Hillary – The Ultimate Capitalist

I can’t help but delight in all the drama surrounding Hillary Clinton these days. Those of us on the ‘right’ seem totally to the idea that she and her husband have committed serious offenses against the nation. And she probably has. At least by all the accounts that continually get press. At the very least there’s Uranium One, Benghazi, the email server, the nebulous Clinton Foundation, and of course ‘pay-for-play’ scandals from her time as Secretary of State. Plus who knows what else may surface in the weeks or months to come. Now, if you’re like me, you are jonesing for her to be formally accused of some high crime, and taken away in shackles. In fact the image is really quite appealing. But….as NFL referees like to say “upon further review” Hillary is very different than what she first appears.
It is my contention that Hillary is the quintessential CAPITALIST. That’s right. Let’s take a look.

broke Hillary

If you recall January 20, 2001 Hillary and Bill were being evicted from their home because they were bankrupt. Oh, wait, not exactly true, but close. Hillary and Bill were leaving the White House at the end of two Bill Clinton terms as President. But the bankrupt part is true according to Hillary. They were being sued (for stealing items from the White House??) and made a public appeal for donations to their defense fund because they were ‘dead broke’ (her words). So that’s the baseline – January 2001 – dead broke. Zero, nada, outta money. Send us your $10 bills to help us pay for attorneys. Fast forward to today January 2018, seventeen years later and now worth more than $250,000,000. Pretty astounding I’d say. That means either 25 Million people sent them $10 each or they found other ways to amass a fortune. She averaged $15 Million per year not counting any spending cash. Oh, and by the way, neither of them had actual ‘jobs’ during the intervening years. Now let’s go back and look at the list of some of Hillary’s more profitable accomplishments in a different light. A light that any right-wing capitalist would be proud to shine.
So, Uranium One – let’s put giant wadges of cash into the Clinton Foundation in exchange for the ‘yes’ vote on that deal. Perfect. Skirting the law a little, but very profitable. And the Foundation itself? Operated as profitably as any corporate mogul could aspire to. It seems that there were almost no real expenses to go against the millions of dollars in annual donations. How perfect is that? Unbelievably large revenues and equally unbelievably small expenses. National Security won’t be an issue for her – because she’s planning to have so much money that she and Bill will always manage to be safe. Then let’s use a Senate seat (what capitalist wouldn’t want one of those?) to catapult into the Secretary of State position. I can just hear her waking up one day saying “Heck, while I’m here, I can use my mini bully-pulpit to strong-arm foreign nationals into paying Bill millions for speaking engagements and to get even more donations to the Foundation.” No wonder that her response to Benghazi was “what difference does it make”? She was being honest for once. It really didn’t matter to her. There wasn’t any money to be made there. A little post-script here. Has anyone made even a single dollar of donations to the Clinton Foundation since she lost the election?
All told, Hillary has done an amazing job generating capital for herself and Bill. 250 Millions worth. She is a top tier capitalist. Unfortunately for the rest of us, her brand of capitalism is the robber-baron brand. The kind that gave capitalism a bad name. Everyone, including her country, be damned. She’s in it for herself. Textbook exemplar. Now that she’s out of government we’ll need to see how she continues to make money. There’s really only one last question that we all need to answer: “What Happened”?

What the Heck?

What’s Good for the Goose – or – The Door Swings Both Ways

You’ve undoubtedly heard both of those phrases.  And I know you’ve heard “Do unto others, yadda yadda, etc. etc.”  C’mon, admit it, your parents taught you all those when you were little.  Usually they accompanied them consoling you when the bigger kids did something to you that you didn’t like, right?  And you internalized the principle as you grew up.  So now like most good people you try not to do anything that you wouldn’t want done back to you.  But that’s only half of the story, there’s a tootsie roll center there too!  Like most good philosophical principles there is something deeper hidden inside it that doesn’t make itself too clear at first glance.

By now you’re used to me asking you, in these pages, to figure out what the heck that premise has to do with anything of import in your life.  So here I go asking – can you figure it out? What exactly makes them important?  Here’s my early clue – there’s something in there that lies at the heart of what could eventually bring our nation to its knees unless we find the tootsie roll first.  You read that correctly.  The “Do unto others” line is critical to our survival as a nation.

