Sovereign Debt is not a bank loan. Let's start there.

To the left is a picture of The Great Wall of China.  It is a national treasure and a national asset.  No one can buy and sell the Great Wall of China, it belongs to the people of China.


In a diplomatic act China and the USA came together over a common denominator.  Let's say we admired their potential for economic growth and purchasing our products.  There is a 'trust' relationship in that diplomatic act that cannot be violated, otherwise, all kinds of problems erupt.  


The reason China loans the USA money and the reason China has so much economic interest in the USA is because of our assets, our people, our belief in them and the relationship that has existed from the time that diplomatic act engaged the relationship.


The reason the Great Wall of China is a national asset is because it earns money through tourism and as a landmark for China.  There is a great deal to admire in The Great Wall of China and that wins certain interests that are not even tourism.  The USA has the same thing in their National Parks.  


China loaned the USA money because they believed the USA would be an ally in economic development for a long time.  In that 'understanding' was that China would have the right to market their products in the USA to build an economy domestically in China.


China felt SECURE in loaning the USA money because there is a RELATIONSHIP that China controls that benefits the Chinese people.  Their products come to the USA, the American people purchase them, within that dynamic is an element of SECURITY in the monetary loans to the USA.  China has a VESTED  INTEREST in the USA's domestic economy as well as their own and therefore they have continued the RELATIONSHIP to support the lending needs to the USA.  


China is not a democracy.  It is a communist country with no desire to go to war with anyone quite frankly.  The USA gave China the technology to assist in a Chinese Space Program that is the pride of Chinese prosperity.  A space program is a symbol of security, national pride and power and the sovereignty of the people.  It is a modern day technology that no one ever dreamed the Chinese people would be capable of even launching, yet alone building.  The same was true of the Olympic games held there.  They are accomplishments that make statements to the world of the capacity of the Chinese people.


This is going to sound 'counter-intuitive' but China is a very benevolent country.  A little naive at times, but, benevolent in their 'interest' in most other countries in the world.  We don't really approve of the power the Chinese have mastered on all venues because if feels like a threat to us, but, the willingness of the Chinese to have an interest in the USA's economy is a benevolent act especially to the extent China has invested in us. 


I am not referring to just the monies we owe, but, also to the 'interest' China has in the USA economy that directly feeds the Chinese people, both literally and figuratively.


So the 'idea' that we can 'starve the beast' of the USA economy in some hideous idea about an austerity agenda is not just foolish, it is incompetent and very under informed.  If hatred is dominating the legislative agenda in the House then there is profoundly huge problems facing the USA that someone needs to resolve.  This is a dynamic no one wants to breach.  I promise you.


If the world witnesses the "Fall of the USA" that leads to impoverishment of its people while their own economies waste away, they won't stand by silently to witness it.  I am fairly confident of that.  The first 'symbol' of hostilities is removal of diplomats.  This is no joke.  Japan is an ally engaged in the same dynamic and their country cannot tolerate the destruction of the USA economy.  Japan won't simply wring their hands and allow their country to sustain more and more stress.  


This is a dynamic that no one should be playing with and the politics should never have been introduced at all.

Okay. How do you tell the Alabama 5th Congressional District they have to recall their Congressman?

July 13, 2011 5:14 PM

Rep. Mo Brooks: I'll do "anything short of shooting" illegal immigrants (click title to entry - thank you)

…"Anything that is lawful, it needs to be done because illegal aliens need to quit taking jobs from American citizens," Brooks said in an interview with Alabama television station WHNT, an excerpt of which was posted to YouTube….

Mo Brooks is not a competent legislator.  I still can't believe the RNC was a party to this disaster in the House.


This was his statement about illegal immigrants.  To him they are objects of anger and not human beings.  That might expose a ‘clue’ to why he believes there is no problem with the nation’s debt ceiling now.  He wants to pay all obligations to creditors and remove over $1.4 Trillion from the USA economy. 

While I admire the idea that Americans can stand on their own, their economy cannot stand on its own and the debtors that we pay will actually feel the removal of the $1.4 Trillion from the USA economy that pays the government’s obligations to the country and in turn can’t pay their debtors or participate with disposable income.

The idea is extremely naïve and under informed.  There is just no way the American people should be treated as objects rather than human beings. 

The Tea Baggers have a problem.  They are not able to understand the way the USA economy’s dynamics actually contribute to a larger picture that if unable to pay their domestic obligations would impact the global economy and the outcome would be catastrophic.

Anger should never replace reason.   There is no reasoning in stating that dynamic as a reasonable choice for the USA.  It will also incur human rights violatoins against the people within the borders of the USA. 

