,)

Day will break and I'm gonna wake
and start to bake a sugar cake
for you to take for all the boys to see.
We will raise a family,
a boy for you, and a girl for me,
Oh can't you see how happy we will be.
(How happy we will be)