So let’s step back and look from a distance, just for a minute, at the political climate today.  Right now I’m pretty sure that you’re thinking that the answer is somewhere in the realm of “we shouldn’t bully other countries around”.  Or maybe “America doesn’t have a good reputation in the world, so let’s try to be nicer people”.  Or “What gives us, the big country, any right to try to dictate what some foreign country does”.  Nope!  Not even close. You fell into the trap of looking only at the outside of the tootsie pop. Too easy for these pages.  Let’s delve a little deeper.

diversity poster
But UNITY is Better!

We live now in a culture that suggests, no demands, that we TOLERATE other people’s cultures, other religions, and every other “other” that comes along.  We hear political leaders stumping about being tolerant.  We instruct educators to include inclusiveness in their lesson plans.  We have religious leaders pontificating about how our religions are more alike than unalike. We must reach out and make it known that we will tolerate each other’s differences.  Americans will not be outdone in this matter.  Now don’t assume that I think this is a bad policy.  On the contrary I endorse it in the extreme.  I think it is a noble goal of an educated society.  I happen to personally like the idea that we can have a country that is at once inclusive and unified.  There are few places on the planet where tolerance is given out so freely.

But here’s the rub (isn’t there always a rub?).  All of those politicians and educators and religious leaders have only looked at the outside of the pop.  The answer lies in what we’re NOT doing!  That’s right, we’re not doing enough.  In fact we’re only doing half.  The other and equally important half is that we need to demand, from all those that we willingly tolerate, that they in turn tolerate US!  That’s the tootsie roll.  And we don’t get it, literally or figuratively.

Yes, Christians will accept Muslims, so long as Muslims accept Christians.  Yes, Whites will accept Blacks so long as Blacks accept Whites.  Yes, I will recognize your individual right to do pretty much whatever you damn please, as long as you accept my right to do the same.  And in the end, if it proves out that the other guy won’t tolerate me – then I stand by my right not to tolerate him.  That’s the “as you would have them do unto you” part.  It’s the part that speakers are always too shy to mention.  Oh, and by shy I mean scared!

Can you imagine a President standing up and saying to the country “Let’s accept and tolerate the XXX’s – but only if they accept us too – and by the way, stop trying to kill us!”  Nope, never happen.  Not unless another Teddy Roosevelt comes along.  But why not?  It is just as good for the goose, isn’t it?  But until we start demanding a bi-lateral approach, we are very likely going to tolerate ourselves right out of existence!

Who is responsible for this?

Here are two interesting stories from the news recently.  See if you can tell how they are related!

First comes a story from Ohio. The story is about a 2nd grade boy, not an ordinary 2nd grader, but a 2nd grader that tips the scales at 210 pounds!  Sound incredible? But it is true.  You know how much concern there is today regarding obesity. Seems that the state authorities are very concerned about obesity too, and they didn’t like the idea that this kid’s parents allowed him to get so big.. He could have health issues in the future, they say.  Why should we be interested?  Here’s a hint, it has nothing to do with obesity. I’m interested because the state took the child out of the home.  He was put into foster care.  That’s unfortunate in many ways, but what I wonder is – who is responsible for this?

The second story comes from Michigan. Apparently activists in Detroit got the word out that traffic accidents can be caused by people eating while motoring in the motor city. I know that I certainly get distracted from my meal if I have to stay in my lane.  Of course there was a public outcry. So, being the leaders that they are, the town fathers outlawed eating behind the wheel. Driving under the influence of a Happy Meal makes them very unhappy now. But what I really wonder is – who is responsible for this?  

What’s your guess on how these first two stories are connected?  Food you say ??  I think not – that would be too obvious.

