When George spoke, we should have listened

If I were Donald Trump's campaign manager, this is about as close as I'd let him get to a microphone.  And I'd delete his Twitter account, too.

All he had to do is pose pretty with his family for the next 100 days and show up for his inauguration.  Between getting caught stumbling from scandal to scandal and ducking whatever WikiLeaks is going to throw at her next, Hillary was doing her best to hand this election to him.

But then The Donald took the bait and said he "sacrificed" as much as Mr & Mrs Kahn's son who died in service to our country.  Wha....what? 

I'm sure Donald Trump is a smart man.  His grades in college showed it, his classmates said so, and his bank account validates it, too.  So then why does he say such stupid things?  Has old age somehow disconnected his brain from his mouth?

But here's the strangest part:  This may not necessarily kill his election chances.  Hillary Clinton "talks the talk", but she doesn't "walk the walk".  She's likely do something stupid herself, like getting caught on a hidden camera a la Mitt Romney saying something derogatory about a group she needs, which will even the odds again. 

Bottom line....we're being held hostage by a closed two-party political system that gives us bad options. 

Now more than ever, we should remember the words of George Washington:

 

“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

S

The good news for Republicans...

...is this:   The Republicans now know what they need to do to field serious presidential and congressional candidates.  They have seen first hand that marching in lock-step with their party's most extreme elements (the Tea Party) is a recipe for disaster.  The majority of Americans are not extremists. 

For too long Mitt Romney had to pander to the Tea Party, telling them what they wanted to hear in order to get his party's nomination, and then couldn't back-track fast enough to show he was a moderate.  He made a good effort with the first presidential debate, but it was too little, too late, and his public 180 was probably considered too hypocritical.

And the disaster wasn't just at the top of the ticket, either.  Many of the leading congressional Tea Party-backed candidates were defeated, too.  If the larger Republican party is smart, and I think they are, they will begin to distance themselves from the extreme elements in their party and move back towards the middle.  They don't have to be afraid to be moderates, to stand up to the Tea Party and say, "NO, you're wrong!"

Now would be a great time to do that.  Both parties need to sit down and begin working together for the first time in a long time to constructively address many of the problems facing our country.  Looks like the ball is now in the (Republican controlled) House of Representatives' court.  Have they gotten the message or not?  We'll soon find out.

S

Last minute election thoughts

I feel like I'm watching a really interesting football game, with every offensive thrust countered with a defensive parry.  Momentum has changed, subtle adjustments have been made, and a bit of luck has been thrown in, too.  It will likely be a field goal as the clock expires that will give us a winner.  Except this isn't a game.  This is much more serious.  This could conceivably change the way our country is governed for decades to come.  I'm talking about tomorrow's presidential and congressional elections.

Here's what has been bugging me for months now:  Mitt Romney's choice of running mate.  I've always thought of Romney as a moderate, but in the primaries he recited loud and often the Tea Party line, which scared the bejeebers out of me.  At the first debate Mitt did a complete 180, coming across as a moderate, and his fortunes improved immediately afterwards.  I'm hoping the "new" Mitt is the "real" Mitt, but in the background he's still there....his running mate, Paul Ryan, and I wonder. 

Be very afraid...the Young Gun leadership (L-R, Reps. Kevin McCarthy, Eric Cantor, and Paul Ryan)

Ryan is a proud member...a leader, even...of the Young Guns, a group of extremist, ultra-conservative Republicans who want to gain control of, first, their party, and then the country.  They have demonstrated they are willing to throw the entire country under the bus* as long as it will hasten their power grab.  (Suggested reading:  Do Not Ask What Good We Do:  Inside the US House of Representatives by Robert Draper.)  

They practice the concept of the more they can do to paralyze the country (by their obstruction) and discredit their opponents, the worse things will get and the sooner The People will turn to them to fix things.  The pain the rest of us must endure in the process is of apparently no concern to them.  To them the end justifies the means.  I agree there are lots of things that need changing, but IMO the changes need to be made thoughtfully with a scalpel, not with an ulterior motive and a meat cleaver.  All these guys have are meat cleavers.

