tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-78782663402136626902024-02-22T12:21:59.879-07:00A Random Childarandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-5208599605427031592017-01-04T15:19:00.000-07:002017-01-04T15:19:55.206-07:00You can trust us. We're politicians.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzighhm6yXXHB1DKenGEP18-h8XuqMnl3FVgI5JomJDqASKJfCUUV-4sj-9y9qxON7kskkRijZDArUomnPyf_Vd9rwYNuT9XrHJxFWcswNggkzosU17rR5LWNIJo9ZASwOcJu9lyELasQ/s1600/03ethics-master768.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzighhm6yXXHB1DKenGEP18-h8XuqMnl3FVgI5JomJDqASKJfCUUV-4sj-9y9qxON7kskkRijZDArUomnPyf_Vd9rwYNuT9XrHJxFWcswNggkzosU17rR5LWNIJo9ZASwOcJu9lyELasQ/s320/03ethics-master768.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Well, it looks like the new gov'ment has decided to start the year off with a bang in the form of a traditional Congressional kerfuffle. Seems the Republicans in the House o' Representatives weren't too happy 'bout the idea of a bunch of regular folks looking over their shoulders while they're busy living up to the their responsibilities of passing laws 'n' making policy decisions to support their main constituency. (In this case, read "constituency" as, "lobbyists offering the biggest bribes".) Course, they got a point - how many of us can do our jobs with someone constantly telling us, "You cain't do that! It's illegal.", ever'time we try to do something we ain't supposed to just 'cause someones handing us great wads of cash to do it anyway? So they decided that, 'fore the latest crop of deep-pocket lobbyists descend on Washington, they should get their House in order and get rid of the Office of Congressional Ethics 'fore they started prying into their soon-to-be fatter secret bank accounts. Course, they do have a point. Why do you need an Office of Congressional Ethics when folks have known for years that Congress has no ethics, which certain members have proven time and time again?<br /><br />But let's take a little deeper look into this thing. For those of you who might not be familiar with the Office of Congressional Ethics, they are an "independent, non-partisan entity charged with reviewing allegations of misconduct against Members, officers, and staff of the United States House of Representatives" who review "a wide variety of allegations relating to earmarks, travel, financial disclosure, and legal expense funds". They are composed of "private citizens and cannot serve as members of Congress or work for the federal government" and consist "primarily of attorneys and other professionals with expertise in ethics law and investigations". (All quotes are taken from the official web site of the Office of Congressional Ethics.) So, they're basically a group of non-governmental professional citizens who make sure that members of the House and their staff are keeping their noses clean and investigating those who ain't. Another important thing to know is that they don't have any actual powers to do anything to the folks they's investigating. All they do is present the reports and findings of their investigations to the House Ethics Committee for further review and actions. Now, that may seem like nothing that should be raising this big of a fuss amongst so many members of the House, but the real kicker comes with what happens when their reports are sent to the House Ethics Committee - they are also made public. Not only are they made public but, according to the terms under which the OCE operates, they <i><b>must</b></i> be made public. I'm willing to bet cash money that it's that last part that has so many Representatives frothing at the mouth to get rid of the OCE. (And, in the spirit of the kind of fairness that certain politicians seem to believe in only in word and not deed, both Republicans and Democrats have been gunning to gut the OCE of its powers ever since day one.)<br /><br />Still, looks like we ain't gotta worry too much 'bout it. Good old President-elect Grump has put an end to the House's shenanigans . . . for now. 'N', in typical Grumpian fashion, he did it with a scathing tweet condemning the Republican members of the House for their actions. He said that, with ever'thing else they got to work on, cutting taxes for the rich and repealing health care for ever'one and all that, did they really want to make this their number one priority? Course, if we take a closer look at what President-elect Grump really said, we might get a difer'nt picture of the whole thing. His exact tweet reads, "With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance! #DTS" So, what President-elect Grump seems to be actually saying is that he agrees with the Members of the House that having an independent group making sure they play by the rules is somehow "unfair". It also appears that he is not saying that they shouldn't be trying to gut the OCE's powers - he's just saying they shouldn't be trying to do it right now. The betting on how long it is 'fore they return to this issue and try again at some later date starts now.<br />
arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-6863657307282559242017-01-03T10:59:00.001-07:002017-01-03T11:12:51.582-07:00Happy New Year!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikuv6nfTghUt3iy80itfxkmwojeWI6GV4ovhsTm3cKjpK8Ezd_gsW45UeIqBH4U743Us7wXI8_UQOYpcUzal18v35MWMek3njwJTvdWM_1sEhi-znGFutCXGADFhRDufsRdUGwwTGUR7A/s1600/o-BLACK-NEW-YEARS-facebook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikuv6nfTghUt3iy80itfxkmwojeWI6GV4ovhsTm3cKjpK8Ezd_gsW45UeIqBH4U743Us7wXI8_UQOYpcUzal18v35MWMek3njwJTvdWM_1sEhi-znGFutCXGADFhRDufsRdUGwwTGUR7A/s320/o-BLACK-NEW-YEARS-facebook.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div dir="ltr">
Well, here we are at the start of a New Year, 'n' we all know what that means. For those of y'all that don't, it means recovering from any excesses you may have indulged in while celebrating the end of the Old Year. There is one small differ'nce with this New Year, though. Thanks to all the foolishness that was the Old Year's Presidential election, even those of us that did not indulge in the bacchanalian excesses of others is going to have to deal with the suffering of the New Year hangover. So, thank you to everyone who was complicit in helping to nominate a candidate who couldn't have won to run against a candidate that shouldn't have won. To the rest of ya'll, buckle up 'n' hang on. 2017 is shaping up to be one humdinger of a ride.</div>
arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-15063654120668990712011-01-17T18:06:00.000-07:002011-01-17T18:06:00.417-07:00Monuments o' Stone<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #262626; font-family: arial; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px;"></span><br />
<div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is a little something I jotted down back in November o' 2006 when they dedicated the monument to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. up in Washington.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I sure am relieved to hear they's putting up a monument to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Washington D.C. today. 'Specially after hearing that President Jr. said "on this ground, a monument will rise that will preserve his legacy for ages." I'd been beginning to worry that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s legacy's in danger o' disappearing on us, but now we's gonna get us a pile o' rocks up in the capital to preserve 'em, I guess they's nothing to fear 'bout on that front. Plus, I'm sure it's a load off o' the mind o' other folks, too, 'cause now they ain't gotta worry 'bout passing no more laws to ensure civil rights ner making sure the current ones're enforced. In fact, maybe they can even start getting rid o' some o' them laws. I mean, they's paying $65.5 million dollars fer this pile o' stones to keep his legacy under, why cain't we just get a little more mileage outta 'em 'n' use 'em to store his ideals 'n' dreams 'n' accomplishments as well? It's a memorial, after all. That's what you put up to honor the memory of a person er event, right? So now we's gonna have this here pile o' rocks to remember him by, why do we need to remember him with words 'n' deeds 'n' actions?</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">'N' just why're we putting up a memorial to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. fer anyway? Don't get me wrong, now. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a great man who accomplished a lot o' good, not just fer any one group o' people, but fer all o' humanity. But, great as he was, he was not the Civil Rights movement solely unto himself. They was lots o' other folks who were in that fight with him, before him, 'n' since him. Why're folks so anxious to th'ow up monuments to this one man on account o' the work he did fer Civil Rights but you don't see too many people running 'round trying to scrape up a bunch o' money to th'ow together a pile o' rocks to memorialize Civil Rights entire? 'N' I mean all o' Civil Rights, not just the Civil Rights o' any partic'lar group 'cause they ain't just fer any partic'lar group. 'N' I don't think Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was fighting fer the Civil Rights of just one partic'lar group.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">We could have us a great big pile o' stones with statues 'n' quotes 'n' pictures. Maybe something like a great big Stonehenge kinda contraption with each o' the outside stones dedicated to one o' the individual fighters er groups in the battle fer Civil Rights like Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 'n' Mrs. Rosa Parks 'n' Mr. Cesar Chavez 'n' the ACLU 'n' freedom riders 'n' the United Farm Workers 'n' even the Supreme Court 'n' such's that. Then, inside o' that ring o' protecting stones, we could have a ring o' stones dedicated to the legislation passed to protect the Civil Rights o' individuals: stones to <em style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Brown v. Board of Education</em> 'n'<em style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: italic; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Roe v. Wade</em> 'n' the Civil Rights Act o' 1964. Then, in the center, the largest part o' the memorial could be gardens 'n' fountains dedicated to the single largest 'n' most important group involved in the struggle fer Civil Rights: the vicitims. They could be things like reflecting pools 'n' rose gardens 'n' cherry groves dedicated to folks like Matthew Shepard 'n' Malcolm X.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: 11px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ask me, that's the kind o' memorial they should be putting up in Washington D.C. Then again, with the one they's putting up fer one man costing something like $65.5 million dollars so far, it might be a bit expensive trying to put up something to honor all the thousands who we owe rememb'rances to 'long them lines. Maybe that's why they decided to just do a memorial to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. alone. Which makes me kinda wonder what he would o' thought o' all this. Seems to me, if you's to ask Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. which he'd rather have, $65.5 million dollars spent on a pile o' rocks to preserve his legacy er $65.5 million dollars spent on education 'n' programs to keep his legacy alive 'n' moving forward, I get the feeling he might o' just preferred the latter. I never met the man, but, somehow, I get the feeling that, if I's to ask him, he'd say something 'long the lines o' "If you wish to build a memorial to me, build me no memorials of stone or steel, for they are cold and dead things and even stone and steel will crumble to dust in time. If you wish to build a memorial to me, build me a memorial of your words and your deeds and your actions to one another, for these are living, breathing things that will endure as long as you speak them and do them and pass them on to the generations to come. If you wish to build a memorial to me, build me no memorial in the cities of man, for even the greatest cities can be destroyed and pass into the dust of time. If you wish to build a memorial to me, build me a memorial in your heart and in the hearts of all who cherish justice and truth and equality, for the hearts of honest and just men can never be destroyed and will last until the end of time."</div>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-64162407909120283722010-12-16T14:33:00.001-07:002010-12-16T15:57:12.258-07:00They Don't Write Westerns Like They Used To<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWrO40ufGEVimsr8yG_N6fhdIdXm_Imt04j5JVBhMgGSqq9FBaNgP1mswKQwSSzQaNdBnjUkOD27A8_DikUJSCNsTkuS3MLfsRpxKY1Fxu_5YmJBU0qoH8HTrbosJLyPjCYQC21d1hyphenhyphenAo/s1600/260xStory.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWrO40ufGEVimsr8yG_N6fhdIdXm_Imt04j5JVBhMgGSqq9FBaNgP1mswKQwSSzQaNdBnjUkOD27A8_DikUJSCNsTkuS3MLfsRpxKY1Fxu_5YmJBU0qoH8HTrbosJLyPjCYQC21d1hyphenhyphenAo/s1600/260xStory.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">United States Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry</td></tr>
</tbody></table><div><br />
<br />
A gang o' ruthless outlaws is preying on innocent folk somewhere in the desert south o' town. The federal agents get a tip as to where their hideout is, so they saddle up 'n' go looking fer 'em. They come across the desperadoes one night 'n' a shoot-out ensues. Law 'n' order prevails in the end 'n' the bad guys are brought to justice.<br />
<br />
Sounds like the plot o' one o' those ol' black 'n' white westerns you can still find playing on some late night cable channel, don't it. Well, this weren't the plot to no movie. This is something that actu'ly happened south o' here night 'fore last. In this case, the bad guys was a group o' five real life bandits that've been preying on illegal immigrants 'n' drug smugglers crossing into the United States from Mexico, 'n' the good guys was members o' the United States Border Patrol. Unfortunately, this being real life 'n' not some Hollywood make-believe story, the ending don't involve the good guys riding off into the sunset.<br />
<br />
True, the good guys won 'n' four o' the five bandits was brought to justice. (They's still looking fer the fifth one.) But it ended in tragedy with the death o' Brian Terry, one o' the Border Patrol agents. At some point during the gun battle, agent Terry was shot in the back 'n' died from his wounds some hours later.<br />
<br />
Firstly, I'd like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to a courageous, upstanding, dedicated human being who went far above 'n' beyond the call o' duty. I say "above 'n' beyond the call o' duty" not just 'cause he made the ultimate sacrifice o' giving his life in the cause o' justice, but 'cause he went beyond what was required of him by the agency he served. To explain what I mean by that, first let me quote the mission statement o' the United States Customs 'n' Border Patrol.<br />
<br />
"We are the guardians of our Nation's borders. We are America's frontline. We safeguard the American homeland at and beyond our borders. We protect the American public against terrorists and the instruments of terror. We steadfastly enforce the laws of the United States while fostering our Nation's economic security through lawful international trade and travel. We serve the American public with vigilance, integrity and professionalism."<br />
<br />
So, 'cording to this, it was agent Terry's duty to "safeguard the <u>American</u> homeland", "protect the <u>American</u> public", 'n' "serve the <u>American</u> public." But what agent Terry done wasn't done just fer the Americans. What agent Terry done was done to protect innocent folks irregardless o' where they was born er what country they was citizens of.<br />
<br />
Even more'n that, what he done was done to protect some not so innocent folks as well. In spite o' what you may've heard in various news stories, these bandits weren't rampaging through American towns massacring, raping, 'n' pillaging law-abiding American citizens. 'Member, these bandits was preying on "illegal" entrants 'n' drug smugglers. But that didn't stop agent Terry 'n' his fellow agents from going after these folks.<br />
<br />
Now, there is a secondly to this, but that's another story fer another day. I don't want to take anything away from the respect 'n' heartfelt thanks that folks like agent Terry 'n' others deserve fer putting their lives on the line to protect all folks from evils such as this. So I'll leave the ranting 'til another day 'n' just end by saying right is right. 'N' if you want to know what right looks like, take another look at that picture up there.</div>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-30835114021513970312010-11-02T17:43:00.000-07:002010-11-02T17:43:04.969-07:00Election Time, AgainWell, it's that time o' year again when we folks in the United States of America go out 'n' decide what we want to complain about fer the next one er more years. The day we try to figger out who the smallest liar is 'n' whether er not we want to agree to vote ourselves another tax we can gripe about having to pay. The day we have to make an extra trip, carve a little extra time out of our busy schedules, 'n' put up with long lines full o' folks we normally wouldn't want to be within fifty feet of, just so we can put some marks on a sheet o' paper 'n' hope that enough other people're smart enough to put the same marks down so that our marks will actually count fer something. It's election day.<br />
<br />
