Autism & The Debate

As the father of a 12 year-old with autism I think I know a bit about the issue. Yes, Senator McCain autism is on the rise but what are you going to do? Sarah Palin's son is only a few months old and in that time she's done little on the issue. I heard no program or solution

As for Senator Obama, I'm glad that you think we need to do more. However, research is not going to solve the problems that real people face trying to help their children while the insurance companies reject claims for therapies that work.

IMHO, neither politician gets it and clearly cannot articulate a solution for anything.

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Lightness of Being

I wrote about particle physics not too long ago. In that time, I bought a book on the subject and am about half way through. Lightness of Being is written by a Nobel Prize physicist who attempts to lay out the state of physics just before the LHC changes everything we know. This book is the first time that the nucleus of an atom are described as simply as electro-magnetism (electrons and light) is elsewhere. The only problem is that the science is less complete and the nature of the nucleus is far more complex. For those who dare to do something geek, I highly recommend this book.

Wow!

What a week to be an observer of the financial markets. The Dow looked like a WWII dive bomber letting loose a torpedo only the torpedo seemed to go off before release. Today was downright scary. I looked at the stocks app on my iPhone about the minute that the market opened. With the number down over 600 points I figured that it was yesterday's total and the feed didn't start yet. WRONG! It was down, big. Then up, bigger. Up and mostly down all day until another rally that faded at the end.

My brother correctly pointed out that we're towards the end of all of this nonsense. First, the housing bubble went. The next domino was the credit bubble linked to housing. We're in the last phase - the hedge bubble. With all of the loses taken by hedge funds they had to liquidate or risk failing. So a few more volatile days ahead and maybe the Dow can go back to some sort of old normal - up or down a few points a day. Then maybe we'll go back to being an investor nation not a trader nation.

While the economic situation is scary it's not as scary as the political situation. Money is logical. People place bets with their money in situations where they know where they will win. If there's a chance of losing, they take their ball (cash) and go home until they can make money. That's what we're seeing now. Trades are being undone because money is not being made. When risk is not rewarded then not risking is the smart play.

The politics this past week have been far from assuring. The administration is showing no signs of leadership. Every time that President Bush talks during market hours the ticker shows up next to him in media coverage. Almost on cue, the market tanks while he's talking. Better to sit this one out in Crawford, or Dallas because I guess that's where he's going to retire to. The stooges that want to replace him have no clue either. Why people are openly for these guys is beyond me. We had a non-debate this week in which new questions were answered with old answers. If this were not bad enough neither candidate makes much sense in their responses. There is absolutely no continuity. One minute they want to cut taxes. The next they want to tax oil companies but forget that while the stock market is tanking oil is dropping like a rock too. So what are they going to tax if the oil companies can't turn a profit? Finally, they're adding programs and buying up all of our mortgages. A whole lot of programs with no coherent plan and a lot of misrepresenting how our economy works. Ayn Rand would say that we have two looters running for president because they are.

It's pretty clear that the only thing running this country is fear. The old Franklin Roosevelt line about there's nothing to fear but fear itself line of government assuring us all that things will be good if we trust them has given way to a new approach. People only fear things. We fear terrorism, financial ruin, what we eat and the weather. We fear and we vote but instead of going to the one who puts our fears to rest they go to the ones who make us fear what's going on the most.

This week we saw anger. In all honesty, I'm a bit shocked that we have not seen more if it sooner. But we're seeing it now and McCain is tapping into it. If we could run our cars and power plants on anger we'd be a bigger energy producer than 10 Saudi Arabias. So the final month of the campaign is going to be fear versus anger instead of solutions. In the past, we deserved the government we elected. This time around we can't afford it but are bound to get what we deserve anyway. If asked a right track or wrong track opinion of these choices I can't choose because they're both the wrong track. Right about now a Perot/Stockdale ticket is looking pretty good.

Did We Really Need This Debate?

Different questions from debate 1, different format and venue but the same answers. If we're not good enough to be new answers in a debate how are we going to get new answers to big questions like the economy.

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Changing the Subject to the Keating 5

Now that the McCain campaign is going to use Ayers as their main attach for the week the Obama campaign is coming at McCain hard with the Keating 5. The point that they are making is that McCain went to bat for failing banks in the past and today we'll see more of the same so McCain cannot be trusted.

The substance of this attach is weak. McCain was involved in some meetings with federal regulators but did nothing corrupt. The public records shows he made a bad decision and showed poor judgement but was cleared of any wrongdoing. And the bottom line is that his actions did not cause the S&L's to fail.

The tactic may work because both were bank scandles and the current one is not over yet. Not with world markets tanking this morning. But the Obama campaign's quick change of subject deserves more scrutany. The Ayres connection should be examined a little more closely. While the campaign is accurate in saying that Ayers is not part of the campaign and he and Obama are not close. But they served on a board together and spent a large sum of money on education. The results did not better education in Chicago and is a microcosim for what is wrong in education today - too much nonsense and not enough of the 3-R's. So, the Obama campaign fights hardest to prevent people from finding out what happened during this phase of the man's life. They send e-mails to supporters asking that phone lines be flooded when critics are on talk radio shows. And now they're putting out an 18 minute video on the Keating 5.

If Obama is a new kind of politician he's not showing it. And if he's as successful as he wants us to believe he needs to speak about this time in his life rather than hide from it. Otherwise, how can we trust?

Saving Our Economy: What Next?

Just watched the aboved titled special on Fox News. Very good analysis of how this happened. Highly recommended if you want to understand how this fiasco developed over time. An interesting fact is that the US had 6 mortgage meltdowns between the Civil War and WWII. Clearly, none to this order of magnitutude.

Sent from my iPhone 3G

A Shift in Strategy.

So now, after the debate, the McCain campaign is going after Barak Obama on character. It's about time but may also be too late. The focus should have been about the economy. McCain's campaign let Obama set the tone on the economy discussion. There are folks in congress doing a better job of countering the bashing of Supply Side economics by pointing out that the Keynsian economics advocated by Obama is vintage 70's and should stay there with the Leisure Suit.

I hope that McCain has something to follow up with - something of substance because this line of attack is not going to change too many minds. My advice is to go after Obama's economic meassage hard but with humor to belittle the view that his plan is credible and he has a grasp on economics. The re-cast tax policy as being about 1 thing - to raise money for government operations not for social justice. I don't see that happening but miracles do happen.

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Hated Worse than for Iraq

Keith Olbermann and his merry band of America haters have long stated that the Iraq war has caused other countries to 'hate' America causing out nation to lose prestige in the world. I never agreed with that view. As the world's lone superpower, preemptively invading Iraq to rid the world of their WMD's was a signal that an angry America would be able to do things in this world and could not be stopped. What drove our mainly European critics was fear - fear of what we could do rather easily if the thing that angered us shifted from WMD's to something far less. This is an understandable position for them to take but it was never articulated that way by the Left in the United States because they had a mission to weaken a President who was not going to perpetually campaign for public opinion.