Here’s the connection – (and I gave a few hints earlier) – Its not food, it is a matter of responsibility. I know that you guessed that. So who’s responsible for the obese boy? It’s the boy’s parents you say. Oops, you guessed wrong that time. Who’s responsible for the spilled taco?  The Driver? - wrong again Batman!  It’s the government of course.  You see when the state gets into the act then, by default, the state becomes the responsible party. And in a very short while, we all begin to expect the state to handle the problems of childhood obesity and driving under the influence of french fries.  And we quickly lose our own ability to take charge.  We will look to the government to take all the chowing drivers off of the road and to take all the obese children out of their homes.  All in an effort to protect us.  I suspect that by now you are asking if this is going anywhere. Of course it is, let’s go;

There are two factions in our society. One wants you to be responsible for yourself. For your own safety and health and finances, etc. This is the way that your parents or grandparents (if you’re lucky enough to be under 30) tried to bring you up.  The second faction thinks that the government should be responsible for everyone. For everyone’s safety and health and finances, etc. Everything.  Unfortunately this second group is taking over. As a society, we are sliding into the arena where the government does it all.  When the government is responsible for everyone, then everyone except you has the ability determine your life.

So if you don’t take proper care of your kids – in their eyes- then they can take your kids away. Soon enough it will extend to other things.  Maybe if they decide that you must vaccinate your kids (oops too late we’re there already).  Or maybe they’ll determine that every kid gets a trophy at the end of the year, so that nobody’s feelings get hurt ( double oops – we’re there already too)  Maybe they’ll decide that you can’t give them expensive sneakers because some families can’t afford them.  But only they can decide – for you!  When the state gets involved with things like eating and driving – then it won’t be long before there is a law against other things while driving. Think of all the things that can distract you while you’re driving. No cell phones (triple oops – already an issue) No radio maybe. What about kids in your car?  Anyone that has ever driven with little kids in the backseat knows just how distracting that can be. I suggest that we limit the number of kids allowed to just one per car. And forget about dates in your car.  Much safer don’t you think. So, hopefully now you can see the result.  It really is what YOU think – YOU get to decide for the other people but not for yourself!  So stop and think before you jump on the ‘let’s make a law’ bandwagon – for anything.  C’mon, hop in the car, let’s go get some fries!

Sleeper Cell French Fries attack America!

I know it sounds like a bad Japanese science fiction movie.  I didn’t believe it myself, at first.  But it is true.  A group of California scientific researchers have recently uncovered a heinous plot to attack the youth of America. Homeland security commented that they didn’t hear any of the typical back-channel chatter, but actually became aware of it via a newspaper story. The plot revolves around a huge corporation that up until now was viewed as one of the great American success stories.

a typical cheeseburger
secret sauce? or secret agent?

Just how this corporation kept this under cover for so long is a mystery.  Their name has been associated with lunch-time smiles on the faces of kids for decades!   The researchers notified a group of concerned citizens, and that group brought it all into the light of day.  According to the group the so-called ‘happy meal’ is actually causing the downfall of American youth by literally force-feeding them fatty foods.  Thereby causing obesity – and the eventual downfall of the entire country.  What makes the episode so shocking is that the parents of the beset children had no idea that they were under attack – and had even less of an idea that their children were being compelled by a secret sauce – I mean force – to consume large quantities of the meals.  The researchers have yet to determine exactly what the force is behind the compulsion, but they are certain that it is definitely NOT the fault of parents, who seem to be blameless since they cannot be expected to counteract the children’s wishes.  Corporate officials have denied any covert operation.  However, in retribution for the charges, the company has replaced the fries with a packet of apple slices.  This, in turn, has precipitated children’s groups to protest that the corporation be forced to rename it’s product to the ‘Less-than-Happy’ meal.

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Thomas Jefferson

Of course the real story here begins with the idea that the government should take responsibility for every citizen, and that the citizens should have none of their own.   If you agree that french fries can cause obesity, and not lack of parental supervision, then you must also agree that there are plenty of other foods that cause obesity.

chocolate chip cookie
are these next to go?

