Kelly Clarkson backs the crazy uncle

My respect for Kelly Clarkson has gone way down. No, not for her singing, but for her backing of Ron Paul. When my mom and I were talking today, she said Paul sounded like a nice, easy-going man. I told her, he reminds everyone of their crazy old uncle. Everyone has or has had one, the one that can sound so comforting and smooth and sweet, but as soon as you hear his opinion about something, you realize how crazy he really is. Don't believe me? This is a man that thinks that drug regulations are unlawful. No, not only the drugs you get over the counter, but those a local dealer would sell. Think heroin is okay? He doesn't, but sees nothing wrong if someone wants to use it. The same with any other drug. I wonder how he'd feel if the pilot of the plane he was on or his doctor the night before surgery thought there was nothing wrong with using drugs? See a problem in the world that we might want to do something about, like hunger and AIDS? Rep. Paul says they need to help themselves, that no foreign aid is needed or should be given out. Defend our friends like Israeli? No, that is out, too. Our military is only to defend our country here, not to help our friends. That also means if a country wants to acquire nuclear warheads, well, he has said all countries have the right to have them. But yes, that isolationism will shrink the military budget, and make it easier to balance the budget. Own a business and want to decide who you can serve to, discriminating against everyone you don't like? You can do that under Paul's plan for our government. Now if you're discriminated against due to any reason under his idea of the government, like sex or race or sexual orientation, too bad. That owner will have the right to do business with whom he/she wants. Women, get raped and want an abortion, or have a pregnancy that endangers your life and want an abortion? Now, under his idea of America, you can't do that, as all abortions are illegal, with the penalty of prison for either performing it or having it done. And this is only part of Rep. Paul's ideas for America.
Kelly, I hope you keep making wonderful music, but are these your views, too? If not, look into Rep. Paul's views, and read his pamphlet, which you can google. Take his views to a conclusion of what would happen if he got his way and see what you think. If you have, and you agree, then I will be one of the few to say that I will continue to listen to your music. But I and many others will never want to buy your CD or see you perform. You have the right to your opinion, and we have the right to choose how we spend our money. For this, in that way, will always be America, at least I hope so.      

What's a Tea Party to do?

With less than a week until the Iowa caucus, it looks like there are several scenarios that could happen, but they all lead to one conclusion: Either quickly or after a long battle, Mitt Romney becomes the Presidential candidate of the GOP. Either he wins Iowa, or comes in the top 3 in a very fractured caucus, then wins New Hampshire. He then goes to South Carolina, where he has the backing of the governor. But besides Newt, who else will campaign there? Will Paul? I'm sure he will. Perry? I think so, as he has the money. And either Bachmann or Santorum who gets very good in Iowa, one of them will campaign in South Carolina. So there's still 4 people that will vote by the Tea Party. So Romney might win in South Carolina, and then he'll win most of the states. But then, what will the Tea Party do? They don't like Mitt, so will they want a 3rd party against Democrats and the GOP, or will they not vote? I don't know. Probably, they don't know, either.   

1 Event- 2 Views- 3 Elections

As we look forward to 2012 and the election, I think it is important to look back. No, not at 2011, but at an event earlier that is still reverberating in our elections. And when it happened, nobody saw how it would affect our national outlook and have a great effect on our political system. The event? Hurricane Katrina. What no one could see was how we as a nation would look at our government afterward. And it isn't just that we look at our government one way, but how two camps have such a different view. One, which is held by the left and most of the center of America is that government had gotten ineffective, and the main culprit was President Bush. These people hold that government has many things that it can do for the people, but they must be done efficiently and with effective regulations. This camp sees that corporations, running rampant, pay for the government to tilt the scales in their favor, either by loosening or eliminating certain regulations or by having regulations enacted that limit competition and keeping taxes low for themselves. This camp voted for President Obama, and elected Democrats to majorities in both the House and the Senate in 2008. But this was just one point of view. The other was that government itself was the problem, and that the least government intrusion from Washington was the best, with the ideal being no federal government. This is the view of the far right, and some in the middle. And this camp voted in the Tea Party members into the House majority in 2010. And this brings us to now, and the 2012 election. Which camp will win this battle of different points of view and set the country on the path for the next few years? This is the question of 2012, and although jobs, foreign policy, monetary policy, entitlements and all the other topics of the day will be talked about, it is the view of the country, and the course it will take, that will be decided this election. And that makes the 2012 election a watershed event for America.      

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

To everyone who follows me on one of my blogs, on twitter, and/or facebook, I want to wish all of you Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. I am old enough to remember when Happy Holidays wasn't meant or thought of as a denigration of Christian beliefs, but as a way to convey good wishes to all throughout the season, and that is the way I send it out to all of you who read this. May you all enjoy the season, and may 2012 be a wonderful year for you and your family.

Boehner, when you save face, you still lose

Well, the Speaker of the House caved in and there is a deal on the 2 month tax cut extension, but Speaker, even now you lose. Every national cable news station (other than the 1 you can guess) is ripping the Speaker for his about-face and his ridiculous stance on why it happened. Oh, you're right, Speaker, it wasn't the smartest political move, but, admit it, it was the worst move you could have made. You've caved into the right-wing of the Tea Party, and when you were shown to be completely out of touch with the American people, then you caved into those people in your own party that realized how wrong you were. So, you got off your high horse and won a small battle, but you didn't win the battle, did you? The Democrats, and Senate Tea Party members, made you look like the small and petty person you are, and you gave into their compromise bill. So by winning in trying to save face, you lost the battle, and you're losing the war. Not one person from a non-Fox News station is giving you any credit for doing anything right. Saving face for you was one step forward, and you took 4 steps back at the same time.

Another Tea party mistake?

Rep. Eric Cantor of the Tea Party once again has stepped in it. Today, he said that he hoped that President Obama would not start his vacation until the tax cut was approved. Say what? President Obama has already said that he will be in town until the bill is passed, so what's the problem? You say the President shows no leadership, but yet, it was reported that when Speaker Boehner told the far right wing of the Tea Party about the 60 day extension, and pictures of the Senate Tea Party members high-fiving themselves after their vote, they told the Speaker that they would not vote for a 60 day extension. This made him come out and say he couldn't vote for the bill, and even change the language to pass/turn down the Senate bill. One member of the Tea Party even went on TV (I"m sorry I can't remember her name) and said she was glad that the Speaker gave in to their demands. So Speaker, this is leadership? You cave into less than 1/3 of your Tea Party, and you complain about the President's lack of leadership? Another Tea Party mistake? No, just a repeat of the same one you continually make: Thinking that just because you say it, it must be true. And every time you repeat the mistake, fewer people listen to your lies. That's why the Tea Party has gone from a 27% approval rating in the summer to 19% now. Keep talking, and soon you'll be in single digits, just like Congress.     

Newt, you know history?

I am constantly amazed by the Tea Party and its ability to have facts say what they want rather than what it really means, but now history is getting the Tea Party treatment thanks to Newt? The federal courts,with the Supreme Court being the final arbiter, aren't the decision-makers on which laws are within the Constitution and which ones aren't, and therefore are illegal? Isn't that their role in the government, Newt? Didn't Marbury vs. Madison in 1803 decide that was its job? Wasn't Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation written so that it effected none of the slaves in the states that were part of the union? Wasn't this done just so that the proclamation wouldn't go against the Dred Scott decision? That Supreme Court decision was never changed, and slavery was still allowed until the Constitution was changed, and therefore vacating the decision? It took me less than 5 minutes to look up these 2 cases and find these facts. Newt, how long did you study history, and are you sure you know history?      

Space for $200 billion? I'll take it!

In today's Parade magazine, one of the questions was if spending $200 billion in the last 40 years for space exploration was worth it? And the answer was, "really in the eye of the beholder." What a horrible answer! But my question would have been, if we have spent $7 trillion in the last 10 years in wars, how could spending $200 billion in 40 tears on space exploration be considered bad? Not only have we expanded our knowledge of the universe, and therefore mankind, but several useful things have gone from space exploration to use by some people, including light-weight heat resistant suits, artificial heart pumps, and land mine removal devices. What has the last 10 years in Iraq got us? Except for deaths and being hated by a lot of Muslims, not very much. We spend $1 billion every week now for the war, and in 4 years, we spend that we more than we spent for going into space. Now, tell me which money was worth it better?    

Goodbye, Ron Paul- Iran got you

There are a lot of things that Ron Paul says that I don't agree with, but at least I can understand his beliefs. But I agree that we need to bring troops home, or at least need to leave several places where our troops are no longer needed. But Ron, your stance on Iran is a death-knell for your push to be President. Thers are evils in the world that we need to stand up to, and Iran is one of those. And if you can't see that, then you don't have what it takes to be President. But the rest of the candidates made no sense either. We can't be the world's police force, but we can be its moral high ground. If Iran is close to getting a nuclear weapon, does anyone think that only Israel and the United States are worried about it? Think Iraq is happy about it? What about other countries in the region? Think Europe is happy about it? If Iran is close to getting that weapon, this would be a perfect time to talk with all the leaders in the area and see what they think. If action needed to be taken, it could be taken in unison with almost every other country in the world. Diplomacy would be the key. Did anyone say that last night? No! So where is this generation's James Baker in the GOP? Oh, that's right, the Tea Party has purged that part of the GOP. And that's why I refuse to put an (R) after any of these people's name, but a (T). The GOP is now the Tea Party, and that will be the death-knell for the GOP. 

Newt, it's influence peddling

Newt, don't you know when you're wrong? If you had said that your biggest mistake was not giving the money back to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae since they weren't folowing your advice, you may have been forgiven by the Tea Party. But your constant refusal not to see how wrong you were shows again what a horrible President you'd be. When Rep. Bachmann called you on accepting money from Freddie and Fannie, you defend it and say you did nothing wrong? And you think you're the smart one on those stages? I kept waiting for Rick Perry to say, "As the Texas governor, I know influence peddling, and Newt, peddling your influence is exactly what you've done since you left the government", but I guess that was a very low bar that the Texas governor couldn't jump over.  