What America hath brought now may actually bring hatred compared to the fear during the Iraq war. The free world is on the precipice of economic failure. An America that fiddles while Rome is burning due to petty politics is likely to make even the least vocal Europeans speak up. Why? Because when times are good small things like the sacking of a dictator is not likely to rile people up. But if someone loses their job and cannot put food on the table because of inaction by the same superpower is going to get people who are normally rational in an irrational state in a hurry. Remember, it is with foreign money that we have been allowed to borrow and spend our way into prosperity. Foreigners are going to look at the situation and see that things went too far and call it quits. If people are unemployed and marching in the streets it could get downright ugly.

This last several months has felt like the missing chapter of Atlas Shrugged. The looters have siezed control over the media and made this election a coronation. Opposing views have been shot down and criticism is not allowed to take place. Allies like Unions and Acorn are being awarded in bailout packages. While hundreds of billions are being debated, more billions are being spent while people are distracted. And the former smartest guys in the room have been taken over by the new smartest guys in the room. Trouble is that neither were the smartest, most talented, most creative or best. Those guys must be hiding in Galt's Gulch.

Change is not going to be a solution and it's clear from this saga that change in part caused the problem. Bipartisanship is not needed because there's little that can be agreed to which will bring about a solution. Maybe fear will be the solution. Once we see the horror of what we've done to other innocent parties maybe, just maybe we'll get our act together. But I guess that's America - we're not unified until the British are coming, Pearl Harbor is attacked or Sputnik is in orbit.

I Want Names

Today's news couldn't get much worse. The banking bail out plan fails because Nancy Pelosi couldn't keep her big mouth shut and decided to blame the administration and Republicans for being the cause of the banking crisis immediately before the vote. Normally, that kind of nonsense is worth criticism and a blog entry. But when things are down you simply have to look at the humor in any bad situation. In essence, life threw us a whole lot of lemons today so I'm going to make some lemonade.

At the end of the bailout vote the numbers were 227 Nay, 207 Yea and 1 not voting/absentee. At the moment before the voting closed two votes changed from Yea to Nay. In other words, two brave souls saw that the bill was going down and they wanted to look good in the eyes of the voters in their districts. Nobody would know they pulled a John Kerry and voted for it before they voted against it so they pulled the trigger. You got to love the courage that they showed by changing their votes. This is the type of nonsense that got us into this situation in the first place. I'd love to get the names of the two representatives so I can post their pictures because they belong on a wall of shame.

How McCain Blew it Big Time

After watching clips of last night's debate I walked away with the impression that there is so much that John McCain could have done to KO Obama but didn't. McCain's debate errors allowed Obama to go unchecked in both parts of the debate and actually lead to Obama winning the first part on economics. Here's what I saw that would have KO'd Obama and might have actually lead to a shift in the current momentum in the campaign in Obama's favor.

1. It's clear from in speeches and campaign documentation that Obama truly believes in Keynsian economics. Keynsian economics was the central economic strategy in this country for the better part of the 20th century. In Keynsian economics, the government uses fiscal policy (taxation) to shape social policy. At it's worst, it led to the tax code having too many tax brackets and also led to it's main premise, heavy taxation on the wealthy who could afford it, being undermined because the middle class actually ended up paying most of the taxes.

What McCain should have done is remind people that this was the key economic strategy in the Carter years. Then remind people that Obama was either in Indonesia or a stoned HS student living in Hawaii during those years (crude but effective to remind people that he was not paying attention and want's to relive what most believe was a total and complete failure). Next, remind Obama that the purpose of taxation is to fund the government not to create an elusive social equity. The payoff would be in reminding Obama Keynsian economics lead to the wealthy using their wealth to find tax loop holes to avoid taxation which lowers tax revenues and ends up causing the middle class, who cannot afford accountants and have few loopholes, to make up the lost revenue. Finally, remind Obama what happened in the transition from Carter to Reagan when taxes were cut and the code simplified - revenues to the government went up because there was no need to avoid or fear taxation. This was the policy of Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 and will be for McCain.

2. Obama loves to state after the fact facts when discussin both Iraq and Afghanistan. On Iraq, he forgets that Bush did not invade Iraq without the consent of Congress. In Congress, the vote was not a majority but closer to a Super Majority (2/3 vote) in favor. This then makes the discussion about intelligence and forces Obama to make wild, left wing Daily Kos/Move On.org claims about Dick Cheney's scheme to skew the intelligence in an effort to get Halliburton more government contracts even though he was long gone and divested. This is a better playing field then letting Obama appear that he has a knack for foreign policy and was somehow a visionary when in fact he's far from it.

On Afghanistan, Obama seems to think that the Taliban are back in force and have been allowed back because of some US inaction. Obama needs a history lesson on Afghanistan. For years, the effort there worked just fine. The Taliban were at bay and the country was on a path to move forward. Then two things happened. First, Nato forces arrived to assist in rebuilding the country. Then the tactics used in Iraq were being used by the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The former was a problem because some of the Nato forces would not engage in combat (Germans I'm talking about you). That and the new Iraq tactics led to more success by the enemy and an emboldened enemy. Reminding Obama of these facts under cut his theory and put him into a box. He's not willing to act unilaterally. He also believes that other allies have the same level if interest in doing something that we do which is simply not the case. If he's disproven in Afghanistan then it makes his whole foreign policy strategy look Carterish which it is.

Fortunately, McCain has two more chances to make Obama's strengths his weakeness, which indeed they are. He also has the opportunity to do the same with ads but has yet to do so. Which is why McCain is trailing in national and electoral map polls and is looking to be a loser in November.

This Debate Was Not Worth The Commotion

The debate is on. The debate is off. The debate is back on again. THE DEBATE'S A DUD! Now I know why I was never fond of either candidate. Neither candidate was all that impressive. Maybe its because they don't have a personality between them. The only question I have is where were the zingers that the Obama campaign promised?

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Cowardice!

Cowardice is what you can call the recent developments in Washington. Here's the bottom line. The Democrats have enough agreement within their ranks in both houses to pass The Great Banking Bail Out Package of 2008. In the senate, there are enough Republicans that are willing to go along to make it look nice and bipartisan. The house, however, is a 'problem'. The house Republicans do not want to agree to the Administration's plan. The Democrats could still bring a bill to the floor and pass it but they are cowards. The right thing, the 'Country First' thing and the 'Change We Need' is for the Democrats in the house to pass the bill. But they're afraid of short term political considerations - that the voters in their districts who are angry will vote them out of office.

There are worse things in life then losing elections for the doing the right thing. Time to man up and get our lending institutions back on track with the appropriate supervision in place. Waiting will do only one thing - make the problem even worse and force them into making a decision while they watch the stock markets collapse. Time to put the 'L' back in Leadership.