I was sharpening my tongue up fer a big ol' diatribe 'bout the sorry bunch o' folks we got to choose from this year. I was coming up with 'n' reviewing some, hopefully, witty 'n' scathing remarks 'bout the propositions they's trying to fool us into getting passed, er voting down. I was ready to lament the poor state o' the Arizona constitution, which they seem determined to keep hacking up, tacking on to, 'n' just generally rewriting ever' year. But then I read something last night that made me rethink the whole thing.<br />
<br />
It was an article by <a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/05939949561996555115">Peter M.</a> on his blog 'bout <a href="http://newenglandfolklore.blogspot.com/">New England Folklore</a>. Mr. M. said that, back in the early years o' this country, even 'for it was a country, folks used to vote in the fall fer their local officials even though the officials didn't take office until the next May. The day they took office in May was called "Election Day" 'n' was celebrated like a holiday. He says that, by 'bout the mid 1700's, the celebrations included such things as parades, parties, athletic events, 'n' even special cakes. The best part 'bout it was, it was a celebration 'bout the simple fact o' being able to elect folks. Nowadays, it seems like the only celebrating folks do 'bout elections is to celebrate that their side won er the other side lost.<br />
<br />
So I read that. 'N' then I thought 'bout it a bit. 'N' then I thought 'bout it a bit more. 'N' then I thought 'bout all the time that has passed between then 'n' nowadays 'n' all the changes that have happened in this country 'n' the ways folks viewed the whole voting 'n' election processes during all those 250 to 300 years. Then I thought 'bout the way so many folks seem to treat voting these days.<br />
<br />
I thought 'bout the stories I've read 'bout how they used to close down the bars 'n' taverns 'n' the pubs 'n' the buying o' liquor on election days 'n' how you couldn't buy a drink 'til after the polls'd closed 'cause going out to cast your vote was a serious, sober responsibility. Do they even still do that these days? I'd be willing to bet real money that I could walk down to the local grocery store 'n' buy a six pack er a fifth o' something er other 'n' wouldn't no one bat an eye. I bet I could walk into any bar in town at any time today 'n' watch folks getting drunker 'n' drunker as they watched the election news. I'd even be willing to bet that there'd be at least one person, already well past the "legal" limit, who'd suddenly stand up 'n' say, "Shoot! I ain't even voted yet," 'fore running out to the polls.<br />
<br />
I thought 'bout the stories o' folks who would get dressed up in their Sunday best to go vote 'cause voting was so important 'n' serious as church. Now days it seems like folks just show up in whatever they happen to have on er whatever they can grab 'fore they head out. In the last Presidential election, there was even a few folks in line who hadn't even bothered to change out o' their bed clothes. (Although, I guess I should give 'em credit fer being so eager 'n' dedicated to vote in that one that they was willing to get up at all that early in the morning.)<br />
<br />
I thought 'bout all those folks back 'fore there were cars who had to walk er ride miles 'n' miles to get to where they was supposed to go to vote 'cause it was so important to 'em. So many of 'em today seem to treat it more like some kind o' chore er drudge than the right er privilege that it is. They seem to approach it like it's some sort of odious task, like having to clean the cat box er jury duty er something. The biggest thing these days seem to be all the folks signing up to early vote er vote by mail so they don't have to take that extra time out o' their day to go do it. Personally, I get a big shot o' pride walking up to that desk 'n' taking pen in hand to mark all those little circles. I stand a little taller when I walk out o' the building with my little "I Voted" sticker tacked onto my shirt. I ain't never seen it as a chore ner an imposition. I've always seen it as a solemn something I'm more'n proud 'n' happy 'n' honored to do.<br />
<br />
'N' I thought 'bout the idea of a bunch o' dour, humorless Puritans kicking their heels up 'n' having celebrations 'cause the folks <i>they</i> got to pick was stepping into office, instead of a bunch o' folks someone else had lumped 'em with. Now days it seems like so many folks're so busy voting 'gainst something er someone they cain't take no joy in their decisions. Maybe that's why we ain't having no parades ner parties ner even special cakes to celebrate the fact that the folks <i>we</i> get to pick're stepping into office. Maybe too many folks these days're feeling like they's stuck with a bunch o' folks someone else lumped 'em with 'cause they felt like they couldn't vote fer who they really wanted lest the "wrong" person wound up winning.<br />
<br />
So I thought 'bout all this stuff 'n' I decided I was going to try 'n' learn a lesson from the way they viewed elections back in the olden days. From here on out, I'm going to try 'n' keep my sharp tongue in my pocket on election day. I'm going to try 'n' keep my civil tongue in my mouth on the days I get the privilege o' going to the polls 'n' jotting down my two cents' worth in the form o' little dots on a page. I'm going to try 'n' show the day the respect it rightfully deserves 'n', who knows, maybe next year I'll even make a special cake on the day. 'Sides, I got all the other days o' the year to take my sharp tongue out o' my pocket 'n' use it.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-43125667960729257892010-10-28T14:56:00.001-07:002010-10-29T09:05:05.237-07:00I'll Drink ('n' Drive) to ThatSaw a story online 'bout a feller who lost an argument with a train the other day. The feller's name was Jason Michael Hair 'n' the altercation took place near Queen Creek, Arizona, which is a little southeast o' Phoenix. What happened was, he was speeding down the road, texting on his cell phone, 'n' broke right through the crossing arms and smacked into the side o' the train, which was already in the process o' crossing the road. One witness to the crash claimed that Hair had passed him, doing somewhere near 65 mph, so intent on his typing to whoever was on the other end o' the phone that he either didn't notice the train, er was unaware o' just how fast he was going 'n' couldn't stop in time. (Makes me wonder just what he was typing, too. "Hey! I'm going to try for one of those "Darwin Awards"!")<br />
<br />
They said the crash was so bad that Hair had to be cut out o' the wreckage 'n' suffered a head injury. Now, you might be thinking, "Well, he got what he deserved for being so stupid, then," 'n' you might be right. The thing was, though, that his four-year-old boy was in the car with him. The son survived, too, but he also had to be cut out o' the wreckage 'n' was flown to a local hospital as a precaution. Whatever Hair may have deserved fer his stupidity, his boy sure didn't deserve to suffer fer it.<br />
<br />
Anyways, this story got me to thinking 'bout the last time I was up fer jury duty. See, the case we was being considered to jury fer was a drunk driving case. (They didn't actu'ly say that, but when they start asking prospective jurors questions 'bout whether they've ever been convicted o' drunk driving er whether er not they er a loved one has ever been involved in an accident that was caused by a drunk driver, you kind o' get the indication that that's what the whole thing's 'bout.) More important, it was just after they'd started running news stories 'bout studies done on the dangers o' yapping on the phone er texting while you're driving.<br />
<br />
So, once they'd picked their first dozen possible jurors 'n' sent the rest of us out in the hall while they questioned 'em a little more intensely, I sat there thinking 'bout those studies 'n' 'bout how they was some that claimed to show that yapping on the phone er texting while driving was least as dangerous, if not more so, than driving after a few drinks. Then I got to thinking 'bout how one o' these dangerous practices had been illegal fer decades while the other still didn't have no laws 'gainst it.<br />
<br />
Well, that was the direction my thoughts was running in when it turned out that there was some o' the original twelve who'd been dismissed, so they come out to question some o' the rest of us more closely, me being one o' those they chose. They took me in 'n' sat me down in a chair 'n' started asking me 'bout the time I'd been in an accident 'caused by someone who had given all appearances o' having been three sheets in the wind at the time. (Never did learn what that feller's problem was 'cause he wound up pleading guilty to the accident 'fore it ever got to trial. But when the guy leaves the scene o' the accident 'n' then shows up fifteen minutes er so later, pushing his car in the opposite direction 'cause it ain't working so good no more, you got to wonder 'bout what kind o' state his mental faculties 'n' judgement abilities're in.) All those questions was fairly easy to answer, 'cause all I had to do was tell the truth.<br />
<br />
Then the judge turns to me 'n' asked,"Is there any reason that you think you could not render a fair and impartial verdict in this case?" Well, I had to stop 'n' give that question some real consideration 'fore I answered it. I mean, here was a guy who was being tried fer doing something that was no more dangerous than what other folks was doing with no fear o' being hauled into court fer. So I told the judge that it just didn't sit right with me that this feller was facing the possibility o' legal repercussions fer doing something when there were studies that showed that something that was just as dangerous was considered perfectly fine 'n' legal.<br />
<br />
To my surprise, the judge agreed with me 'bout how he also thought that yapping on the phone while driving should be just as illegal as driving while intoxicated. But, he said, as a judge, his concern had to be with the law, 'n' since the law 'lowed one o' those actions while outlawing the other one, he didn't get to choose which ones appeared in his court. So he changed his question a might 'n' asked if I could overlook my opinions on driving while yapping 'n' render a fair 'n' impartial verdict based strictly on the law as it stood at that moment.<br />
<br />
I gave that a little more thought 'n' decided that, since I was a law-abiding citizen, it was my duty to see that the law was upheld 'n' render a verdict o' guilty if I felt that the prosecution had proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the feller had in fact been legally drunk at the time o' his apprehension. So that's what I told the judge. He thanked me fer my time 'n' sent me out o' the room while they brought in the next person to question. (I wasn't picked to serve on that jury, by the way.)<br />
<br />
Since then, I've given the topic a lot more thought. Mostly what I've thought about was this: Where do my duties as a law-abiding citizen really lie? Is it merely to see that the law, all laws, no matter whether I agree with 'em er not, are upheld? Don't I, as a citizen who loves his country 'n' should be concerned 'bout the rights of all my fellow citizens, also have a duty to fight against laws that are unjust 'n' discriminatory? If a law singles out one group o' folks fer punishment while 'lowing other groups o' folks to get away scott free fer doing something that is just as bad er dangerous, what is my duty then? Do I side with the law, er with the citizens who are being discriminated 'gainst?<br />
<br />
Isn't the law supposed to treat all folks equally? Shouldn't the law treat the drunk driver just the same as it treats the person who's yapping er typing on his phone while driving? 'N' what about the person who's so busy putting on makeup, er trying to read a road map, er eating, er yelling at the kids, er changing the station on the radio? (We actually did have a case like that a few years back where a young boy hit 'n' killed a lady on the side o' the road 'cause he'd looked down to change the radio. I don't 'member the partic'lars, but I'm pretty sure he got off with a lot lighter sentence than he would have if he'd had a couple beers in him.) Aren't those distractions just as dangerous as being drunk er texting?<br />
<br />
'N' what about a law that penalizes folks fer what they might do? That's what a lot o' these drunk driving (er "driving while intoxicated" er "driving under the influence" er whatever else they call 'em) laws're actu'ly punishing folks fer. I would be willing to bet real money that most folks who get convicted fer such offenses did so when they hadn't actu'ly 'caused any accident yet. They were hauled into court simply 'cause o' what they <i>might</i> do.<br />
<br />
Seems to me we should have just one law that applies to ever'body: a "driving while distracted" law, if you will. It would apply equally to anyone who has been drinking, anyone who is yapping on a phone, typing on a phone, putting on makeup, trying to read a road map, eating, yelling at the kids, changing the station on the radio, er whatever else it is they might be doing that takes their attention away from their driving. I just don't see how I can continue supporting anything less.<br />
<br />
So, if I ever get in another situation where a judge asks me if I can offer a fair 'n' impartial verdict based strictly on the law as it stood at that moment, I guess I would have to answer with I could only do so if the law, as it stood at that moment, was fairly 'n' equally applied to all folks who could fit in the broader scope o' the spirit o' that law 'n' what it was enacted to protect us against. I'm willing to bet I wouldn't get chosen fer that jury, neither.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-56261756639437177712010-02-08T16:21:00.000-07:002010-02-08T16:21:38.481-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part VIII)<table cols="2" cellspacing="10"><tr>
<td align="center" colspan="2">The State of the Union<br><br />
given by President Oprama<br><br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" width="50%">What they said</td>
<td align="center" width="50%">What I heard</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>That is the leadership that we are providing — engagement that advances the common security and prosperity of all people. We are working through the G-20 to sustain a lasting global recovery. We are working with Muslim communities around the world to promote science, education and innovation. We have gone from a bystander to a leader in the fight against climate change. We are helping developing countries to feed themselves and continuing the fight against HIV/AIDS. And we are launching a new initiative that will give us the capacity to respond faster and more effectively to bioterrorism or an infectious disease — a plan that will counter threats at home and strengthen public health abroad.</td>
<td>That's the kind o' leadership I'm providing: ensuring the security 'n' prosperity o' those who agree with me, 'n' endangering the security 'n' destroying the prosperity o' those who don't agree with me. We are working through the G-20 to take control o' the global economy so we can tell other countries how they should be doing things. We are working with Muslim communities 'round the world to try 'n' drag 'em into our version of enlightenment. We've finally caved in to the views o' the misguided 'n' gullible masses to fight global warming. We are helping developing countries so they'll quit taking our food so we can maybe start charging decent prices so more Americans can afford a decent meal 'n' continuing to try 'n' teach 'em how to keep it in their britches so they won't keep spreading AIDS. We are continuing to scare folks with the threat o' bioterrorism 'n' pandemics so the chemical 'n' drug companies can continue to make outrageous profits off their unnecessary products.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>As we have for over 60 years, America takes these actions because our destiny is connected to those beyond our shores. But we also do it because it is right. That is why, as we meet here tonight, over 10,000 Americans are working with many nations to help the people of Haiti recover and rebuild. That is why we stand with the girl who yearns to go to school in Afghanistan, we support the human rights of the women marching through the streets of Iran, and we advocate for the young man denied a job by corruption in Guinea. For America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity.</td>
<td>Just like we have fer over 60 years, we're doing this because it is America's destiny to rule the world. We also do it 'cause we're right, 'n' ever'body else needs to realize that. That's why we're helping folks in Haiti recover from their earthquake, so they'll think we're so wonderful they'll want to be like us. That's why we support girls wanting to go to school in Afghanistan, women marching 'gainst the gov'ment in Iran, folks who ain't corrupt enough to get a job in Guinea, so they'll all think we're so wonderful they'll want to be like us. 'Cause America must always stand on the side o' the way we define freedom 'n' human dignity.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Abroad, America’s greatest source of strength has always been our ideals. The same is true at home. We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal, that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it, that if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.</td>