There is a real problem here.  Someone needs to do something soon or we will have a disaster to the entire US economy and the global economy.   My thoughts are worse than what I write.  There are broad sweeping implications that makes Iraq and Afghanistan look benign.  I mean that.  Buoy.  WOW.  Mr. Brooks makes Bachmann look like a Rhodes Scholar.  WOW.I…I….IIIIIIiiiiiiiii…..

Eric Cantor has to go.  He is not competent and he is not a leader.  I hope the DNC is paying attention.  This is no joke.  These folks are estranging the identity of the USA to its global partners and its domestic populous.  They are dangerous people.  Very dangerous.

The President made a profound mistake. He actually believed, not thought, but believed the Legislature was competent.

Remember these folks?

The President did his job.

The Simpson-Bowles Commission (click title to entry - thank you) ended its work in December of 2010.  What's the problem already?

The President doesn’t write and pass legislation.  He is the Executive Branch that carries out the business of the nation.  Doesn’t Speaker Boner know who and where the Treasury Secretary is?  Did he call for a commission regarding the debt and deficit as the President did?  When is the House going to pass the bill that increases the debt ceiling of the USA?  They haven’t sent a competent bill to the President to sign yet.  When is that going to happen?  The bills the House is passing are political action messages and not legislation this country can live with.  When will the House pass a bill the Senate will vote for?

GOVERNING is not about having a temper tandrum or demanding what extremists want, it is about writing and passing competent and independently produced legislation free of cronyism, deceptions and TRAPS that citizens will become ensnared in.  

What seems to be the problem?  Don't know how?  I doubt the President has time to give seminars or classes on how to accomplish it.

Why doesn't Boner ask Secretary Geithner to come and address the House?  That might be important right now.

Article II - The Executive Branch

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Section 4 - Disqualification

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Here's one for you.

Honest.  No lie.


When I purchased a new vehicle it was never off the car lot.  It was always to order.


The way I wanted it.


It was even affordable.  The order was simply put into the production schedule.


Nice.


I didn't care about the 'wait time' at all.  I was getting what I wanted the way I wanted it, the color I liked with the amenities specifically to order.  


The wait time was told to me by the salesman before I signed the contract and put down my down payment.  I then got financing and told the showroom they were guaranteed their money as soon as the vehicle arrived.  It took about six weeks from order to delivery.  


Local small business people don't need large inventories if they do custom work.  


Example:  Bridle dress.  If a person knows how to sew all the better, but, if a person knows how to taylor clothing, having suppliers that will work with custom orders will provide a clientele that will work for them.


Example:  Artists that can paint custom designs for homes and/or frame it can do the same thing.


It is about being an expert, adding quality of life to the local 'culture' and providing excellent customer service on everything.  


Customers have to be willing to allow creative input and time to secure what they want the way they want it.  It is about reliability and trust coupled with marketing techniques that work to attract the right consumer.


Store fronts eventually develop and a Main Street is not only alive but the place to be.  Social, communal creates meeting places and business.  


Competent local small business people grow economies, not tax breaks that will find a home overseas.


In Africa there are villages of women that produce products to sell in specialty stores the USA.  As their competency grows their products will become less expensive as more and more are produced and they will replace some lousy manufactured products.  The same can happen in the USA.  Can a group of women/men become a 'partnership' to have a store front of consumer items no one else carries in a quality no one else can match?  Yep.  


Example:  You would not believe the cupcake store that people flock to in our local area and pay $1.50 per cupcake and $6.50 for custom made.  It works.  People pay those prices and they love it.  Why?  Because it reflects who they are to the social gathering they purchase for.  Average Middle Class people pay those prices and the cupcake store can't keep up with the business.  Oh, they do specialty cakes on request, too.  No wedding cakes though.  At this point I don't believe they want the pressure or liability.  Just smart business sense.


End.

Supply Side Economics is the worst thing that ever happened to the Free World

Low Prices due to high inventory.


Poor wages for unskilled labor.


A really screwed up Trade Balance.


Debt in the government instead of revenue.


It's ridiculous.


Warehouses replaced Main Street and the only employees needed are tow motor operators.


Ridiculous.


When domestic companies produce their products 'to demand' their profit margins increase, their work force stabilizes, their labor force is more competent and their wages and benefits increase with efficiency and competency.


Transportation costs go down while the quality of products increase with better labor.


The entire economy of the USA is backwards.  Completely, absolutely backwards.

All those tax cuts for businesses the Republicans claim to need to stimulate jobs?