Now I read that Paul Ryan, "quiet for now, is planning for an active role" as Romney's VP.  "...if the Republican ticket prevails, Mr. Ryan plans to come back roaring, establishing an activist vice presidency that he said would look like Dick Cheney's under President George W. Bush."  (There are to this day many loyal, moderate Republicans who cringe at that thought!)  He says he will "reach out" (to Democrats) across the aisle.  (Riiight...and pigs will fly south for the winter.  It's just not the way the Young Guns do business.)

I just hope that if Mitt Romney should win he governs like the responsible moderate our country needs, and not like a "slash and burn" Young Gun.  And as for Paul Ryan, "Vice Presidents should be seen (at funerals of foreign dignitaries) and not heard."

If you disagree, that's fine.  Just be glad we live in America where we're all free to express ourselves however we like.  :)

S

*The current budget "sequestration" mess and past (and future?) budget impasses...the work of the Young Guns.

Football and lawyers...talk about a hodge-podge post!

For one weekend a year my brother and I do our impersonation of the Hatfield's and McCoys.  That would be this weekend, when Texas Tech plays Texas.  I'm an alumnus of Texas Tech, while he is a graduate of the University of Texas....sort of.  Not the University of Texas at Austin, the Longhorns (it's a tough, stringy-meated cow), but the University of Texas AT DALLAS, the Fighting Insurance Salesmen. *Zing*

I usually can't get too "in your face" with him because more often than not UT beats us, but this year we're actually favored to win.  He jumped the gun yesterday and showed up wearing his Longhorn ball cap, but I've dusted my "Double T" cap off and will come armed today.

Would it be improper to ask God to let me kick his ass this year?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tell me again why we need lawyers?  I recently read several articles that made me wonder.

One was talking about how the bankers have 3,000-5,000 lawyers and lobbyists working full-time to thwart the implementation of new banking regulations that would curb their ability to roll the dice like they did a few years ago.  That drunken binge ultimately required the taxpayers spend several trillion dollars to bail them out.  

Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act which sought to reign in the banks, but the banks have fought every word, every paragraph, every attempt to implement it, and they're winning the battle.  Dodd-Frank is still pretty much an empty shell at this point.  That would make it Lawyers, 1; The People, 0.

The other article told of how Bronco Bama and Mittens Romney both have thousands of lawyers fanned out all across the country looking for the slightest excuse to file a lawsuit in order to thwart the will of The People in next week's election.  Make that Lawyers, 2; The People, still 0.

The US today has over 1.1M lawyers.  I say we keep a few hundred and then send the rest to the Northeast to help clear debris and haul trash.  In other words, to DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE!

That, or it's off with their heads!  (Hey, I'm trying to be fair about this, 'cause, you know, I'm a compassionate kinda guy.)  *wink*

S

The snake oil salesman is alive and well

When a President goes through the White House doors

And does what he says he'll do

We'll all be drinking that free Bubble-Up

And eating that rainbow stew

Merle Haggard..."Rainbow Stew"

We must be the most gullible electorate walking the face of the earth.  It's an election year again, another crop of "tell 'em what they want to hear" politicians are talking out of both sides of their mouth, and we just smile and nod and bend over and let them have their way with us.

Four years ago it was Barack Obama "spreadin' it deep and sellin' it cheap".  "Hope and Change" was going to save us all.  But how?  No details?  Nope, just the power of positive thinking.  And enough of us voted for him to put his name on the mailbox at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  You may already be a Publisher's Clearing House winner.  No purchase necessary.  

We'll all be drinking that free Bubble-Up....

This year it's Mitt Romney.  He tells us he's going to give us all a 20% tax cut, expand funding for our military, and somehow still balance the budget.  Since when does 2+2=9?  We're all going to have good jobs, freedom from government interference, and a bright future, too.  How?  Only he knows, and he's not sharing any details with us.  Nope, we're just supposed to "trust him".  And a sizable number of us will.  Maybe enough to make him our next President.  