<td>Abroad, our greatest source o' strngth has always been American ideals. That holds true here. We find unity in diverse folks all acting 'n' thinking the same, drawing on the promise in our Constititution that all American citizens are created equal, long as you look kind o' the same as the majority o' other Americans, if you don't fight against the unconstitutional 'n' discrimanatory laws imposed upon you, that if you just do what you're told you will be treated like ever'one else. Course, you have to be a legal American citizen fer us to allow you to claim all those freedoms 'n' rights.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>We must continually renew this promise. My administration has a civil rights division that is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination. We finally strengthened our laws to protect against crimes driven by hate. This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. We are going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws — so that women get equal pay for an equal day’s work. And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system — to secure our borders, enforce our laws and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nations.</td>
<td>We must continually beat you over the head with this idea. My rule has a division that is once again persecuting folks who are even perceived o' civil rights violations 'n' employment discrimination, 'long as their actions follow our definition o' what constitutes civil rights violations 'n' employment discrimination. We have finally strengthened the laws 'gainst hate crimes. This year, I'm going to make Congress 'n' the military finally repeal the don't ask, don't tell law so that gays who love their country just as much as the next person can finally serve openly in the military. We are going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws so women can finally make the same kind o' wages the fellers are making. 'N' we will continue to fight 'gainst the evil illegal aliens flooding our country. It don't matter that these folks are risking their very lives to try 'n' provide a better life fer their families. They ain't got no place in a society that encourages freedom 'n' prosperity fer all folks.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>In the end, it is our ideals, our values, that built America — values that allowed us to forge a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of the globe, values that drive our citizens still. Every day, Americans meet their responsibilities to their families and their employers. Time and again, they lend a hand to their neighbors and give back to their country. They take pride in their labor, and are generous in spirit. These aren’t Republican values or Democratic values they’re living by, business values or labor values. They are American values.</td>
<td>In the end, it is these selfish, self-centered, 'n' self-righteous ideals 'n' values that built America: values that 'lowed us to to forge a nation made up of immigrants that now excludes other immigrants who share the same dreams, hopes, 'n' desires that brought those earlier immigrants from ev'ry corner o' the globe. Ever' day, Americans give what is due to their families 'n' their bosses. Time 'n' again, they help out the folks they know 'n' pay their taxes so they won't get tho'wed in jail. They do their jobs, no matter how much they may hate 'em, 'n' are generous in spirit, if not in material goods. These ain't just the values o' Republicans er Democrats, business er labor. They are the values of America.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions — our corporations, our media and, yes, our government — still reflect these same values. Each of these<br />
institutions are full of honorable men and women doing important work that helps our country prosper. But each time a CEO rewards himself for failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for his own selfish gain, people’s doubts grow. Each time lobbyists game the system or politicians tear each other down instead of lifting this country up, we lose faith. The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates into silly arguments and big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away.</td>
<td>Unfortunately, most folks don't believe that our corporations, media, er gov'ment share these values. Each o' these groups have folks doing the important work o' trying to impose these values on others. But each time their selfish, self-centered, self-righteous actions are applied only to themselves, doubts grow. Each time lobbyists er politicians do something other than lifting this country up as a beacon to the rest o' the world that we won't let 'em claim fer their own, we lose faith. The more TV folks take what I say out o' context er show me doing the opposite o' what I say, our citizens turn away.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>No wonder there’s so much cynicism out there.</td>
<td>No wonder folks don't believe us.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>No wonder there’s so much disappointment.</td>
<td>No wonder folks don't like us.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I campaigned on the promise of change — change we can believe in, the slogan went. And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren’t sure if they still believe we can change — or at least, that I can deliver it.</td>
<td>I promised change we can believe in. Right now, a lot o' folks ain't sure they wan't the kind o' change I'm offering.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>But remember this — I never suggested that change would be easy or that I can do it alone. Democracy in a nation of 300 million people can be noisy and messy and complicated. And when you try to do big things and make big changes, it stirs passions and controversy. That’s just how it is.</td>
<td>Remember this, I just promised change. I never said I would actually deliver on that promise. Democracy in a nation o' 300 million folks ain't easy. You cain't please ever'one. That's just the way it works.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Those of us in public office can respond to this reality by playing it safe and avoid telling hard truths. We can do what’s necessary to keep our poll numbers high and get through the next election instead of doing what’s best for the next generation.</td>
<td>Those of us in public office can ignore reality. We can focus on just getting re-elected the next time 'round, irregardless o' how much we damage the country doing it.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>But I also know this: If people had made that decision 50 years ago or 100 years ago or 200 years ago, we wouldn’t be here tonight. The only reason we are is because generations of Americans were unafraid to do what was hard, to do what was needed even when success was uncertain, to do what it took to keep the dream of this nation alive for their children and grandchildren.</td>
<td>But I also know this: if folks had thought this way years 'n' years ago, I wouldn't be here tonight. The only reason I'm here now is 'cause generations of Americans were'nt afraid to do the right thing, not just fer themselves er their own children 'n' grandchildren, but fer their fellow human beings, irregardless o' race, nationality, color, socio-economic status, gender, age, er even whether er not they even knew those other folks.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Our administration has had some political setbacks this year and some of them were deserved. But I wake up every day knowing that they are nothing compared to the setbacks that families all across this country have faced this year. And what keeps me going — what keeps me fighting — is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination and optimism — that fundamental decency that has always been at the core of the American people — lives on.</td>
<td>I've had some political setbacks this year, I ain't going to deny it. But I wake up ever' day knowing it ain't nothing compared to the kinds o' setbacks folks all 'cross the country have had to face. That's what keeps me going: that spirit o' stuborness 'n' hope 'n' the fundamental decency 'n' fairness that is supposed to be at the core o' the American folks.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>It lives on in the struggling small business owner who wrote to me of his company, “None of us,” he said, “are willing to consider, even slightly, that we might fail.”</td>
<td rowspan = 3>Now I'd like to give an example o' that from some letters I've gotten. I ain't actually read none of 'em, but I've been told that they were sent to me.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>It lives on in the woman who said that even though she and her neighbors have felt the pain of recession, “We are strong. We are resilient. We are American.”</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>It lives on in the 8-year-old boy in Louisiana, who just sent me his allowance and asked if I would give it to the people of Haiti. And it lives on in all the Americans who’ve dropped everything to go some place they’ve never been and pull people they’ve never known from rubble, prompting chants of “USA! USA! USA!” when another life was saved.</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>The spirit that has sustained this nation for more than two centuries lives on in you, its people.</td>
<td>That spirit o' fundamental fairness 'n' equality fer all folks may be on life support these days, but I believe it still lives.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>We have finished a difficult year. We have come through a difficult decade. But a new year has come. A new decade stretches before us. We don’t quit. I don’t quit. Let’s seize this moment — to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our union once more.</td>
<td>It ain't been an easy year. The Republicans have made a right hash out o' the last decade. But a new year has come. We's facing a new decade where I'm in control, not the Republicans. We ain't going to quit. I ain't going to quit. Get out o' my way 'n' let me do what I need to do to start anew, carry the dream forward, 'n' strengthen our union once more.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Thank you. God Bless You. And God Bless the United States of America.</td>
<td>Now I'll close with the traditional statement, so the Republicans will have one less thing to beat me over the head with 'n' because I really do love 'n' care 'bout America 'n' the folks who live here. God Bless You. 'N' God Bless the United States of America. </td>
</tr>
</table>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-42038334832617965952010-02-05T11:29:00.000-07:002010-02-05T11:29:13.936-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part VII)<table cols="2" cellspacing="10"><tr>
<td align="center" colspan="2">The State of the Union<br><br />
given by President Oprama<br><br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" width="50%">What they said</td>
<td align="center" width="50%">What I heard</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I’m also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform. You have trimmed some of this spending and embraced some meaningful change. But restoring the public trust demands more. For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online. Tonight, I’m calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single Web site before there’s a vote, so that the American people can see how their money is being spent.</td>
<td>I'm also telling Congress to quit all the pork-barreling. They've alread done a little bit o' that. But it ain't nearly enough. Some o' ya'll already post your pork-barreling online where folks can see it. Tonight, I'm telling all ya'll to do it on a single web site 'fore you go voting on 'em so all America can see how you're wasting their money.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Of course, none of these reforms will even happen if we don’t also reform how we work with one another.</td>
<td>Course, none o' that'll work if we cain't all learn how to get along better.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Now, I am not naive. I never thought the mere fact of my election would usher in peace, harmony and some post-partisan era. I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched. And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways. These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, have been taking place for over 200 years. They are the very essence of our democracy.</td>
<td>Now, I ain't stupid. In spite o' what I may have said when I was campaigning fer office, I know my being 'lected weren't going to result in sudden peace, harmony, 'n' love. I knew both sides refused to get along with each other. Sometimes we just think dif'rently from each other. Some o' this dif'rent thinking, over such things as how much gov'ment should be doing fer folks, where our priorities lie, 'n' national security, have been going on fer more'n 200 years. But that's what Democracy's all 'bout.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is election day. We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent — a belief that if you lose, I win. Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can. The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual senators. Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, is just part of the game. But it is precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people. Worse yet, it is sowing further division among our citizens and further distrust in our government.</td>
<td>What gives folks conniptions is the way we all act like we're constantly running fer office. We cain't always be out to just try 'n' embarass the other feller: sort o' the worst I can make you look, the better I seem by comparison. None o' ya'll should be getting in the other feller's way just 'cause you can. You shouldn't be holding up the confirmation o' my nominees just 'cause you don't like me. Washington folks may think they can tell just any ol' whoppers 'bout each other they want. But it's just that kind o' foolishness that's stopping us from doing anything like work. 'N' it sure ain't winning you no friends 'mong American citizens.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>So no, I will not give up on changing the tone of our politics. I know it’s an election year. And after last week, it is clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual. But we still need to govern. To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills. And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. So let’s show the American people that we can do it together. This week, I’ll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans. And I would like to begin monthly meetings with both the Democratic and Republican leadership. I know you can’t wait.</td>
<td>So I ain't going to give up on trying to get ya'll to behave. I know it's another 'lection year, but ain't they all? Ya'll may have all caught campaign fever already, but we still got a job to do. I'll remind my fellow liberals that we're still number one, 'n' folks're still looking fer us to do something fer 'em. To the Republicans who say we still need their votes to get anything done 'round here, I say that means ya'll are on the hook too. Just saying "no" anytime we ask ya'll to try 'n' do something ain't what I call leadership. We were sent here to help Americans, not ourselves. So let's show 'em we actually can do what we're s'posed to be doing. This week I'm going to be giving the Republicans a good talking to. 'N' I'd like to give both sides a good dressing down ever' month. Bet ya'll are really looking forward to that.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Throughout our history, no issue has united this country more than our security. Sadly, some of the unity we felt after 9/11 has dissipated. We can argue all we want about who’s to blame for this, but I am not interested in relitigating the past. I know that all of us love this country. All of us are committed to its defense. So let’s put aside the schoolyard taunts about who is tough. Let’s reject the false choice between protecting our people and upholding our values. Let’s leave behind the fear and division and do what it takes to defend our nation and forge a more hopeful future — for America and the world.</td>
<td>Throughout history, no issue has divided our country more than what constitutes our security 'n' the best way to achieve it. We seemed somewhat more unified 'bout all that after 9/11, but it ain't lasted. You can argue 'bout who to blame fer that, but we all know it was the Republicans, so that's all I got to say 'bout that. I know we all love what this country can do fer us, instead of us going out 'n' doing things fer ourselves. All of us want to see it defended. We just cain't agree on the best way to do that. So let's quit with the childish bullying each other. They ain't no choice between protection 'n' values. We can have both. Remember, withouth America, the whole world'ld fall apart.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>That is the work we began last year. Since the day I took office, we have renewed our focus on the terrorists who threaten our nation. We have made substantial investments in our homeland security and disrupted plots that threatened to take American lives. We are filling unacceptable gaps revealed by the failed Christmas attack, with better airline security and swifter action on our intelligence. We have prohibited torture and strengthened partnerships from the Pacific to South Asia to the Arabian Peninsula. And in the last year, hundreds of al-Qaida’s fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed — far more than in 2008.</td>