It's About Time - Part 2

George Bush comes out of hiding to give a speech on the banking crisis - it's about time. Wouldn't of be great if it was done last week? I'm glad he wasn't short and actually articulated the cause of the problem and the proposed solution in a reassuring way. Typically, you never know what you're going to get with him in a speech. So, now we've had our sighting we'll see him again at the next photo op and then it's back to his hibernation leaving the business of running the country to the Presidential Cruise Control.

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Mr. Obama - Please Return Your Senate Paycheck

John McCain is returning to Washington to turn the tide in Congress and get banking bailout legislation passed. Where in the world is Barak Obama? Traveling the country campaigning. His plan is to talk about change rather than delivering change. He is still on the Senate payroll. This is shaping up to be THE most important legislation that the Senate votes on this year. He believes that to be Presidential you have to do more than one thing at a time.

This crisis is about your job, life savings, 401(k) and the financial future and the financial futures of your children and grandchildren. To have nothing happen is unthinkable. It's a given that the taxpayers are going to get a raw deal. So time to get something passed that minimizes the impact on the taxpayer, is not a give away to financial institutions and solves the problem that Obama supporter and highly respected investor Warren Buffett calls a Financial Pearl Harbor.

In the 1970's when New York City was in a financial crisis of it's own President Ford told the city to bail itself out. The headline in the Daily News was 'Ford to NYC: Drop Dead'. The Daily News should get those printing plates out of mothballs becase they're needed again.

It's About Time!

Both of the Presidential candidates are sitting Senators. While they're on the road talking their colleagues in Washington are trying, unsuccessfully, to pass a bill to bail out our banking crisis. It's about time that they understood what's going on and their help in Washington trumps campaigning and debates. If this is a once a century crisis as many have said then you don't talk your way out of a problem that you behave your way into you do what it takes to solve the problem with actions. Kudos, for John McCain for finally realizing what's more important and what Country First really is and getting it right on this issue. Hopefully, Barak Obama follow suit and give us the Change we Need.

Fair and Balanced on Race?

Recently, there were two articles published about race in the upcoming election. The first argued that Barak Obama would face 6% of voters would would vote against him simply because he is half black. The other stated that some middle class Democrats who have a negative opinion of black people. I have no intention of challenging the articles. Racism exists and there are some who simply just not going to vote for Obama or any other black man or woman.

If race is an issue there's another racial story that is not being told. If it is wrong that a small minority will not vote for Barak Obama on the basis of race then what's going on with the Black vote? Barak Obama carriers nearly 100% of the black vote across America. There are multiple blocks behind that total. The majority of blacks are Democrats, so it's natural that Obama, being the Democratic candidate, will get most of their vote. Then there is identiy politics. Some blacks are going to vote for someone who looks like they do. Not exactly the best reason to vote for someone but it's not necessarily racist or unusual because many people do the same thing on the basis of gender, religion, ethinc group or sexual orientation. But is there a small, extremist percentage out there among the black vote that is similar to what's reported about whites that will not vote for John McCain because he is white? We may never know because the magnifine glass is only on whites. What's sad is not that the liberal media will not make the effort to analyze racism on both sides because they're doing what is expected - they're protecting a constituancy that consistantly supports their initiatives. What's sad is that few call them on the issue and once again they are allowed to get away with it. It's OK to call whites racists but in their model of the world racism is only a white issue. The media's model is wrong and should be corrected.

Rome is Burning, Nero is Fiddling

Is anyone at all shocked that the Wall Street Bail Out plan is not fairing well on Capital Hill. The people who contributed to the problem by failing to regulate and legislate are looking to score points on TV rather than take the problem behind closed doors and get a deal done.

We all know the situation stinks and that nobody wants to issue a blank check. So stop complaining about how hard of a situation you put yourself into, stop looking to blame someone else for your failure to lead and stop shopping for votes while you are on the Hill instead of at home where you want to be. Just get an acceptable deal done so we can term limit you in November for getting us into this situation to begin with. And for you lucky 67% in the Senate who face the voters in 2-4 years consider yourself lucky your term will survive past January.

Idiots!

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Another Blank Check

So the Wall Street bailout details are coming out. $700 @%&*ing Billion to correct something that could have been prevented if our government worked properly. All we keep hearing is that Congress needs to move fast (probably true) and should keep the details to a minimum to allow the Treasury Secretary to do his magic. All I have to say is AGAIN?

We've written blank checks for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. We've written blank checks for Katrina Aid. We've written blank checks to cover pork and pet projects. The last thing we need is yet another blank check with nothing in return.

The Majority in Congress is asking for provisions to ensure that people keep their homes and to limit executive pay. Great, trying to score more political points for the base. But what's in it for the taxpayer? I heard one idea that I though was great. In exchange for saving companies we should 1) make it uncomfortable by negotiating favorable terms for the taxpayer. If that means 30 cents on the dollar then so be it. The other is that we should ask for warrants. What are warrants? In essence, they company would be giving the new RTC agency stock options.

While this would wreak of Socialism it is a fair exchange. The taxpayers are assuming the risk. The company is getting out of bad decisions and their corporate value is going to take off without that weight on their balance sheets holding them back. Why shouldn't the party taking the risk get something out of it? We get warrants, convert it to stock and sell it on the market at a profit.

The other thing I am not hearing is any kind of war bond type of initiative. Politicians are looking to end this as quickly as possible and report home for campaigning. They don't want to sell patriotism and duty to have as much of the bonds being in the hands of Americans rather than in the hands of the Chinese and Saudis. They seem to be fine putting the US at their mercy and being less secure on another level. They are thinking in the short term as Westerners typically do. The Chinese don't view the world the same way. They don't care if they take us down next week or next century the bottom line is winning. So if it ever came down to a confrontation between out countries the Chinese are looking for a way to win without firing a shot. This gives them more ammo. That's another story for another time. There should be Bailout Bonds floated and they should have the warrants behind them as more of a reason for Joe 6-pack to lay down $100 for some.

None of that will happen. All we're going to see is another foreign funded bail out of America and then the Government can go back to doing things the same way. Change, yeah I'll believe it when I see it.

The Worst Government EVER!

Now I don't believe for a moment that the crisis on Wall Street is symptomatic of the broader economy. Industrial and service companies in America are strong except maybe for automakers who have the wrong product mix in their home market but right products elsewhere in the world. That's another topic for another day because their problem is in part due to the fact that their best, most fuel efficient products in Europe and South America cannot make the cut here due to emissions regulations, but I digress. Wall Street's problems this week were caused by a number of factors. Perhaps the worst had to do with the removal of proven securities rules (uptick rule, no 'naked' shorting of stocks) which turned investing into trading. Add to that the insistence that federally backed mortgage institutions had become political instruments forcing Freddie and Fannie to make loans that made sense to no sound financial institution.

