Double-dutch, Double dumb

By

Sarge

Barack Obama, in true form and ready recognition he never had a thought wasn’t given to him by an underpaid staff writer, read the Teleprompted State of the Union Address (SOTU) to the nation Tuesday night. It was jingoism (an appeal intended to arouse patriotic emotions) and doublespeak reminiscent of Orwell’s 1984.

A Republican Party film showed the glaring repetition of Obama in past, and now latest, SOTU addressing the same hackneyed issues in the same hackneyed language over the last three years. In a side by side comparison of rhetoric we find Obama isn’t getting more bang for our buck but he is getting more obvious in his lack of competence. We wonder if the Republican National Committee (RNC) has a ringer in the writer’s bullpen. The redundancy was a point of comedic energy for tele-pundits and media alike. For the American people it was a statement and argument for disaffection.

The statement of needing to be fair in our efforts has always been of interest. Who decides what’s fair? What parameters are set for the measurement of fairness?  If it’s fair today and you have new individuals taking advantage of something tomorrow is it still fair if it doesn’t fit their needs? Just what the heck IS fair?

The answer of truth, justice and true Americanism: there is NOTHING that’s fair? It’s only perceptual and specific to the individual as to what is equitable or inequitable for his purposes. So where does Obama come off saying he knows it’s fair to take my rewards for hard work and give the benefits to somebody not matching my work ethic? It all comes from the ethically challenged theories of socialist sharing of the wealth.

But in reality it’s like lowering test scores, or my favorite, not keeping score because it might damage the self-esteem of the participants to have it noted their production efforts draw suction. You dumb the system downward until everybody remains an equally lower achiever than they might have become if they were allowed to honestly compete to be the best they could become.

This is how the proletariat rises to the estate of the bourgeoisie they seek to replace. Individualism is sacrificed for the equality of the masses. Liberte’, Egalite’, fraternite’ ou morte: (liberty, equality, brotherhood or death) is the state motto of France. Obama seems dedicated to following socialist egalitarianism as he drives our economic status underground with a liberal application of Socialist Grecian Formulary they so desperately are following toward their own destruction.

The heavy usage of cliché’ is becoming desperate. He’s kicked the “can down the road” while watching “bi-partisan” efforts being damaged by people “playing politics” for “personal gain” and other such trite little dribblings of tripe. In fairness his opponents are equally as desperate when they display this annoying garbage. They’ve even taken to “doubling-down” as though this is some sort of poker game they’re playing with OUR assets they mistake for their own.

But we expect more from a SOTU Address. At one time SOTU was a statement of the relative health of our nation and its efforts at growth, prosperity and leadership in all worlds economic, political and ethical. Now it’s a time when a sitting resident of the oval office gets to informally announce his reelection campaign. The speaker is disingenuous, the verbiage is vapid and the message is repetitive with nearly exact quotes being re-fried until they carry the integrity of the beans they so closely emulate. That message spoken of earlier has all the gaseous power points of the beans in this beef-less burrito we’re forced to endure choking down annually.

The SOTU has become a form of Double-Dutch, an elaborately orchestrated and choreographed form of rope-skipping where the competitors dance, gymnastically leap and posture while skipping rope to a rhythmic chant or song. It’s fantastic and seemingly impossible to replicate by such as we are, old folks. But it sure is neat to watch when it’s done correctly.

Unfortunately, this form of double-dutch isn’t all that much fun to watch. But it does show Obama is good at putting on a song and dance routine.

Thanks for listening

Technocratic babble

By

Sarge

Michael Walker-Jones, the Director of the Louisiana Association of Educators opposes the educational programs backed by Bobby Jindal. Bobby Jindal says it’s: “incredibly offensive and exactly what is wrong with the top-down approach."

There are other ways to say this however and this writer has no problem with being somewhat less diplomatic: Mr. Walker-Jones, you’re a schnook. You’re a Technocrat spewing the babble of the loser justifying the lack of substance in his argument.

Your statement people in poverty are too heavily stressed to educate themselves on issues concerning school choice and the selective direction of their elected officials is revolting. We must move education from the basement of accomplishment under the guidance of the Louisiana Association of Educators and others like it.

It’s always interesting to note whenever a well-to-do union representative speaks on an issue the rhetoric always proclaims the people they represent know best what’s good for schools. They know what’s best for teachers, what’s best for administrators: but none seem to expend more than the intestinal gas they pass when speaking about what’s best for the students.

Mr. Walker-Jones, I’m sure you’re a very well educated man. You know much about systems and logical applications of those systems’ to see they’re used according to the goals the systems pursue. But there’s something neither you nor any other member of your union or the people you represent can KNOW: that would be what’s BEST for my child. He’s my kid, not yours.

You have theoretical dissertations and statistics to back up your arguments. But, you don’t know the individual child and I suspect couldn’t care a whit about an individual child other than your own because you represent teachers not students. You’re a labor union representative and it’s been shown over the course of history unions represent dues paying people, not individuals. And, I will say this with NO caring for your feelings; you know NOTHING about what’s best for my child. That’s an ignorance you fly like a battle standard daily: the emblematic standard of Technocratic absurdity makes you and yours believe you’re superior to me and mine.

You are not superior. Your knowledge is based on statistics developed by others bearing your same theories as truth. That’s not truth. It’s the statistical compilation of selected facts supporting a theory I and others believe is totally your self-serving, meritless stance on subjects affecting you and yours only. For every statistically buttressed argument you develop I know of at least one of opposing polarity to argue against your stance on any issue. For me and mine it represents truth based on interaction with those needing of representation-our children.

Our kids are “hot-button”. They’re our emotional and real responsibilities; not mere tools to be used for leverage and emotional impact as you and yours Mr. Walker-Jones, seek the upper hand in any particular negotiation. Your stances (as presented before us, the voter/parents you seek to lobby against) are disingenuous at best and outright insulting in reality. You, your stance on this matter and the manner in which you present your argument are not only specious and dishonest; they conceal your agenda which is to benefit your clientele over the needs of the children.

Mr. Walker-Jones, you said, "If I'm a parent in poverty I have no clue because I'm trying to struggle and live day to day." One thing I know; that impoverished parent cares more about their kid than you do.