<td>That's what I started doing last year. From day one, I've changed our focus from Iraq to Afghanistan. I've squandered more money on failed 'n' unnecessary homeland security measures 'n' claim we disrupted plots, real er imagined, that threatened American lives. We're making air travel even more frustrating fer reg'lar folks fer no good reason. Let's face it, the failed Christmas attack proved that, no matter how much we inconvenience folks, if someone is determined enough to try 'n' commit an act o' terrorism, they'll find a way. We've stopped admitting to torturing prisoners 'n' have strengthened our ties with other countries. Most important, at least fer my image, is that last year I personally killed more al-Qaida fighters 'n' senior leaders than Jr. did the year before. Yeah, I'm butch.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>In Afghanistan, we are increasing our troops and training Afghan Security Forces so they can begin to take the lead in July of 2011 and our troops can begin to come home. We will reward good governance, reduce corruption and support the rights of all Afghans — men and women alike. We are joined by allies and partners who have increased their own commitment, and who will come together tomorrow in London to reaffirm our common purpose. There will be difficult days ahead. But I am confident we will succeed.</td>
<td>I'm sending more troops to Afghanistan while claiming it's to help reduce our numbers o' troops there. If the Afghan gov'ment can do a better job o' running things in their country than what we're doing in ours, we'll give 'em a hearty pat on the back 'n' a big thumbs-up. There's other countries that're also increasing their troops in Afghanistan, 'n' they'll be having a get-together in London tomorrow to congratulate each other 'bout that. It ain't going to be an easy row to hoe, but I know I can get ever'body to agree with me eventually.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>As we take the fight to al-Qaida, we are responsibly leaving Iraq to its people. As a candidate, I promised that I would end this war, and that is what I am doing as president. We will have all of our combat troops out of Iraq by the end of this August. We will support the Iraqi government as they hold elections, and continue to partner with the Iraqi people to promote regional peace and prosperity. But make no mistake: This war is ending, and all of our troops are coming home.</td>
<td>As we move more troops into Afghanistan, we'll be leaving Iraq to fend fer itself. I said in my campaigning that I was going to hang 'em out to dry, 'n' that's just what I'm going to do. I'm pulling all our combat troops out of Iraq by the end of August. We'll still cheer the Iraqis on 'n' continue to tell 'em how we think they should be running their country 'n' what they's doing wrong. But make no mistake: I'm going to put an end to this thing, 'n' all our troops will be coming home. Ne'mind what I just said 'bout only combat troops leaving. Now I'm saying all troops. I just said combat troops the first time so we can leave some other kinds o' troops there if we need to without me making a liar out o' myself. 'N' once our troops do get home, we'll just turn 'em right back 'round 'n' pack 'em all off to Afghanistan. But they will come home first.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Tonight, all of our men and women in uniform — in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world — must know that they have our respect, our gratitude and our full support. And just as they must have the resources they need in war, we all have a responsibility to support them when they come home. That is why we made the largest increase in investments for veterans in decades. That is why we are building a 21st century VA. And that is why Michelle has joined with Jill Biden to forge a national commitment to support military families.</td>
<td>Tonight, all our folks in the military, whether they be in Iraq, Afghanistan, er anywhere else in the world, need to know they have our respect, gratitude, 'n' full support. (I knew that'd finally get you stony faced fellers from the Joint Chiefs o' Staff on your feet. Don't want to go looking bad in front o' your own folks, do you.) 'N' just as we need to give 'em what they have to have to fight, we need to give 'em what they have to have when they finally get home. That's why I ran us even deeper into debt fer the largest increase in veteran investments in decades. That's why we're finally going to get 'round to providing 'em with some decent healthcare fer a change. That's why I'm making both the Mrs. 'n' Mrs. Joe work on supporting military families.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Even as we prosecute two wars, we are also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the American people — the threat of nuclear weapons. I have embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan through a strategy that reverses the spread of these weapons and seeks a world without them. To reduce our stockpiles and launchers, while ensuring our deterrent, the United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades. And at April’s nuclear security summit, we will bring 44 nations together behind a clear goal: securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.</td>
<td>'N' just 'cause we's already fighting two dif'rent wars, don't go thinking that's going to stop us from trying to keep scaring you 'bout the threat o' nuclear weapons. I'm just going to do the same things Kennedy 'n' Reagan done, even though they obv'ously didn't work, so you'll think I'm the same kind o' great leaders folks say they was. We're going to reduce our nuclear arsenal, while still being able to look tough enough that won't no one want to mess with us, by negotiating the farthest-reaching arms control treaty with Russia in almost two decades. Considering how little's been done 'bout that the past twenty years, I know it don't mean much, but it sure sounds impressive. 'N' in April we's going to have a nuclear security summit with 44 other nations. Our goal is going to be to secure all vulnerable nuclear material all 'round the world within four years so don't no terrorists get a hold of it. Course, they's going to be some countries with nuclear material that ain't going to be there. 'N', no matter how hard we try, if anyone wants to get their hands on nuclear materal bad enough, they'll find a way.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>These diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of these weapons. That is why North Korea now faces increased isolation and stronger sanctions — sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That is why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran’s leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: They, too, will face growing consequences.</td>
<td>That means we can gang up on those countries that disagree with us 'n' think they should be able to provide their citizens with cheap, clean nuclear energy. That's why North Korea is continuing to isolate themselves 'n' we are vigorously enforcing sanctions that only serve to hurt the common folks, since the leaders o' that country ain't suffering from 'em. 'N' if Iran don't toe the line, we's going to do the same to them.</td>
</tr>
</table>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-11459089822848425752010-02-03T23:34:00.000-07:002010-02-03T23:34:58.288-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part VI)<table cols="2" cellspacing="10"><tr>
<td align="center" colspan="2">The State of the Union<br><br />
given by President Oprama<br><br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" width="50%">What they said</td>
<td align="center" width="50%">What I heard</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>So let me start the discussion of government spending by setting the record straight. At the beginning of the last decade, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. By the time I took office, we had a one year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts and an expensive prescription drug program. On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. That was before I walked in the door.</td>
<td>Let me start talking 'bout gov'ment spending by blaming the Republicans right up front. At the beginning o' Jr's. reign, we had an impressive sounding budget surpuls. When I took office last year, we had a one year deficit of an even more impressive sounding amount 'n' we was telling anyone who'd listen that is was just going to keep getting worse if you didn't elect us to fix things. Let's just get one thing straight right here. Problems o' this nature 'n' magnitude don't happen overnight, no matter how hard we try 'n' get folks to think otherwise. So the budget surpluses under ex-President Slick may have actually been because o' Reagonomics finally kicking in. 'N' the staggering deficits under former President Jr. may just've been ol' Slick's chickens finally coming home to roost. But we ain't going to admit to the possibility o' either o' those. We's gong to give credit to 'n' lay blame on the ones who was in office at the time these things finally came to fruition. What I will say, though, is that the recession took another impressive chunk out o' the budget. Just don't pay no attention to the fact that it goes against basic math that the amount I just mentioned is actually three times larger than the amount fer last year's deficit that I mentioned earlier. Anyway, that's the way things were when I finally got to the oval office.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Now if we had taken office in ordinary times, I would have liked nothing more than to start bringing down the deficit. But we took office amid a crisis, and our efforts to prevent a second depression have added another $1 trillion to our national debt.</td>
<td>I'd love to tell you that the first thing I did was to start bringing down the deficit. But I didn't. In fact, I added another chunk o' change to that rascal. But we'll blame the Republicans fer my extravagant spending habits, too. </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I am absolutely convinced that was the right thing to do. But families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same. So tonight, I’m proposing specific steps to pay for the $1 trillion that it took to rescue the economy last year.</td>
<td>I ain't gong to accept no blame fer it. But folks've been having a rough time 'n' have had to make some tough choices. We in the gov'ment should have to do the same. So tonight, I'm going to tell you some specific steps we can take to pay fer my spending spree last year. 'N' take note o' that. I said "specific" steps, not the broad kind o' generalizations folks're used to hearing from politicians.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don’t. And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.</td>
<td>Starting next year, I'm ready to freeze gov'ment spending fer three years. I ain't going to mess with spending to keep our country secure, ner Medicare, ner Medicaid, ner Social Security, neither. But ever'thing else is fair game. I'm going to do things the way folks should be doing 'em at home: pay fer what you actually need, not fer what you just want. 'N' don't go thinking I'm afraid to whup out my big ol' veto pen to get' er done, 'cause I will.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>We will continue to go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can’t afford and don’t work. We’ve already identified $20 billion in savings for next year. To help working families, we will extend our middle-class tax cuts. But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, investment fund managers and those making over $250,000 a year. We just can’t afford it.</td>
<td>I'll continue going through the budget one line at a time to eliminate as many o' the Republicans' pet projects as I can. I've already identified a whole bunch fer next year. I'm also going to extend middle-class tax cuts. Again, I ain't going to do nothing to help lower-class families. I'm also going to use the deficit as an excuse to take away the tax cuts fer some o' the most hated groups in America: oil companies, investment fund managers, 'n' the rich. I ain't gong to impose no new taxes on those groups, even though it would make us a lot more money. Least, I won't impose none yet.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Now, even after paying for what we spent on my watch, we will still face the massive deficit we had when I took office. More importantly, the cost of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will continue to skyrocket. That’s why I’ve called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can’t be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans. And when the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason why we had record surpluses in the 1990s.</td>
<td>Now, even afger we get my tab paid off, we still got to pay Jr's. bills. Even more important than that, Medicare, Medicaid, 'n' Social Security'll continue to cost us more 'n' more since we ain't going to try 'n' do nothing to lower healthcare costs. That's why I want to create yet another do-nothing commission that sounds good on paper but won't actually accomplish nothing. To make sure o' that, I'm going to put both Republicans 'n' Democrats on it to make sure it stays deadlocked on ev'ry issue. I'll also tell you that it's based on an idea by Republican Judd Gregg 'n' Democrat Kent Conrad to make it sound like I'm giving 'em credit, but really so we'll all no who to take it out on when it don't work out. Yesterday, the Senate refused to let me create this commission. So I'm going to go behind their back 'n' use my power of executive order to create it. 'N' when the Senate votes tomorrow ('n' what it is they's voting on I don't rightly recollect, but they's voting on something, I'm sure.) they better restore the pay-as-you-go laws that we had under Slick.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I know that some in my own party will argue that we cannot address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting. I agree, which is why this freeze will not take effect until next year, when the economy is stronger. But understand — if we do not take meaningful steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing and jeopardize our recovery — all of which could have an even worse effect on our job growth and family incomes.</td>
<td>I know they's a lot o' my fellow Democrats who ain't going to be happy 'bout not being able to continue their tax-'n'-spend ways. Well, they ain't got to start worrying just yet 'cause I ain't freezing nothing 'til next year. That'll give us plenty o' time to try 'n' figger some way to get out o' that promise. But know this: I'm going to keep talking like this is a real threat 'cause we got to do something to try 'n' fix things. The big carrot I'm offering is that I'll back off on this if we see some real changes. The big stick I'm threating with is that I might just carry through on it if we don't.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>From some on the right, I expect we’ll hear a different argument — that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts for wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations and maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away. The problem is, that’s what we did for eight years. That’s what helped lead us into this crisis. It’s what helped lead to these deficits. And we cannot do it again.</td>
<td>I 'spect a lot o' griping 'n' bad-mouthing from the other side. But they'd do that no matter what I say er do, so tough. I'm in charge now, 'n' we ain't going to keep doing things their way no more.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it’s time to try something new. Let’s invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let’s meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let’s try common sense.</td>
<td>Instead o' doing the same ol' nothing we been doing fer years in Washington, let's try to do something that'll actually help reg'lar folks fer a change, since that's what we're supposed to be here fer. Let's try using a little common sense fer once.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust — deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we must take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly and to give our people the government they deserve.</td>
<td>It's time to face the fact that, even though folks keep voting fer us 'n' re-electing us year after year, they really don't like us all that much. So we should all get together 'n' work on getting folks to take out their anger 'n' frustration on the lobbyists.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>That’s what I came to Washington to do. That’s why — for the first time in history — my administration posts our White House visitors online. And that’s why we’ve excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs or seats on federal boards and commissions.</td>
<td>I came to Washington to try 'n' give folks a more effective gov'ment, whether they deserve it er not. That's why I'm letting folks know who all comes through the front door o' the White House. That's also why I ain't letting 'em hire lobbyists fer policymaking jobs er seats on some boards 'n' commissions.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>But we can’t stop there. It’s time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or Congress. And it’s time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office. Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well, I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.</td>
<td>But we cain't let 'em off that easy. We need to make 'em tell us who all they've been trying to bribe 'n' influence. We also need to limit the amount of a bribe they can offer to candidates, 'specially now that I've already been elected 'n' it won't affect any o' my campaigns no more. Last week the Supreme Court really screwed things up by letting foreign interests try 'n' buy folks fer office. That ain't right. Only Americans should be allowed to buy American politicians. I'm even going to urge Congress to pass a bill that helps show the Supreme Court the errors o' their ways.</td>