Harry Reid, stop being yourself

For several months, I've railed on the GOP, who now aren't the Republican Party but the Tea Party, for being bombastic and rigid. They aren't in any way the party that said that all men and women, no matter the race, were equal (Lincoln), railed against big business and their perks (Teddy Roosevelt), wanted the country to have great access to roads, trains, and opportunity (Eisenhower), and would raise taxes to get what he wanted (Reagan), so they are now the Tea Party.  But Harry Reid this week reminded me why, for most of my life, I didn't like Democrats. A bill comes to the Senate from the House with what the President wants, with extra things attached, and what do you do? You say the bill is DOA, being and rigid. Even my own Democratic Senator says you went too far. Stop being the ass you are (yes, I've met him, talked to him, and discussed issues with him when I lived in Nevada) and be the Senate Leader. Complain that the the Republicans filibuster every bill the President sends you? Then make them actually stand and do a filibuster. Don't like a bill that the House sends you? Vote, then compromise. Do your job, Senator. Your job isn't to be the pocket veto of the President. And if he asks you to do that, he isn't doing his job. Be bigger than yourself. Be the leader of the Senate, which is a chamber of the government, not the government itself, and not the representative of a small part of Nevada. I'll rail against the idiots in the GOP, and Senator Reid, if you keep being an ass, I'll rail against you too. Because if you're not part of the answer to bring our government together, then you're a problem, no matter the party you're in.   

Harry Reid, let the governmaent run right

I'm tired of partican politics, and for quite a while, that I don't like the Tea Party. But now, Senator Reid, that said that you told that the Bill from the House that was DOA? So you are just as bad as Tea Party. Don't say that we disagree, but we'll take it to a vote, and then compromise? You're as stupid as the Tea Party is. Refuse to vote on the 15 bills that the House have sent you and refuse to talk? You're just like Mitch McConnell saying their # 1 goal is to stop all and see

Leaving Iraq- If not now, when?

The troops are out of Iraq and will be home for the holidays. And a man that I have respected and have met a few times, Senator McCain has stopped being the maverick, the smart, moderate person I knew and has turned into a NeoCon and Tea Party puppet. I spent 20 years in the military, Senator, and I know that when the objective is complete, you leave and come home. Are you saying our mission in going to Iraq was to set up an American satellite state to counter Iran? No, the mission was to defeat Hussein and bring democracy to the country. Well, the despot is dead and election have been held. What now do you want from Iraq? The country will continue to have problems, but they will be their problems, not ours. And would keeping 20,000 troops there prevent these problem? No, we'd just be sucked into them. Unfortunately, Senator, you think like too many military men I knew, and why I got out when I did. "No matter what happens, I will not allow this command to get smaller," is a statement I heard several times in briefings. This, I believe, is the mindset that keeps troops in Europe. History will be written many years from now, when both you and I are dead, Senator, but when it is written, if this is found to be a mistake, the problem won't be that we left too soon, but that we went there in the first place.       

With Newt, Tea Party finds a match made in their heaven.

Although I have my doubts about Newt Gingrich's staying power, what I fear isn't that he'll say something stupid and blow up his chances for the nomination, but that he'll continue to say stupid, idiotic things, and this will endear him to the Tea Party. This is a man that was fined $300,000 while in the Congress, came up with the plan to compromise with Democrats only as a last resort, thinks poor inner-city people have no work ethic, believes child labor laws should be abolished, sees no problem receiving over a million dollars from a government agency he thinks is taking illegal actions, and believes the dumbest thing he ever did was to do an ad with Nancy Pelosi. And lastly, he hates President Obama, not just his policies, but him personally. And he fits like a hand in a glove (an iron glove, though) with the Tea Party. They believe that banks are under-regulated (overturn Dodd-Frank), want air and water rules relaxed, if not completely repealed (Abolish the EPA), believes that the Constitution doesn't apply to all people (wants to limit the rights of gays and lesbians), and will go against the Constitution to stop the census (Abolishing the Commerce Department, which oversees the census, which is required in the Constitution). And yes, they hate President Obama, not just his policies, but him personally. The are a perfect match, but I wouldn't call where they are at heaven.     

What can they be looking at? Must be Fox News

In the paper today, out of 9 letters to the editors, 3 were hatred directed to President Obama, the Democratic party, or Occupy Wall Street. One said that  President Obama's speech in Kansas should have been given in Liberal Kansas, and not one President should give such a class-warfare rhetoric speech. After reading the speech transcript, what was the class warfare? The part that said that laws should be fair? The part that said loopholes should be closed to even out the tax burden? And wasn't it taken almost a word for word from another Presidental speech? Oh, that's right, yes it was, and a Republican President at that. The letter against the Democratic Party said that liberals refuse to compromise. Again, what did the GOP compromise on? If Democrats were willing to look at Medicare and Social Security and make cuts, where was the Tea Party on raising revenue and cutting defense spending? They were nowhere, refusing to look at either. The letter against the Occupy Wall Street groups said that they were camping out at every park, disturbing the peace, cops were getting beaten up and people killed by the occupiers, the group burning cars and breaking windows. Not only for the most part did this not happen, and vandalism was almost non-exiastant until the protesters were maced, hosed, and corralled into small areas, but it was the police in certain areas that were spraying pepper spray into the eyes of people that were hand-cuffed and on their knees. By these 3 letters just got me thinking, where can the Tea Party be getting their information? I know it's not CNN or MSNBC, and I doubt the 3 broadcast news casts would tell such obvious lies. No, I think I know where it came from, and it makes me want to change my last name. For my real name is John Fox, and when I give out news about myself, it comes out as a Fox News Report. I think I'll change my last name to Onion-LOL!!!   

How many people can be on the edge of a dime?

Although I am thoroughly disgusted with the GOP and their remaking themselves the Tea Party, when it comes to the budget deficit and the need to get it balanced, both sides are at fault. GOP, taxes are too low, no if, ands or, buts. While the norm for the amount of government income (taxes) to GDP and expenditures to GDP is around 19%, and taxes sit at 16% now. This cannot continue, and taxes must be raised. But expenditures are now at 23% or more (it seems to differ by how it is calculated), and this cannot be continued. So my suggestion is to have taxes at 21% and expenditures capped at 19% until the budget is balanced, and the then taxes can be lowered to 20%, and expenditures can be raised to 20%. But I know that will never happen. Why? Because in a lot of ways, it is like I am on the edge of a dime, seeing the head side and the tail side never meeting, and thinking they are both the only correct side to the coin. But until there are more people not siding with either side of the coin, but splitting the difference, there won't be any compromise. And that makes me wonder, how many people can fit on the edge of dime, anyway?

Oh yes, Mr. Cain, you had an affair

I hate to tell you this, Herman, but it really doesn't matter if you had sex with that woman. Well, it does, but it really doesn't since, if you knew a woman for over 10 years, gave her money occasionally, and your wife knows nothing about any of this, or even that you knew her, then you were unfaithful to her. Reverse the situation and see how you'd feel. Your wife has known a man for that long, has occasionally given him money (It's just that she's generous), and you know not one thing about him, or know that she knows him. Has she been truthful to you all these years? Has she been faithful to you? Now, back to you, and your actions. Does this make you a bad choice for President? No, there are many other things that do that, like your lack of experience and you views on the world. But it does mean that you've been living a lie for many years, and that, in my mind, does disqualify you to lead this country.  

Are debates Reality TV? No, it's an alternate world

It has been suggested that having Donald Trump moderate would show the debates for what they are, which is really a badly produced reality show. But I think it really shows that we now live in an alternate world, where non-sense makes sense, and lies are accepted as fact. Where is the place that has debates between those that have a background of governing states, like Johnson and Roemer, can be in the debates, and a CEO who has run for office but never elected has to sit out? Where is the place that when a candidate lies, it is immediately brought up, and they must answer the accusation? Where is the place that tells a person's background and holds them responsible? That would be the real world. But that's not where these debates are being held. No, these debates are being held in: THE TEA PARTY TWILIGHT ZONE.  

Newt? Are you serious?

Maybe it is the fact that I don't listen to oldies on the radios, rarely watch old TV shows, and I don't like to sit and talk about "The good old days", but Newt Gingrich? This is a man that was drummed out of the House over 10 years ago, has been a shill for clients to anyone that will listen in government since then, and will state a policy on a Sunday talk show and by Tuesday say anything that he said on that show is a lie. Tea Party, are you so bereft of thinkers, of people with good ideas, of people who can articulate a thought, that you will back Newt? On second thought, you don't have to answer that on. I've watched the debates. Your real choices are between someone who will change his mind and say whatever is needed to get elected, and someone who has a background as conservative as anyone, as articulate as anyone, and as ideas that are even more thought out than anyone on the stage. But he decided that to him country was more important than party. So Tea Party, go back to the past. The rest of the country will be looking forward, and away from you and your party.

National Security Debate

Tuesday night's debate was interesting on a couple of levels, and although no candidate thought they made a mistake, there were several that were found by me and many others. The biggest, by far, was Mr. Cain and his ridiculous assertion that we couldn't invade Iran due to to the hilly terrain. Say what? Afghanistan isn't hilly, then? What a crock. Mr. Gingrich, a family who is here for 25 years illegally can get citizenship if they go to church? That way the family can stay together? What if they have no criminal record but don't go to church? Are they deported? So you want a church following person to be legal here? Which of your ex wives do you explain that to? Rep. Paul, foreign aid has done no good in Africa? Explain that to the hundreds of thousands that have worked in the Peace Corp in Africa for the last 50 years. Think they believe they've done no good, setting up schools, water treatment plants, distributed medicine, and taught trades and skills in towns in almost all the countries in Africa? These mistakes don't even include what I found interesting. 1, if the neo-cons are in decline in the GOP generally, they weren't in that room Tuesday night. And for Huntsman to say that the military budget must be looked at for savings was a brave statement. And the look on Romney's face as Huntsman explained in detail the reasons for a quick drawdown in Afghanistan was priceless. Yes, Mitt, you're right. It's a damn good thing for you that the GOP is too far right-wing to take a good, long look at Huntsman. If they did, you'd be toast. And speaking of toast, that's the second thing I found interesting, and that toast would be you, Gov. Perry. When you can make Michele Bachmann look serious, thoughtful, and mature, you're toast. Well done, even partially burnt. And even on this Thanksgiving week, we throw that toast out.   