Do you think if an entrepreneur had come to Mitt when he was the CEO of Bain Capital asking for money, with a business plan that simply said "We're gonna buy cheap, sell value, go for volume, and get rich", he would have put millions of dollars in this upstart venture? Absolutely not!

And eating that rainbow stew....

Has our educational system failed us so badly that we can no longer critically think?  Has common sense gone the way of the dodo bird?  Do we just hoover up everything Fox News or MSNBC tells us, questioning nothing?  

I'm certainly not going to tell you how to vote, or how I voted.  That's a personal decision.  But please, know why you're voting for a particular candidate.  We need meat and potatoes details in order to make smart choices.  We're getting puffed pastry promises.  In politics, nothing is what it seems.

I have no idea who will be running in 2016, but I can hear their campaign promises now...."Jobs for all, taxes for none, and a free puppy for everyone (while supplies last)."

S

"Speak softly and carry a big stick."...T Roosevelt

Isn't tonight's presidential debate supposed to be the one that concentrates on foreign policy?  If so, let me give you a sneak preview of what to expect:  Ours sucks.

This isn't really news.  Our foreign policy has been retarded as far back as I can remember.   Bay of Pigs?  Vietnam?  All of the wasted years we've spent trying to bring "peace" to the Mid-east?  Now Libya and Syria?  Our government is simply inept.  This isn't just the Obama administration's bungling.  This goes back decades.

Right now Mitt Romney and Eddie Munster Paul Ryan are saying Obama botched protecting our diplomats in Libya, resulting in their deaths.  What an obvious political ploy.  Shame on them!

Here are the facts Mitt:  Congress....that would be the Republican controlled House and the Democratic controlled Senate, voted to CUT the funds for embassy protection around the world.  (I believe I heard the number was $300M they cut.)  We need to curb spending....I get it....but don't act surprised when we cut past the fat, through the meat, and into the bone, then it hits the fan because all we can afford are local hired guns to protect our diplomats.  They're worthless!  (Wonder if President Mitt would agree to cut HIS Secret Service detail when traveling overseas and rely on "locals"?)

Didn't I read that at about that same time we "requested" permission from the Sudanese to bring in US military personnel to safeguard our embassy in Khartoum, and they rejected it?  So much for political correctness.  We should have said, "We're bringing in OUR people to protect OUR embassy.  If you object, we're bringing our diplomats home, and they're bringing OUR CHECKBOOK with them."  Then I'll bet they couldn't have said 'approved' fast enough!

Forget about niceties in the Mid-east.  It's lost on them.  Just lay it out there.

(Hey, I'm retired.  I have the time.  I could take over and fix things if they'll just call me.)

S

I didn't see THAT coming!

  
I think like many people I watched the Veep debate last night expecting to see a personable Joe Biden yap and on que say something funny that Saturday Night Live can take and make into a hilarious skit.  That SNL skit may still happen, but what I actually witnessed was an informed, powerful, very combative, stand-his-ground candidate Biden.

Specifically, here's what I saw:  Biden probably said the words "middle class" 20 times.  Same with "level playing field", and "a fair shake".  He came across as the populist defender of The People, something I think will play well with blue-collar voters.   And what is THE most critical state still in play?  Ohio....gritty, blue-collar Ohio.  Eighteen electoral vote Ohio.

Biden got so worked up on several occasions I fully expected to see him start foaming at the mouth.  But again, that much passion is probably appreciated by the blue-collar types.  Just go into a bar in Ohio and bring up Michigan, or vice versa.  You'll see lots of "mouth foaming"!

And Biden had something for war-weary voters, too, when he promised we would be out of Afghanistan by 2014.  "Sure, the Afghans would be happy to let us keep doing their fighting for them forever.  That's why we put them on notice.  'You'd better be ready to defend YOUR country come 2014.'" I think that struck a popular chord and will be well received.

In this case at least I think Biden's age and experience trumped Ryan's youth and vigor.  How could Ryan compete with Biden's "I was right there with Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neil (and a bottle of scotch?) during their epic budget battles"?  Or, "I was on an hour-long conference call with Bibi Netanyahu (Israeli PM) and the President and we're all in complete agreement...." 