</tr>
</table>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-78238094693762766772010-02-02T23:38:00.000-07:002010-02-02T23:38:29.694-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part V)<table cols="2" cellspacing="10"><tr>
<td align="center" colspan="2">The State of the Union<br><br />
given by President Oprama<br><br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" width="50%">What they said</td>
<td align="center" width="50%">What I heard</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>From the day I took office, I have been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious — that such efforts would be too contentious, that our political system is too gridlocked and that we should just put things on hold for awhile.</td>
<td>From day one, folks've been telling me that trying to solve our problems was too unrealistic. They said that Democrats 'n' Republicans was just too busy carping 'bout each other, picking on one 'nother, 'n' trying to just get re-elected to get any actual work done.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>For those who make these claims, I have one simple question:</td>
<td>I got just one question fer those folks:</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>How long should we wait? How long should America put its future on hold?</td>
<td>How long you want me to wait fer both sides to finally shape up 'n' fly right?</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China’s not waiting to revamp its economy; Germany’s not waiting; India’s not waiting. These nations aren’t standing still. These nations aren’t playing for second place. They’re putting more emphasis on math and science. They’re rebuilding their infrastructure. They are making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs.</td>
<td>See, Washington's been making us wait fer years 'n' years while they carp 'n' pick 'n' run fer office. It ain't helped one bit. 'N' while they's busy doing all that, other countries ain't just sitting 'round on their hands. I'll specifically mention countries like China, to tap into your fears o' the commies, Germany, to tap into your fears o' the Nazis, 'n' India, to tap into your anger over the fact that ever' time you call someone fer help these days you get someone from India instead of an English-speaking American. Unlike us, those folks're more int'rested in actual schooling than they are sports, entertainment, cell-phones, 'n' i-pods. They's rebuilding things 'n' investing in clean energy 'n' stuff 'cause they know folks're frantic 'bout all that global warming nonsense.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Well I do not accept second place for the United States of America. As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may be, it’s time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.</td>
<td>I don't know 'bout ya'll, but I ain't going to accept no second place ribbon fer the good ol' US of A. It's time to get off our backsides, put down our cell phones 'n' blackberries 'n' i-pods, 'n' get some work done.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>One place to start is serious financial reform. Look, I am not interested in punishing banks, I’m interested in protecting our economy. A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families into investments that raise incomes. But that can only happen if we guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire economy.</td>
<td>Firstly, like I said before, it's the economy, stupid. The big banks need a good whooping fer all the mess they've caused 'n' to try 'n' learn 'em not to do it again. But I ain't going to say it like that. I'm going to say I'm whooping 'em to try 'n' protect the economy. Making good, strong businesses makes fer a good, strong America. But that'll only happen if we don't let things fall apart from sheer greediness, like the Republicans done.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>We need to make sure consumers and middle class families have the information they need to make financial decisions. We can’t allow financial institutions, including those that take your deposits, to take risks that threaten the whole economy.</td>
<td>We got to smarten folks up 'bout financial things 'cause they been making some awfully stupid choices 'bout finances. Just like we need to smarten up the financial institutions that've been making stupid decisions.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>The House has already passed financial reform with many of these changes. And the lobbyists are already trying to kill it. Well, we cannot let them win this fight. And if the bill that ends up on my desk does not meet the test of real reform, I will send it back.</td>
<td>I already got the House to cave in 'n' agree with me on a lot o' this. Course, the lobbyists ain't none too pleased 'n' are squawking 'bout it. Won't do 'em no good, though, 'cause if what I finally get don't cut the mustard, I'll just whup out my big ol' veto pen 'n' make 'em keep doing it 'til they get it right.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Next, we need to encourage American innovation. Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history — an investment that could lead to the world’s cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched. And no area is more ripe for such innovation than energy. You can see the results of last year’s investment in clean energy — in the North Carolina company that will create 1,200 jobs nationwide helping to make advanced batteries, or in the California business that will put 1,000 people to work making solar panels.</td>
<td>Secondly, we got to get folks to think 'bout other things than their fancy toys 'n' electronics 'n' entertainment 'n' fancy electronic entertainment toys. Now, I'm going to tell you we made the largest investment in funding basic research last year, but I ain't going to tell you, e'sactly, what kind o' research we was funding. I'll talk 'bout clean energy 'n' cancer research so you'll think it was something 'long those lines, but, needless to say, it was in an area that's been so woefully underfunded up 'til now that we could just add any unimportant amount to it's budget 'n' still honestly claim it was the largest investment in history. I'll even give you a couple o' fer instances with numbers attached to make it sound even more impresive.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. That means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. And yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.</td>
<td>But to create even more o' these kinds o' jobs, we need to build more production facilities, cut out the lollygagging, 'n' offer more 'n' bigger bribes to companies to get 'em to go along with the idea. That means we need to build more nuclear power plants 'n' make some hard choices 'bout whether er not to open new areas fer offshore drilling. Well, I see that finally got some o' you Republicans up 'n' clapping fer me, so I ain't going to tell you that the hard choices 'bout offshore drilling mean we ain't going to be opening up no new areas. I've blocked that one before, after all. Anyways, I know ya'll don't like folks seeing you agree with me, so now I'll tell you something that'll stop your clapping 'n' set y'all back down. It also means passing a comprehesive climate bill 'n' promoting non-petroleum based energy sources. That shut you up, didn't it?</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I am grateful to the House for passing such a bill last year. This year, I am eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate. I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy, and I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. But even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future — because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation.</td>
<td>I'd like to thank the house fer finally caving in 'n' agreeing with me last year. This year, I cain't wait to try 'n' get the Senate to knuckle under, too. I know some folks're bright enough to see through all that nonsense 'bout global warming 'n' climate change. But it don't matter how smart you are 'cause ever'body else is just following along behind it like a bunch o' mindless sheep. So we're going to cater to them, not to you.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Third, we need to export more of our goods. Because the more products we make and sell to other countries, the more jobs we support right here in America. So tonight, we set a new goal: We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support 2 million jobs in America. To help meet this goal, we’re launching a national export initiative that will help farmers and small businesses increase their exports and reform export controls consistent with national security.</td>
<td>Thirdly, we need to get the rest o' the world to buy more o' the crappy stuff we sell. I'll tell you it'll mean more jobs here, but we all know pret' much ever'ything's made in China er Taiwan er some other foreign country these days. I'm even going to claim we'll double our exports over the next five years to make you think I'm serious 'bout how it'll mean more jobs fer Americans. In fact, I'm going to launch a national export initiative, but I'll make sure that ever'thing's consistent with national security so it'll be sure to fail.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>We have to seek new markets aggressively, just as our competitors are. If America sits on the sidelines while other nations sign trade deals, we will lose the chance to create jobs on our shores. But realizing those benefits also means enforcing those agreements so our trading partners play by the rules. And that’s why we will continue to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets, and why we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like South Korea, Panama and Colombia.</td>
<td>We need to find new places to sell our junk. I'll push fer more open trade with Asia 'n' South Central America, but we still need to get rid o' NAFTA 'cause this is about selling our stuff, not buying from someone else.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Fourth, we need to invest in the skills and education of our people.</td>
<td>Fourthly, we need to learn our kids better.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>This year, we have broken through the stalemate between left and right by launching a national competition to improve our schools. The idea here is simple: Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success. Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform — reform that raises student achievement, inspires students to excel in math and science, and turns around failing schools that steal the future of too many young Americans, from rural communities to inner cities. In the 21st century, one of the best anti-poverty programs is a world-class education. In this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than their potential.</td>
<td>This past year, we finally beat the Republicans into submission 'n' got 'em to agree with us 'bout launching a competition to improve our schools. It's a no-brainer: make the schools come up with a bunch more tests fer the students to try 'n' pass so they can show they's teaching 'em something. Course, all they'll be teaching 'em is how to pass the tests, not anything important like math er science. But as long as we can show a bunch o' high scores, we can fool folks into thinking we's teaching 'em good.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>When we renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we will work with Congress to expand these reforms to all 50 states. Still, in this economy, a high school diploma no longer guarantees a good job. I urge the Senate to follow the House and pass a bill that will revitalize our community colleges, which are a career pathway to the children of so many working families. To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans. Instead, let’s take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants. And let’s tell another 1 million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after 20 years — and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public service. Because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college. And it’s time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs — because they too have a responsibility to help solve this problem.</td>
<td>When we go to renew the Elementary 'n' Secondary Education Act, we'll try bullying Congress into expanding the reforms to all 50 states. Course, a high school diploma don't mean squat in this country no more. So I'll pressure the Senate into doing what the House done 'n' pass a bill to give more money to community colleges, since they actually teach real job skills. Course, I won't demand that colleges charge realistic tuitions. Instead, I'll try to take even more money away from the banks 'n' give tax credits fer college 'n' increase Pell Grants since tax credits mean we ain't got to actually pay nobody nothing. I'll also urge that we turn future generations o' college graduates into deadbeats by forgiving their debts after 20 years, er 10 years if they choose to work in low-paying public service jobs. Folks in America shouldn't have to go broke just so they can go to college. But I ain't going to help 'em with that. Instead, I'm going to tell the colleges 'n' universities to cut costs, not tuition, so their boards o' gov'nors 'n' administrators can put even more money in their pockets. After all, the boards o' gov'nors 'n' the administrators have more political power than a bunch of ignorant college students, so it's better fer me if I address the effect, not the cause.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Now, the price of college tuition is just one of the burdens facing the middle class. That’s why last year I asked Vice President Biden to chair a task force on middle class families. That’s why we’re nearly doubling the child care tax credit, and making it easier to save for retirement by giving every worker access to a retirement account and expanding the tax credit for those who start a nest egg. That’s why we’re working to lift the value of a family’s single largest investment — their home. The steps we took last year to shore up the housing market have allowed millions of Americans to take out new loans and save an average of $1,500 on mortgage payments. This year, we will step up refinancing so that homeowners can move into more affordable mortgages. And it is precisely to relieve the burden on middle-class families that we still need health insurance reform.</td>
<td>College tuition ain't the only financial burden facing the middle class. That's why I asked Joe over here to chair a task force fer middle class families. The upper class has got enough money to take care o' themselves, 'n' don't no one care 'bout the lower classes, 'cause there ain't enough o' them who vote to make much differ'nce. That's also why we're going to be giving even more tax credits to families with children 'n' fer folks with retirement accounts. Again, tax credits don't cost us nothing, but they do make it sound like we's actually doing something important. We're also going to work on increasing the values o' folks' houses. True, that ain't going to help folks who cain't afford a house now 'n' will help to drive the prices o' houses back up to the ridiculous levels they was before, but we don't care 'bout that right now. We just want to get the current homeowners on our side. Now I'm going to use all o' that as a way to segue into talking 'bout health care.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Now let’s be clear — I did not choose to tackle this issue to get some legislative victory under my belt. And by now it should be fairly obvious that I didn’t take on health care because it was good politics.</td>
<td>First off, I ain't gong to claim I chose to tackle health care hoping fer a big win. 'N' even though it may have seemed like a good idea at the time, it turns out that my ideas ain't as pop'lar as I'd hoped they'd be.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I took on health care because of the stories I’ve heard from Americans with pre-existing conditions whose lives depend on getting coverage, patients who’ve been denied coverage and families — even those with insurance — who are just one illness away from financial ruin.</td>
<td>I took on health care 'cause it helped get me elected 'n' 'cause that's the kinds o' things we Liberals're supposed to talk 'bout.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>After nearly a century of trying, we are closer than ever to bringing more security to the lives of so many Americans. The approach we’ve taken would protect every American from the worst practices of the insurance industry. It would give small businesses and uninsured Americans a chance to choose an affordable health care plan in a competitive market. It would require every insurance plan to cover preventive care. And by the way, I want to acknowledge our first lady, Michelle Obama, who this year is creating a national movement to tackle the epidemic of childhood obesity and make our kids healthier.</td>