The fact is you have no more right to represent knowing what an impoverished parent thinks than the man in the moon. Your suit cost more than what many welfare recipients and retirees were paid last month; and you’ll pretend to speak for the impoverished? Your patronizing represents the haughty, superfluous stance you represent.

We represent our children’s needs as we see those needs each day; not merely when our dues paying members feel threatened by accountability and the removal of self-serving tenure ensuring the incompetent can remain entrenched in jobs they’re not qualified to fill.

Mr. Walker-Jones, you insult the intelligence of every parent in this state with your technocratic babble and elitist posturing.

Go away.

Thanks for listening

Paste masquerading

By

Sarge

In the mind of some seeking to understand people running for high public office, the discussion of carat count as it applies to diamonds might be an apt analogy when considering a choice for office. The 5 Cs of diamonds are: Certification, Carat count, Clarity, Color and Cut. They have equivalencies in the sense of a candidate’s 5Cs: Character, Conscience, Courage, Competence and Compassion. So let’s take a look at the comparisons.

Each GOP Candidate and Barack Obama is certifiable as politicians. They have career trajectories measurable (in some cases) in numbers approaching dog years: 7 to 1 or more. The career element of these men is a major defining aspect as it applies to their experience in the jobs they’ve held. None of them barring Barack Obama has less than ten years in the political realm. Obama was a first term Senator when he chose to run. Gingrich is a former Speaker of the House. Romney is a former Governor and Santorum was as Senator. Ron Paul has been in the House of Representatives since John Jay was a law clerk. There’s that much experience there to judge.

Next we must consider Clarity which is in correspondence in some ways to Courage. These people must show a certain courageous willingness to stand on their principles and to advertise them as acceptable and necessary for the advancement of their agendas. It takes courage to take a stand and adhere to it. Romney has a problem in that he has a glaring history of flipping after flopping on so many issues he’s been described as a weathervane with ADHD. Gingrich has a history of waffling on issues and is believed by some to be an opportunistic dilettante moving whichever way he sees fit to assure his personal course stays intact. Santorum doesn’t have the checkered history of Romney or Gingrich but he doesn’t have the longevity of either of them. Ron Paul, though a perennial candidate has seemingly stood fast by his ethics and platform for years.

Then there’s the issue of character. Gingrich has the tediously described “baggage” of past marital issues. Is he somebody with the character necessary to best represent America? Simply saying you asked God for forgiveness doesn’t mean you got it or deserve it from the people you’re asking to vote for you. Does Romney deserve it in light of his ability to change his position based on what looks best for him at the moment? What’s that say about his character? Santorum has, so far stuck by his conservative rhetoric and Paul is still hanging in on his stated beliefs.

Competence is a really important element of the program. How many of these people have actually tried to run a country before? Being governor of a state is close but no cigar is given because it’s just not the same. There’s NO foreign policy element to consider on the basis of state’s public relations. Issues of budget and international relations don’t equate to Speaker, Representative or Senator. They’re only peripherally part of the participatory act of the individual; not the full time job. Anybody can kibbutz and Monday morning quarterback.

Next comes compassion and there the element takes a turn. Compassion applies to more than feeling for those less fortunate. It also involves the concepts of ethics, moral codes and definitions of morality. When does expedience take precedence over truth and the steadfast adherence to a recognizable standard of behavior? Where does expedience supersede telling the truth and doing what’s right as opposed to what you can get away with? The moral aspect defines the character of the person being scrutinized. Conscience draws down the parameters of a person’s social contract and his/her willingness to remain ethical over self-serving. How soon can a person sell-out Americans to advance a political position?

Americans place a high value on the character of their candidates. If there is a candidate says he’s born again, many accept it outright. Who would lie about such a thing?

Politicians would; in a heartbeat.

That’s why we need to quantify and inspect the 5Cs of the candidates. Some are paste masquerading as jewels.

Thanks for listening

Panderers

by

Sarge

When campaigns are conducted it’s virtually impossible to discount the affect the media has on the candidates and the issues. The Press (both print and broadcast media) has the effect of helping the candidates to construct and destroy edifices. These false fronts are where they posture and preen so they can create more false fronts to present to the American people. The media constructs the silk screen the candidates hide behind with strategically placed holes through which they’ll sneak a peek. They report what they see from a limited viewpoint.

All Presidential candidates have a percentage of their character base centered in their narcissism. They love themselves so much and want to share it with us – the voters. The problem is the go-between for this illicit love affair is the pandering action of the media. They meet us in the shadowy side-streets of a campaign and report what they believe we want to hear. The liberals have their panderers: MSNBC, CBS, NBC, The New York Times, The L.A. Times etc.

The conservatives have FOX, The Washington Times, the various conservative blogs and internet sites catering to the desire for more traditional forms of government, and reminiscences of the “good old days”. Each effort put across by the panderer is to get you to recognize your fantasy and their ability to produce what you want in the body of the candidate they find most favorable, at the moment. Sometimes truth works; other times it’s a lie, a form of misdirection because they have an agenda of their own.

Panderers have no loyalty to anybody other than themselves. They’ll sacrifice, at the drop of a hat, their prime money-maker for the sake of new talent. You must only pay attention to the roller-coaster ride a national campaign represents to see the ups and downs of any particular candidate and how he/she fares in polls and/or primary results. Like sharks the media pick-off the weakness of the candidates floundering in the surf while nurturing the remora (sucker-fish) living off the waste given them by the shark.

It’s a parasitic relationship feeding off of headlines. Headlines are what get readers/viewers. Lead stories require controversy to titillate and entice the audience to buy their wares. Selling their wares ensures the growth of their advertising dollars and increases their monetary solvency. Truth, innuendoes, lies, suspicions and fabrications have no barriers between them and the truth for some in the media. The format used in framing a question can be either negative or positive dependent upon the needs of the reporter. The greatest ally of a reporter is the candidates’ own narcissism; their overwhelming self-love and self-centering is prey for the opportunistic in the gallery.