These causes developed over time and each contributing factor happened independently. Politicians and businessmen from both sides of the aisle are to blame. Many of them profited by making millions before the fertilizer hit the proverbial fan. And now we see the fruits of their labor. No only is Wall Street looking like it was hit by Hurricane Ike but because we live in a global economy their actions have impacted markets, companies and citizens across the globe.

So now that there's a crisis which requires leadership where are our elected officials? Running scared and hiding. President Bush, where are you? Why did you cancel your opportunity to address the press the other day? Assurances that no matter what happened the government would be there to help would have been a great thing to do. Instead we hear nothing from the White House as the government takes a case by case view of which companies to bail out and which to let go into bankruptcy (which is not the end of the world and in some cases is good but the media will have you believe that these companies have evaporated). Nancy Pelosi, where are you? You wanted this opportunity to be the Speaker of the House and made some bold promises. Yet, you were in charge of a do nothing congress more partisan and corrupt than the one that you replaced promising change to the American people. Claiming that this mess is not your fault is not only untrue but also not a sign of leadership. And going on recess may help you campaign but watch out for what you see when you hit the campaign trail - my guess is a lot of folks with pitchforks and torches. Harry Reid, where are you? Saying that nobody knows what to do is not the kind of leadership that we expect in this country. We pay billions of dollars for you to have staffers and advisors. The Constitution gives you powers to subpena powers to get people to talk to you. How about using some of your God-given authority and actually finding out what to do instead of quitting?

These are the top 3 elected officials in our country. None of them is leading or doing anything. One is retiring in January and good riddence to him. One is up for re-election. I hope the people in San Francisco see her for what she is and give her the boot but believing that will happen is like Harry Reid going to his happy place while Wall Street burns.

What about the people running for President. Neither has shown leadership. Obama's 2 minute Presidential Address was a joke. Nothing to disagree with but no plan and no content. And his content is the wrong message. We've been throwing money at problems that Washington created in the first place and we're going to be asked to bail the government out. Sorry, Senator but wrong answer. John McCain shows that he's voted on the right side of these issues in the past. But I don't even hear rhetoric from him on the subject - good or bad. Saying that the problems are greed and he's for the American worker is on par with what his less experienced opponent is saying. And finally, there's Joe Bidan. Sorry but sending more tax money to Washington only to be wasted is not Patriotic it's stupid, plain stupid.

People, give us sign that you get it. Please.

Cultures of corruption

Point 1: Rep. Charlie Rangel

In the run up to the 2006 mid-term elections, Nancy Pelosi who would become House Speaker framed the election as a way of doing away with the Republican's culture of corruption. She promised a clean, reformed congress under her watch. There's another watch going on and it deals with corruption in her leadership ranks. Charlie Rangel who is Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which writes our country's tax laws, is under fire because he did not claim income from Caribbean properties that he owns. At least that's what we originally thought. It must be worse than that now because he's hired a forensic accountant to sort through his previous returns to correct it's many inaccurcies. Where does speaker Pelosi stand on this? She's allowing Rangel to keep his chairmanship. This is not exactly the sort of change we were looking for.


Point 2: Government Oversight

Two branches of government are responsible for oversight of the financial markets - Legislative and Executive (read Congress and the White House). The Bush Administration has shown an ability to clean up the mess after it became a mess - they've become good at cleaning up their own messes. But where's Congress been? They've been busy doing nothing. This Congress can barely pass a budget. They've taken more of an interest in digging up dirt on the Bush Administration than overseeing situations today that could impact us tomorrow. It's not simply their lack of an energy policy it's everything - financial markets, telecommunications, global trade practices, healthcare and education. This Congress is more interested in scoring political points to win the next election than they are putting together a stronger America for tomorrow. Social Security and Medicare? Forget that - they shot down's Bush's desire to change that nearly 4 years ago and haven't been back there since. I guess it's not enough of a problem, yet.


Point 3: Corporate Aristocrats

I'm all for free markets. I'm also for capitalists who risk everything they have to succeed reaping the rewards for their efforts. These capitalists are the business founders who put in the long hours, put their family assets at risk and bet big on themselves. The people who work long hours during the week, all weekend and take no vacations because they want to be a success and want their businesses to succeed. There are many examples of this in America both yesterday and today. In the past, think of names like Ford, Vanderbilt and Morgan. Today think Walton, Buffett (Warren, not Jimmy) and Munger (who badly gets overshadowed by his partner but deserves as much credit for Berkshire's success), Jobs and Woz, Gates and Allen, Michael Dell and Larry Ellison. You may not like some of these people but there is one common denominator - all started with little and grew their businesses.

Now compare these people to the new American Gentry. The people who inhereit companies built by others but expect the riches afforded to the founders because they carry the title of CEO or Chairman. These people rent their office space after being given title by their board and no matter if they do well or do poorly they are rewarded with multi-million dollar salaries, stock and options. If they last a while they somehow become a company's largest shareholder. This feat comes not because they had the fortune before but were granted the fortune by the board. If they fail, they walk away with tens to hundreds of millions compared to nothing but the shirt on the back of a founder who does not succeed.

Somewhere along the line boards forgot the risk-reward principle. You're rewarded for the personal risks you take not for being nursed by the company and punching a clock for a few years as stewart of a company.



In Washington and around the country there are two people who are talking about change. Both will likely bring change to some of these practices which I am happy with. However, the type of change is going to be radically different. Listen carefully and understand that we can be as punitive as possible on points 1-3. However, we need to understand that these changes, though necessary, should not go so far that we risk our competitiveness for years to come. I'm not talking slap on the wrist punishment for those who do wrong or light regulation. I talking about true reform that understands we live in a free, global market and change that puts the United States in a competitive position moving forward. This is possible and at the same time is necessary. In the meantime, time to throw the bums out - all of them.

Unscientific Americans

In an earlier post I indicated that one of my interests is particle physics. I also commented on the news that the LHC at CERN was going live this past week. Well, the news reporting on this subject was quite interesting. The news ranged from the accurate (that the scientists at CERN were firing up the LHC for the first time and running tests) to the totally off base (the LHC was live and after use there were no tiny black holes and all was well).

If you ever wondered why China, India and third world countries around the world are catching up with us you have part of the answer. If our schools don't make us all dumb paying attention to the mainstream news surly will. There was a time when those who reported the news were literate, maybe more so than the average person in the country. Those days are long gone. The average person has more education and common sense than the average reporter. But the know-it-all attitude that goes along with being in the news business remains. To that, add the fact that the editorial choices that are made in what constitutes news and you have the answer to the question of why people are online looking for news from weblogs and YouTube rather then buying their local newspapers and watching local and network news.