This is more than just a ‘slippery slope’. .  There are recent examples of us sliding down this slope.  We start with activists brandishing a ‘good’ cause, and we end up giving the government more responsibility for us, and losing some liberties in the bargain.  No Smoking on airplanes – a good idea.  Then no smoking in restaurants – a less good idea (we can discuss why in another article).  Then no smoking in public buildings and on streets – and now there are entire towns where it is illegal to smoke.  So here we go – no fatty ‘happy’ meals for kids.  Then no chocolate cake at birthday parties – because kids are forced to attend them, so we shouldn’t be allowed to serve cake!  Think that’s extreme?  I don’t.  I think it’s just the next wave.  After that, no chocolate chip cookies – they’re just as bad if you eat the whole bag, and god knows that mom can’t be responsible for keeping her kids out of the cookie jar.  This is what happens when we decide that the government should take care of us all.  Now, if you don’t like happy meals, or chocolate cake, or smoking, then you probably think this is all good stuff.  But I’m sure that there’s something that you do like that other people think is harmful to you.  That’s right – THEY – think it’s harmful to YOU.  And they’ll lobby to make sure that you can’t do it or have it any more – because it’s bad for YOU.  If you sit by quietly and let them take away the happy meals, they will come for you too some day, I assure you.  It will be easier for them to get you too – because you will be pedalling the government approved bicycle (no more auto fumes), down a dirt road (asphalt is hazardous), We’ll know exactly where you are, because every bike will have a GPS chip (to deter bike thieves).   And you’ll be leaving a trail of half-eaten celery – organic celery – because that’s the only food known to science that is completely fat free, taste free, liberty free.

Fox News vs. CNN

Here’s the headline:

Obama resembles Thomas Jefferson.  Gingrich channels John Adams.

Welcome to America. Polarized America that is.  Gone is the good ol’ Red, White and Blue America, now we’re down to only Red or Blue.  Everyone knows whether they live in a Red State or a Blue State.  When we’re in our cars, if we’re not listening to music, we listen to Red talk or Blue talk.  We read Blue newspapers or Red newspapers, but not both.  And of course, we watch Red news or Blue news on television. Oh, and by Red news I mean Fox News and by Blue News I mean CNN.  There’s no attempt at purple by either of the top two entertainment news networks.

shows the fox news logo I say entertainment news because that is largely what they have become.  They’re like real reality shows (can I say that without being redundant? again).   They take daily events and beam them out to their audiences filtered through their (red or blue) colored lenses.  If you take a snapshot of their websites you will see two completely different takes on the day’s events. Almost as if the networks themselves were in two different countries.  shows the cnn logo Now, some people today are disturbed by this.  They worry that you are getting your news skewed with one ideology or the other.  And you are.  They worry that the great majority of middle America is unaware of the situation.  And they are.  But mostly they worry that this causes a polarizing bias on both sides.  And it does.

Here’s the rub.  We Americans take our politics very very seriously.  We live it and breathe it.  But this polarization of the news is not news.  It isn’t even a new situation.  Fox didn’t invent it and neither did CNN.  Here’s where we do the look ahead – look back thing that I love to do.

I’ll bet that you would be surprised if I said that President Obama and Harry Reid have lots in common with Thomas Jefferson!  Don’t go sticking your tongue out yet (because you could easily step on it).  I’ll bet you’d be surprised by my suggestion that Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain bear some distinct resemblances to John Adams! OK, maybe those two ideas are a bit of a stretch.  But there is a huge connection here.  You see, the polarizing press has existed almost from the very beginning of our country.  And almost continually ever since.  Starting right with the Presidential election of 1800.  That election deserves a bigger place in our national memory bank.  It was the very first time that there were two candidates opposing each other.  Up until that, George Washington took two terms uncontested.  With Washington there was no need for political parties.  He was the unanimous choice of the electors.  BUT – starting with the Adams/Jefferson election there suddenly were parties.  With the parties came heated and divisive oratory on both sides.  AND this is where it gets really interesting – Adams and Jefferson both had newspapers that worked directly for them, that they actually funded!  The editors wrote the stories that they wanted written, and trashed the opposition the way that they wanted them trashed. In retrospect, Obama and Gingrich can’t hold a candle to Adams and Jefferson.  They’re literal (or literary) babes in the woods by comparison.  No, I don’t really believe that Obama resembles Jefferson.  Jefferson was so much more accomplished at the task.  And Gingrich, he kind of does resem…..  (forget that).  So the lineage of Fox and CNN goes back over 200 years.  It didn’t seem to damage the national psyche in the interim.  It most likely won’t damage it now either.  But in order to get a truly ‘fair and balanced’ portrayal of the world, you need to watch a little Red and a little Blue.  Or get yourself a pair of HD-3D multi-color reading glasses.