Mitt Romney, for a while, was the candidate of greatest expectation. He’s been running so long he’s catching up to Ron Paul as a caricature of the perennial candidate. He’s nearly become a redundancy as much as others before him. But when the combative element of Newt Gingrich’s personality exerted itself, the media started the near magnetic attraction they have for controversy. He’s a multi-time philanderer and a Speaker of the House rejected by his own party at one time.  He’s a self-centered lexicographer, a student of the lexical component of language crafting words and pithy statements to attract audiences and push them toward his agendas. He’s cotton topped geriatric Obama.

He and the media work well together - for the moment.

But this is a matter of comparison, a place where one camp lays claim to a shoreline on the Rubicon, a point of crossing over, a place where commitment becomes solidified. After they cross it, there’s no turning back. One has to wonder how much of a push either candidate gets from the panderers pulling the connective strings makes them dance.

No matter the candidate: Obama v. Gingrich/Romney/Paul, the media will be pandering to the prurient desires of the American people to watch a candidate’s destruction and possibly the ascendancy of their favorite son in the contest.

The winner doesn’t matter; the media will have a guiding role in the selection of the platform these strange bedfellows lay on together.

Thanks for listening

Reporting the lie

By

Sarge

One of the things I deplore most about politics, a professional populated by legumes and nuts, is the relative absence of fruits and vegetables.

I hear the dull thud of jaws hitting the floor. “Hunh?”

In the old days, political campaigns (when rhetorical oratory involved the shoveling of dogma and doctrine) were occasionally punctuated by the feelings of the electorate as they threw overripe apples and oranges, rotten tomatoes and eggs as well as anything else a pig could pass after a night of revelry in the swill at the candidate. This festival of garbage laden reverie really got the message across to the candidate as to how well he was, or wasn’t doing in the polls. The full impact of the message was in the immediacy of the report given. The strength of the protest was noted in the odor given off by the rotting fruit or veggie.

In recent history, a certain legislator shouted out, from the gallery at the Capitol, that Barack Obama was speaking lies. The offender was blasted for his lack of decorum (modesty, propriety or tact) and his lack of deference (respect, reverence or submissiveness).

Question: why? Must we show deference to a man we believe to be a liar? Must we show reverence admiration, devotion and (what they want most) worship toward people wanting acceptance as modern gods? The guy’s the first Half-black/Half-white person elected to the presidency. So what? That distinction doesn’t elevate his rhetoric to the equivalent of a Papal Bull. It means he’s human, fallible and thus, worthy of criticism. And if an elected representative sees a lie; I pay him to report the lie and unmask the liar whether the liar holds high office or not.

This man challenging Obama held my respect for about one (1) day. Then he caved to the pressures of people covering their own posteriors. He apologized. Why must we sacrifice our principles in order to get along by going along with the same lie? Obama is not deserving of either deference or worship.

We’ve developed language to the point of approaching perfection. We’ve also developed colloquial, conversational words to “soften” the impact and temper their appearance of combativeness. Disingenuous means dishonest and insincere where the desire is to call the liar out of the shadows and hold him accountable. Obstructionism is referred to where we’re trying to point out a politician is hiding his wrong-doing. But it sounds better than “liar, liar, pants on fire”. It soothes the potential boo-boos where hemorrhaging gushes the limited credibility of the liar into a pool at the base of the podium. We mustn’t be thought of as intransigent and unyielding. If we want to be honored, we must show honor. What goes around comes around.

Do we need any more cliché’s?

Ambrose Bierce’s Devil’s Dictionary defines a politician as: n. an eel in the fundamental mud upon which the superstructure of organized society is reared. When he wriggles he mistakes the agitation of his tail for the trembling of the edifice. We must take their existence with a grain of salt to begin with and a mountain of it at their belief we’re as stupid as they think we are.

In Bierce’s time rhetoric was immediately challenged and placed in context by the opposition. There were numerous “high-falutin” speeches and the sound of every pulpit being pounded by men no more pious than the snake tempted Eve. When the populace needed a quick and sure way to get the message across they weren’t happy with the performance; out came the fruit salad missiles and vegetarian projectiles. It was in this way the politician understood full-well he was transparent to the masses. The message was immediate, personal and easily understood: “We’re on to you!”

This was followed by a resounding splat as a rotten egg impacted where they stood. The indignity of the assault was bad enough; but the cloying odor and permanent staining of the egg lasted longer to allow the message to sink in fully.

Boy! I miss the good old days because nobody really gets the message until it affects them personally.

Thanks for listening

Eating the shrapnel

By

Sarge

Keystone (n): A central stone at the summit of an arch, locking the whole together. The central principle or part of a policy, system, etc., on which all else depends.

Pennsylvania’s motto is: The Keystone State. This is because of its fundamental importance to the colonies as an entity in the in the 1600s. It was a center for commerce, energy production and became the site of the fledgling United States’ capitol and seat of government for a short period of time. Its symbol is the Keystone as it’s represented in the construction of bridge or structure supporting an arched doorway.

The Keystone is more than an emblem; it’s representative of its ability to create the solidity and solidarity of its link holding things together passively, yet dynamically when used properly. It accepts the pressures exerted by opposing forces and spreads the load responsibility BACK toward its genesis. If you want to understand what it looks like look at the front of a popular brand of ketchup.

Barack Obama has decided to NOT permit the Keystone XL Pipeline project. This is sad. This is regrettable. This is a STUPID act committed by a STUPID man proclaiming his STUPID dogma takes precedence over men and women needing jobs. It’s proof positive this STUPID presidential imposter has NO idea how to produce jobs.

We endure his lack of leadership in an economy showing all the signs of an 1812 warship trying to combat a 21^st Century Aircraft carrier: it’s sluggishly slow, it’s technocratically inferior and its inability to compete is quickly becoming evident as the seas of world economic contest grow more and more hazardous. As he tries so hard to emulate the tragedy of European economic policy, any and all efforts to launch lifeboats are quashed because this guy thinks he walks on water so we all should be able to. His political posturing for a weather gauge is moving this windjammer across the bow of disaster.

The Keystone XL program would have produced hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs for Americans particularly challenged by Obama’s poorly crafted economic policies and ignorance of their failing implementation. Jobs would have been created on both sides of the U.S. / Canadian border. The economy would have improved. The people supported it. The unions supported it. Republicans supported it.