<td>We've been jawing 'bout this fer close to a hundred years, 'n' we still cain't get it right. But folks seemed fed up with it enough now that we thought we might just take another run at the thing. Course, the approaches we've taken are focused on the wrong end o' the stick, just like our approaches to education 'n' housing values. We's focusing on how to pay the obscenely overpriced demands o' the health industry, not on how to get 'em to lower their costs to something more reasonable. 'N' since I ain't mentioned her yet, let me just say something 'bout the Mrs. so she can get on camera tonight. I'm making her take on the cause o' fighting to put an end to all these fat, little kids running 'round the country.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan. It would reduce costs and premiums for millions of families and businesses. And according to the Congressional Budget Office — the independent organization that both parties have cited as the official scorekeeper for Congress — our approach would bring down the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades.</td>
<td>Our approach will preserve the rights of insurance companies 'n' doctors to continue grossly overcharging folks. It will reduce the benefits 'n' treatments fer millions o' families. 'N' according to the Congressional Budget Office, an independent group that both parties have agreed to completely ignore, our approach will, somehow, supposedly lower the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next 20 years. So if it don't, I'll be long gone from office 'n' we can blame whoever comes after me.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Still, this is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people. And I know that with all the lobbying and horse trading, this process left most Americans wondering what’s in it for them.</td>
<td>Let's face it, you cain't please ever'one. The longer we spent yapping 'bout it without actually doing anything, the less pleased folks was with it. I'll take some o' the blame fer not using small enough words fer folks to understand. But I'll place most o' the blame on the lobbyists 'n' Congress' process o' swapping favors 'n' selling each other their votes.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>But I also know this problem is not going away. By the time I’m finished speaking tonight, more Americans will have lost their health insurance. Millions will lose it this year. Our deficit will grow. Premiums will go up. Patients will be denied the care they need. Small business owners will continue to drop coverage altogether. I will not walk away from these Americans and neither should the people in this chamber.</td>
<td>But we ain't going to stop yapping 'bout the problem, neither. 'N' I ain't going to stop trying to scare you with tales 'bout how folks are suffering from the way health care does business now.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>As temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we’ve proposed. There’s a reason why many doctors, nurses and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo. But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses, let me know. Here’s what I ask of Congress, though: Do not walk away from reform. Not now. Not when we are so close. Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people.</td>
<td>If I keep yapping 'n' scare you enough, I might just get you to finally let me do this thing the way I want. The reason doctors, nurses, 'n' other health care professionals consider my way as being so good is 'cause they still get to charge obscene amounts o' money. If anyone else can come up with a better idea, let me know so I can steal the best bits 'n' present it as my idea. What I want Congress to do, though, is to give in 'n' agree with me.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Now, even as health care reform would reduce our deficit, it’s not enough to dig us out of a massive fiscal hole in which we find ourselves. It’s a challenge that makes all others that much harder to solve, and one that’s been subject to a lot of political posturing.</td>
<td>Even if this thing actually worked, somehow, 'n' helped reduce the deficit, it still wouldn't be enough to fix the mess the Republicans stuck us with. In fact, that mess is something I plan on using to blame a lot o' my other failures on fer years to come.</td>
</tr>
</TABLE>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-82322718838993908542010-01-31T13:43:00.000-07:002010-01-31T13:43:20.874-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part IV)<TABLE COLS=2 CELLSPACING=10> <TR>
<TD ALIGN="center" COLSPAN=2>The State of the Union<BR>given by President Oprama<BR>Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What they said</TD>
<TD ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What I heard</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>Now, the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America’s businesses. But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers.</TD>
<TD>You can also blame the businesses that don't go out 'n' create more jobs. I can try 'n' make it easier fer them to expand, but, if they don't, that's their fault, not mine.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>We should start where most new jobs do — in small businesses, companies that begin when an entrepreneur takes a chance on a dream or a worker decides it’s time she became her own boss.</TD>
<TD>Now I'll say some nice things 'bout small businesses 'cause that's what we Democrats want ya'll to think we care 'bout - the small business, not big business like the Republicans do.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>Through sheer grit and determination, these companies have weathered the recession and are ready to grow. But when you talk to small business owners in places like Allentown, Pa., or Elyria, Ohio, you find out that even though banks on Wall Street are lending again, they are mostly lending to bigger companies. But financing remains difficult for small business owners across the country.</TD>
<TD>They's a stubborn bunch, like reg'lar Americans, so we'll blame the greedy banks fer any failures the small business owners are encountering.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>So tonight, I’m proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community bank sgive small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. I am also proposing a new small business tax credit — one that will go to over 1 million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages. While we’re at it, let’s also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment and provide a tax incentive for all businesses, large and small, to invest in new plants and equipment.</TD>
<TD>So I'm going to propose we take some o' the ransom money we got back from the big banks 'n' give it to the smaller banks 'n' make them responsible fer giving it to the small businesses. I may not be acting like a tax-'n'-spend liberal, but I can still act like a take-from-the-rich-'n'-give-to-the-poor liberal. I'm also going to propose even more tax cuts fer new small businesses. I won't just propose more tax cuts, though. I'll even propose we eliminate some taxes fer all businesses, large 'n' small. That should get big business on my side a little bit. That's right - even fewer taxes. That'll make you like me better.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow. From the first railroads to the interstate highway system, our nation has always been built to compete. There’s no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.</TD>
<TD>Next, let's talk 'bout doing what worked fer Roosevelt, 'cause I want ya'll to think o' me as the same kind o' great leader he was. Then I'll th'ow in some stuff 'bout how America is the greatest country on earth 'n' shouldn't be taking no back seat to the commies in China when it comes to things like faster trains 'n' new factories.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>Tomorrow, I’ll visit Tampa, Fla., where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act.There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help our nation move goods, services and information. We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy efficient, which supports clean energy jobs. And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it’s time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs in the United States of America.</TD>
<TD>Tomorrow, I'm going down to Tampa, Florida, to take credit fer my Recovery Act being responsible fer them being able to start working on building a new high-speed railroad. Now, I'll tap into your fears 'bout all that global warming nonsense 'n' high gas prices to tell you we need to do more towards clean energy 'n' energy efficiency. I'll also tap into your fears 'bout sending all our jobs overseas to try 'n' get your support fer helping me take even more money from the rich companies 'n' giving it to the poorer ones.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>The House has passed a jobs bill that includes some of these steps. As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same. People are out of work. They are hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.</TD>
<TD>The House has already passed a bill that will include some o' these things. First thing this yearm I'm going to tell the Senate they need to do the same thing, 'n' I want 'em to do it now. If they don't, then all those folks who are out o' work, hurting, 'n' need help can blame them.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>But the truth is, these steps still won’t make up for the 7 million jobs we’ve lost over the last two years. The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth and finally address the problems that America’s<br />
families have confronted for years.</TD>
<TD>It ain't going to solve the problemm however. But least I can claim that it will be a start to changing things. 'N' if it ain't, well...I'll probably be out o' office by then 'n' we can claim it would o' worked if the folks who came after me hadn't mucked things up.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>We cannot afford another so-called economic expansion like the one from last decade — what some call the lost decade — where jobs grew more slowly than during any prior expansion, where the income of the average American household declined while the cost of health care and tuition reached record highs, where prosperity was built on a housing bubble and financial speculation.</TD>
<TD>Just like we can claim the previous administration was responsible fer what I'll call slow job growth during the last decade. I'll even make a little play on words, changing last to lost fer a cheap laugh. I won't give you any actual numbers to back up that claim, 'cause then you'd have something to compare the number o' jobs that was created last year to, 'n' that might not look to good fer me. But it weren't just the previous administration to blame, neither. There was also the fact that the health care industry, higher education, 'n' realtors was overcharging folks just way too much money 'cause they knew there was enough folks stupid enough er desperate enough to pay those high prices that they could just keep on charging 'em.</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-69151324535910811672010-01-30T12:31:00.001-07:002010-01-30T12:33:11.077-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part III)<table COLS=2 CELLSPACING=10><tr> <td ALIGN="center" COLSPAN=2>The State of the Union<br />
given by President Oprama<br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What they said</TD> <td ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What I heard</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>And tonight, I’d like to talk about how together, we can deliver<br />
on that promise.</TD> <td>'N' tonight, I'm going to tell you how I can deliver on that promise if folks would just get out o' my way 'n' let me do what I want.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>It begins with our economy.</TD> <td>It's the economy, stupid. I know that phrase got a lot of use during ex-President Slick's first run fer President, but I figger there's still some kick left in that ol' mule yet.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same<br />
banks that helped cause this crisis. It was not easy to do. And if<br />
there’s one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, it’s<br />
that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. You hated it. It<br />
was about as popular as a root canal.</TD> <td>The first thing I had to deal with when I took office was to pay the ransom the banks was demanding. It weren't no easy thing to do, neither, 'cause folks hated the idea 'bout as much as having to get a root canal. Even the Republicans hated doing it, 'cause it meant they had to admit that they hadn't been handling the situation too well to begin with.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>But when I ran for president, I promised I wouldn’t just do what<br />
was popular — I would do what was necessary. And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today. More businesses would certainly have closed. More homes would have surely been lost.</TD> <td>I told ya'll I weren't going to do just what was pop'lar, but that I'd do what actually needed to be done, irregardless o' what folks thought 'bout it. 'N' I single-handedly saved the economy, even if things wouldn't have been a lot worse than they are now, I'll still say they are just to make myself look good.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>So I supported the last administration’s efforts to create the<br />
financial rescue program. And when we took the program over, we made it more transparent and accountable. As a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we have recovered most of the money we spent on the banks.</TD> <td>I'll even go so far as to say I supported former President Jr.'s efforts on financial rescue. But it was what I did after taking office that really made a diff'rence. I've even managed to make those tight-fisted suckers give some o' the ransom money back.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>To recover the rest, I have proposed a fee on the biggest banks.<br />
I know Wall Street isn’t keen on this idea, but if these firms can<br />
afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee<br />
to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of<br />
need.</TD> <td>To try 'n' get the rest o' the ransom money back, I'm going to try 'n' sock the banking folks with some high fees. I know Wall Street 'n' big business 'n' Republicans don't like that idea, but they got too much money as it is anyway. They can afford to give a little back. 'Sides, they'll just make up the diff'rence by socking their users with higher fees, but don't go blaming me fer that.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>As we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get<br />
our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible and help<br />
Americans who had become unemployed.</TD> <td>While I was stabilizing the banks, I also worked to save the economy, jobs, 'n' help all y'all who was unemployed.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>That’s why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for<br />
more than 18 million Americans, made health insurance 65 percent<br />
cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA and<br />
passed 25 different tax cuts.</TD> <td>That's why I spent more on unemployment benfits for a whole bunch o' folks, cut your health insurance benefits through COBRA so it would be cheaper, 'n' passed 25 diff'rent kinds o' tax cuts. Make note o' that! I passed tax cuts, not the Republicans, 'spite their accusations o' me being a tax-'n'-spend liberal.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Let me repeat: we cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of<br />
working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes<br />
for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care<br />
for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for<br />
college. As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on<br />
gas, and food and other necessities, all of which helped businesses<br />
keep more workers. And we haven’t raised income taxes by a single<br />
dime on a single person. Not a single dime.</TD> <td>Let me repeat that over 'n' over again. I cut taxes. I cut taxes. I cut taxes. I cut taxes. I cut taxes. I cut taxes. That means I made it look like folks had more to spend fer things that they was being charged way too much fer to begin with, even if they really didn't have more to spend. 'N' I ain't raised income taxes by one single dime fer one single person. Let me repeat that 'cause it makes me look so good. Not one single dime.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Because of the steps we took, there are about 2 million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed — 200,000 work in construction and clean energy, 300,000 are teachers and other education workers, tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers and first responders. And we are on track to add another one-and-a-half-million jobs to this total by the end of the year.</TD> <td>Thanks to me, there are now a whole bunch o' folks working right now that I will tell you would have been out o' work. Whether that's true er not, I'll say it anyway. I'll even give you some made up numbers just to make you think I'm telling you the truth. I'll also tell you I'm going to add even more jobs 'fore the end o' the year, even if that don't happen. If it don't, I'll just find someone else to lay the blame on.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts<br />
to the jobs, is the Recovery Act. That’s right — the Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus bill. Economists on the left and the right say that this bill has helped saved jobs and avert disaster. But you don’t have to take their word for it.</TD> <td>My plan that made all this possible was my Recovery Act. I'll repeat that - my Recovery Act. Folks on both sides admit I helped save jobs and avert disaster with my Recovery Act.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple its work<br />