No deal is a bad deal for Democrats

After the Super-Committee couldn't come up with a way to cut 1.2 trillion dollars from the budget over the next 10 years (was anyone really surprised?), the big surprise is that Democrats are scratching their heads over how this could happen. Why? The Tea Party had no skin in the deal. If no deal was met, what taxes would be raised? None, the entire 1.2 trillions were cuts, not tax increases. If there was no deal, Senators had already decided to write laws to exempt the military from the cuts, so all the cuts would come from domestic programs. So since this is exactly what the Tea Party would find acceptable, what were they bringing to the table? That's right, absolutely nothing. So no deal by the Super-Committee was still a deal for the country, just a bad one for the Democrats, and for the 99% that will be hurt by the cuts.  

Riot Control for Dummies

I hope that the police at all the University of California sites will take the time to look at the handbook that explains how to react to an unruly mob and has been out for quite a while, Riot Control for Dummies. In the handbook, it explains that in the case that an officer uses pepper spray, this is to be used to help subdue and tame people, making it easier to take down and hand cuff. For all those that can't get the order right, that think you take the person down, hand cuff and then pepper spray, I just hope you find another line of work, since you obviously can't read. Now as far as the Chief who said that the protesters were a threat to the police, I give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, just like Mr. Cain has said, he was hired to lead, not to read. For the Chief, we'll get him to watch the DVD.    

You're a mean one, Mr. Gingrich

I think after this weekend, and the ridiculous rant of Newt Gingrich, it would be very easy to think of all the Occupy places as off-shoots of Who-ville, and OWS itself could be thought of as Occupy Whoville Square. And yes, that would make Newt that mean green ogre taking the treats from the kids. For over 30 years, the wealth inequality in this country has swung the power in this country to a small group of people.Wall Street firms lead this country to the edge of financial ruin, get rescued from closure by the government ( ie. The people of the United States), and what do they do? They foreclose on homes they have no legal right to foreclose on since they don't own the actual deeds, stop loaning money to companies that want to expand, and give their managers millions of dollars in bonuses. So why aren't they the Grinch in this tale? Well, as anyone who watched TV this weekend, Newt has taken 10 steps right and found a place he's comfortable being in. To those protesting the gross unfairness that Wall Street is perpetuating, Newt says to take a bath and get a job! He states that protesters are on land they didn't pay for. Newt, public land is land that is given to city for the use by its citizens. That land is for all the people, not just those that the 1% say can voice their opinion. But that's right, you're the Grinch who is taking the rights away from those in Whoville. And who is helping you? All the idiots who applauded your line in Iowa this weekend. You're a mean one, Mr. Gingrich, you and all your ilk.  

This year's non-hit reality show: Debating with the would-be Stars

In looking back at the debates so far, I've realised that this has nothing to do with politics, but is just a reality show, with the winner going on to being on the ballot next November against the President. Now that we are getting down to the elimination rounds, let's look at the main contestants:
CAIN- This is the man who has a business plan that would increase the costs of goods with a VAT tax, ensure the middle class would pay more taxes, slowing their ability to buy things, and keep the lower class down with he flat tax. When it comes to foreign policy plans, he doesn't have any. He'll have to discuss things with his advisers, who we know nothing about. Personally, he has been accused of sexual harassment, and whether it is true or not, the organization he headed thought they were strong enough to settle out-of-court. And now wants a Secret Security detail to protect him from the press. And these are his strengths.
PERRY- The Texas governor can't remember his main talking points, has trouble articulating those that he can remember, and lies about his performance as governor, and his ads are inaccurate. These are his strengths.
GINGRICH- The former speaker can speak out of both sides of his mouth, retracts everything he says, is hypocritical in his beliefs, believes in the family value platform while on his 3rd marriage and in the year of hating everything Washington is the ultimate Washington insider. And he'll tell you that all this is a lie, right after he'll tell you these are his strengths.
BACHMANN- The representative thinks that China is a perfect economic model for America, wants to get rid of the clean air and water acts, doesn't know American history (or mistakenly speaks about it if she does), believes that states don't have the right to set health standards, and strongly believes that certain Americans should have fewer rights than others. And not only are these her strengths, explain them to her, and she'll be proud of them. Actually, the most consistent on the show.
PAUL- Wants to run the government to dismantle it, thinks all wars are bad, doesn't understand why Ciivil Rights Acts are needed, and that those in place should be repealed since the Constitution didn't give those rights to the Federal Government, and doesn't understand the difference in actions that need to be taken today if they weren't taken at the turn of the 20th century. Is very proud that these are his strengths.
SANTORUM- Believes that all actions to stop other countries from disagreeing with us should be military based, either with the threat or actual actions. He forgot that he lost an election in his home state which is needed to take the White House. Has other views that he'll be glad to tell you about, but nobody cares. And that is his greatest strength.
ROMNEY- Has spoken the truth as he has seen it at the time, and changed his mind every time. Has helped companies get rid of jobs and destroyed pension plans. His biggest strength is that he doesn't believe he ever did these things, and that is his biggest weakness.
HUNTSMAN- Is articulate, knows the needs of states and the federal government, has a knowledge of events and countries needed in this day and age, and doesn't like to speak in 30 second sound bites. Why? he believes all our problems are too big to decide in just 30 seconds. While these are his strengths, on this show, these are also killer weaknesses.
Well, now very soon we're getting to the elimination rounds, and to most, they can't come soon enough. But they're coming way too soon for the one candidate, Huntsman, who may be the first one voted off the island.    

It's called knowing your audience

Watching Morning Joe this morning, I was surprised to hear Michael Steele state that Jon Huntsman needs to stop being an ambassador and be a leader and take charge. In Michael's words, if he'd do that, " He'd cut through the Republican candidates like a knife through hot butter." Now Michael, you have a fine mind when it comes to politics, but you'd never make it as a comedian. I don't mean that you were saying was a joke, and yes, Jon Huntsman has the vision, ideas, and background to be a conservative but still mainstream President. But you forgot the first rule of a comedian: Know your audience. The people who are voting early in the GOP process are in states where the Tea Party will not listen to mainstream ideas, and take them as lies perpetuated by the media. Take almost any position, and to be a member of the Tea Party, you must be far, far right. And that is the group that will dominate the voting bloc early, and maybe even in the middle and late. No, it isn't the way he's speaking, and it isn't what he's saying, in a lot of ways. It's the audience, and nothing that is sensible, smart, and logical will be listened to, much less accepted. And since that is all Jon Huntsman has said, he'll never cut through the other candidates like a knife through hot butter, because the audience isn't looking for that person.      

Liberal media? Not in local news!

I didn't listen ot tape the GOP CBS Foreign Policy Debate because I didn't know there was one ( It may not have mattered. I have a limit to hearing politicians out-and-out lying, and one 2-hour GOP debate a week actually goes way over the limit). So imagine my surprise when my local news stated that not only was there one, no gaffes were made. So after a few looks on-line, and a few hours watching the Sunday morning shows, I was so glad that these weren't gaffes: Bachmann said the China, with substandard pay, horrid living conditions, and dirty air and water since they have no regulations, is a great model for our country's future; Perry stating that foreign aid is bad to give a government if they're not our friend, so much for things like development aid, and the Peace Corp, I guess; and Santorum and Romney stating that we need to either attack Iran or ensure Israel does; some saying that torture should again be part of our interrogation procedures; and all but Huntsman saying that Obama has no foreign policy other than to capitulate to other countries and listen to the ACLU. These aren't gaffes? If the local news said these statements are mainstream and normal, the GOP doesn't have to worry about a liberal bias in local news. But maybe we should worry about our local news. 

Shame on Penn State

I have waited a few days to write anything about Penn State to see what would happen today and wanted to wait until after the game, but after listening to the morning blogs and watching the shows, I finally had to speak. Penn State has had it's head in the sand for many years, and their latest attempt to look good and get ahead of the story has been a fiasco. The president of the university and the football coach are fired, but the assistant coach who witnessed the rape of a young boy is still on staff? He was going to be allowed to be on the sidelines today, but the school put him on paid leave and advised him not to go to the game, citing his safety as the reason for the action. His safety? What a crock! What about the safety of the young children under the watchful and leering eye of the pedophile? You don't care about them, and actually don't care about the assistant coach. You put him on paid leave? He should have been fired before either the president or the coach, although they should have been next. If he is being kept on staff to ensure his co-operation, this is also a laugh. If he refuses to co-operate, book him for accessory after the fact. You care about nothing but yourself, plain and simple. You are taking half-steps to do the minimum that will look to outsiders that you care and are taking every action you can. And for this, shame on you, Penn State.    

Negative polling numbers can lie, too

As everyone knows, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics, and when it comes to polling numbers, so far this year some of those numbers are actually worse than damn lies. And one of the the biggest lies is the President's polling numbers. Now like all statistics, the actual number is correct, but what it tells people is wrong. To give this some subtext, let's look at George W. Bush's numbers and compare them to President Obama. In W's last year, he hovered around 38%, and stayed there. Now this is a horrible number, but actually is higher than some would think. Take any generic president and say that after his first election, he would invade 2 counties, take a yearly surplus in taxes and turn it into a $7 trillion deficit, watch as a major American city was devastated by hurricane and man-made errors and do nothing to help, and still have a 38% approval rating, and while it's surprising that 38% still approved of his actions, it would be obvious that the approval would come from one wing of one party. Now there's Obama's numbers, which is a steady 44% approval rating. But here is where the numbers get different. With TARP, the Stimulus Bill, and Obamacare, it is obvious that the right hates the President. But what isn't shown is other actions that he's taken. The troop are still in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay is still open, DOMA still hasn't been overturned, and even in the health care bill, there was no single pay government entity like in Medicare. Each of these actions and lack of action have infuriated the left. So while only 44% approve of the Presidents actions, there are those on both sides of the aisle, and even some in the independent middle, that disagree with some of his actions. But as the GOP pulls farther right in their search of a nominee, the farther they go, the more they have no chance of getting the left, and less chance they have to get the independent middle. So yes, only 44% approve of the President's actions, this doesn't mean that 56% will vote against him.Find where the 56% stand on specific issue, and you'll know if the 44% statistic is just a lie, or a damn lie.          