But Obama wanted to appease his tree-hugger complainants and advance HIS agenda. He catered to the whims of people believing the program would be bad for the environment. It’s true; it’s going to be really bad for the political environment he and his opponents dwell in, covers pulled tightly over their heads, so as not to be aware of the economic perils lurking under the bed they’ve all decided they want to share: partisan politics.

Remember that line in the first full paragraph: “…it accepts the pressures exerted by opposing forces and spreads the load responsibility BACK toward its genesis”. This will prove true because the cowards running the Republican Party have kowtowed to the petulant whims of this reality challenged theorist so they could posture as being the people’s true representatives.

John Boehner has dropped his speaking voice a little deeper into the well so it almost sounds sincere when he says the Keystone Project may be moved to China; and he says that’s a bad thing.

NO Spit (sic) John. What did you do to help keep it here? What did you and the Republicans do with a spoiled brat political adolescent holding a hand-grenade daring you to do something? Did you pull the trigger and stop him. Or did you wait as he sat idly by and waited until you Republicans attached a rider to a bill needing approval just so they could say you got one over on the opposition.

He pulled the pin and BANG! now America eats the shrapnel. Some protector you Republicans are. Petty political parasites lurk on both sides of the aisle. You deserve derision and disgust.

These pressures WILL be exerted backward AGAINST BOTH opposing forces to spread the load responsibility BACK toward its genesis.

Concerned citizens in this country will see to it you dumb basses.

Thanks for listening

SOPA meets PIPA

By

Sarge

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA and the Protect IP (Internet Provider Act (PIPA) are bad ideas. Congress is worried about Hollywood and writers losing billions of dollars to on-line piracy.

The issue’s important for people sincerely worried about having their intellectual property stolen, used without permission and profited from by people having no connection to its production. A couple of nefarious keystrokes result in the theft of personally developed ideas. The genuine producer loses income. Movies are pirated regularly amounting to billions of dollars lost.

My son’s a “Coder”, a computer programmer. His thought process is hardwired to the production of a product bearing the copyrighted proof of his expertise. It’s the foundational aspect of his ability to produce a quality product for his company’s customers. It’s the integrity of that thought process solidifies his resume’. What he does today assures proof of what he can do again tomorrow. He’s very jealous of his copyrights – that’s why they call it “coding”; it’s secretive and privileged information both personally and in distribution.

This column’s copyrighted. It’s mine. I loan it to the publication for dissemination. But, I own the copyright and anybody looking to: steal my thoughts, the way I lay them out before you and the stance I take on issues are mine and mine alone to profit from. Unless I give specific licensed permission to use them for other purposes they run the risk of being sued.

Now the government; you know, those guys brought you the Patriot Act, the TSA and the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover want to legislate the nationalized control of an operation with an international reach. They want permission to shut down what they feel are illegal sites based both here, and in other countries. Because they can’t gain judgments against everybody internationally, they can only seek recourse by shutting down the offenders’ sites before they’re accepted by American ISPs (Internet Service Providers).

Keep in mind this is to be done by a group of people who can’t define pornography but want to decide what is theft, illegal copyright infringement and theft and then bring the culprits to stand before the bar of American Justice. Nice thought, but it’s unenforceable against anybody but American pirates and people not pirating anything but potentially, simply disagreeing with some political dogma.

To understand the fears concerning SOPA and PIPA we need look no further than this past year’s “Arab Spring”. The first thing the government under siege did when threatened was shut down the internet. This controlled, curtailed and squashed world-wide awareness of historical events as they developed. The immediacy of the horrors unfolding was stunted initially but overcome when reporters could get to freely operating internet services to transmit the images and commentary.

Don’t tell me this can’t happen here. In a country once freely disposed to freedom of speech we see more and more efforts to control the dissemination of information. The Press is polarized into left and right factions. Commentary is readily rebutted by the other side because of the self-service sought by greedy publishers seeking an audience best suited to give them more money. Politicians seek greater power and there is no greater power than to control the collective thought processes of the people. Ask Hitler. Ask Stalin. Ask Mao. People speaking their minds are vilified and shouted down in public and, now conceivably in Cyberspace.

The Chinese have, in the past, blatantly shut-down GOOGLE there because Chinese dissidents used the internet to report human rights violations. GOOGLE reached an agreement with China to continue offering a censored and diluted product.

Who decides what’s objectionable? Who decides which cases have merit? Who decides when to pull the plug on a site? What are the criteria? Just losing money isn’t enough – we have civil law suits for that.

Remember; all the while you hunt the wolf; he hunts you. You could be the next to suffer some bureaucrat’s knee-jerk reaction to a perceived slight.

I know personally how badly loss of copyright sucks. But loss of the rights to read controversial copy and ideas sucks worse. It’s CENSORSHIP. It’s a bad thing.

Thanks for listening

Pulling the weeds

By

Sarge

This is one of those days where yesterday’s events stimulate my aggravation intolerance program. I despise some people’s tendency for seeking the spotlight when other guerrillas in the mist need shadow to function best. As the self-possessed hero jumps from protective cover so all can see his splendid cape and tights, he runs the risk of giving away the hidden agenda and placement of his comrades. In their own way they self-inflict wounds (and possibly kill their efforts) by “friendly fire”.

One of the top ten elements of Murphy’s Law of Combat is: “Friendly fire ain’t…” (You’re still wounded and bleeding stupid!)

It’s nauseating to note the GOP debates and peacock-like prancing of the primary candidates are doing their best to indelibly etch the participants’ pettiness into the psyche of those they need most to achieve their goals and direct their agenda.

I’m a member of an organization. Whether I stay a member is questionable and it’s not because I got my feelings hurt and want to pick up the ball and go home. It’s because I’ve watched organizations of great value die of self-inflicted wounds while trying to figure out why they’re becoming ineffectual in their efforts.

Internal wrangling and contention are the two biggest killers of grassroots organizations. Grassroots organizations amass small groups of individuals seeking to increase the volume of their community voice to better their lot in society. Unfortunately, with organization we create a society in microcosm; a society with all the problems and glitches of larger social orders because they’re both composed of people. People are aggravating and moreso for their inequality.

The natural order of things means there’s a matter of natural compensation takes place. Deaf people have increased smell sensitivity. The sightless may hear better than others. Sometimes the infirmity causes an adaptation bringing the balance closer to reality for the person’s survival.  