Diversity – good? or bad?

“Oft expectation fails…  and most oft where most it promises”          Helena – All’s Well that Ends Well               William Shakespeare

 

Do you have a pet cause?  An ideology that stirs you up?  Here’s a tip that will help you achieve your goal.  If you choose the terminology before your opponents do – you will be able to set the terms of the debate!  The naming rights here are just as important as they are for sports arenas.  If you’d like an example here’s one. Consider the abortion controversy. The first guys in were the “right to life” advocates. Of course that would leave their opponents with the “right to kill” moniker – not a name that would garner much popular support.  So the other guys counter with “pro-abortion” which is a much more gentle spin, but still not really the positive connotation that they could have gotten for their cause if they were first into the fray.  Round one always goes to the guys with the naming rights.

Here’s another example. A cause celeb in current events is the immigration debate.  The first guys in this battle were the people that want open borders.  Their banner is “Diversity”.  Now this group has done an outstanding job at setting the terms of the debate and they are hosting it on the Politically Correct playing field too.  It has become so PC in fact, that the people on the other side of the debate can’t even come up with a good name for their team!

“Diversity is strength”. I know you’ve heard that tagline. “Embrace everyone’s cultural background”.  How could you be against that?  You can see why the naming rights are so important.  You’d have to be a Neanderthal to argue against their terms, – a ‘right-to-kill’ sort. The diversity group has overwhelmed their nameless opposition with a deluge of these one-sided debates.  Now, in an effort to stay within the PC boundaries, I must state unequivocably that I am definitely not against immigration – from anywhere on the globe.  I embrace the cultural history of America as being the great “melting pot”.  This mixture of peoples and cultures was a part of our history from the very beginning.  Wanderers and adventurers from every other country have settled in America, and it is part of the reason why we have States and not just a singular “country” like every other government that came before us.  But the process of absorbing newer arrivals hasn’t always been easy.  In fact it has never been easy, either for the new arrivals or for the people that were already here.  But it always found a way to work itself out.  Even though everyone expected that the trials of becoming American were sometimes grueling, new people still came here, still saw America as the best hope for freedom in the world.  And after paying for the privilege they embraced the ideas of being American.  The end result was that we grew, we chugged along, we engaged the dreams of the entire world.

Then something changed.  We got soft-hearted.  Suddenly we wanted to make it easier for people.  Make their journey easier, make it “toll free”.  Since we are a free nation, everyone should be able to bring their cultures here as a free, but separate, group.  It’s called Diversity.  Today we are being told that keeping diversity makes us strong.  A forward thinking idea, except that if you have that expectation, it will fail where it promises most.

Once again we can learn from history (remember the whole premise of this blog site).  One example from history is still right in front of our eyes today.  It’s printed on the Seal of The United States.  There’s a little tagline written there – (albeit in Latin so you need to translate it) – E Pluribus Unum!  What, you don’t have latin, ok I’ll translate it for you – literally it is “Out of Many, One”.  Meaning UNITY.

e Pluribus Unum
the Great Seal of the United States

We took all of the states and UNITED them into The United States of America.  How long do you suppose that we would have existed as the Diverse States of America?

If you don’t let the other guy frame the debate, it is particularly easy to see that diversity is not strength, but a weakness.  More history coming – can you feel it? here it is –  Even the ancient Romans knew that diversity is weakness.  One of their favorite practices while they were conquering the western world was – DIVIDE and CONQUER.  They divided along the lines of diversity.  Caesar knew it and I’ll bet you knew it too.  I’ll also bet that the diversity side wouldn’t want you to make the association.  What all of this means is that we should still welcome all of the huddled masses from other places on the globe.  It really is quite enriching to embrace them.  But we should also require them to go through the same process as every other huddled mass before them.  In the end, in return for our embracing them, they need to embrace what being American is all about – It’s called being United!  ’When in Rome, do as the Romans do’.

Are numbers running the world?