What state is Kansas City in?

Ask anyone outside the state to name some places in Missouri, most people will tell you about the Arch in St. Louis, they'll tell you about the Ozarks and the hillbillies that supposedly live there, some will know that that Jefferson City is the capital, some will know the University (MU) is in Columbia, and now people, due to the tornado, will name Joplin. So people here in Kansas City aren't surprised that most don't know much about the city when it comes to people in other states. But Sunday, even MU forgot that Kansas City is in Missouri, when they made the announcement of leaving the Big 12 and going to the SEC. They didn't care what people here think. St. Louis? Oh yes, that is a city that MU made sure would love the move. Springfield and the south, they love the fact that Missouri will be in the same conference as Arkansas. So what about Kansas City? Having the mayor, congressman, and county chairman all say they wanted MU to stay in the Big 12, was this even heard?  Did they all fall on deaf ears, or was it that they weren't even considered part of the state. But maybe after the Chiefs lost to the previously win-less Dolphins and Sporting Kansas City lost in the MLS (soccer) Eastern Conference finals, they were just hoping that Kansas City wasn't part of the state. 

The Tea Party Symbol

I have argued that the Tea Party has no right to the name Republican, and to me the GOP is now the Tea Party, but I've also decided that the Elephant can't be the party symbol. If the GOP can't remember that it is the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Reagan, the Elephant isn't a proper symbol. So after watching the way the Tea Party doesn't believe anything they hear anyway, I've decided on the Ostrich as the party symbol. Cain has a sexual problem in his background, stick your head in the sand and dismiss it as false. Perry acts like he's high when he gives a speech, stick your head in the sand and say it was taken out of context. Canter lies about class warfare, stick your head in the sand and say it the Dems fault. Congress refuses to compromise, doesn't pass a bill that will add 1 job during this downturn and says it's the President that's playing politics. Yep, that's the Ostrich. Head stuck in the sand.

It's not the fall that kills ya'

Anyone who has ever watched any political scandal has got to be thinking that great Yogi-ism when they watch Mr. Cain twist and turn in the wind: It's deja-vu all over again. First you attack the organization that asks the question as biased and with an agenda, then there's the denial, then a lie, then a half-truth. Then enough people have the facts that the truth is given by the accused. And make no doubt about it, the truth does come out. But respect is lost, not in the original action, but in the lies and cover-ups. So now we know that over 10 years ago, Mr. Cain was accused of sexual harassment, there was a settlement made by the group he headed, and no criminal charges were ever filed. Since non-disclosure forms were signed, this may be the end of it. But it's too late now. But it wasn't the fall over 10 years ago that killed him, it was the steps taken recently that was his downfall. Don't believe me? Well, let's say that Mr. Cain had told Politico that he was accused of harassment, that lawyers decided that even though he had taken no actions, the trial would be messy, public, and cost more than the settlement, and so they settled. End of story. It doesn't drag on for days, and the campaign goes on. Sorry, Mr. Cain, it wasn't the fall that killed your campaign, but that first step afterward to the press was a doozy. And a killer.  

Origins of OWS not the same as Tea Party

There have been thoughts on TV recently that the Tea Party has the same origin as Occupy Wall Street. I couldn't disagree any less. The origins of the Tea Party came from the idea that government was mis-spending taxes. Maybe a better way of saying it is that the Tea Party didn't believe their taxes was used in ways in that didn't represent their beliefs. Out of this idea came the political will to block all legislation from the Democratic Party. After all, if government couldn't be trusted to use taxes in ways that were acceptable to them, why trust it at all? So no ideas that they didn't some up with on their own were to be voted down. And everyone who disagreed with their views were to be ousted, or if not in office, voted down by any means necessary. Now Occupy Wall Street started as a way to protest the money and the power being in the hands of a few people. It protests the middle class' loss of wealth and money. Since in a truly free money market society this is impossible, Occupy Wall Street must look to government to help equalize the system. Not with hand-outs, but in laws fairly and equally distributed. To ensure that all are created and treated equal and not just some get the break, it is only a government that can level the field. So what will the political will be of this group? What will they require to keep government running? But 2 things when looking at the situations this way become very clear. One is that the 2 groups have very different agendas, and therefore different goals and means to get there. And the second thing is that only one group believes in the founding principle of this country, that all men are created equal and should be given equal chances to succeed. And it isn't the Tea party. Which side are you on?        

If women ruled the world

A friend of mine on facebook posted this saying: If women ruled the world, there'd be no wars. Now this is a saying I have heard before, but in this politically-charged time, it got me thinking. Now as a divorced man, and a guy with 4 sisters, I can tell you that idea a woman wouldn't go to war is at best, ludicrous. Heck any man that's ever been married or lived with a woman knows there are times she'd go to war (And I don't mean time of month). Everyone knows, or should know, that if someone threatens to or actually harms a woman's family, she will do whatever it takes it protect, or at worst, get revenge for anything done to her family. But a woman wouldn't go to war for stupid reasons that have nothing to do with the safety and protection of her family. And a woman at the head of a country will feel the same way about the country. Think Golda Meir of Israel or Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain. They would and did go to war to protect their country, their family as it was. Now, to put it in today's context, when bin-Laden attacked and took down the towers, a woman would have no problem going after him and his group with all the fury at her disposal. But she wouldn't have gone to war and invaded Iraq. If women ruled the world, there'd be wars, but there'd be few if any stupid, petty wars.   

If women ruled the world

A friend of mine on facebook posted a saying: If women ruled the world there'd be no wars. As a man with 4 sisters, can I tell you that the idea of women not making war is ludicrous at best. Heck, any man that has ever been married or even lived with a woman knows there are times that a woman will go to war (And I don't mean time of month). Everyone knows, or at least should know, that if someone harms a woman's family, she will do whatever she can to get even. But a woman wouldn't go to war for stupid reasons.

Did America try to build an empire?

Throughout the weekend, with the news that our troops were leaving Iraq and that Libya's Khaddafi was dead, there was a lot of talk on the liberal shows about how many thought we wouldn't actually leave Iraq. The pundits, most of them came  from either Africa or the Middle East, were talking about how since we were a nation that had built an empire, we weren't very likely to give it up. So this got me asking the question: Did America really try to build an empire?
Now if you go back 65 years to the beginning of the cold war, there is no doubt that America propped up dictators that would stand against the Soviet Union. And if you think of this as trying to build an empire, then I guess America did do that. And since almost all those dictators, by their very nature
 

Where's the middle ground? Not in foreign policy

Just when I think that nobody could take one side or the other, both the Tea Party and the Democratic Party have decided that since they can't stand each other when it comes to domestic policy, they'll extend it to foreign policy, too. Now where I can almost understand why the Tea Party hates what happened in Libya (This was all President Obama's doing, and his actions have been proven to be correct. So much for a Democrat mismanaging a crisis.), the actions taken to bring home all military from Iraq has both sides rattling their sabers. (Sorry about the war analogy.) On the left, everyone is hailing the President's actions as one of the greatest feats he could ever take. Now, whoa Nellie! President Bush had signed an agreement to get all but a few thousand troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Now, instead of a few troops that could get easily sucked into any civil war, and would be in the eye of the tiger, so to speak, now if there is any problems in Iraq, it will be Iraq's problem to solve, which is the way it should be. So the President's actions were simply prudent actions taken by him. Now for those on the right that believe this shows his lack of foresight (And I can't say the Tea Party, because a lot of Tea Party members want all troops brought home from everywhere, not just Iraq), remember that this was basically the agreement that President Bush signed. How long would you keep troops there? What should their mission be? Do you know? Do you even care? All military missions should cease whenever the mission has succeeded or when there is no chance to accomplish the mission. The mission has been accomplished, and so the troops are coming home. And I will be glad to say to them, Welcome Home for the Holidays, troops. Mission Accomplished.    

Senate Rules Helps Tea Party Lie.

Watching Kevin McCarthy, Tea Party Representative from California and , I believe, the 3rd ranking Tea Party member of the House, I was reminded how much the Tea Party will take a fact and then use it to tell a lie. Or tell a lie and prove with information that they see one way while the facts are the other. Rep.McCarthy stated that the Tea Party was not obstructing President Obama and would work with him if he'd let them. To prove this point, he stated how President Obama jobs bill wasn't acceptable to either Tea Party or Democrats, since the Democratic controlled Senate couldn't get the votes to get it passed. Now, while it is true that the bills didn't pass, it isn't because the bills didn't get a majority of the votes. Both bills got enough votes to pass a straight up/down vote, but due to the arcane rules of the Senate, both bills needed 60 votes to pass. So yes, Rep. McCarthy, your minority in the Senate obstructed the majority in trying to pass a bill. So in this case, you took information and stated it in a way which was a lie. Now your original statement about not obstructing the President is also a lie, or every paper in the country got information about the $4 billion compromise to cut programs and eliminate tax loopholes was wrong. Rep. Boehner and the President had an agreement but Boehner was told by the hard-core members of the Tea Party that they wouldn't vote for it, so the compromise was shot down. Do you not call this obstruction, or do you think that every paper in the country lies? Oh, that's right, you're the Tea Party, and when someone disagrees with you, they lie and are un-American. I guess to you, the papers all lied, and polls that say how unpopular you are lies too.     