Unfortunately, in organizations, it seems the more challenged the person is in personal relationships the louder their voice. They become more crude and rude in their conduct with those they see as less than they are. They accept this as their right and entitlement. Their alleged superiority belies the reality of their lower self-esteem. This can become calamitous. The interaction necessary to attain agendas and gain our goals is strained at best and non-existent at worst.

Do you want to do your best for somebody considers you inferior?

How can you accomplish anything if there’s only voice heard with one person’s point of view? Governmental problems are panoramic. They cover broad expanses of human relations, experiential diversity, greater and lesser talents in specific areas of expertise. There’s always more than one way to get to any destination. There’s more than one way to interpret the findings of a study or experiment.

It’s imperative a choice be made when it comes to reaching a final resolution. The stand must be sure, solid and steady in its presentation. But the one thing needs to be remembered is THERE IS NO ONE MAN, WOMAN OR CHILD ON THIS PLANET KNOWS IT ALL! No matter how much they think they know they’re not gods placed here to guide us with their omnipotent knowledge and paternalism.

The greatest threat to any organization is its membership. The cult of personality is dangerous; ask anybody ever heard of Charles Manson. You’ll see where misguided actions take the ultimate wrong-turn. The various other factions claiming they alone had the answers to all of life’s questions have come and gone like badly scented whispers on the wind. You know something was there but can’t remember what it stood for other than resulting in its own disastrous demise. Many times the destruction of a good group thought occurs with no real danger to society. But the problem in that case isn’t in the death of the endeavor; it’s the fact the endeavor never got the chance to grow to fruition.

More great gardens have never been known because of the mistakes and mismanagement of a self-centered, know-it-all gardener refusing to take advice from and listen politely to his peers.

Maybe I’m the weed needs pulling; but I think not.

Thanks for listening

Beer and brats

By

Sarge

As this is written we celebrate Martin Luther King’s Birthday as a Federal holiday. That means federal employees (other than those in the military) have the day off with pay. Now, because I’ve invoked the name of the patron saint of progressive politicians seeking to secure specific voter blocs, I stand ready to be clobbered for what comes next.

Why are we celebrating this?

Why do people celebrate the lives (and allegedly, reflectively mourn the deaths) of any and all personal heroes while assuring they get the benefits without really attending to the memorial aspects of the day?  I mean; just because you spend thirty minutes at a MLK (or President’s Day or Labor Day or any of the other dozen or so holidays) ceremony why should you be allowed to get paid to do nothing? The Federal government is effectively shut-down by the loss of (for no good reason) millions of daily man-hours. And we do this by Congressional acclamation. (Is that a clue?)

The most ironic declaration is Labor Day. All labor stops and the sacrifice of miscellaneous animal lifeforms, supported by the consumption of millions of gallons of potent potables (alcoholic beverages) become the bacchanalian festival of the masses. Okay – for the people who DON”T want to run to a dictionary: we all get stuffed with hot-dogs, burgers, beer and booze and forget the solemnity of the holiday du jour.

Holiday comes from the words: HOLY and DAY. These were days of religiously mandated solemnity to observe some form of sacrifice made by some ancient guy or gal who was snuffed by a barbarian or such nastiness.  Maybe they performed some miracles or something. Whatever.

The time was meant to be an earnest recognition of the sacrifice of the dead guy/gal and a time to make offerings to God to keep their credit lines as well as those of the good people offering the sacrifices. Today we sacrifice the flesh of the heated dog in lieu of Isaac’s effort to please his god by Isaac killing his son. Instead of praising a deity for delivery to a land of milk and honey we offer a mountain of dead soldiers (booze bottles) and beer can caskets filled with the belchy odor of stale brew.

Instead of sitting in solitude and reading, then contemplating and reflecting on the word of our personal deity, we watch TV sports, Cable TV game shows and pass gas in recognition of the feast we’ve enjoyed. I think God must be shaking his head at times wondering if he really wants to return on the eighth day. If he does I fear it won’t be for “beer n’ brats”.

So; for you people thinking I’m being a jerk because I asked about Martin Luther King Day, please rest assured I hold equivalent disdain for the manner we “celebrate” all of our national holidays. We waste our time while we’re on the job (American productivity is suffering the same malaise as the economy. Funny how that works out isn’t it? It’s seems like they’re almost connected doesn’t it?) then jump at the chance to spend more time away from work so we can medicate our depressing inertia.

Nobody ever lost an election because they supported a new national holiday. We already know Congress can mismanage their time better than any other body in the universe. If the Big Bang was controlled by Congress we’d still be waiting for the fuze to burn down because they postponed the bang in favor of a congressional recess. They grandiosely promote the size of the coming explosion but always put it off as long as they can; then it’s like a muted popcorn putz in a full bathtub. You don’t get much bang for the buck.

So in an effort to understand better what we’re doing I ask again: why do we do this? I don’t believe we need: Inauguration Day, Presidents’ Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day (I am one so cool it! We already have Memorial Day) and any other specific State Holidays designed to capture and assuage undisclosed, undiscovered voter prejudices either.

This country has enough problems without legalizing sloth, gluttony and laziness.

Thanks for listening

Opening the artery

By

Sarge

The other day Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas Governor, political analyst and heavyweight presidential candidate/contender in the last election said where Iowa was a boxing match South Carolina was a “Cage Match”. He was alluding to the relative savagery of the candidates’ use of character assassination as a viable tactic in the primaries.

It appears he isn’t prone to understatement. Watching Newt Gingrich attack Mitt Romney (and vice versa) is comparable to watching a shark with a seal pup in light surf. The attacks are brutal, without mercy and designed to draw as much blood as possible in the shortest amount of time. It’s only fair to note Romney’s Super-Pac people started it all with their attempted evisceration or near surgical removal of Gingrich’s organs of character reference. It may have been minor surgery. They sliced away all pretense of civility they may or may not have found in him. Their bold-faced attempt at rendering him valueless was an act of futility as he’s come back at Romney with a vengeance.

People are watching. Those people avoiding residence in either camp (or normally referred to as independent or undecided) are losing their indecisiveness. And, that’s not a good thing because the feeling may be: “if you (name a candidate) know your opponent best as a fool and a liar; and he says the same about you – why should I vote for either of you”?