I think that "complete agreement with Israel" reference probably reassured the Jewish community, too.  And correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Florida have a sizable Jewish community?  Twenty nine electoral vote Florida.  Smooth.

Paul Ryan is a numbers man; a budget, Medicare and Social Security expert.  While very important stuff, it's also very boring to talk about.  It's all based on "projections" and "assumptions", and with accounting being such a fraudulent practice today, can easily be refuted.  It's a "He said, She said" argument that politicians have been throwing at us for so long they're hardly believable any more.   "Projections" are a tough sell.

Most awkward exchange:  Ryan sharing Gov. Romney's compassion for a family who had suffered through a horrible car crash, while Biden explained he WAS the family that suffered through a horrible car crash.  OUCH!

Best zingers:  When Ryan mentioned that Jack Kennedy cut taxes, Biden chimed in, "Oh, so now you're Jack Kennedy?"  Also, when Ryan explained how Romney mis-spoke when talking about the 47% quip, saying, "I'm sure you know what it's like to have your words come out not the way you meant for them to."  Haha!

While the red states are still red and the blue states are still blue, I think Joe Biden's performance probably picked up quite a few net votes for the Democrats.  This is going to make for an interesting finish come November.

S

My two bits.....

The first Presidential Debate is in the can.  Time to compare notes:

IMO, Mitt Romney came across as cool, collected, and very well prepared.  It was like he knew the questions before they were asked, which of course he didn't.  Kudos.  He was aggressive, didn't have any odd mannerisms, didn't twitch, sigh, roll his eyes, etc.  He addressed his remarks towards the President.

IMO, President Obama seemed to have been caught flat-footed and often fumbled with how to respond to Romney's jabs.  He was definitely on the defensive.  He didn't seem to be as well prepared.  He looked down or nervously towards someone (Michelle?) in the audience.  He had way too many long pauses and "Ahhhh's".

But the curve ball I noticed most was, who REALLY is Mitt Romney?  I've said for months he was making a BIG mistake by pandering to ultra-right-wing Tea Party conservatives.  He had their votes automatically by default.  It will be the moderates who will be the deciding factor in this election. THEY are the ones he has to win over.

Tonight he talked straight to those moderates.  Very smart politics....but very much at odds with what he's been saying before now.  Example?  He said he would give everyone a tax deduction basket with a specific dollar amount cap.  Taxpayers could fill it with anything they wanted from a list of possible choices UP TO THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT.  He specifically said the wealthy would top off their deduction basket early, and that's it.  They would lose almost all of their current deductions.  There's no way in hell the Tea Party would have smiled on that idea! 

In other words they (the rich) would see their taxes go WAY up.  That is NOT what he's been saying for the last year.  If he had offered that before now Obama would have jumped all over it enthusiastically!

Another example?  In his closing remarks he said as Massachusetts's governor he worked well with a legislature made up 80% by Democrats.  As President he would sit down with Democrats in Congress and find common ground with them for the good of the American people.

That is definitely NOT what he's been intimating to the Tea Party crowd.  If he really felt that way, why would he choose Paul Ryan as his running mate?  Ryan, along with congressional Republican Young Gun leaders like Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy, have been notoriously uncompromising.  They are the main reason this Congress is gridlocked.  It's "their way or the highway".  I'm sure Paul Ryan cringed when he heard his potential boss say he would sit and sing Kum-ba-yah with the Democrats.

So was the Mitt Romney that I saw tonight, the moderate, the REAL Mitt Romney, or was tonight's Mitt Romney just a poser?

It's gonna be an interesting finish.

That's my two bits.

S

I believe I hear the fat woman singing....

....and I don't think Mitt Romney likes what he's hearing.

Various polls are now saying Willard "the Mitt" Romney is losing ground in the few critical up-for-grab states that are going to decide who will be our next President.  Sure, there are numerous things that could turn his campaign around, but as I see it, they are all outside his control.