And Libya is in Africa, too.

So now Qaddafi is dead and the people of Libya are free from his rule and thankful for the help of the U.S., I'm wondering how the Tea Party will make this an utter defeat for the Obama Administration. Of course, since most of them would need an atlas to find the country, I don't know why people would listen to their opinion anyway.

Commander-in-Chief

At last tally, President Obama has found and killed almost all the high-ranking people of Al-Qaeda, taken the right actions in the Arab Spring Uprisings, is getting troops out of Iraq faster than the Iraqi government has requested, and now has helped NATO take actions that has helped the Lybian r 

And the winner is---

Well, for once the debates got rather heated, and I was so proud of the candidates acting like 5th grade schoolboys at recess. After I wrote down all the half-truths, lies, and contradicting their own statements, I had almost 2 pages of info that was wrong. And the second hour hadn't started. Immigration, taxes, foreign policy, government departments, the military budget, and even their own backgrounds was lied about by the candidate themselves ( Yes, Santorum, you lost the Senate seat.). And for those who were happy to hear the audience boo at the statements about LDS (Mormons) being a cult, remember that Nevada has a large LDS population, so that was no bonus point for audience. They still applauded every sound bite that restricted rights and restricted government oversight. So in my mind, there was only 1 winner in the debate last night, well 2 actually. The first one is Jon Huntsman, who by not showing up was missed by those that wanted the truth to be uttered. And the 2nd winner was all those that didn't watch. After all, who wants to watch a bunch of schoolboys during recess yell at each other.

Knock Knock. Who's there? The truth

After the debate last night, several people on a couple of channels wondered why Romney hasn't locked up the GOP nomination yet. He's been head and shoulders better than everyone else in every debate. But they can't understand why he can't get more than 30% of the votes from perspective voters. So what don't they get? Yes, just like the knock knock joke, the truth. You see, they don't understand the truth. The truth is that Romney is getting all the votes of the non-Tea Party wing of the GOP. Okay, maybe Jon Huntsman is getting 1%, but other than that, Romney is getting all non-Tea Party votes. So what's the truth that they don't see? That now, 70% of the GOP is affiliated with the Tea Party. And that 70% don't believe, like, or even care about Romney. And they will never vote for someone who doesn't follow lock-step with the Tea Party. And again, that is why I put a (T) instead of an (R) after anyone in the GOP. Knock knock. Who's there? The Tea Party and we're the GOP now, and, unfortunately, that's no joke.

A grown man walks into a frat house

Yes, it sounds like a joke, and in at least some ways it was. So what was Gov. Perry doing at a frat house after the economic debate Tuesday night? Well, one of the things he was saying that the American Revolution was in the 16th century. Well that meant you were only off by 200 years. And then you said that debates aren't your strong suit. Well, at least that's true. But don't you think that as President, you'd have to talk and debate things with leaders of other countries? So, it might be important if you're President that debate is one of your stronger suits. So a grown man walking into a frat house does sound like a joke. but what he said wasn't funny at all.

The Economy Debate and fact checking

Well, after almost sleeping through another debate ( Is it a debate when everyone takes the same side? Everyone there agrees: No regulations for businesses, get rid of the Fed  chief or the Fed totally, President Obama is to blame if the sun doesn't shine through the clouds), I just want to add one thing that would make the debates more exciting; Instant Fact Check. When a candidate or most of the candidates makes a statement that's a lie, a buzzer goes off and they are confronted with their lie. The Dodd-Frank Act was to blame for the Collapse of 2008? Someone who was on that stage last night explain to me how a collapse that happened in 2008 can be caused by a piece of legislation that was enacted in 2010, and wasn't even debated or brought up in Congress until December 2009. Is there a time machine the government has that I don't know about? You can have different ideas about what you want the country to look like and how it runs, but when you lie so easily about something so easy to check, I don't question your ability to be President, I know you don't have the ability to be President.

A veteran's view of war

As a person who spent 20 years in the military, I have a view of war that not many my age or younger have. But it may be my view of a war's end that is strange to most, both those that served that those that never have. I believe that there are good reasons to go to war, and there are wars that have no reason at all. But in this day and age of wars being declared not against a country, but a regime or terrorists, I think it is imperative to know when to call a war a win and leave. But we as a country have not learned this, or so it seems. Now let's take a few places that we have military now, see how they got there, and let's see if they are still needed there. Korea, where we still have a large contingent of military, was due to the Korean war. And North Korea still would like to overthrow the government of South Korea, so military is needed there. Western Europe, where we fought WW II and defended against the USSR. Well, now there is no USSR, and does anyone in Europe worry about a Russian conquest? If not, which I highly suspect, then bring them home. We definitely won that war. If a base or two is need there for forward-deploying of forces, then that's fine. But do we need to be at all the bases in Europe we're at? Now for the tough ones. Iraq? Now that is a question that is just about answered. We went there under false pretenses, but over-threw an evil dictator, and have helped build a country. And it looks like we are leaving. And we should leave completely. And now, Afghanistan. We went there to find bin-Laden, kill him and dismantle Al-Quida in that country. Mission accomplished. And we have stayed to help build a government. But now, if we stayed another 10, 20, or even 30 years, would the government be stronger, the situation any different than it is now? Since the answer is no, we must bring those troops home now, too. So what do we do with these troops? Now that's a question for another blog.    

Occupy Wall Street and The Rule of Law

In the local paper (The Kansas City Star) yesterday, there was a letter to the editor that said The Ten Commandments were the basis of our laws. My thought was: There aren't that many people that can be that stupid, is there? A lot of people in jail for adultery or not honoring their parents? If there was a $10 fine for using the Lord's name in vain, I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have a national debt. No, our laws aren't set down from the Ten Commandments. How we want people to act, how we perceive people and their actions, our social mores, they may be based on The Ten Commandments, and in most communities, are based on them. But our laws are based on English justice that goes back to the Magna Carta. Barons forcing the King to codify laws and abide by them. This was later expanded to freemen, and then all men, which we now in America think of as We The People. Now what does this have to do with Occupy Wall Street? Well, this is the people telling the King that codified laws must be abided. Who is King? That would be Wall Street, who has basically run rough-shod over the economy, ruining lives and leading the world to the brink of a world-wide Depression. Occupy Wall Street has simply reminded not only Wall Street but all of America that people have rights, and codified laws must be obeyed. Now Cain, Cantor, Perry, Palin and others have decried this action by the people. Occupy Wall Street  may be non-political and broad-based, but it isn't hard to see where its enemies are.

Hey, Tea Party, are you always wrong?

I have been reading the blogs for the last few days, and I want to make sure I have all this right.
-- Cain, people who aren't rich, is it really all their fault? For 1 thing, in a perfect economic model, the line wouldn't be straight, where everyone made the same amount, it would be a Bell Curve. You remember a Bell Curve, right? Very few would be severely poor or extremely wealthy, and most would fall in the middle. So your basic premise is wrong. And what does our country's economic Bell Curve look like? This gets us to-
--Cantor, ordinary people protesting financial institutions that helped ruin the economy institutes is a mob? How many have broken into those institutions? How many have taken acts of violence? I would say if the number isn't 0, it is in the single digits. What is happening isn't a mob, but a non-violent protest. And when those institutions get regulations trying to insure that what happened in the mid 2000s culminating in the ecpnomic bust in 2008 won't happen again, they ask you and your kind to repeal those laws. You agree to do so. And does the mob go and take action against you and the rest of the Tea Party? No, they are peacefully protesting, not trying to enforce mob rule.
But now we get to the person that the Tea Party doesn't like-
--Romney, we need more military? Where? We need to get out of Iraq, and I don't mean leave a few trainers. Out completely. Why are we still there? And no, I'm no peace-loving nut. I'm a retired military man. Why are we still in Europe, by the way? Is it that horrible Cold War? That was over 20 years ago. We need to defend against the USSR? Oh, that's right, there hasn't been a USSR in nearly the same time. And I haven't even brought up Afghanistan. Why? Because we still do need to be there for a while, not to prop up a corrupt government, but to insure a draw-down that is as bloodless as possible. We went there to ensure Al-Quida (I hope that's the spelling of the day) couldn't attack us from that region, and to eliminate its head people including Bin-Laden. Job done. Now let's go home. And I hate to tell you, but we as a country have made mistakes. We've propped up, and are still propping up, evil dictators who mercilessly brutalized their country. Shouldn't we acknowledge and apologize for those action? Only smug, arrogant groups refuse to do that, but you already belong to a group like that, don't you? Yes, the group is called The Tea Party.  

Yankees lose, but a guide for the Royals?

Well, if you live here in Kansas City and are a certain age, seeing the Yankees lose isn't as good as watching the Royals win, ... ... ... but it's close-LOL!! But seriously, in the loss is a the plan for Royals being a very good if not great team. Is the players here to go toe-to-toe with the Yankees? Pretty much, yes. If Soria has a good year, is the bullpen comparable? Yes. But where did the Yankees lose this series? Clutch hitting, absolutely, was a major reason. But look at the Tigers pitchers vs. the Tigers pitchers. The Tigers had the younger, stronger, fresher pitchers. So, and this is just my opinion, Dayton Moore, please stay with the young arms we have in our minor league system. This should be the guide. This is the lesson the Royals can take from the Yankees losing. Don't go out and get a 30 year-old plus pitcher. Keep the young, strong arms coming. With good health, Duffy can only get better, Telford looks like a fine 3rd or a great 4th starter, Montgomery is on the way, if not here, next year. And more arms are on the way, ready in late 2012 or at the beginning of 2013. So are the Yankees the guide? No, actually the Giants, and in some ways the Diamondbacks are. But they can show teams how not to win a championship.      

MU to the SEC?