These men are assuring the electoral waters are as poisonous as they can in the shortest period of time necessary. The Democratic Party has developed more ammunition to combat the eventual Republican candidate than could ever be hoped for usually. The interesting part is the fact each candidate minimizes their actions’ impact by saying “it’s all a part of the process”.

It’s noted there is NO sincerity in political endeavor. These people practice their particular brand of political homicide with hopes nobody will care once the final cut’s had its impact. Unfortunately the presidency relies on at least the appearance of personal integrity in the person winning the office. These guys don’t feign any knowledge of what personal integrity is at times. The attacks are loud, embarrassing (for both sides) and relentless as it appears now.

This debacle detracts from an examination of any particular issues affecting the American people. It’s all about the individuals and what’s wrong with them. From the way these guys attack each other (as opposed to their Democratic Party opponents) you’d think open battle wasn’t so much a primary necessity as it is a blood sport they adore. If that’s the case then practice looks like it makes perfect.

Where Gingrich, Romney, Paul, Perry and Santorum have little organizations digging up the dirt and finding better ways to articulate the nastiness of the stains; the Democrats are taking notes. They’re also figuring out how to use it against the one chosen to oppose them.

Obama placed a clarion call to America for transparency. It was a lie unless you consider it’s being used against the Republican machine. It’s crystal clear the Republican Party is composed of a group of people having no idea what they’re doing. They surely have no idea of how to make a good impression.

Politics is contentious. Politics is confrontational. But politics have an impact on so much in this country and the world it’s difficult to accept our allegedly “best” political minds and contenders for leadership of the free world are no more than spoiled brats squabbling in differing venues for the right to be ineffectual as well as ineffective. It’s as though they thrive on shame but don’t know they should be shamefaced. They expect absolution for their increasingly disgraceful notoriety.

Decorum is a state of grace exhibited by statesmen. It is a necessary deportment the leaders of the free world need to be practiced at exhibiting at all times. Childish petulance is a downer and can lead to a diminishment of a nation’s standing in the world theater.

Each camp appears to have opened an artery from which their credibility is hemorrhaging. These clowns need to understand all of this. Now

Thanks for listening

Obama’s gambling problem

By

Sarge

Success isn’t always part of “Free” Enterprise or Capitalism when practiced by the Federal government. A look at Solyndra shows the incompetence of the administration where it pertains to gambling your taxes away as investment capital.

When a person decides he/she has an idea for a business he forges the links of entrepreneurship. This is where he does the research, crunches the numbers and develops the path he’ll follow to give birth to his dreams of operating his own business and possibly employ others. He could impact local, state, regional and maybe even the national economies. It’s a thrill many people experience each year. Some succeed. Others fail.

That’s where the element of Risk enters into a volatile equation only the market can determine the outcome of for the business. Risk is the potential of a chosen action or activity (including the choice of inaction) leading to an undesirable outcome. The notion implies that a choice influences the outcome. Potential losses themselves may also be called "risks". (Wikipedia 2012). Risk is involved in ANY and ALL activities conducted by man.

But somewhere along the line people have taken to the notion they shouldn’t suffer any risk. They believe risk must be driven to the lowest possible potential in order to assure profit. But, this isn’t the natural order of things. ”Risk is involved in ANY and ALL activities conducted by man.” Get out of bed; you run the risk of not ever getting back into that same bed. Drink something; you could aspirate and choke. Cross the street; you could get hit by a vehicle. Every activity, no matter how benign, carries an element of risk. From some such risks there are NO bail-outs. . But bail-outs aren’t necessarily a strictly Democratic Party problem. Republicans are just as guilty of cronyism as anybody.

So where does this belief come from that you should suffer no risk? Ill-advised and easily exploited social programs lead the list of prime and misguided programs allowing for people to fail in recognizing the risks of their behaviors. Don’t believe it? Think again.

The entrepreneur looks for investment capital to start the business. He may take out a loan against future profits. He may seek partnership with others he’ll share profits with in the future. He may do as is becoming a problem in America; seek taxpayers’ dollars to assure, ensure and be sure they’ll have a political connection to keep them solvent. Obama likes making friends with your money. It’s the Technocratic way to behave.

Technocratic bureaucracy is the mortal enemy of Capitalistic Free Enterprise; the backbone of the American Economy. Where self-proclaimed experts with accumulated and manufactured resume’s can direct the day to day operation of any company by mandates, edicts, diktats and regulations, business runs the risk of failure. This is a benign as well as an active construct.

If the government technocrat gives the money to the industry with little or no oversight, there can be mismanagement and collapse of the industry. This is the benign element of bureaucratic interference. Where the technocratic bureaucracy feels it’s best they regulate and oversee too tightly, as in mandates, edicts, arbitrary and pernicious regulations issued solely for the purpose of showing the bureaucracy’s right and ability to direct operations. This is the active consequence of active interference.

Solyndra is an example of governmental/bureaucratic/technocratic interference resulting in the death of a company from its own mismanagement but also from a laissez-faire attitude of giving away what isn’t yours and not controlling the usage of funds you gave away.

A little misdirected power is a dangerous thing. Just because you’re the president doesn’t mean you’re a good gambler with taxpayers’ money. And Obama has used that very word (gamble) in a speech while trying to justify giving money to “green” companies to end our reliance on fossil fuels.

Obama is neither an economist nor a businessman. He’s a professional politician with a penchant for big dreams broadcast from a bigger ego. He’s got a really small footprint in the real world. He employs technocrats not knowing whether they’re competent or not.

This guy’s gambling with your country’s future.

Thanks for listening

It’s depressing

By

Sarge

What takes precedence: LSU or Romney winning in New Hampshire with Ron Paul and Huntsman climbing in the polls? I don’t know; all of it’s depressing.

First of all, who beyond Les Miles believed Jordon Jefferson was an asset against Alabama. Admittedly, the coach accepts the buck stopping with him. But I have to wonder if he’s ever seen a player (a quarterback no less) apparently spit into a towel and then wipe his face with it. It seems hygiene is another thing forgotten right after play selection and PROPER EXECUTION of those plays.