Brick Obama could have a brain fart during the debates, but I think he's too smart for that.  Israel could turn Tehran into a smoking hole, causing them to close the Strait of Hormuz.  Gas goes up to $8 a gallon, and Obama could be sending out resumes.  Who knows?  Unemployment could take a huge leap up, but with holiday hiring now kicking off, that doesn't seem likely. 

So where did Romney go wrong?  As I've said for months, most Americans don't want an "extreme" candidate from either end of the spectrum.  Remember the extremely liberal Democratic Party of the 1980's?  The Republican's ultra-conservative Tea Party of today is that far to the right.  Many middle-class mature voters are turned off by those types.  Why didn't Mitt move towards the center?  

Instead he picked lightning rod Paul Ryan for a running mate, IMO a bad mistake.  Seniors see him as the guy who's gonna mess with their Medicare and Social Security.  Even though Ryan said nothing for them would change, seniors don't believe him.  It's sort of like how, when one company buys another, they always say, "No operational changes are expected."  

Yeah, right.  Six months later divisions have been sold-off, pensions and health care have been overhauled for the worse, and a few more pink slips are passed out every Friday.  That's how many seniors see Paul Ryan.  And just coincidentally, battle-ground states Ohio and Florida are loaded with seniors.

And the "47%" quip, the "my wife has two Cadillacs", and the "I don't know anything about NASCAR but several of my friends own teams" hasn't exactly made folks want to invite Mitt and Ann over for hot dogs and a friendly game of backyard horse shoes.  There's just no "warm fuzzy".

Nope, I don't think Mitt Romney has enough time left to distance himself from the Tea Party "Young Guns" and reinvent himself as a moderate (that he probably really is).  I guess we can read the expert's election post mortem three months from now and see if my analysis was on target or not.  One thing no one can argue with is this has been a ridiculously expensive, nasty election.  Can you imagine the free-for-all in 2016?

S

Where has all the common sense gone?

For the life of me I just can't figure out Mitt Romney's economic logic.  I've enjoyed a pretty good formal education and nearly 40 years of business experience, but more than anything I am most proud of my common sense.  Mitt is a brilliant man, no doubt, but his plan to create jobs and grow the economy just defies (my) common sense.

He says he wants to cut taxes for the rich, or at least include them in the extension of the soon-to-expire Bush tax cuts, and that they (the rich) will then use this increased wealth to create jobs.  But from all I've read, including in the Wall Street Journal (hardly a leftist rag), there is somewhere between one and two TRILLION dollars in capital sitting on the sidelines waiting to be invested long-term.  What's missing is consumer demand to buy more of the stuff these new businesses/jobs would produce.  If there's no demand, why produce it?

Because of their vast numbers, estimated to be 50% of all Americans, the middle class drives our consumer-based economy.  The poor can't buy enough to create jobs because they, by definition, have no money.  The rich have plenty of money, but there aren't enough of them to buy in the mass quantities needed to drive industry.  That leaves the middle class to "spend, baby, spend".

When the middle class has enough money (and is confident enough to part with some of it), then demand will increase, businesses will produce more goods and services to satisfy the demand, and jobs will be created, in that order.  To think you can create jobs and THEN wait for demand to catch up defies common sense.  No business is going to pay employees to just sit around and wait.

I'm sick of hearing about how the rich need more money.  I'm not saying they shouldn't have more money.  What I am saying is what we ALL need right now is for the MIDDLE CLASS to have more money, for it is they, not the rich, who will return us to prosperity.  That's just common sense.

S

It's official!

Thurston Howell III and his wife Lovey have endorsed Mitt Romney....

....after his own bid fell juuuuust a bit short.

(Oh, chill.  It's just a joke.)

WHAT was he thinking??

Can anyone explain to me Mitt Romney's grand strategy in choosing Paul Ryan as a running mate?  If he has one at all it baffles me.  All he did was solidify those conservative / Tea Party folks who were going to vote for him anyway.  He might now be able to bring in Ryan's home state of Wisconsin, but it will probably cost him Florida and several other states with large senior populations.