The talk around college sports is that the University of Missouri will go from the Big 12 to the SEC. Now I know that there may be many reasons for MU going to SEC, but I have to ask one question? Where do you get your recruits, MU? Now on this, I am only talking football, but since it is football that is driving combining of college football, I think it is a valid question. Right now, outside of the state of Missouri, MU is like all other Big 12 schools, heavily recruiting the state of Texas. If Texas doesn't go to the SEC, why would a kid sign with Missouri and hardly ever be seen in his home state? So this move would hurt recruiting to MU. Most of the kids in Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana won't go to MU. So MU will lose a lot a recruits kids. So where would you get some recruits, MU?

Steve Jobs- Visionary

There are probably millions of people in my generation and older that never used one of his devices,  some still don't know what an i anything is, and even a few that when they hear someone say app, they think the person is stuttering. But if you asked even them if a man lived his life his way, influenced billions and made not only his corner of the world brighter and more fun, but helped almost the entire world in some way, what would you say about that man? They would say that he was an extraordinary man, a lucky man, and a man they would want as a friend. And they would say that that man was a vision of what they want everyone to become. Steve Jobs, visionary, Rest In Peace.

A Third Party? Sarah's right, and wrong.

Well since she brought it up, I will again talk about a third party, but this time be specific. In this election, if Romney gets the GOP (Tea Party) nomination, a third party would come from the far right. This would split the GOP and ensure that President Obama a second term. But let's say that a true Tea Party member like Perry gets the nomination. This would leave a vacuum down the middle. Now let's say that the New York mayor and Jon Huntsman entered as the third party. They have the money to run in all states, and would take votes from moderate GOP people, but would also take votes from conservative Democrats. Now none of the three would get a majority of the votes or the electorial college votes, and the House would elect the President. Not one person would vote for someone outside their party. So now a Tea Party would hand the Presidency to its nominee, in this case Perry. So, Palin, once again you might be somewhat right, while being completely wrong about  what could very easily happen.  

Moderate Americans - A Majority?

I happen to believe that a majority of Americans are basically moderates in most things. Most people believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but that everyone, heterosexuals and homosexuals, should have the same rights. Most people think that having a gun is a right, but there are times and places that guns should be restricted, if not banned. ( If a person goes to a political rally to shoot a member of the government, isn't this an attempt at a violent over-throw of the government? Isn't this treason?) Most people believe that government should be big enough to pass laws to ensure the life is fair for all people, and that corporations don't run rough-shod over the country ( some don't even care about this, and yet they wonder why so many don't like them?). But everyone agrees that government should be as efficient as possible, and as small as possible to achieve these means. I could take just about anything in the news, and say that if there was a middle ground, a way to make both extremes happy and unhappy at the same time, a majority of people would be for that idea. But how big is the majority, and maybe more important, is that majority a minority in a large part of the country? My guess would be that 60% to maybe 75% of Americans would fall into this group, and there are very few places in America that they're not the majority. But tell me how many people in either the Congress or the White House feel that way? Would you get to double digits? Even if you barely get to triple digits, that still means not only that you're in the minority, but that over 80% of the government doesn't feel that way. Washington, does this help you understand why so many dislike you? Unfortunately, probably not.  

General thoughts- busy news day

After watching the MU news conference, I have a few thought about that, and other things that have happened the last few days.
--Everyone is saying that MU is done with the Big 12, and that may be true. But MU may also just be saying to Texas, " Look, either share the revenue equally, or we're gone. And if A&M and we go, what makes you think anyone wants to be in a conference you're in."
--Governor Christie may have views I would hate, but I have to admit, he has a presence, and scruples, and would be a great leader in the right organization. I can understand why a lot of people want him to run after watching the news conference today.
--As bad as the Chiefs looked in their first 2 games, if they win Sunday, a winning season is still possible. It may not be enough to get in the playoffs, but after all the injuries, it would be a very good year.
--I'm ecstatic that the Wall Street protests are going world-wide. We need to peacefully protest things that we disagree with and are bad for our country. And what Wall Street has done to our economy and in countries around the world. CNN is showing the protests in a bad light, which just shows who's pockets they're in.
--Speaking of the Wall Street protesters, there is talk on twitter that some think they will be the left's Tea Party. I can't see where this group would ever hijack the Democratic Party, stopping moderates from getting nominated, and try to get rid of the federal government. But that's exactly what the Tea Party has done to the GOP.
--In a recent poll, over 50% of the people asked didn't know that GOP stood for Grand Old Party. Now, this wouldn't be so bad, but it was asked of only registered Republicans, and it was multiple choice. And still more than half got it wrong. 
--The weather has been so great here recently, so I'm sure when it snaps, it will snap with a vengeance. The next time we get a storm, I'm half expecting a tornado or snow to hit.
--The Royals may actually lose players in the Rule 5 draft instead of picking up 1 or 2. While this may not mean much to most people, it means that the team is now getting so deep, there are players we can't protect that other teams want. And that can't be a bad thing.
--I'm still amazed that Verlander pitched in the 8th inning, and his pitches were averaging over 95mph that inning. He was only pitching in the low to mid 90s early in the game, and was over 100 several times in the 8th.   
  

Protests? What took so long?

Mike Barnacle on Morning Joe today had the right idea: The protesters are on the wrong street. They should be in Washington, in front of Congress and the White House, telling both parties to get off their ass and do something. And where is organized labor in all this? Well, maybe they're finally showing up, but if they had organized tent cities around Washington, leading marches and being in at first instead of after 3 weeks, think of how many people would have noticed. Does anyone think that anyone there after labor's help would ever vote against a shop being part of a union?  Isn't there anyone in unions that can see the big picture? Unemployment is still over 9%, and you haven't organized any protests? Maybe unions really don't deserve to be around anymore if they can't help those that would help them the most. 

I hate to admit it, but he's right

Now I don't know much about Gov. Christie of New Jersey, and from what I do know, I don't agree with him much. But about one thing he's talking about, I thoroughly agree: There is a lack of leadership in the federal government. Now, President Obama isn't the start of it, as it has been going on for over 20 years, but he is the person in the White House now. So, right now, it's his problem.
For over 50 years, America had something to fight, and it was that way almost every year. From the 30s when it was poverty and the depression, through the 40s and 50s when it was WW II and the Korean War, through the 60s and the space race, almost every year we had something to strive against. Then we went about 10 years with nothing to strive for, and look at how we as a country were lost. Then in the 80s, we fought against the USSR to destroy it, and we did. So what have we been striving for since? Since the late 80s, we haven't tried to strive for anything. Not even after 9/11 were we asked to unite and strive for something other than revenge. What are striving for now? I don't know either.
So Gov. Christie is right, and yet even he didn't go far enough. But I do know that as a country, we need to unite and strive for something. It can be education, where we've fallen so far, or transportation, where with high-speed rail for cargo we could get fresher groceries to markets faster, or upgrade utilities, so storms wouldn't always knock out power, and lines in the east are almost always at capacity, and power can be lost with a fuse going out. It can be one of those, or dozens of others, including jobs. But only the President can give the country a vision of where we need to go. Do you believe anyone in the Tea Party has that vision? Neither do I, so President Obama, I hope you do. You campaigned on hope once. Please run on a vision this time.

Sports, the real reality shows

After a night of channel-changing, emotional-charging laugh-until-you-cry night in front of the TV, I am even more amazed that most women don't like sports. Now, I don't mean playing sports, I mean watching sports. At one point tonight, out of the 4 games played tonight, 3 were being lead by the team that lost. In the ninth inning. Two cities that at the beginning of the month were almost locks to make the play-offs lost tonight and both are out of the play-offs. The Boston Red Sox were over 99% sure not to be in a 1-game play-off to get in the play-offs, but to be in the play-offs. The Atlanta Braves were one out from going to St. Louis for a 1-game play-off. And less than hour later, neither team were in the play-offs. And, in a way, neither was their town. Try that on Idol.
So I'm sorry Kardashians, Snookie, Gene Simmons and the rest of you on the E! channel. These shows I watched tonight, with those teams, they aren't scripted. Idol and the X-Factor, 2 of my family can sing well enough to be on your shows, and DWTS, my whole family can dance better than stars, even my mom with a bad heart. For me, I'll watch the real reality shows, where nobody knows who will win or lose until the game is finished. Sports, the real reality show, that's what I'll watch, where the only thing that's certain is that if the team is from Kansas City, it's probably not real good, and the owner doesn't live here. Well, hopefully, that's only half right-LOL!!!        

Third Party Politics- The Bigger Picture

I have railed about the Tea Party, saying that they have no right to the (R) label, since they are not the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and even Reagan. But even I have missed the bigger story, that there aren't just 2 parties now, but 3. So for those on the right, but not far right, you better look for the 3rd party now. Inside the banner of the (R), there are still a few moderates, those that believe in the ideas of the past, a connection with the past Republicans that I mentioned. Then there are the far-right conservatives who call themselves Tea Party members. Now 1 of 3 things can happen in finding a nomination for President: 1) A moderate, pro-compromise can get the nomination. If that happens, the Tea Party will sit out, complain about the process and actions whomever would be elected, and drive the party even farther right in 2014 and 2016. If this doesn't work, then they'll make the 3rd party. Or 2), the Tea Party gets their nominee through and he/she becomes a candidate. If that person becomes the President, even if the country doesn't fall into a great depression, he/she will either make you follow their beliefs, and even if you follow them 85% of the time, that's not enough, and they will push for you to resign your post, and will be actively campaign to ensure you aren't elected. In  that case, you have no party. Or you can accept 3) Form your own party now, either by taking the (R) for yourself and making them start putting a (T) after their name, or becoming a new independent party and making a new name. Moderate conservatives, it's up to you. But in fact, we already have 3 parties. We just don't have 3 nominees to choose from. And one way or another, moderate conservatives, it's your nominee that's getting squeezed out. 

Who needs a study?

Sometimes, I really don't understand why people need to do a study to say some things. Was a study needed to prove the sun rises in the east? So why was there a study needed to prove that women drinking coffee cuts depression? Is it a surprise that a stimulant cuts depression? I, for one, don't need a study to tell me that watching a woman have an alcoholic drink cuts depression in men- at least in the short term-LOL!!!  