I can't remember the exact date that this happened for I can point to the event. Back in the late 80's after I graduated from college and was in the workforce for a year or two I read an article about the New York Times. The Times decided to lower the vocabulary in their publication so that it was on par with vocabulary used by the average 8th grader. This you're not smarter than an 8th grader decision was supposed to help the Times reach more readers. My sense is that the average reporter was not as smart as veteran journalists - the kind of which we once respected.

Getting back to science, there will be a day in the next month or so where the LHC does actually perform an experiment. When that happens we may see some interesting things but my sense is that the end of the world is not going to be one of them. What the LHC is going to create is something close to the conditions present in the universe not seen since the Big Bang. The end of the world will not come, in my opinion, because the LHC will simply not be able to provide enough energy and the universe will absorbe much of what energy and matter used in the experiment.

CERN, The Large Hadron Rap and Hip Hop

One thing in life I love to explore but have trouble getting people to relate to is particle physics (proven by my atomic inspired logo). It's not because I'm a scientist or techno elitist, I'm not, but I find the subject fascinating. Discovery in this field tells us more about how the universe was made and allows one to have a deeper appreciation for the world we live in and the one who created it.

So news of this weeks activities at CERN, the particle collider located in Switzerland and France got me all excited. Particle colliders are like time machines. The force of particles running into each other at speeds close to light speed allow scientists to see how matter behaved close to the Big Bang. The faster the speeds, the harder the collision the closer to the time of the Big Bang. The upgrades at CERN that are now being completed will give scientists more of an opportunity to discover particles missing from current theories of the Universe which will have an impact in science in the years to come.

During my news scanning on this topic I ran across a YouTube video which provoked some thought. It's called the Large Hadron Rap named after the Large Hadron collider at CERN and was created by alpinekat. Apprently, alpinekat is a Michigan State scientist who works at CERN but has a flair for Hip Hop. Her rap song is about the facility and partical physics in general. In the past, Hip Hop was not something I was a fan of but she made me one with this song. It's catchy enough for my 10 year-old son who liked it and is no fan of Hip Hop either (he's into Guitar Hero Aerosmith these days). And since the video runs the lyrics along allows kids to read the story of what's going on in particle physics today. What better way to engage future scientists and let people know more about discovery which is normally explained in ways that they cannot comprehend. Bravo to aplinekat!

My final thought is on Hip Hop itself. All of the anger and negativity in the 'art' form repel people like me and my son. But clearly it is an effective form of communication and one that can be used to good end. Now I don't expect to see artickat on top of the Hip Hop charts anytime soon. However, it would be great to follow he lead and take anger out of it and turn it into something positive rather than something that is a release for some and degrading for too many more.

More on particle physics in the future.

My Congressman and Me

About a month ago, my congressman, David Price - North Carolina (D), was on a local radio show. The host is new the the all talk station and it was the first opportunity for this morning drive host to speak with one of the local representatives to Washington. Gas prices were a hot topic of discussion because we were paying close to $4 per gallon of gasoline.

The host asked about drilling off shore. Being a Democrat, naturally Rep. Price gave the party line of environment and using the leases that have already been granted. Now I can understand the environmental issue. Here in North Carolina it is a big issue because of our beaches. Any drilling will have to satisfy the need to maintain the beaches which are a summertime draw for tourists from neighboring and inland states. But with any drilling coming miles off of our coast I have doubts that there will be a major spill which has an impact on our beaches.

Callers made similar comments and naturally the congressman took refuge behind the lease issue. Many people could not get him off of this because they are not sure why oil companies refuse to drill on these leased areas. Well, there is an answer and it is one that requires an understanding of economics to comprehend. So, that means that democrats will not get it because they choose to ignore economic realities. So, here's the answer.

People wrongly assume that all oil extracted from the ground is the same. This is not true. At one time oil on the market here in the US was known as 'West Texas Intermediate'. The name was later changed to 'Light Sweet Crude'. Why? Because it better reflects the type of oil that it is and represents the type of oil that refiners want in order to make gasoline. So, there is light oil which is low in sulfur, considered an impurity and removed from crude in the refining process. There is also sour oil which has more than 1% of it's content in the form of sulfur.

As I stated earlier, sulfur is considered an impurity in oil that needs to be removed in order to make gasoline. The more sulfur in the crude the more the crude must be refined raising the cost of oil. So, if oil companies get a lease and find that the oil is high in sulfur they will find that the refiner will not buy it favoring crude lower in sulfur giving the oil company less of a market to sell their product. The investment in exploration, building a rig and extracting the oil will not be paid off unless the only alternative is sour oil. If the were able to sell and refine the sour crude the cost at the pump is going to be higher.

So what should be done? Open up the coastline for exploration and extraction. Make it far enough off the cost so that the rigs cannot be seen and so any spill will not impact the beach, wildlife. Once the pockets of light sweet crude are found then Drill, Drill, Drill! In the meantime, refiners are going to have to find better ways to refine sour crude. Make sure that some of the proceeds are reinvested into these processes. If necessary, make it a DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) which has a better track record of technical advances than grants and other government programs. It is, after all, vital to national security.

So, what happened with my congressman? I wrote him a letter letting him know that he let me down. I requested a response and asked for no Democratic talking points. His response contained the talking points about the leases. So, I essentially took him to task again giving him the explanation I gave above but being even more critical than in my 1st letter. In the time between letters (4 weeks - thanks for the prompt response BTW, congressman) the Democrats in congress tried to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower prices. But their move did not end there. They wanted to replace the Light Sweet Crude with Heavy Sour Crude meaning that the oil in the reserve would be useless when it was needed most - a really good short term measure and really bad long term decision and one that's typically Washington. So, knowing that he was part of this debate I took him to task for knowing the truth but communicating disinformation. But what do you expect from an incumbent.

Battle of the Brands: Oprah versus Palin

The Drudge Report today had a series of posts related to Oprah. Word got to Matt Drudge's staff that Oprah's organization is split on whether to have Sarah Palin on the show. No doubt that given the ratings for Palin's speech on Wednesday the ratings on Oprah would similarly be through the roof. However, Oprah want's no part of Palin because she's thrown her support behind Barak Obama.

This decision has infuriated many of Oprah's fans the most vocal of whom have left messages across the Internet. There is also an equal and as vocal faction that is supporting Oprah's decision. How this turns out is anyones guess but given her support for Obama it is unlikely we'll see Sarah Palin on Oprah until after the election if at all.

Now it is Oprah's show. She's the boss and that fact alone says that her word is law. She's got every right to not have Palin on the show. What is questionable, however, is her reasoning. Oprah maintains that since the 2008 Presidential campaign commenced that she has not had a candidate on the show - that includes Barak Obama. In essence, she's saying that there is a firewall between her show and politics.

While that is a lofty and admirable sentiment there is a flaw in her logic. The fact of the matter is that Oprah is a brand. What she is, what she embodies and what she believes is the show, the magazine and all other Oprah/O/Harpo entities. Once you become a brand they all represent you. So when Oprah attends Obama's Acceptance Speech it is a reflection on the rest of her assets without separation. So while Oprah want's to act as if she is above politics she is not.