It’s pretty evident that the world today is sliding quickly into one where numbers and accountants rule.  This is a problem.  Not that I don’t like accountants (although they’re mostly pretty boring), but I don’t want them to run my life.  Where did the “art” of life disappear to?  By art I don’t mean the fine arts, but those aspects of life that should be dominated by creativity and gut-feeling.  What will our culture look like when it’s completely gone.  Entire industries that were once the fountainheads of creativity are now the maidservants of accountancy.  It stifles invention and takes most of the fun out of life.  Witness the automobile industry.   Do you remember how exciting it was to see the new model year come out – to look at those designs – to “feel” the urge to have one in your driveway?  Can’t say that any more, can you?  Or how about Television.   A medium that could be a bastion of creativity – its immediate, its available everywhere, and everyone is addicted to it.  But Lo – somebody produced a cop show that focused on solving crimes by the scientific evidence.  One show – cool.  But now we have 51 shows just like it, on every channel and situated in every city!  So, more evidence of the domination of numbers over art.     …

send in your story about something or some part of life that is now run ‘by the numbers’……

to be continued …

Supercommittees.. Then and Now

“A Horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse!”   (King Richard)  William Shakespeare

AHH, the “Supercommittee”.  Rewind the clock six months, back to last summer, and you can watch most of our Congressmen and Senators climbing all over each other to get appointed to the Supercommittee that would be charged with finding ways to reduce our national deficit by $1.3 trillion.  That’s trillion with a “T”.  There are three truly astounding aspects of this process.  The first is that 1.3 TRILLION dollars is only a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend in this country.  The second is that everyone knows that if you want something to be left undone – appoint a committee to do it.  And third is that we could even dream of allowing the same people that are responsible for the mess in the first place to try to fix it.  It’s really mind-boggling (and I don’t mean the amount of money).  If they fail to reach any agreement then the consequences are disastrous for the ecnomy - but there are absolutely NO consequences of failure for the individual members of the committee.  No wonder every lawmaker wanted in, it’s a classic no-lose situation for them.  At the end of the scrum, twelve of the nations “finest” lawmakers were seated at this most prestigious table. As we can see, each had their own individual agenda and their own party agenda.

john kerry

Will anyone remember who this man is in 20 years?

But none of them had anything remotely resembling a national agenda – nothing, nada,  zippo.  How do I know this?  Because their game has ended.  The final buzzer has sounded on their game.  And the score is……Wait, not telling yet.  Humor me.

Rewind your clocks again – this time go back 224 years to the summer of 1787.  Take your time, I’ll wait, it’s a long rewind.  Follow me back to Philadelphia, in the sweltering heat.  The economies of the 13 individual free states (we weren’t really the United States of America yet) are on the brink of disaster.  The war had devastating effects and the states were all near bankruptcy.  So fifty guys get appointed to the second Continental Congress – 1787′s version of a Supercommittee.  They are charged with fixing things.  Things in the economy and things between the states.  Sound familiar?  Seems we’ve been here before (remember, one eye forward and one eye back).  That’s where the similarities end though.  These 50 committee members work throughout the summer, without air conditioning or running water.  They know the consequences if they are to fail.  It’s likely that the newborn country will die in its infancy.  They also know the consequences if they are to succeed.  It’s likely that each of them will have to give up some of their personal power and influence.  BUT – These 50 guys are STATESMEN!  So they wrangle and haggle, give and take, sweat and argue –  and they get it done.  They don’t just fix the problems with the economy, they create the Constitution and they create the United States of America in the process.  The results are even greater than the original task that we charged them with.  For many of them it signalled the end of their political power, because they created a republic that took away their power and invested it in the citizens.  They knew it was a possibility, but they also knew that the state they were saving was ultimately more important than their personal gain.  For others, they went home knowing that they didn’t achieve every goal for their individual state, but they also knew that their state would be the beneficiary of being part of a bigger country.

Does anyone need to be reminded who this man is? Can you tell the difference between a Statesman and a Politician?

This was their big game.  You might call it the very first national championship.  And when the final buzzer sounded in Philadelphia the score was Country 100 – Personal Ideology – 0.  A romp.  They crushed ‘em.