And politicians usually like to talk in vague, opaque language, giving out as few details as possible so the opposition will have a difficult time pinning them down with specifics to pound on.  Not this time!  Ryan has a detailed, articulate budget plan that will be a lightning rod issue.  Again, those who were already going to vote conservative will, while those who weren't still won't.  But now many of those absolutely vital moderate swing voters, many of them elderly, will have reason (Medicare / Social Security) to vote Democratic.  You just don't make the elderly's Medicare or Social Security benefits the centerpiece of a campaign, especially if it is to "reform" it.

This violates all rules of general elections.  You appeal to your core supporters in the primaries, and then move towards the middle when appealing to the larger population.  Just watch....Obama will appeal to the moderates with reassuring words while criticizing Romney as an extremist, and Romney will have to distance himself from his own Veep's controversial budget plan.  He should have brought Ryan on board later after the election (if he won) as a cabinet member.  

This is just bizarre.

S

Does anybody besides me even care?

Do you remember Ronald Reagan's famous quote from his presidential campaign back in 1980?...."Government isn't the solution to our problem.  Government IS the problem."


I have a new updated version for the presidential campaign of 2012...."Mitt Romney (and his peers) aren't the solution to our problem.  Mitt Romney (and his peers) ARE our problem."


IMO, it's the shenanigans of the hedge fund managers, the investment bankers, the financial engineers, the slick derivative / swap  traders, etc, who screwed us blind, raked off billions of dollars for themselves, and left us to deal with the world-wide disaster they created who are ALL our problem.  


Everyone seems to have that one single political "hot button" that determines who they'll vote for.  For some it's gay marriage, immigration reform, abortion, jobs, health care....whatever.  For me it's re-gaining control of the irresponsible, downright dangerous financial services industry.  Right now we're well on our way to another financial train wreck.  The guys who caused the last one are still in control of their respective institutions, high-risk deals are still being made, mega-bonuses are still being paid, champagne corks are still being popped, and white-collar jail cells are still empty.  


Barack Obama SHOULD have done something long before now.  I have no faith that Mitt Romney will turn on his peers now and start looking out for OUR best interest if he should be elected.  What to do?


What's your "hot button"?

Is his world even in the same solar system as mine?

Yesterday I read an interview with Edward Conrad, one of Mitt Romney's partners at Bain Capital and the author of Unintended Consequences:  Why Everything You've Been Told About the Economy is Wrong.  He was brought into Bain after it was already up and running and Mitt tutored him.  I can only assume his views are essentially those of his mentor's.  If Mitt is to ever have any chance of becoming President he'd better hope no one ever reads Conrad's interview or his book.


Conrad says, "The financial crisis...was not the result of corrupt bankers selling dodgy financial products.  It was a simple, old-fashioned run on the banks."


What has he been smoking?  He goes on to say, "The banks made some mistakes, but the important thing now is to provide them even stronger government support."  He advocates "...creating a new government program that guarantees to bail out the banks if they ever face another run."  *jaw hitting floor*  As for exotic derivatives (that were the root cause of the Crash of 2008), he doesn't see a problem.  "They were fundamentally sound."  * speechless*


Sure, everyone he ran with got to retire to the Hampton's with their fortunes pretty much intact.  But for every one of his buddies in that position there were tens of thousands who got royally screwed.


Gonna be a tough sell, Mitt.


S

I think he needs a bit more coaching

I don't think 'ol Mitt gets it.  At this stage of a political campaign aren't candidates supposed to put on their jeans (after they buy some), roll up their sleeves, and mingle with the common folk?  Mitt managed to pull off the first two, but it's the "mingling" part that seems to be giving him fits.


He's in Michigan, blue collar heaven, and he tells a group of auto workers that he drives American-made cars, and that his wife drives a Cadillac, TWO actually.  And when asked if he followed NASCAR, he replied, a little, he's not really an expert, but several of his best friends OWN NASCAR teams.  