Oprah is a very intelligent and talented person. She knows this loop hole and expects that we all believe that what she's doing is fair and proper. This is an example of what conservatives brand as elitism. Since the day that natural selection kicked in where those who outsmarted people of lesser intelligence, the thinkers have been using their minds to suppress others in a soft, nonthreatening way. It has always worked. However, in the information age people are wise to these scheme because few of these Jedi Mind Tricks go undocumented.

While we'd all love for people like Oprah to relent and admit that she is a Brand and allow Sarah Palin to be on her show the reality is she's simply not going to do it. Some can get all worked up an a lather over it but it's not going to change anything. In time, those who get upset will make amends with Oprah which is all well and good. But never, NEVER forget that someone who builds an empire on a brand on their persona like Oprah, Obama, Trump, Branson, etc simply cannot selectively step away from any part of their brand.

McCain-Palin Win Where Bush Couldn't

I think that, if he wins, John McCain will have done what George Bush only wished he'd have accomplished. What's that you may be asking? Well, George Bush wanted to create a permanent majority for the Republicans. IF Sarah Palin can impress in person the way her resume does she could go toe to toe with Hilary Clinton in the future and having served as a VP would have an edge. She will come off as an in a head to head match up as a stark contrast. She's an accomplished woman who has done it without the help of her husband. She comes off as a less entitled person and more like your next door neighbor. She has a child with special needs and as a father of special needs childre I can say that I can relate to her. She's a former athlete, outdoors person and beauty queen. A lot of men can relate to that. So while Sarah Palin could have an impact in the 2008 election the impact of her nomination may have a more resounding impact in 2012 or 2016.

Change, YES! Big Government, no.

I've got to hand it to Barak Obama. He performed well last night and his speech was very good. And I agree with him that America needs to change. The elected 'leaders' in Washington care more about their team than they do about the country. God forbid that they actually work together on an initiative for the benefit of the country over having an edge over their political opponent. I'm actually for eliminating party politics because they're counter poductive and legally not mentioned in the US Constitution.

So a resounding YES to change from what we see now in Washington. But what about the change that Barak Obama spoke to last night. He gave us a Clintonian litany of big government concepts and solutions to our problems. Yet, dispite the all of the stories about Obama's difficult past he succeeded without big government. So, why, other than for political reasons, are big government solutions necessary.

What change should we expect this election cycle. Well, few if anyone is talking about how we're being challenged in the world. China and India have cost advantages over US workers. The Arab states are milking us of our dollars because of worldwide demand for energy. Russia, now a wealthy capitalist country with a flat tax, is reasserting itself in the world. The change we need is in our mindset. This is now a global world so US centric thinking will not work.

I don't mean that we should make a beeline for the UN and place an emphasis on world government. We need to keep our sovergnty but need to be prepared to live, work and compete in a multi-power world. We need to get energy independent, export oriented and thinking bigger than what our government can do for us. We need to stop attacking our companies who will provide the jobs and export capability that will create an economy with fewer dips. Don't believe me? Look at recent GDP numbers. Our economy grew by 3.3% - a number far larger than expected. Not exactly the stuff of depression or even recession. Why? Because we grew through importing less (mostly because of a slowing domestic economy) and an increase in exports. Those jobs that Barak Obama says are going overseas may actually be remaining here in the US and helping us to grow.

So, over the next 3 months when people talk of change tell them you agree. When they tell you that Big Government is the answer tell them to revisit their premise.

My John Kerry Moment

The first rule of blogging is to never change your mind. There's a public record of everything you say and if you change your mind you'll be branded a flip-flopper like Senator John Kerry. The second rule of blogging is to never change your mind. Same reason.

Since my post about boycotting the networks and 24 hour news channels I have received news that there are some fireworks going on at MSNBC. Apparently, Joe Scarborough, former Republican Congressman and current host of Morning Joe, and Keith Olbermann, MSNBC's resident hate monger and self appointed second coming, had words. It didn't end there because Scarborough had words with David Shuster this morning.

I'm going to flip flop and tune in tonight, at the risk of falling into their ratings ploy. While the political coverage these days is for the hate Bush crowd I'm not expecting a revelation.
They say that some people go to NASCAR events looking for a wreck so I'm going to tune in and hope for another wreck. If I'm really lucky there'll be a celebrity death match.

Viewing the DNC Convention the Wrong Way

I'm tired of the 24 hour news channels and network news. There's no journalism at these networks and I'm really really tired of the nitpicking and the anchors reading vitriol written by others who then go on to make snarky remarks (yes, Keith Olbermanm I'm talking about you). So, rather than endure more torture I found a new outlet to watch the convention - BBC America.

Yes, BBC America. The British National Network's USA division. A show hosted by Brits trying to decipher American politics. Do they make mistakes? Yes, the anchor tried to make a connection between President Kennedy's ascension to the president via the US Senate and the path for Barak Obama. A colleague had to remind him that it's the same path that John McCain would be making. Mistakes aside, I'm still not down on the coverage. They're trying and they're not under the pretense that the coverage needs to be from the right or from the left they want to neutral. And they're willing to do something that I'm not seeing from the American media - asking challenging follow up questions that force the interviewee off their talking points.

So, CNN, Fox, CNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS you all can count me out. I'll be tuning into the BBC for the next two weeks.

Gravitas

So, Barak Obama picks Joe Biden as his running mate. The pick was to balance the ticket with someone with foreign policy experience and Washington experience. 8 years ago, when George W. Bush selected Dick Chaney it was exactly for the same reasons. What did the media say at the time? They ALL and I mean all came out saying that Chaney's selection added 'Gravitas' to the ticket. I'm waiting for the media's use of 'Gravitas' in response to the Biden selection.

"Above my pay grade"

Q (Rick Warren). Now, let’s deal with abortion. 40 million abortions since Roe v. Wade. you know, as a pastor I have to deal with this all of the time. All of the pain and all of the conflicts. I know this is a very complex issue. 40 million abortions. At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?

A (Barak Obama). Well, I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade. But let me just speak more generally about the issue of abortion because this is something obviously the country wrestles with. One thing that I’m absolutely convinced of is there is a moral and ethical content to this issue. So I think that anybody who tries to deny the moral difficulties and gravity of the abortion issue I think is not paying attention. So that would be point number one.

Not exactly a Presidential answer to any question. Is it just me or is Barak Obama looking and behaving like a playground weakling? First, he allows Hillary Clinton's name to be put into nomination at next week's convention. Let's not forget that Hillary didn't lose by much when it came to delegates and is currently on the outside looking in because of the Super Delegates, or Democratic elected officials, who went for Obama even as the closing states were going to Clinton. Since these voters can change their minds at any time whose to say if Obama's audition over the last few months causes a few to change hands in smoke-filled back room in Denver? Not exactly the type of move that Sun-Tsu or Nicolo Machivelli would recommend to world learders.