Florida Straw Poll- WTH?

Sorry to put it that way, but does anybody really think that the Tea Party of Florida stood up and said: We think a black businessman with no governing background is the best choice to our next commander-in-chief (Well, the did elect Scott as governor, so I guess that is a possibility)? No, I think it is basically a protest vote. They seem to be saying: Romney and Huntsman, you're no Tea Party people, so you're out. Newt, you're the past, and Santorum, you couldn't get re-elected in Pennsylvania as Senator, so you can't be President, so you 2 are out. Johnson, cute line, but stealing from our radio god is verboten, so you're out. Paul, nice ideas, but you have been running for President for how many years, and you look like the guy on TV selling popcorn a few years back. Nobody will take you seriously, so you're out. So now we have Michele, who believes whatever someone says to her,and doesn't believe in taxes. Well, one out of two isn't bad, so let's put her on the back burner. Now Perry, we've listened to you, and we like what you say--- when you make sense. And that happens even less with you than it did with W. No No, No, No, No, and may I say--- NO! So who is the least likely to be elected, the one no one thinks takes seriously, the one that will get Christie and/or Ryan to sit up and take notice that we're not happy with anyone, and we want you to run: Yeah, Cain, that's who we'll vote for. That will get somebody else in the race, someone we can really get behind.
It's either that or they really think that Cain is a serious candidate. I'm not sure which one would be scarier.

Friday night thoughts and comedy

As the week draws to a close, I realize:
-- I see that Manny Ramirez wants to come back to and play baseball. Manny, after what you did to Boston and LA, not even President Obama wants to re-build the bridges you burned.
-- Watching ESPN and their Grantland commercials, I have decided that Virginia Madsen should read the jobs report when it comes out. With her looks and voice, she could make it sound like wonderful news.
-- Deon Grant was one of the Giants that fell on the turf trying to stop the Rams' no huddle offense. After listening to his press conference and his BS explanation of why he did it, I'd say he's building a very strong resume to work in the Big 12 Media Department when he quits playing football.
-- After watching a few Tea Party debates and watching the History channel's series on the Roman Empire and the colleseum, I think Shirley McClain may be right about reincarnation.
-- When baseball teams get youger, they always take a step back before moving forward. So it isn't a good sign that the Royals will win more games this year than they did last year, it's a sensational sign.
-- The Pacific Athletic Conference (PAC) 12 has a team in Colorado. Next year, the Big East will have a team in Texas (TCU). Big Ten has 12 teams, and Big 12 has 10 teams. Brand names don't seem to mean right in college sports. Actually, the political party that used to called the Republican Party doesn't believe in a strong central government. They'd rather have America to be a confederation than an actual republic.  So that's the brand name is as wrong with the NCAA sports.  

The Tea Party's Orlando Debate

I could probably write a few thousand words on the debate if I wanted, but I will try to shorten it a bit. Anyone who comments and asks me about the debate, I will answer and tell you about anyone that debated last night.
-- Overall, everyone seems to have found their comfort level. and not many answers were surprises. Most would dismantle almost all of the government that had to do with domestic issues. No EPA, Dept. of Education, IRS, and just about anything else on the domestic side would be eliminated or severely reduced. So here are the individual highlights and lowlights. And yes, even the audience got into it again.
-- Johnson- Had by far the best line of the night when he said that the neighbor's dogs had gotten more shovel-ready jobs than President Obama. But, actually, it isn't the President's job to make those jobs, but the states and the federal government job. He is trying to get the money to get them going. But it was a great line. But your consumption tax, which is all you talked about, is really a national sales tax. Do bring in enough money, this tax would have to be over 30%. Would anyone buy hardly anything they didn't need if the tax was 30%? This would cause a severe depression.
--Paul-  Is there any part of the government you think is good? But you stated your position better than anyone else.
-- Cain- We are all happy that your cancer is in remission, or cured. And maybe with the new health plan, you wouldn't be alive if it were enacted back then. But I'm fairly sure it was your vast wealth that ensured quick actions, tests, and surgeries, and it would be true if it happened today.
-- Gingrich- Yes, the 90s after the budget got balanced was great. But what would you do looking forward? You can't raise taxes like you did in the mid 90s with Clinton, not if you are part of the Tea Party.
-- Santorum- Not 1 good thing to say about you. Gays and lesbians are second-class citizens, and we need to have military in how many countries? Are there any countries you don't want to send our military?
-- Huntsman- I'm glad your wife is the greatest person you've ever met. But you need to hit your stride quicker. Almost all your ideas make sense, and when you don't delay with your answers, you sound and look like a statesman. Or in other words, you have no place in the Tea Party. Get with Bloomberg and get an independent party started.
-- Bachmann- Who knew you were even more of a libertarian than Paul? People ideally wouldn't have to pay any taxes? So if there's no government, what are you running for? You want as little government as possible. Actually, most people feel the same way, but the question is, How much government is necessary?
-- Perry- You're at your best when you go after Romney, but other than that? 30 seconds to respond doesn't mean your words need to be 7 letters or less, and your sentences as short as possible. Try to remember that you're running to be the President of the United States. You look and act like you're running to be Sheriff of the United States.
-- Romney- This isn't your first rodeo, is it? (sorry to put it in a way Perry could understand.) Keep it up. But Huntsman is right about 4 years ago. If you mortally wound yourself killing Perry's candidacy, you've won the fight but lost the war. One piece of advice: When Perry goes after you about Massachusetts, just tell him that as governor, you did what you thought was best for your state, and if he can use that in defense of his actions, he has no right attacking you for doing the same thing.
-- Audience- You boo a military member because he's gay? I hope you all walked there, since you obviously don't want government in your life. The roads you drove on were paid by taxes you paid to the government you hate.
-- I apologize for this being so long. Take care, and I hope to hear from all of you that read this.  

Royals last home game-and other sports

Well, the Royals lost their last game at home, but tonight, over 28,000 showed up at the game. This is for a team that, while full of young talent, is 20 games under .500. I am very proud of the city supporting the team this way. I wonder how many will show up at Tampa Bay this weekend? And the Florida Marlins won't get half that many, and both teams have better records than the Royals.
Is the Big 12 still together? It feels as if the league is on its last legs, but I still wonder 2 or 3 things- Can Oklahoma get Texas to be a co-equal instead of the big honcho of the Big 12? If not, will the money they make offset the money they'll spend in travel? Colorado may find out that a million or 2 doesn't come close to the travel cost to Washington state a few times of year.
On that note, if only 1 of the conferences, the Big East or the Big 12, disbands, may money is on the Big East. The reason again is travel and the cost. There is no team in the Big East that has a longer travel flight to school if they go the ACC, SEC, or BIG 10 than they do now. Think OU or Oklahoma State really wants to travel to Seattle, Spokane and Portland 20 times a year or more? Remember, it isn't just football, but both men's and women's teams in basketball, volleyball, and a dozen other sports.   
The Red Sox may make the playoffs, but if they play the Tigers in the 1st round. they're toast, and even if they play Texas, it doesn't look good. The Tigers have great pitching, and good hitting, while the Rangers have better pitching and just as good a hitting team as the Red Sox.
Buster Olney. ESPN baseball reporter, has Hellickson winning the AL Rookie of the Year (ROY). While he's had a good year, his record is only 13 wins and 10 losses. I'm sorry, but Eric Hosmer, after a 1-4 night, is still batting .299, with 18 homers and 75 RBIs, and has played gold-glove defense. While the homers and RBIs are really only very good, remember he didn't play the first month. Give him another 3 or 4 homers and 15 to 20 RBIs for playing in the first month, and this is a slam-dunk. But on the other hand, I think our last ROY was Angel Berroa. Remember him? Hell, heard of him? It may not be the worst thing not to be ROY for Hosmer.
And finally, the Chargers are 14 and 1/2 point favorites against the Chiefs this weekend. If you live around Kansas City, or follow the Royals and Chiefs, are you sure you're ready for baseball to end?         

Over the line- and into the abyss

While campaigns have been mean and dirty for years, and maybe since the very first campaign, it has always been an unwritten rule (hell, maybe written) that foreign policy while it is happening is off-limits to all campaigns, including the incumbent that is taking the action. Maybe it started with Libya, where Tea Party candidates jumped in while actions were taking place. But in Gov. Perry's attack on the President 's stand on Israel today while the UN starts a session and gets ready to debate the question of a Palestinian state, he went over the line. On top of this, he has an Israeli official with him while he gives his briefing. Governor, you brought in a foreign official, had him stand behind you,  and brought him into a domestic political situation? It doesn't matter that you are wrong about the Obama Administration's stance on the Palestinian state. They have already said that they would be the lone veto in the Security Council if that's what it took to ensure that there wouldn't be a Palestinian state through a UN mandate. I would say that the Obama Administration is Israel's best friend in the world, but on this, they may be the only friend Israel has. Even if you were right, in bringing the campaign into a foreign policy situation, and added foreign officials, you didn't just step over the line, you jumped right into the abyss.