I remember a basketball whiz-kid in the high school I worked at as a School Resource Officer. He was an awesome player. But, he had a problem in that he was as dense as a brick scholastically. He couldn’t understand why he was getting such lousy grades. As he said to me one day: “I don’t know what the problem is Sarge. I do all of my work.”

The thing escaped the kid at that time and I’m not sure he gets it today is: you have to do it correctly and on time dummy. Some people will say : ”You shouldn’t call kids names. It ruins their self-esteem.”

To this I would say –“Screw their self-esteem”. Just because you can throw a ball farther or sink basketballs with the regularity of a metronome doesn’t make you a tactician or a leader. It makes you a guy who throws a ball. The kid I spoke about has an established resume’ chapter to be proud of – convicted drug dealer. His Mom who has the social skills of a hyena must be so proud.

A leader develops his team mates’ confidence in him. Then he puts himself, his talent, his knowledge of the game and his intangibles like charismatic leadership and valor in the face of the opposing forces, and moves forward to the best of the team’s ability.

LSU now appreciates Jefferson’s lack of “charismatic leadership… and valor in the face of the opposing forces”. Because they surely didn’t move forward too well against Alabama they now have the thrilling accolade of being first loser to a team they’d humiliated earlier in the year.

Coach has talents and abilities I can’t even hope to approach in his field. But you have to wonder why there weren’t some obvious changes made in the on-field leadership. But that’s his choice to make and I recognize it. I have trouble understanding it and respecting it but I MUST accept it.

C’est la vie (as they say in France or Ville Platte, pick one).

Mitt Romney won the New Hampshire Primary with 39.3%, Ron Paul was second with 22.9% and Jon Huntsman as third choice with 16.9% of the overall vote.  That’s a completely new element to be appreciated.

We have a “non-politician” who’s been running for the presidency since the ‘90s, a Texas Representative with more political road rash from past campaign efforts than he has foreign policy acumen and a former ambassador who can order from a Chinese menu more efficiently than the oriental imposters running many eateries.

Romney’s problems have been covered here too many times for me to justify banging on your ears concerning his inability to distance himself from certain issues (Obamneycare). Now he’s serving up easily misquoted and readily misinterpreted campaign rhetoric he’d be better off not saying. “I like firing people…”? Quit trying to be spontaneously glib and inventive. Stick to the issues please.

Ron Paul scares me. Nobody can be isolationist and have his country survive. He seems almost confrontational toward the American people because some don’t see it all HIS way. Sound like Obama? It does; doesn’t it? Admit it.

Jon Huntsman’s interesting when he speaks about Communist China fearing their own people and they’re making greater investments in state security than social programs and the economy. Does that sound like Obama? It does; doesn’t it? Admit it.

Maybe the guy’s got a point. But I trust nobody believing he’s so popular he can run after the field was set and the gun sounded to start the race.

Ask Rick Perry.

Thanks for listening 

A country of laws; not men

By

Sarge

What we see, we seek to understand from its genesis, through its adolescence and into the senior elements of its consequence. This column approached an issue yesterday. It was published on-line today in The Hayride ©.

Obama’s deliberate avoidance of “proper” procedures such as adherence to the system of checks and balances indicates a reckless disregard for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Constitution and Bill of Rights protect us from the intrigues of little men seeking absolute power. They constrain the vainglorious efforts of the egotistical seeking the summit of acclaim they manufacture for themselves.

No one man is beyond the people. No one shall gain ascendency in this country on the freshly slain corpses of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Where Obama proclaimed there’ll be fighting in the streets he’s the one seeking revolution, the socialist tool, to diminish the political ambitions of the people in favor of control by the state. He engenders insurrection by deliberately inciting the emotions of those less controlled in their manner. He jabs the sores of the unemployed and says his already proven to be unresponsive economic model can be different than the failures of fascism and communism. Both are examples of socialist and communist dogma wagging the dog until it dies of the whiplash.

America needn’t die this way. Burke said: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”. It’s painfully true when you see the Nazi’s rise in the 1930s. Hitler burned the Reichstag, the German Parliament. The fire started in the place where the Chamber of Deputies, the equivalent of Congress, met while in session. “Good Germans” did nothing but suspect the Jews as they were told to do.

Now, Obama is striking steel to flint to burn the Constitution. He tests it every time he sees weakness in the Republican Party. He proclaims their intransigence while concealing his refusal to concede any point of balance for the sake of the people.

How can any man proclaiming he’s the FOURTH BEST President in history out of a total of 43 be recognized as being anything but egotistical? How can any man declaring he’s above and beyond 39 other presidents (with no other recognizable acclamation outside of his party and his inner circle) be described as anything but self-centered?

This man says he can’t wait for Congress. Why not? Who proclaimed him savior of America and all it stands for? The system of checks and balances was put in place to prevent the removal of the people from their rights by distant monarchs wielding absolute power. The system of checks and balances was established to assure NO petty oligarch, posturing pratt (a self-aggrandizing, pompous fool who’s full of himself) or a progressive charlatan prancing across the national stage and the world theater could rule by edict, mandate or personal diktat. Checks and balances are designed to slow impetuous, reactionary efforts based more on emotion than reason.

The people’s will is not manifest in the closed mind and dictatorial manner of anybody appointed or elected. It resides in the hearts, minds and souls of honest men and women electing representatives to speak as their voice for what they see as being right.

Conservative commentator Bryan Fisher (Renew America © website 7-29-10) is quoted: “We are a nation of laws, not men, and we are going to exercise our right to follow duly enacted federal and state law and carry out our solemn duty to protect our citizens from harm whether you like it or not. We’re not going to allow a petty tyrant … to deny us our right to govern ourselves and to rob us of our ability to enforce good laws.”

We are a country of laws and not one man. We are a democratic republic not a soviet style union of slaves conscripted to function for the state.  John Adams’ said: “A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”  (Letter to Abigail Adams: 17 July 1775)

Mr. Obama; you’re transparent. We see right through you.

Thanks for listening

The Emperor

By

Sarge

So, everybody knows Obama appointed four people to posts normally requiring approval by the Senate. This is in violation of the Constitution because the President is only allowed to make appointments like this when the Senate is NOT in session. Technically the Senate is in session with a token force of Senators on scene in Washington to man the gavel, sit in a seat and speak about worthless matters of no interest before a bunch of empty seats. The Republicans are screaming “NO FAIR” and fretting about a Constitutional crisis coming about because Obama slid this crap through based on an interpretation of a technicality.