It isn't about jobs, it is about destroying entitlements.  Absolutely.  Never thought otherwise.  


I don't know why anyone votes them into office.  Seriously.  

Oh, heck, no.

The 'cost cutting' Republicans want to do to 'stimulate' job creation is not a real priority.  We know for a fact that is an artificial agenda item ESPECIALLY in this economic environment.


Nope.  That isn't it.


Any CEO will state "The best tax structure for a company to increase jobs is ZERO tax burden."


Well, sure.  But, that is not a guarantee there will be jobs created.  


A ZERO tax burden for the entire Middle Class will stimulate jobs more than a ZERO tax burden for corporations.  As a matter of fact, ZERO tax burden on the Middle Class will stimulate the economy beyond any imagination and the American people could probably recover the economy themselves.


But, this economic environment it is not possible to do that.  The governments at any level are important and cannot be abandoned for the sake of anarchy.  So, the idea ZERO tax burden for Middle Class is a priority is not prudent.  An agenda item, but, not a priority.


But, to believe cutting taxes on corporations will stimulate jobs is nonsense.  We know it is nonsense. 


The disproportionate Bush tax cuts for the wealthy have to stop.  They are ridiculous.  I do believe the wealthy have hired all the lawn maintenance people they are going to hire in the last ten years.


Enough for now.

A couple of things and then I'm finished for now.

Rebekah Brooks stated the legal services paid for and the agreement to pay for them by News Corp is a form of accommodating the crime.


I am going to displace the concept to bring focus.  Let's say there is malpractice in a hospital and a lawsuit if filed.  The hospital employs many people.  Those people are witnesses to any malpractice or negligence.  Commonly, very commonly, nurses and those that document are mentored into 'documenting defensively.'  In other words they are not suppose to implicate any physician, staff member or anyone else in any way in committing any incident the hospital might be legally responsible.


That is a fact and it happens in the medical profession everyday.


In the larger world professionals such as physical therapists, nurses, respiratory therapists have the option of having a personal liability policy to cover any such incident so they aren't impacted by others or themselves in their lives.  


This is getting ugly and lengthy, but, then imagine a nurses working on a hospital unit having their own insurance and some not having their own 'practice' insurance.  (practice insurance is know by the public as malpractice insurance).  Now, imagine 'an incident' of negligence occurring on that unit.  There are anywhere from two to three shifts per unit with professionals rotating through to cover the 'care needs' of the patients on that unit.  The documentation by the 'staff' is not necessarily going to be identical for several reasons, but, one of those reasons is that some see themselves as 'safe' to practice according to ethical and legal standards of their profession and some are not.  Where professionals providing patient care are only insured by the hospital their 'demeanors' and 'their advice' regarding any incident that requires testimony in court is dictated by the same legal team serving the hospital.  There are hospitals in this country that ask all their staff to not carry independent practice policies for that reason alone.  Because if a nurse has a personal practice policy the lawyers involved with her policy will be different than those representing the hospital and the testimony of that nurse, based on her documentation, could be very different and implicate others rather than exonerate them.


The same dynamic is playing out here with the testimony of the people subpoenaed to testify today to the British panel.  Rebeckah Brooks stated the legal fees were paid and will be paid by New Corp because the employees leaving asked that to be the case.  It is my estimation the legal fees were offered as a settlement to those leaving the paper so News Corp had control of the outcome through their legal team.  At any rate, it is unethical for such dynamics to exist, even though it does, because of conflict of interest between the employees and the company.  Actions by employees are not necessarily within policy, especially where that corporate culture is corrupt and over reaches its authority.


In regard to USA Entitlements and the Debt Ceiling.


Oh, yeah, Brooks also contradicts the amount of 'contact' between the Managing Editors and Rupert.  He stated, 'when he had to' and she stated, 'one or twice a week.'  Once or twice a week of a global organization the size of New Corp is micromanagement, company policy and practice and not a casual interest.  It is my estimation Brooks is more correct as she has been arrested and has more on the line as her testimony will be considered in her legal charges which could even extend them.


I want to entertain the thought that 'extending and strengthening' Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid might be an excellent strategic move for the Middle Class and Poor.


If I may.


There was a profound reality that existed in the years of Bush and Cheney and that was SSI, Medicare and Medicaid were under attack in a very unique way.  I have mentioned this before.  :Literally, Bush would remove the military budget and submit it to Congress annually in that context.  It was "W"rong and unethical, but, always seemed to be justified in one way or another and never received the attention it should except perhaps in the pages of newsprint concerned with the topic.  