KC Sports and the Big 12

With everything that is going on here in sports, I've decided I know less than just about everyone about what's going on. But since that's never stopped me from throwing my 2 cents worth in before-LOL!!!, here goes--
-- Dayton Moore, GM of the Royals got on-line for a chat, and answered some very good questions. He was forthright and straight to the point. More on chat next, but it got me wondering if Scott Pioli, GM of the Chiefs, would ever do the same. He might do the chat, but I think he would try to keep everything as close to the vest as possible. Now, for some of what Dayton said:
    -- When asked how soon we could expect a team that could be at .500, or win 81 games, and he said simply that being .500 wasn't the goal. He expected to be that good or better next year and for years to come.
     -- When asked about keeping the team together, he quickly stated that the Royals have Cabrera for next year, Frenchy for 2 years, Gordon couldn't be a free agent until 2015, Escobar until 2016 and the rest of the infield and catcher until 2017, and that he thought he could sign most of this core group for longer than this.
     -- When asked about pitching, and where he would look for better pitching, he stated that first and foremost, he'd look within. He then rattled of a dozen names that would be able to be starting pitchers in the majors next year or the following year. He included Crow, Paulino, Adcock, and Telford, but added names in the minors like Mendoza, Montgomery, Dwyer, Smith, Aguilles, and Odorizzi ( I hope I spelled the names right) and others. Then he said he would look at a trade if that didn't work out, and then at a free agent signing.
-- This makes me think that there will be no big free-agent signings, but if the team is close to winning the division next year, he would trade for a #1 pitcher. But then so will everyone if they have a chance to get into the playoffs.   But the Royals minor leagues are still incredibly deep, even after bringing up 10 players that played significant minutes. the AAA, AA, and one of the two A teams all made the playoffs. 
-- The Royals have won 8 of their last 9 games, and if they win their last game at home tomorrow, they will have only the 2nd winning seaon at home since 1996. And Soria has been injured and hasn't pitched in any of these games. Actually, if Soria this year had been the same as last year, the Royals would already be at 71 or 72 wins, and they'd be looking at getting close to .500 this year.
-- Around 27,000 people went and saw the next-to-last Royals game of the year. I doubt that there will be that many in the stands for the Chiefs last game if they aren't very good. Now, weather will have a big say in how many show up, but don't be surprised if next year, Royals tickets are harder to get than Chiefs tickets. Part of this is because of the All-Star game being here, and if you buy a season ticket, you get an All-Star ticket, and some of this is just that Kansas City loves winners. But part of this is that Kansas City is at heart a baseball town. There just hasn't been a good team here in a generation.
-- If it's in the PM, the Big 12 is still together, but if it's the AM, they may be breaking up. This is how crazy this has become. But no matter what happens in the next few days, there will be fewer and bigger conferences soon. But I do wonder if the biggest fly in the ointment to the super-conferences isn't the Bowl Committees. If there are just a few conferences, a playoff system seems likely. But the small bowls may be putting some pressure on the conferences, too. It's tough enough to watch a Bowl game with the 5th place team from the Big 12 play the 4th place team from the WAC or 6th place team from the SEC. If there were only 4 conferences, would anyone really want to watch the 10th place team from one conference play the 11th place team from another.
-- And finally, if the Big 12 does split up, I doubt that Missouri and Kansas would go to the same conference. My gut says the Border War games in football and basketball would continue, but I wonder how many would say to just let it go, the games don't need to be played. If that were to happen, it would be the saddest part of the greedy grab for money that college sports has become.          

Great speech, now where's the legislation?

President Obama gave what I thought was a wonderful speech explaining how he'd like to get the Jobs Act paid for. But he didn't do several things, the most obvious is actually send specific legislation to the House. But there were other notable problems. What should the actually tax rate be for high income people? Do we go back to the rate under Clinton, or is it actually to be higher since deductions are taken away? Part of the money to pay for the Jobs Acts is money saved in drawing down the war. If the Job Act isn't passed, it's not likely that you're going to keep wars going, so in fact, this isn't savings at all. Savings in Medicare and Medicaid comes from what? Was this ever explained and I missed it? That is possible but I doubt it, as no news bureaus explained how it would be accomplished.
Now, again, I thought the President gave a great speech, and I agree with him in principle. But as they say, the devil is in the details. And the largest detail is missing: The Tea Party controlled house isn't likely to pass anything that the President brings them to enact. So Tea Party members, where is your plan for getting people back to work? No, a tax plan isn't a jobs plan. A tax plan is a way to change taxes. A jobs act is a way to create jobs. You don't like the President's plan or his way to pay for it? Bring up your own legislation, pass it, and get it to the Senate. But if you don't, you can't complain when the President says you're a do-nothing Congress. All he's doing is telling the truth.  

Kansas City and Sports

While thinking of what to put in my blog on President Obama's on ways to pay for his jobs initiative, I am taken by all that is going on in sports around Kansas City, which got me thinking:
1. While I agree that the demise of the Big 12 will be a tremendous loss for Kansas City, the thought that the Big 12 is in KC's DNA is over the top. For most fans here, if you held a basketball tournament and the local teams played ( MU,KU,KSU) played, it wouldn't matter if the other teams would be major universities from any state (possibly with the exception of ISU) or whether they were basically the Little Sisters of the Poor. This is old Big 8 country from way back. Nebraska football is still in the paper. Do you think that Texas Tech or Baylor will be after the Big 12 disbands?
2. After 2 games, people here want the head of either Chiefs GM Pioli, Head Coach Haley, or both. I always thought that sports organizations, no matter the sport, that made rash decisions, changing coaches and GMs every few years were thought of as losing organizations, and showed a lack of leadership and stability. Is this what Kansas City wants?
3. It was ranted on local TV this weekend that this is a down time in our professional sports, worse than any time before. What a crock! The MLS team is streaking toward the playoffs, the Royals, while not good, have again the best minor league system in baseball. And the Chiefs, while being horrible right now, still have a very good young nucleus. Unfortunately, most of it is injured for the year. Remember the early 2000s, when the Royals stunk and Schottenheimer was fired? Remember the mid 60s when the A's were leaving, and nobody went to see the Chiefs? Okay, even I don't remember that one-LOL!!!
4. There was a letter in the paper today that said that Kansas City deserves better teams than we have. I have to ask, why? Is there anyone in the local area that stepped up and bought the Royals? So neither the Royals nor the Chiefs are locally owned. And want to go to a game, have a few drinks (or maybe more than a few), and get want to take mass transit there and back? Sorry, there is no mass area transit, not on Sunday or later than 6 or 8 the rest of the week. So we should have built a stadium downtown, where there is transit? There is still no way to get there without a car. For people in Kansas City, go to the bus schedule and ask to go to Kansas or Eastern Jackson county at night or Sunday. It can't be done. Now, the people in Jackson county did agree to raise taxes to keep the stadiums up-to-date, and for that, all of us in Jackson county should be commended. But did the other counties follow suit and help? Not only no, but the former Mayor of Kansas City suggested that the city withhold money to the stadiums, even though the city gets revenue through the stadiums. So again I ask, why do deserve great teams?
5. It looks like my fantasy team is going 0-2, although this week is so close it will again go down to the last quarter of the game. ( I lost by 2 last week)
6. Nothing more. It just seems that a 6-pack of things to talk about is a good number. Now I guess I'll go to the fridge and open up a different type of 6-pack-LOL!!!   

Why I Speak Out Against the Tea Party

For those of you who follow me but don't know my background, I spent 20 years in the Air Force, all enlisted. And part of the oath that I took was to defend the country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. And even though I am retired, I still feel that I must do what I can against all enemies. And why do I think  that the Tea Party may fall into that category? Here are some of the steps taken by other groups that came into power through legal, democratic methods. And they seem to be following the same playbook.
1. No one that disagrees with them can be patriotic, and those that speak out against them are un-American.
2. Take control of a major political party and make in conform to your wants and desires for the country.
3.Re-organize the government from within the government, even though they are a minority in government. Refuse to compromise, and make all parts of the government that disagrees as irrelevant as possible.
4. Disseminate and distort information to make the enemy, the opposite party, look as bad as possible. In the absence of facts, lie. But make sure it gets out, and is repeated as often as possible.
5. Allow your followers as much power as possible, and always try to get them more.
6. Restrict rights from those that don't believe in your way of life, and your way of thinking.
7. Take control of everything that you can, and ensure that only information favorable to you is allowed.
8. Eradicate the opposition.
So what step is the Tea Party at? Have they accomplished steps 1 through 4,5 or 6? If they have, is this the kind of group that most of the country wants to run their country? If most Americans want this group in power, then that is fine. They've accomplished what they want, and those of us who disagree with their vision couldn't change enough minds. But we will continue to get information out, and hope enough people are listening.
So what other groups followed this playbook? I can think of 2 groups, one that failed to gain power but succeeded in crystallizing people's thoughts for years to come, and the other who succeeded in gaining power but whose ideas were debunked. The first was the KKK, and yes they took illegal actions. But they also made sure people who believed in their cause were elected to ensure their beliefs continued. And the second was a certain party in Germany that gained power in the late 1920s. We know what happened to the first 2 groups. That's called history. We are still unsure of the Tea Party. That's called the future.   

How To Win in the Tea Party

This will be the just a generic 6-pack plan for all Tea Party candidates to win and be the Presidential candidate for the Tea Party. For each individual to win, they must make sure all these things are done, and then take the others out. The individual actions I will describe later. But generically:
1. Keep in touch with Congress and make sure the Tea Party bloc in the House and Senate stay together. Block anything that any Democrat may try to enact into law. Remember Mitch McConnell's #1 item for this Congress: Make sure Obama isn't re-elected.
2. Ensure that nothing is answered correctly and with thought in any debate. Short, evasive answers are good, not answering the question and changing the subject is even better. In other words, keep the audience happy.
3. Use no 3 syllable words when a word with just 1 or 2 will do. Most people in the audience won't know what it means, anyway. 10 words in a sentence? At least 3 words too many. Need a good catch phrase? Quote the Bible, not anyone that was in any other book. Remember, if you say " Remember when it was said, 4 score and 7 years ago," everyone in the audience will wonder why you are quoting Shakespeare.
4. Science is your enemy, remember that. Stamp it on your forehead.
5. Went to college? No matter where you actually graduated in your class, tell the audience it was actually 100 places lower than that. If you graduated last in your class, start of every debate with this fact. In doubt, look in the mirror. You did stamp that motto that was rule #4 on your forehead, right? Good.   
6. Never back down to the President. He hasn't shown a spine yet, always backing down when his back against the wall. Don't give him room to breath.
Okay Tea Party candidates, there are your general rules. Now your job is to figure out if any or all of these ideas are real, or if there are any that I just threw in to see if you'd believe it at face value. In other words, my ideas have about as much basis in fact as yours do.
------- And who said I have no sense of humor--- HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

5.