Years ago I heard there was a legislator made the statement somewhat similar to “you can work with the letter of the law but I’ll write procedures and beat you every time” or some such poorly phrased truth. Having checked with a legislative watch-dog I was assured there was more than a grain of truth to the statement. So, in retrospect we have to ask: “how will Obama get away with it”?

Probably, he’ll get away with it for the same reason he figured when managed to try it in the first place.

The Republican Party has all of the fortitude of a Texas steer after a long trail drive.

NONE.

It has become the modern history of the Republican Party, under the leadership(?) of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. These two traditionally raised members of the legislative society of Frick and Frack has managed to shuffle, shuck and jive in the face of a president exhibiting no respect for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or any other conventional concept of the system of checks and balances.

Obama feels the only interpretation of the Constitution to be followed is the one he preached in the hallowed halls of academia. In other words it’s his way or the highway. And the Republicans are too much the cowards to force the issue into the Supreme Court to reestablish the rights of the people to control their government. This is because the Republicans are as crooked in their thinking as the Democrats.

They all are a part of the problem they can’t see they’re creating. And, they can’t and won’t see it because they as the constituent elements of the program are most likely to benefit from it personally, financially and socially. They don’t want to step in the garbage they expect us to accept as due process. It seems they never really get their due (disenfranchising losses at the polls) but they expect us to process it all and accept it out of hand.

Edmund Burke, the great Irish Statesman and Philosopher was credited as saying: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” In this sense we are witnessing the alleged triumph of an already questionable element seeking to control and rule, more than represent and govern. Obama is extending the length of his reach beyond merely extolling socialist banter to grasp regency. He sees himself as an emperor demanding compliance more through usurping the powers of the other branches of the government than through the constitutional limitations placed on the presidency.

And all of this seems to be coming about because supposedly “good men” are doing nothing to stop it. It means less than nothing to understand an election must produce new, complementary legislators in sufficient numbers to defeat Obama’s game plan. But, what if those complementary numbers aren’t elected? Mere numbers may mean nothing.

It’s proven by this power grab that procedure can overpower legislation. Reid, Pelosi and Obama are experts in slamming procedural votes in the direction they want. That’s what’s placed them in a position to accomplish more and more and progressively more to disallow the people their representation under the Constitution.

Where the Republicans have folded more than a new set of napkins at a church picnic, the Democrats and Obama are unraveling the very fabric of the American flag. They’re trampling the Constitution.

And, evil will be done as good men sit and do nothing. What say you, my good men and women?

Thanks for listening

As the empire falls

By

Sarge

Gladiators were forced into mortal combat for the entertainment of the audience in the coliseum. It hasn’t changed all that much. Where wine and other potent potables were served and there was revelry in the stands, we now have armchair pundits sitting around, sucking down beer, chewing bratwurst and ribs while handicapping (placing the odds on) the Republican candidates in the arena.

A bloodbath has been the result. Some candidates sees politics is a dirty and nasty business; more bloodsport than diplomacy. For a man involved in politics as long as Newt Gingrich, it’s got to be noted the man is remarkably slow on the uptake. But that’s the history of his cam-pain; he takes one step forward then gets thrown for a loss by his own people knowing him the best and most. It doesn’t look good on the page everybody’s reading over coffee and crumb cake.

Gingrich was rejected by the state of Virginia because his campaign workers failed to qualify him with the appropriate number of voters’ signatures. He’s dead in the water there. Rick Perry’s organization has the same integrity of operation. His people must have trained with Gingrich’s. Competence is not a required qualification, nor is the lack of it noted until it’s obvious the troops in the trenches are all away enjoying tea.

Gingrich was slammed so hard during the cam-pain in Iowa he lost more blood that a cow during slaughter. Luckily this steer has a thick hide from years of political chicanery of his own. The scar tissue won’t be seen until it’s cut, cured and split to reveal all the defects in the leather. And they are there to be seen.

Herman Cain was hammered. Nobody told him participating in gladiatorial combat when you’re armed only with good ideas and little else is suicide. Nobody in this pseudo-roman extravaganza of political mayhem gives a blip about ideas, ideals and/or truth, justice and the American way. They want to bleed the opponents dry then finish them off after getting a “thumbs down” from the gallery (voters). When the accusers slid their knives across his political flesh the roar from the audience was deafening because first blood was officially drawn. Cain fell not knowing what hit him.

Tim Pawlenty, early on, showed he had no stomach for the bloodshed to come. He also had little loyalty for the people standing for him the longest. He bailed after the very first small-scale test, a straw-vote, showed Michelle Bachmann (the hometown favorite and evangelical golden girl) to be the favorite flavor of the moment. He’s in Minnesota hunting ducks or ducking this hunt while he licks his wounds.

This cam-pain delivered more flavors of the moment than Baskin Robbins on a new flavor discovery junket.

The tastes of the people haven’t matured. This cam-pain has earned a track record for confusing platforms (?), posturing and arthritic positioning for a battle stance they can’t defend.

To explain: is this supposed to be about developing a strategy, a course of travel, the ideas and ideals to contrast conservatives against the liberals? Isn’t it supposed to be about finding the best candidate to put those issues across to America? Or is it an exercise of sending in a Judas goat (the media) to lead these intelligence challenged, self-aggrandizing gerbils to self-destruct? There’s been no indication or proof showing this isn’t what’s happening. Soledad O’Brien asks questions concerning subjects so old they’ve grown hair; then shortly after, Bachmann left the arena. Romney’s minions pummeled Gingrich. Gingrich finally struck back. Perry slammed them all with a vengeance when he stumbled into the arena. Gary Johnson slit his wrists and went to third party candidacy hoping somebody would notice or care.

All of this malarkey appears orchestrated by the political parties and the media. Bread, fish and wine for the masses. Entertainment with a readily replaceable cast of characters is the product. No disruptions like challenging Obama will interfere.

The bread is spoiled, the fish are rotten and the wine is vinegar. But the gladiators willingly keep slashing and hacking each other. And the audience falls with the empire.

Thanks for listening