President Obama is looking at the future of the programs and deciding how best to protect them after his years as President.  One of the ways is to reduce the size of the PERCENTAGE these programs carry in the federal budget especially since the country and the Joint Chiefs are actively seeking to reduce their budget as time goes by.


We cannot admit there was no such strategy or attack against our entitlement programs that protects the most vulnerable in our country.  I happened and if allowed to continue long enough would have succeeded.  Part of the goal that is actively generated over and over and over again by this House of Representatives is to bring spending down without raising taxes to provide more stress on the entitlement programs to fall under scrutiny to end them or change them.  They don't care about destroying Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.  They have already proven to be hostile to the citizens of the USA in their repeal of the Affordable Health Care Act which never passed the Senate.


Eventually, President Obama will leave the Oval Office and the American citizen will be vulnerable to the ravages of extremist conservatives, which Bush and Cheney are, all over again.  I am fairly sure that all problems with our entitlements are being looked at by President Obama and I am also sure he means what he says when stating, "to extend and strengthen' the entitlements.  


It is "W"rong that so many Republicans hate the agenda of the American citizens to provide security to our most vulnerable and portraying a country committed to their people without question.  It can even be said that destroying entitlements is a human rights violation.  But, that does not change the 'status' of the potential to destroy these programs should 'the wind change again' and hostile political interests come into power over our government.


That perspective might be laughable by some.  I hope it is.  But, the President I elected does the best he can for all of us and I still believe that without any doubt.  He doesn't even come close to being "Bush Light" and I'll discuss the issue of the military later.


It has been a day not to forget.  


Regards.

Pie in the face is not a terrorist act. It is usually considered a compliment by comedians.

Media mogul (click here) and Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch was reportedly attacked by a pie-thrower during hearings before members of the British Parliament Tuesday.

According to live reports, a man threw a “white substance” at Murdoch during the hearings. The screen capture above, posted by Reuters’ Felix Salmon, clearly shows a of some kind. Someone, perhaps Fox executive Janet Nova and perhaps Murdoch’s wife Wendi Deng Murdoch, intercepted the pie. Murdoch was not hit.

The pie-throwing incident gave a surreal twist to the hearings, which are aimed at uncovering more information about the allegations of voicemail hacking by employees of the Murdoch-owned (and now shuttered) News of the World.

While insulting the self made CEO of "News Corp" is gratifying for some, it is unfortunate as it gives a reason for embarrassment of the members of the board questioning the Murdochs and distracts from the brevity of the fact a young girl's cell phone was hacked sending parents and police into wild imagings that the girl would be home 'if only.' 

Is a pie in the face a terrorist act? (click title to entry - thank you)

JOHN LEWANDOWSKI

Halifax— The Canadian Press

Published Tuesday, Jan. 26, 2010 11:04AM EST

Last updated Monday, Mar. 15, 2010 3:49PM EDT

A Liberal MP thinks the federal government should investigate a U.S.-based animal rights group under Canada’s anti-terrorism laws after a pie was pushed into the face of Fisheries Minister Gail Shea.

Gerry Byrne’s outrage stems from an incident Monday in which Ms. Shea was hit in the face with a tofu cream pie as she was about to deliver a speech in Burlington, Ont….

There was an incident with PETA whereby some in the Canadian government wanted to call it a terrorist act.  It isn't.  I suppose one could say the exploded, but, it was nearly deadly enough to fall into the category of terrorist act.  I suppose after deciding such an incident was a terrorist act every grocery shopper could come under suspicion.

James and Rupert Murdoch seemed to have come completely unprepared for questions.

I once was asked to give depositions.  When I went to the depositions the final question I was asked was about that preparation.  I was asked, "How did you prepare for today?"


I stated, "I reviewed my notes, the facts of the case and any official reports."  It would seem as though the Murdochs lack the 'quality' of preparedness.


How convenient.  I suppose their calendars are so full, there is simply no time to prepare for such 'consequential' hearings following such a scandal.


One might consider that rude.  One might consider it prudent.  But, the only real 'quality' that comes to mind is 'piss poor management and attitude' regarding any and all matters of brevity.

The time delay in broadcasting the Murdochs testimony has GROWN to a full sentence and increasing...

...soon it will become a burdened viewership and they will start to change to other topics.

That much of a growing delay in broadcasting live testimony is CENSORSHIP.  That is the ability of digital signal over others, so interject their own reality if necessary.  What a reality check that would be for the FOX network to promote.

CNN and MSNBC are simulatious in their coverage and far more 'uninterrupted' than FOX.