Well boy howdy!  Pull up a stool, Mitt, and have a cold one with us.  Or maybe he has one of those false labels he can wrap around his bottle of Dom Perignon to make it look like a bottle of Boone's Farm.  I'd suggest one of those little round cans of Skoal for his back pocket, too.  Yep, "A Man of the People".  That's Mitt.  *Some Grey Poupon for your hot dog, sir?*


S

Not enough zero's on the check

Did you hear that Costa Crocierie SpA, the subsidiary of Miami-based Carnival Corp that owns the Costa Concordia, is offering all un-injured passengers on that ill-fated ship $14,460 apiece as compensation for their little boo-boo?  Italian lawyers are obviously not as aggressive as American lawyers, that's for sure!  If that happened here there would have been an entire fleet of lawyers in rubber dinghies circling the sinking ship passing out business cards before the Captain had a chance to say, "Chao, y'all."


I'm anxiously awaiting our W-2's and donation summaries to arrive so I can do our 2011 taxes.  This is the one time of the year when I'm sorry I don't own a home any longer.  The write-off was nice!  Still, I think the care-free lifestyle we've enjoyed these past 2+ years has more than trumped the write-offs we've missed.


Speaking of taxes, did you see where Mitt Romney (really....who names their kid after sporting equipment?) paid $44,000 MORE in taxes than he should have?  Experts have looked at his newly released tax return and concluded he overpaid.  If it turns out he's elected President I hope he doesn't put his tax man up as Sec Treasury.  As if we're not totally screwed now!  


I'll leave you with these words of wisdom for the weekend:  As my uncle with the bad liver once told me, "Always take life with a grain of salt.  Plus a slice of lime and a couple shots of tequila."  :)


S

"Rain, rain, go away"...no, wait...PLEASE STAY!

"I don't need no stinkin' trainin'."  Smart dog.  Haha!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Rain is always to me a good news / bad news sort of thing.  We desperately need more rain here in drought stricken Texas, but as a homebuilder, rain wrecks a construction schedule.  In a perverse way, not having a home under construction right now is good because we're expecting rain all day and night....2-3 inches of the liquid sunshine, and now I can enjoy it.   I have a couple of errands to run today, but otherwise I'm sticking close to home.  I asked K what needs to be done around here (I'm really scratchin' for something to do, can you tell?) and she said I could clean out the pantry.  How do you "clean out" a pantry?  Do you dust the cans, or maybe arrange them in alphabetical order?  Geez, I'm bored, but....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So Mitt Romney made $42M last year, but paid only 14% in taxes.  I think people are outraged by that for the wrong reason.  I don't blame him for taking advantage of every deduction and loophole available to him.  You would, too, and don't lie and say you wouldn't.  I blame congress, who WE elected, for allowing those loopholes to exist in the first place.  And to say, "Yes, they (congress) are bad guys, all except MY guy, and he's good" is why things never change.  Just because your congressman sent you a birthday card or gave you a commemorative paperweight isn't reason enough to vote for him/her.  At the same time they were robo-signing your card they were emptying your pocket in order to subsidize 'ol Mitt and his buddies.  Think about it.

S  

"They got the elevator, we got the shaft"

I've become fairly knowledgeable about the financial deregulation of the 1990's (although I'll stop well short of calling myself an expert) and the door it opened up for the "blow-and-go"....actually more like "smoke-and-mirrors"....first decade of the 21'st Century.  As we're now painfully aware, all that gee-wizz "financial engineering" that brought Wall Street (used generically to include the big banks, hedge funds, insurers, brokerages, etc) immense wealth actually produced little of real value.  Many respected scholars and actual insiders to what was going on told us years ago that we were on a very slippery slope, but they were drowned out by the lobby for those raking in BILLIONS of dollars in commissions and bonuses.  Those were heady days, and we didn't want to hear any bad news.  Things turned out just like that old song said they would:  "They got the elevator, we got the shaft."


Now here we are in 2012, an election year.  Mitt Romney appears to be on a roll and will likely be the Republican nominee for President.  He was one of those who profited mightily from those deregulated times, and so are his current financial backers.  They really want to see him elected as they have visions of returning to the good 'ol days (for them at least).  They assume he'll call off those who are clamoring for re-regulation, and based on what he's said so far in his campaigning, he will.