force because of the Recovery Act.</TD> <td ROWSPAN = 3>I'll give a few examples here o' folks who claim to have benefited from my Recovery Act, just to try 'n' get you to believe me some more.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Talk to the window manufacturer in Philadelphia who said he used<br />
to be skeptical about the Recovery Act, until he had to add two<br />
more work shifts just because of the business it created.</TD> <td></TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Talk to the single teacher raising two kids who was told by her<br />
principal in the last week of school that because of the Recovery<br />
Act, she wouldn’t be laid off after all.</TD> <td></TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>There are stories like this all across America. And after two<br />
years of recession, the economy is growing again. Retirement funds have started to gain back some of their value. Businesses are beginning to invest again, and slowly some are starting to hire again.</TD> <td>I could make up some more stories like these, but I think I've made my point. Thanks to me, the economy is growing again, 'n' things're starting to get better.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>But I realize that for every success story, there are other<br />
stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from — who send out resumes week after week and hear nothing in response. That is why jobs must be our number one focus in 2010, and that is why I am calling for a new jobs bill tonight.</TD> <td>'Course, things ain't all chittlings 'n' moonshine. They's a lot o' folks who will tell you that my Recovery Act ain't helped them one bit. That's why I'm going to claim to make jobs my number one focus this year. I'm even going to call fer a new jobs bill tonight, so if nothing happens with that, don't blame me. Blame the folks who wouldn't let me get that bill passed.</TD> </TR>
</TABLE>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-11847915947934629232010-01-29T16:00:00.002-07:002010-01-29T16:02:45.950-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part II)<table COLS=2 CELLSPACING=10><tr> <td ALIGN="center" COLSPAN=2>The State of the Union<br />
given by President Oprama<br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What they said</TD> <td ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What I heard</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>So I know the anxieties that are out there right now. They’re<br />
not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for president. These<br />
struggles are what I’ve witnessed for years in places like Elkhart,<br />
Ind., and Galesburg, Ill. I hear about them in the letters that I<br />
read each night. The toughest to read are those written by children<br />
asking why they have to move from their home, or when their mom or<br />
dad will be able to go back to work.</TD> <td>So I know a lot o' folks're anxious right now 'n' that it ain't nothing new. I may not have personal experience o' this, since I went to high priced private schools 'n' fancy colleges, but I've read 'bout it in letters I've received. I've heard 'bout it 'n' seen it in the lives o' other folks when I was helping 'em out in Chicago. That's why I got into politics, so I could help folks out. You ain't got to experience these fears 'n' anxieties yourself to want to help other folks who have experienced 'em first hand. 'N' that's why I ran fer President, to try 'n' help even more folks out.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast<br />
enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don’t understand<br />
why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard<br />
work on Main Street isn’t, or why Washington has been unable or<br />
unwilling to solve any of our problems. They are tired of the<br />
partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can’t<br />
afford it. Not now.</TD> <td>Fer these folks I'm talking 'bout, 'n' fer lots others, things ain't changing fast enough. They's frustrated 'n' angry. They don't understand why we's th'owing money at the folks on Wall Street, 'specially when the folks on Wall Street continued to destroy the economy even after we gave 'em the ransom they was asking fer, 'n' not doing nothing fer folks on Main Street who need, 'n' would apreciate it, more. 'N' folks don't understand why Washington, 'n' by "Washington" I mean the Republicans, seem unable 'n' unwilling to fix the problems. They's tired o' the Republicans' shouting 'n' pettiness 'n' want an end to partisanship. ('N' by partisanship, I mean the fact that the Republicans insist on not agreeing with us Democrats on anything, not the fact that we Democrats refuse to agree with the Republicans on anything.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American<br />
people hope what they deserve is for all of us, Democrats and<br />
Republicans, to work through our differences, to overcome the<br />
numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us<br />
here have different backgrounds, different stories and different<br />
beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they<br />
hold are shared: a job that pays the bills, a chance to get ahead.<br />
Most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.</TD> <td>That's the challenge. That's what the American folks're hoping for. They want Democrats 'n' Republicans to get past our diff'rences 'n' move beyond our politics. That's what we want, to. We want the Republicans to just hush up 'n' agree that we's right all the time, ever' time. Don't matter who you are, the anxieties you face 'n' the aspirations you have are the same, no matter what your personal differences are.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>You know what else they share? They share a stubborn resilience<br />
in the face of adversity. After one of the most difficult years in<br />
our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids,<br />
starting businesses and going back to school. They’re coaching<br />
Little League and helping their neighbors. As one woman wrote me,<br />
“We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged.”</TD> <td>Want to know something else they share? Don't matter if you want to know er not, 'cause I'm going to tell you anyway. They's stubborn. No matter how difficult things get, they's just going to keep right on doing what they're doing. I'll even quote from another letter to back up that point.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>It is because of this spirit, this great decency and great<br />
strength that I have never been more hopeful about America’s future<br />
than I am tonight. Despite our hardships, our union is strong. We<br />
do not give up. We do not quit. We do not allow fear or division to<br />
break our spirit. In this new decade, it’s time the American people<br />
get a government that matches their decency, that embodies their<br />
strength.</TD> <td>It's 'cause o' this stubborness that I am so hopeful I can help improve America's future. Like the reg'lar folks of America, I ain't no quitter. I ain't going to 'low fear ner division to break my spirit. It's time folks had a new gov'ment that's just as stubborn 'n' decent 'n' strong as they are. 'N' I'm stubborn enough to try 'n' give 'em that kind o' gov'ment, whether folks want me to er not.</TD> </TR>
</TABLE>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-19248475074718305972010-01-28T16:22:00.001-07:002010-01-28T16:23:08.553-07:00(mis)Interpreting the State of the Union Address (Part I)<table COLS=2 CELLSPACING=10><tr> <td ALIGN="center" COLSPAN=2>The State of the Union<br />
given by President Oprama<br />
Weds. Jan. 27, 2010</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What they said</TD> <td ALIGN="center" WIDTH=50%>What I heard</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:<br />
</TD> <td>Howdy! How y'all doing?</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the president shall give to Congress information about the state of our union. For 220 years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They have done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility. And they have done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.</TD> <td>According to Article II, Section 3 o' the Constitution o' the United States, I shall "from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union". Presidents have been doing this fer over 200 years, now, even when they had some pret' good excuses fer being to busy to do so, so I don't see anyway I can get out of it. 'Sides, this'll give me a chance to brag about 'n' take credit fer all the good things 'n' successes that have happened over the past year (whether I deserve to er not), and blame the other side fer all the bad things 'n' failures that have happened over the past year (whether they deserve it er not).</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>It’s tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our<br />
progress was inevitable, that America was always destined to<br />
succeed. But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run and the<br />
Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt.<br />
When the market crashed on Black Tuesday and civil rights marchers<br />
were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain.<br />
These were times that tested the courage of our convictions and the<br />
strength of our union. And despite all our divisions and<br />
disagreements, our hesitations and our fears, America prevailed<br />
because we chose to move forward as one nation and one people.</TD> <td>You might be tempted to look back at those moments 'n' think that our progress was inevtiable 'n' that America was destined to succeed. But I'll give you some examples o' times when that progress 'n' success didn't seem so inevitable. But I'll make sure I use examples where our progress 'n' success was brought about by great leaders like Lincoln, Roosevelt, 'n' Dr. Martin Luther King. I'll tell you that the reason we survived those dark times was 'cause o' the courage 'n' determination 'n' strength o' the American people, but what I want you to do is think about those great leaders 'cause I want you to associate me with them.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>Again, we are tested. And again, we must answer history’s<br />
call.</TD> <td>I will tell you that, once again, we are tested now as we were in those times, 'n' that I am the great leader you need to answer the call, just as those gentlemen were the great leaders we needed in those times.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by<br />
severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse and a<br />
government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political<br />
spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second<br />
depression. So we acted immediately and aggressively. And one year<br />
later, the worst of the storm has passed.</TD> <td>Last year, I took office 'n' inherited a whole mess o' problems we will blame on the Republicans in general 'n' former President Jr. in particular. All the experts were predicting the absolute worst was going to happen, as experts always do 'cause they get more attention when they's predicting doom 'n' gloom than they do when they say everything's hunky dorey er not as bad as they seem. So I hit the ground running and ready to get down to business 'n' do some real work from day one. Now, everything's a whole lot better, thanks to me.</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>But the devastation remains. One in 10 Americans still cannot<br />
find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have<br />
declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit<br />
especially hard. For those who had already known poverty, life has<br />
become that much harder.</TD> <td>I'll admit that things are still bad, since I can lay the blame fer all o' that at the feet o' the previous administration. I'll trot out the whole litany o' recent complaints 'bout housing prices, business closures, 'n' poverty. I'll even th'ow out a bit o' meaningless statistics like 1 in 10 Americans cain't find a job, but I won't tell you what those statistics are based on. (After all, more than 1 in 10 Americans are below the age they can legally work to begin with, so I can make a claim like that 'n' still be telling the truth if anyone presses me on it.)</TD> </TR>
<tr> <td>This recession has also compounded the burdens that America’s<br />
families have been dealing with for decades — the burden of working<br />
harder and longer for less, of being unable to save enough to<br />
retire or help kids with college.</TD> <td>Even if you do want to blame me 'er the Democrats fer some o' these problems, we ain't going to accept that blame. We'll just tell you that's the way things have been fer longer than a lot of us have even been in office.</TD> </TR>
</TABLE>arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-22450809375342881452009-03-30T13:52:00.000-07:002009-03-30T14:03:28.559-07:00Smoke 'em if you can afford 'emHere we go again. Big gov'ment is strapping on its size 13 moral-superiority clodhoppers 'n' is getting ready to start trompling all over the rights of a maligned minority 'cause it's the "right thing to do". That's right, they's raising the taxes on tobacco products. Again. When it takes effect on Wednesday, it will be the single largest federal tobacco tax increase ever. The tax on a single pack o' smokes will go from 39 cents to just over a dollar. ($1.01, to be precise.) Taxes on cigars 'n' pipe 'n' smokeless tobacco will be increased, as well. The tax on chewing tobacco, fer example, will increase from 19.5 cents to 50 cents per pound.<br /><br />Course, the claim it's all fer a good cause. Ain't that always the excuse they trot out when they decide to infringe on the rights o' some minority group er the other - that it's fer the "public good"? This time, they say they're going to use the tobacco taxes to help finance a major expansion o' health insurance fer children. While that may be a good use to put their extorted funds towards, in actual practice the idea is just plain stupid.<br /><br />Now, I know you're prob'ly thinking, "Stupid? Ain't that rather a harsh word to use, Random?" Well, that's as maybe. But when it's the right word, it's the right word, 'n' I ain't going to shy away from using it. It <strong><em>is</em></strong> a stupid idea. Just look at the thing logically, which, obviously, the gov'ment ain't doing. They's claiming it's a win-win situation. First off, they's raising money to help fund child care. I admit, that's a good thing. Then, they claim that it will provide further incentive fer tobacco users to quit their bad habits, which will improve their health.<br /><br />Let's just leave the health "benefits" o' less tobacco use aside fer right now 'n' concentrate on the<br />consequences o' diminished tobacco use among the general population. The first thought that springs to mind is: less tobacco use means less tobacco purchases which means a decrease in the revenues from tobacco taxes which means less money fer child health care. That's a lose-win, the children lose but the tobacco users "win" 'cause they're "healthier". If, on the other hand, there isn't a decrease in the number o' tobacco users, er if it even increases 'cause folks want to raise that money fer the kiddies, then it's a win-lose 'cause the tobacco users get singled out fer an unfairly disproportianate tax increase. On the third hand, we have the most likely scenario, which is a lose-lose fer ever'body. There will be a decrease in the number o' tobacco users, which will mean a decrease in the tax revenue fer the kiddies, which will mean another unfair tax increase on tobacco, which will mean fewer tobacco users, which will mean a decrease in the tax revenue fer the kiddies, which will mean another unfair tax increase on tobacco, which will mean fewer tobacco users... 'n' so on.<br /><br />If they want to tax someone to raise money fer child health care, tax the deep pockets, not the folks already struggling with their finances. Make the petroleum companies pay fer it. I'd be willing to bet real money that more deaths in this country can be linked, either directly er indirectly, to the manufacturing 'n' use o' petroleum products than the manufacturing 'n' use o' tobacco. Er they could go after the drug companies. They're the ones who are, probably, most responsible fer the skyrocketing cost o' healthcare in this country, anyway. Make 'em put back some o' what they've taken. If they really want to make some money 'n' a tangible differ'nce at the same time, legalize the illegal drugs 'n' tax them.<br /><br />Now there's a win-win. Maybe even a win-win-win er a win-win-win-win. They'd get more money fer the younguns that way than they could ever dream o' getting from tobacco users. If drugs was legal, they could regulate their manufacture 'n' quality, which means less deaths 'n' health problems from bad drugs. It would also pull the rug out from under the drug cartels 'n' the gangs running drugs in this country. That would mean less violence, less criminals, less folks in jail, safer neighborhoods, 'n' healthier environments fer the children o' drug families.