Now, to the future again, all the way back to November 2011, back where we started.  When we left it last, we were looking for the final score of our game.  We gave our 12 guys through the end of November to come up with some answers to avert an economic disaster.  The result:  Nothing.  No progress, no plan.  None of them – not even one – could put their country in front of their personal agenda.  Think of it this way, on a committee with those other weak players if even 1 guy had any strength or statemanship in him, he could have carried the team.  But we employ 535 unskilled lawmakers between the House and Senate.  They have walked away from what may be the greatest responsibility of their lifetimes, without so much as an apology to us.  They have failed us and they fully expect that they will suffer no ill effects from doing so.  These guys will come to you looking to extend their overpriced contracts next year.  Underachievers, all of them.  So when they do come to you for votes, remember this:  no runs, no hits, no score.  Nobody even got on base.  Final Score Country 0 – Personal Ideology – 100.  We got crushed this time!

 

It’s Election Season Again…

‘Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct’

Thomas Jefferson – regarding politicians.

 

The politicians are at it again, although they never really stop, do they?  It’s stumping time in the USA and this time they are rising to new lows.  And I mean ALL of them too, the ins and the outs.  You can expect to weather a storm of politico troopers on TV and radio and newspapers this election.  The out-front topic that beats all of the others this election cycle is JOBS.  You see, jobs are tight, and for them it’s a matter of keeping their jobs, or getting the other guy’s job, or getting their old job back – in no way shape or form are any of their platforms based on OUR jobs!  Funny how NONE of them are ever seen working at real-life jobs.  Like the dad on Leave It to Beaver, they leave home in the morning, and come home at night, but no one knows where they’ve been all day – especially the outs.  Actually that makes them more akin to mosquitoes (and by the way – where do all the mosquitoes go during the daytime?). They all talk about jobs, the general public’s job, but they never directly mention their own job.  It strikes me as just a little bit unusual that the entire class of politicos, who spend 100% of every day talking about themselves, feel the need to dance ever so delicately around the subject of their employment status.  So every time you hear one of them talking you should get out your ‘Politician-to-English’ dictionary and you’ll find that it translates every phrase into – “hey, I need this job because I’m not qualified to do anything else” followed by a lengthy stream of blah blah blahs (which is every other translation in that dictionary).  That’s it, plain and simple.  No matter what sounds their lips are making they’re really pleading for a job, and not actually trying to help you get a job.  And that’s exactly why we’ll see way too much of them this time – jobs are tougher to get this year.

He can compress the most words into the smallest ideas of any man I ever met.’  

Abraham Lincoln – regarding a politician.

So back to my original point – how did they rise to new lows?  Each election cycle they all seem argue over one major topic.  Some years it is foreign affairs, some years it is education, and this year – wait for it – they are all talking about – you guessed it the “Economy” (remember that means THEIR jobs).  Now someone on one side made up a slogan for their team of  “no more taxes” which, when translated = “ I need the job”.  And the other side quickly counter attacked with the retort “ the wealthy should pay their fair share  translated =  “I need the job” (if you’ve been looking these up in your P-to-E dictionary, then you’re starting to get the hang of it.

Sounds like the basis of a healthy debate, right?  Wrong.  Here’s the downside for us.  By deciding to use this topic for their job-hunting purposes, the one side has alienated all of the people that don’t pay taxes. The other side has alienated all the people that feel that they already pay for everything.  They’ve created a nice little case of class-warfare, and that is very dangerous for all of us.  Unfortunately most of the general public gets worked up into a lather listening to all of this.  We forget that they are just using us to get their jobs.  And the news media won’t remind us of that either, because their jobs also depend on the opposing sides doing battle.  The citizens lose the class-warfare battle every time, no matter which side they’re on.  Check it out in the history books.  French Revolution, Russian Revolution, etc. etc.

Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear just one Politico stand up proud, throw away his Politico-to-English dictionary, and tell us “ Hey guys I really need the job – and by the way” (in English now) – “I think that the country would be better off if we could get some new ideas that will make our economy grow FOR EVERYONE.” And then follow that up with “I’m not 100% sure how we’re gonna do it, but I’m going to spend my days finding some smart people that have some new ideas”.  Straight English – no translation- honest about his or her abilities.  Refreshing – yes.  Possible – no way.  Until we the people realize how the politicos conduct their job searches.  Instead of ballots why don’t we just give them all applications to fill out?