Case 2 is the Russian invasion of Georgia. Has there been a clear and decisive statement from Obama yet? Has he been forceful in a way that gives you confidence that if he received the 3AM call that he'd get the Russians to back down the way that Dirty Harry got 'punks' to back down while looking at his Magnam? No. Yet, he goes on as if he gave a definitive answer to the question while the Russian army digs in for the long haul. Meanwhile, John McCain had siezed the issue and came off as more presidential than our sitting President. Strike 2.

Now we see this self-neutering answer to a difficult question in which he clearly did not want to make enemies in his base or among the audience - both live and in santuary. There are more Clintonian ways to answer them. Since I am not as artful as to try to define the word 'is' I'm not going to offer any. However, I am astute enough to know that way that when you do respond you frame the answer in a way that makes you look authoritative and insightful even though some will invariably disagree with you. This response was neither and the end result is frightening because once you occupy the Oval Office there are supposed to be no pay grades above you.

Women's Gymnastics All-Around

Thank you to Miss. Liukim & Miss. Johnson for going Gold & Silver in the gymnastics all-around and making me look like I know what I'm talking about. And good luck I'm the upcoming event finals.

Sent from my iPhone 3G

Olympic Coverage

I doubt that I'm the first to say this but the NBC Olympic coverage is really bugging me. Part of my does not really like the NBC hype machine. "Must See TV" was really only must see when Seinfield was on. After that there was nothing must see about it. Throw in their political coverage which is far more over the top than Fox News ever was, their painting of everything the color green and a GE swagger which should have been gone long ago since GE is not as relavent now as it was when Jack Welch ran the company and you'll understand my slightly negative feelings for the network.

Still, I want to watch our team and want to like Bob Costas. Costas is from Commack, New York and went to the same high school that I did - Commack High School South. So this Long Islander and Spartan wants to watch the best that Costas and NBC can offer moreso out of Spartan pride (cue the SNL cheerleader sketch) than anything else. I've seen Costas do some great stuff in the past and currently on HBO. His interview with Hank Aaron and Willie Mays last month was simply superlative. So, my hopes for good coverage outweighed my dislike for NBC.

Dislike - 1, Hopes - 0. Why? I don't mind that Michael Phelps is the story - how could it not be? I don't mind that they'll sometimes be homers. This is as Borat said the United States and America and if we can't be homers inside our borders then when can we be? But they've done more to over-hype and create contraversy that really doesn't exist than necessary during an Olympics. Need evidence? Here it is:

The night of the 4 x 100 meter men's relay NBC made the story more than Phelps. They showed a clipping of a quote by one of the French swimmers where he said that his team came to Olympics to beat the US relay squad. That was fine for a moment but they keep bringing it up over and over and over again. That story popped up and died the same day. Why beat it to death unnecessarily.

More nonsense during the women's gymnastics team finals. This was a China -vs- US story. The two best teams in the world head to head. China was leading and opened the door. One of our gymnasts had a bad night and fell twice leading us to a silver while the Chinese won gold. OK they won we had a chance and blew it. NBC goes back to the studio and has Bella Caroli, gymnastics coaching legend and husband of the current US coach, analyze how the events unfolded. Fine, Bella can give insights to the sports that few can and normally I'd appreciate the analysis. However, he came out with an anti-Chinese tirade about the age of the girls saying that some on the team are younger than the 16 year age limit. He didn't stop there arguing that the younger athletes don't fear the limelight or losing as much as the older ones - a way of saying that our 20 year-old who fell was at a significant disadvantage even with her years of international competition experience. Now, for one I don't trust the Chinese and believe that they'll game the system to try to win. Just look at the 1984-ish stuff that they pulled to enhance the opening ceremonies. But the we lost because you cheat story is not one that this American wants to hear. I want us to win even though they do cheat. And if we come up short I want us to take the fight to them in the next even and prove that we're still better. In other words I don't want excuses I want competition. This story line put the coverage into the tabloid realm.

Finally, there are the human interest stories and in studio banter that just gnaw at me. I was a huge Jim McKay fan growing up because of how he handled the Olympics in 1972 & 1976. The up close and personal pieces were terrific and were done for more than just Americans. They set the table for the stories on the fields. There was no friendly banter it was all business. But everything in the studio is an inside joke, a snarky remark or something to witty for the rest of us. The stories don't have the effect of making the coverage more interesting or personal because we don't have enough of a back story on the athletes - Americans or other.

Sadly, I'll still watch. I want to see Michael Phelps break Mark Spitz record - an indellible memory from when I was 7. I want to see fellow Marquette University alum Dwyane Wade bring home a Gold Medal in basketball. I want to see Americans go Gold and Silver in the women's gymnastics all-around proving that our depleted team is made up of true athletes not just one trick ponies. And when the coverage turns to the studio I'll be on my iPhone texting one of my teenage nieces or surfing the web. Anything but watching the coverage in studio.

USA! USA! USA!...

The Bear is Back! Will the ad be?

Back in the '80's there was a political commercial produced by the Reagan campaign which was simple but made an important point about the need for an experienced Commander in Chief. The visual was simple, a huge bear shown in it's natural environment. The narrator spoke about the bear, not knowing it's intentions and the ramifications of actions when interacting with the bear.

It should come as no surprise that the bear in the woods represented the Soviet Union. The actions described were the potential actions of the candidates in the presidential race - the democratic leave the bear alone/don't upset the bear approach versus Reagan's load up on weapons and be ready approach.

Over the last 20 years the bear has been in hibernation. But the recent events in Georgia show us that he's awake again. Not only that he's shed some pounds, is hungry, mad and is far stronger than he was before his long rest. Russia has gone through a transformation. Russia now has a market economy on top of it's already vast natural resources. In fact, they have the most important natural resource in the world right now - oil. The Russians never lacked imagination or the will to be technologically advanced. They were founding members of the nuclear club, led the world in space technology and had advanced fighters and missiles. With money they have all of that and less poverty so now there's no choice between weapons and feeding the masses. In short, the Russians may be more dangerous now than the crumbling Evil Empire of the '80's.

The question now is how will this play out in our current presidential campaign. One candidate is a political newcomer with no foreign policy experience who was damaged when his primary opponent ran an ad about him getting a 3AM call. The call in that ad was about terrorism but in the new context can be about terrorism or an invasion of a friend or ally - both of which Georgia is. The other candidate is as old as Reagan when the ad was run and actually has more military experience that Reagan did. Will he rerun the ad or a variation of it to make a similar point? If I were his adviser I know I would.

Olympic Message - 1

For months we've heard in the media that the United States is done. Our best days are behind us, we're about to get our economic and political heads handed to us by the rest of the world, we can't do anything right anymore. I could go on but you get the point because you've seen tons of those reports and heard many arguments for that position for a long time now. I have opinions about why it started and when it started but that's simply not the point of this post.