I'm no fan of Barack Obama, or more specifically, I'm no fan of the Obama administration.  IMO, he has surrounded himself with advisers who are doing him and the American people a disservice.  They are individually brilliant, but collectively inept.  "What is" and "what could have been" are, sadly, two very different things.


So what will our likely choices be this November?  More of what we have now (how depressing is that?) or a replay of what we had before (YIKES!).  Some choice, huh?


S

He 'da man....

....that would be Willard Mitt Romney, according to the voters in last night's Iowa caucus.  He nosed out Rick Santorum, who is vying with Michele Bachman to come across as the rightest of the right wingers.  She crashed and burned, leaving her free to go home and have a Tea Party.  Good 'ol Ron Paul still makes good sense now and then, in between lapses into mild insanity, and did well in Iowa, too.  And thankfully Iowans saw Newt "I'm different now, trust me" Gingrich as what he is, a hypocrite of the highest order, and Rick "look at my cool hair" Perry as simply a doofus.


Willard...er...Mitt should do well in New Hampshire, while Rick will feel right at home in South Carolina.  Ron has fringe appeal everywhere.  Of those, who is actually electable?  I'm guessing Willard Mitt. (Doh....I hate it when I do that!)  His past is liberal enough to be able to appeal to middle-of-the-roaders, and of course he has Wall Street money in his corner.  His buddies there are already salivating over their soon-to-be-swelled-even-more bonuses. Dom Perigone anyone?


Here's what concerns me:  If Republicans keep their majority in the House of Representatives and can gain control of the Senate (heaven forbid gaining a veto-proof 60 votes), AND see their nominee (Mitt?) win the White House, it will be seen as a mandate for the kind of hands-off / business-as-usual governing that gave us the economic debacle of '08.  The rich will get richer, while you and I....well, you know how that turned out.  Even with partisan politics being as rancorous as they are today, I think we need to split power between the parties.  The gridlock would be hell, but IMHO giving EITHER party a blank check to run the country as they saw fit would be even more disastrous.  What's so wrong with compromise?


What say you?


S

Rudderless

Now for my expert opinion on this year's crop of Presidential candidates:  They suck.  We're screwed.  Now back to you in the studio....


Oh, OK.  Details....Mitt Romney is one of "them", the hedge fund/speculator/big money crowd that I generically call "The Bankers".  That's his background, those are his financial backers, and that's who he'll fall in line with if he's elected.   He likes to point out that in his former stint at Bains Capital he created a lot of jobs, but there's ample evidence his stable of companies were net job losers.  Sorry Mitt, but we've given The Bankers free reign before, and look where that got us.  No thanks.


Newt Gingrich....narcissist, hypocrite, dangerously smart, totally shameless.  He, probably more than anyone else in Congress back in the 90's when he was Speaker of the House, empowered The Bankers to run crazy.  He's not even well thought of in his own party.  Remember the attempted coup by a sizable number of his fellow Republicans to oust him as Speaker?  He tells us he's "reformed" and we can trust him to lead us out of the economic mess we're in.  Hell, he couldn't even pay his own Tiffany's bill without collecting $1.6M from Freddie Mac for "consulting".  *wink*  Umm....no.


Ron Paul....the only one of the bunch I respect.  He'll take a stand on an issue, regardless of how unpopular, and stick with it, the polls be damned.  I admire that.  I even like some of his positions.  Most, however, are way out there.   Not electable at all.


Rick Perry....where do I start?  Smartly dressed, great hair, dumber than a box of rocks.  He wants to bring the hammer down on "those Pakastani countries".  Huh?


Santorum, Bachmann, that guy from Utah....not even on the radar.


Which leaves us Barack Obama.  An incredible orator, a graduate of the Jimmy Carter School of Leadership, totally ineffective.  He's much too liberal to be able to work with any Republican (as much their fault as his), and even a sizable number of Democrats keep their distance from him.  Click here to see what commentator Chris Matthews, a "liberal's liberal", has to say about him.  Can you imagine how ineffective he'll be in a second term as a lame duck?  Ouch!  Why is it an incumbent President gets an automatic pass by his own party to run unopposed?


Where are the LEADERS?


That's why today I'm announcing....  :)


S