The point is that someone needs to tell our Olympic athletes. Yesterday, there were two stories that we should all take note of because our athletes could have done what the media wants us all to do and pack it in when things get tough but in the end did not.

Story 1 is the men's 4 X 100 meter swimming relay. Yes, our team has Michael Phelps on it but was not the favorite going in. The folks on NBC made it a point to tell us that 1) France was going to win and that 2) they were talking trash. So they lowered our expectations and were supposed to settle for Silver. The American team led early and then gave up the lead to France just as NBC predicted. By the turn of the final leg it looked like NBC was right. Then Jason Lezak began to close the gap. With 25 meters (1/2 a pool length) he had almost caught up. It wasn't until the closing fractions of a second that he took the lead and won the Gold for the US. The French swimmers were stunned while the American team celebrated. I'm sure that our swimmers would have been proud with a Silver medal but they didn't settle for it. They put their all into the event and walked away with a win.

Story 2 is the women's gymnastics team. When they were first shown on TV you could tell something was up. They all looked like they were dealt a blow and they were. One team member was already injured and would be limited to one of four events. Now they found out that a second teammate was limited to the same way. They had 4 gymnasts who could compete in all events meaning that all of their scores would count - no margin for error. The night started out badly. Two gymnasts had penalties which reduced their scores which had an impact on the team's score. They settled down a bit on the vault but had more trouble on the uneven bars where two gymnasts either fell off or did not land their dismount. All looked bad going into the balance beam, arguably the most difficult even in the rotation. Something happened at that point. One after another the gymnasts turned in excellent performances. In the end, the team managed to finish the first round in 2nd just 1.5 points behind the Chinese team and in a position to take the gold when the competition begins again.

4 years of hard work. Hearts of lions in a pressure spot. That's how American athletes responded. For them there's glory - it is the Olympics and it's all on TV. However, we are all in a similar but not as bad situation right now yet the media would tell us it is more dire than it is. Do us all a favor, the next time the media decides that we're done turn them off or throw out their print article. Get back to doing what you do best, buckle down and win one for our Olympic athletes knowing that small victories by each of us will lead to a big victory for America.

Now that's what I'

Test

Testing iPhone to blog capability.

Best Regards,

Directionally Challenged
Sent from my iPhone 3G

Military Service and Patriotism and the Truth

Interesting news cycle in the Presidential campaign. First, Obama's surrogate former General Wesley Clark, a failed presidential contender himself, questions John McCain's military record in Swift Boat fashion on Face the Nation. After the host questioned Obama's absence of a military record Gen. Clark basically said that getting shot down in an airplane does not qualify one to be Commander and Chief and said that McCain had no (military) executive experience.

I've heard the buzz over this and other comments in the last 24 hours. While it is true that getting shot down in an airplane, getting captured, tortured and refusing to being sent home do not qualify one to be Commander and Chief I somehow think that Clark and his fellow democrats are missing something in their critique and republicans missing something in their response. McCain grew up in a military family. His father was an admiral. McCain also attended the US Naval Academy and graduated from that institution. So we know that McCain, dispite his reported poor class ranking at Anapolis, is far more qualified to be Commander and Chief then Bill "I lothe the military" Clinton, George "MIA from National Guard Duty" Bush, Hillary "I married a Commander and Chief" Clinton and Barak "I've got nothing" Obama because none of the above have/had anything close on their resume before their quest for the White House.

This is simply more tactical politics as usual. Someone rates highly in an area and the Sun Tsu thing is to do is to make the strength a weakness. We saw it with Bush on Terrorism and Iraq and now it's going to rear it's ugly head yet again. The only thing is that they're trying to take down a true hero, not a counter culture hero like John Kerry, down and that should upset each and every American Patriot.

And that's my segway into Obama's Partiotism speach yesterday. The timing couldn't be better considering the dust storm that his campaign kicked up the previous day by attacking McCain. One has to question the integrity of Obama and his minions after the attack on McCain. Is it patriotic to attack the military qualifications of a genuine war hero? Is it dignified and proper to question his record? Yet, the attack went unpunished even after Obama said that he'll stand for no one questioning the Patriotism of his opponents. Well, if you throw down the gauntlet how about following through on it? Is this how an Obama Presidency would work - talk harshly and carry no stick? Then you see the scripted 'this has no place' comments later on as if the whole production was scripted from the beginning.

Now let's talk about Obama and Patriotism. Did we get another "Ask not..." speach from the person who is compared to Kennedy? No. Did we get something that reveals they type of Patriotism that we should all practice on into the future. No. We got a whiney speach about Obama and his journey. Great for him, maybe it's cathartic and will help him to stay out of therapy but where's the leadership in that? Where's the unifying theme? Where's the rallying cry? Where's the part that makes us all, including Mrs. Obama, proud to be Americans? Still waiting.

Obama's campaign at this stage is nothing more than a B-School exercise and that's not being fair to business schools. Talking about leadership does not make one a leader. Talking about change does not make change happen. Providing us with a biography and personal views about Patriotism does not give use anything to be Patroitic about. Please wake me up when Obama begins to talk about the tangible because Obama doesn't have the chops to take the theoritical aspects of America and top the founding fathers. And the lack of the practical tells me that he doesn't have the experience or capacity for a promotion so quickly after winning a Senate seat from a carpetbagging Alan Keys (good man but not an Illini).

Ready for Takeoff

I've long considered blogging but always felt that I had nothing to say. The more I though about it the more I concluded that my original premise was wrong. Lately, I've been trying to get my bearings straight after having jobs that kept me on the road 80-100% of the time. Now that my world is beginning to make more sense I see that the world around me doesn't. Things that worked are falling apart mostly out of reaction rather than out of intent. The result is a set of unintended consequences that have impacted us all. For example, since the early '70's this country had talked about an energy policy and nothing was done - ever! Jimmy Carter created a bureaucracy called the Energy Department and what do we have to show for it? We have no more supply of energy than if it didn't exist. We have no energy alternatives because the department had no political capital to spend in order to get us alternatives. So we're back in the '70's with better clothes and music but no energy policy. Democrats and Republicans have both failed as have all of the institutions that were supposed to fix problems.

This is only one example of things that frustrate me. The answer is not another conservative or liberal blog it's one that cuts through the nonsense attempts to understand the problem and come up with true solutions. Not some middle-way that appeases both sides but one that solves the problem. And there was a time when people in Washington put the good of the country before their 'Team' but no longer. Problems are not going to get fixed they're going to get politicized. So to make me feel a whole lot better I'm going to blog about it and hope that some folks agree. Maybe more will come of it than that but for now it's just my words and ideas. Hopefully, my world will continue to allow me to do this somewhat frequently.


Best Regards,

J