<br /><br />If they insist on placing the burden on the shoulders o' the tobacco user, then I say the tobacco user's in this country should stand up 'n' make themselves heard. I don't mean standing up in shouting 'bout how unfair it is er writing letters to congressfolks er any o' that, 'cause ain't no one going to listen to 'em if they's just using words. I mean they should speak with their wallets. What I'd like to see happen is fer ever' tobacco user in the country to quit buying tobacco products fer at least six months. Turn off that tax tap 'n' see what the gov'ment does when the tobacco users say, "No, you cain't have my money!" Maybe then they'll see the light 'n' actually try something intelligent fer a change. I know, asking the gov'ment to do something intelligent is like asking a chicken to lay hard boiled eggs. I can still dream, though. Least, until they find a way to tax that, too.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-40279945426750099012009-01-26T14:07:00.000-07:002009-01-26T14:09:46.155-07:00Stop the Presses!I am so proud o' my local newpaper. They have finally reared up on their hind legs 'n' shown some backbone, some leadership, some strength, some courage, some intestinal fortitude, some outright (please forgive my use o' local slang) cajones. The local paper today decided to thumb its nose at the conventional wisdome on what constitutes news 'n' how it should be reported. Forget that we got troops fighting overseas. Forget that we got personal, local, state, national, 'n' international financial crises. Forget the climate problems. Forget that we got a new President in office who seems intent on getting more done in his first month in office than most other folks have managed to get done in their first year.<br /><br />Forget all that stuff. The local editors 'n' reporters have decided that the single biggest item o' news they could report in today's paper, at least in terms o' space dedicated to it (at least a quarter to a third o' the front page, with a big ol' pi'ture to boot), was a nice little piece 'bout folks getting their pi'tures taken. O' course, it weren't just any ol' pi'ture taking event. It's this new project the city has undertaken to help "beautify" a new underpass into the downtown area they's spending $26 million on to complete. What happened was, they've contracted with this group o' photographers to go 'round town fer a few months 'n' take pi'tures o' folks that they are then going to put on tiles to be used to cover panels at the entrances to the underpass.<br /><br />'N' that's just how they reported it. They didn't bother wtih anything that would have taken away from the charm 'n' feel-good nature o' the story. They didn't bother to comment on the downturn in American ingenuity er the failure of American technoloy that is forcing 'em to send the photos down to Brazil 'cause America ain't got the know how ner skills to prduce tiles that would be UV-proof. Ner did they bother to question why the town elders decided that, in this time of economic downturn 'n' budget deficits, it was more important to spend this money on "make-up" instead o' using it fer infrastructure er to help the indigent er fer education er something important.<br /><br />No, sir. They seem to feel that, if we just start ignoring er downplaying all the negative stuff going on, it'll all just go away. Keep it light. Keep it uplifting. That'll help sell papers 'n' make us feel better. Course, it could o' been worse. They might have gone with a celebrity update er, worst of all, a sports story.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-24009711201005820272009-01-22T14:16:00.000-07:002009-01-22T14:29:54.436-07:00Anyone fer Thirds?Well, it looks they finally made it official. Maybe. Seems the powers that be decided they'd better give Oprama a second shot at the swearing in yeste'day to make sure it took. I reckon they woke up like the rest of us 'n' found that the market was still down, unemployment was still up, the troops was still out o' the country, folks was still in deep financial troubles, 'n' they wasn't no heavenly choirs singing "Hallelujah" 'n' figured that, maybe, Oprama weren't officially President yet since they messed up the oath the first time 'round. So they dragged ol' Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts out o' bed, made him dress back up in his black gown, 'n' had him try it again in the White House Map Room.<br /><br />There were witnesses there, including some members o' the press, but they didn't 'low no cameras in the room, so they ain't got no real proof that what they said happened actually happened. Also, they claim that there weren't no Bible used this time. So maybe it didn't take the second time, neither, since ever'one woke up today to find that the market was still down, unemployment was still up, the troops was still out o' the country, folks was still in deep financial troubles, 'n' they wasn't no heavenly choirs singing "Hallelujah". Maybe they need to take a third run at the thing 'n' make sure they get ever' little thing right including having a Bible (I got a Gideon I can loan 'em if they's desperate) 'n' having pictures taken 'n' doing it in front o' the whole country with all the right words spoken in all the right order.<br /><br />The whole thing has got me wondering if Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts got that memo that Jr. was supposed to have sent 'round 'bout how he didn't want any o' his folks pulling any shenanigans during the change-over. After all, Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts is one o' Jr.'s appointees, so maybe he's just fooling around, trying to complicate things 'n' either just make Oprama look bad er out-'n'-out invalidate his claims to office. Look fer all this to come back up when the Republicans decide to start talking impeachment after they decide enough time has passed to bring it up.<br /><br />Course, none o' this stopped, er even slowed down, Oprama's acting like President. In his first day in office, he put a stop to trials at Guantanamo, claimed he was going to close the detention facility there withing a year, imposed new limits on lobbyists including banning them from giving gifts to anyone serving in the administration, froze the salaries o' White House aides making more than $100,000, met with the Joint Chiefs o' Staff 'bout changes in how to handle the campaigns in Iraq 'n' Afghanistan, presided over the White House meeting on the economy, 'n' talked by phone with leaders in the Middle East. 'N' that was just some o' the things he did.<br /><br />President er not, looks like maybe, just maybe, this feller has finished cutting his bait 'n' is ready to start doing some actual fishing. I don't care so much 'bout all his fancy talking. It's his doing that I'm concerned 'bout. 'N', from where I'm sitting, his doing in one day so far has given me more hope than all his talking did in the past 12 months.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-11308921147667353222009-01-20T13:27:00.000-07:002009-01-22T14:44:01.960-07:00The Changing o' the GuardJust a few quick thoughts on the inauguration 'n' speech 'fore the pundits, spin-doctors, nay-sayers, 'n' other assorted 'n' sundry "experts" ruin it for ever'one.<br /><br />Firstly: Oprama seemed like an eager little beaver, didn't he. He just couldn't wait to light into the oath 'n' get it over with so he could get to officially call himself president, could he?<br /><br />Secondly: Why has he got such a problem with saying that he will "faithfully" perform his duties?<br /><br />Thirdly: What has he got against the brave soldiers who have fought 'n' died fer their country since the end o' the Korean war?<br /><br />Fourthly: A campaign 'n' nomination acceptance speech that were compared to/paralleled President Jack's - a train trip 'n' Bible that were last used by President Lincoln - an inauguration on the day after MLK day: coincedences, smart politicking, er eerie omens/premonitions o' bad things to come?arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-18561710548574680502008-11-08T12:45:00.000-07:002008-11-08T12:59:48.730-07:00The Fleecing o' the American EconomyFirst off, looks like my numbers on the election was just a bit off. Since I looked up the results, they've changed the status o' Missouri from having chosen the Arizona also-ran to "undecided", meaning they ain't finished counting all their ballots yet, so it may go to Oprahma, after all. If he does get it, that'll increase his lead in electoral votes by enough to put him up into the same numbers Slick got when he won both times, but it's still far short o' the overwhelming number of electoral votes both former Presidents Reagan 'n' Sr. got. The paper today also said that Oprahma got 52.4% o' the popular vote, vs. 46.2% fer the other side, so I weren't too far off on my numbers fer that.<br /><br />Speaking o' numbers 'n' the way they can change from day to day, what 'bout what Wall Street's been doing over the past few days? There just ain't no logic to the way they's running the thing, these days. 'N' it ain't just the past few days, neither. This defiance o' logic started back months ago. Just look at the way they was acting back when they started with the whole bailout thing. Ever'body got all excited when Congress started talking 'bout their $700 billion plan to pump some life back into the financial markets. Then, when they failed to pass it on the first go, someone on Wall Street pushed the lever down 'n' tried to flush the economy. So, o' course, Congress gave in to their blackmail 'n' rushed to pass the thing on the second try. What did Wall Street do? Were they satisfied that they'd got their $700 billion ransom? No. The very next day after the bailout was passed, all you could hear on Wall Street was more flushing noises.<br /><br />Then, this past week, ever'body's all excited 'n' hopeful 'bout the election 'n' the market reflected that by ending up 'round 300 points er so. Then, the next day when ever'one seemed so happy 'n' excited 'n' relieved 'bout Oprahama's win, the market falls over 400 points, followed by another 400+ point fall the next day. Then, amid reports that the unemployment rate is the worst it's been in something like 14 years, the market goes back up. It goes down when there's good news 'n' up when there's bad. What's it going to take to get these fellers to make up their minds? They need to pick a direction to go 'n' then just go there.<br /><br />I think it's 'bout time we come up with a new term fer this kind o' market shenanigans. We've all heard 'bout the "Bear" 'n' the "Bull" markets, when the general trend is either up er down. So what do we call a market when the trend is up 'n' down from one day to the next? I think I've come up with a pretty good one. Let's call it the "Sheep" market, 'cause that's the way they're acting. They just all bunch up together, follow 'long behind whoever moves first, even if it's right over a cliff, 'n' shy at the least little thing. Looks like the lions o' Wall Street have turned into nothing but lambs.<br /><br />Oprahma's saying this is the greatest economic challenge we've faced in a lifetime. He also said he's going to defer to President Jr. 'n' his cronies until Jan. 20, but once he's officially in office he's going to jump on it with both feet. Let's hope he can knock some sense into the heads o' the folks on Wall Street. He's talking 'bout even more "stimulus packages", but they ain't shown much use it getting things back in order so far. Personally, I think he should just walk out onto the trading floor on his first day 'n' start swinging a 2 by 4 'round. In my experience, folks respond a lot more quickly 'n' decisively to a good hunk o' lumber than they do to a little piece o' paper.<br /><br />If we're lucky, Oprahma'll turn out to be a sheep dog er a leader sheep that can get those folks in line 'n' herd er lead 'em where they need to go. I just hope he don't become some form o' Judas goat er sacrificial lamb. I guess we'll just have to wait 'n' see how this all plays out, though.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-29515146518163475512008-11-06T14:53:00.000-07:002008-11-06T14:54:56.060-07:00The United? States of AmericaAs I was watching the election returns on NBC Tuesday night, I noticed something as they was declaring which states' majorities voter fer Oprahma 'n' which states' majorities voted fer the Arizona also-ran. What I noticed was the way the reds 'n' the blues was dividing themselves up. If you start at the Canadian border 'round 'bout Montana 'n' head due south, you notice ever'thing's a bright shade o' red, 'cept fer a little blue lake in the middle of it 'round 'bout Colorado 'n' New Mexico. Once you hit the Mexican border, make a 90 degree turn 'n' head due east. You'll keep seeing red 'til you run out o' land 'n' hit the Atlantic. Add Alaska into the mix, 'n' that's what the Arizona also-ran won: a big chunk o' the west, the western half o' the mid-west, 'n' the south, 'cept fer Florida which is no surprise since they's all just displaced New Yorkers.<br /><br />The next thing I noticed was when Oprahma stood up to give his acceptance speech. Right up front he said, "...we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America." That struck me at the time, 'cause all I could think was, "United? Ain't you seen that map, yet? You may have the minds 'n' the strong backs o' the northeast, northen middle states 'n' the west coast, but looks like the heart 'n' stomach o' this country still belongs to the other side."<br /><br />So I decided to get out my copy of Excel 'n' play 'round with a few o' the numbers. Now, let me point out a couple o' things right off the bat, here. First off, this ain't meant to be in no way a slam on Mr. Oprahma. The man's got my, tentative, respect 'n' support. He won the thing fair 'n' square. (Er, at least as fair 'n' square as you can win an election in America these days.) I ain't trying to take nothing away from him. Secondly, this is just a little home grown analyzing. I ain't 'n' don't claim to be no kind of an expert on politics, statistics, analysis, er any o' that other stuff 'n' am generally fairly leary of anyone else who tries to prove anything by showing me a bunch o' numbers they been playing 'round with.<br /><br />So, having said that, here's some o' the things I come up with: Firstly, Oprahma won the election with 364 electoral votes to 174 fer the Arizona also-ran out of a total of 538 possible. That's a differ'nce of 190. Looked at another way, that's 68% vs. 32% - better than two-thirds o' the electoral votes. That looks pretty impressive, but only if you compare it to the two presidential elections before the more recent one, when President Jr. was running. He won his first time by only 5 electoral votes 'n' the second time by only 15. If we go back past that, they ain't been another Presidential contest as close as this since former President Carter beat former President Ford way back in 1976 by only 57 electoral votes. That means that all the elections since then, with the exception o' President Jr.'s two wins, were bigger blowouts.<br /><br />Still, a two to one majority of electoral votes is pretty impressive. But that's the electoral votes. When we get down to real folks, it don't look quite as impressive. 'Cording to the numbers I've found, Oprahma won only 29, er 57%, o' the states (plus the D.C. area) to 22 states, er 43%, on the other side. That's quite a bit less than a two-thirds majority in terms o' state-by-state counts. He just happened to pick up more o' the big ticket states. If we look at it by population, then things get even closer. According to statistics fer the, projected, populations o' the United States fer 2007, Oprahma won only 53% o' the vote by population vs. 46% fer the opposition.<br /><br />Now, like I said, this is just a home grown analysis 'n' I ain't no professional in the field, which means I ain't got the fancy numbers available to me that other folks have, so I cain't speak to how any state's registered voters reflect the thinking of a state's population as a whole. But 53% vs. 46% looks like a lot less unity among folks than the electoral votes might lead us to believe.<br /><br />Looks like Oprahma may not be the great healer 'n' unifier folks was hoping he'd be. Not yet, at any rate. He's still got eight years to work on it, though. 'N' he seems to realize it. He said he would listen to us, especially when we disagree. Good thing he's got more ears than the rest of us, 'cause with, what looks like, 46% o' the population not too sure 'bout what he's had to say so far, I'd say he's got a lot o' listening heading his way.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7878266340213662690.post-49622511804064690792008-11-06T14:50:00.000-07:002008-11-06T14:53:18.701-07:00Say Hello to the Next Eight YearsAmerica woke up yeste'day morning 'n' breathed a huge sigh o' relief that the long, dark nightmare was finally over. I ain't talking 'bout the nightmare o' President Jr.'s stint in office. I ain't talking 'bout the nightmare o' the financial crisis. I ain't even talking 'bout the nightmare that we might have to put up with four more years o' Republican hi-jinks. I'm talking 'bout the year-long nightmare o' name calling, mud slinging, muck raking, back stabbing, dirty tricks, voting fraud, questionable financing, 'n' out 'n' out lying that makes American voting the greatest kind o' Democracy in the world.<br /><br />That's right. We done went 'n' elected ourselves a new President. 'N' not just any new President at that. No sir. We went 'n' elected a President that is not only the first o' his kind in American history, but, quite possibly, the first o' his kind in the world. Yes, sir, we got us our very first Siamese twin fer President. You know who I'm talking 'bout: President-elect Oprahma - half female entertainer 'n' half male politician.<br /><br />So, not only has he got to deal with the problems o' being the first-of-his-kind American President 'n' the problems with the economy facing him when he takes office 'n' the problems facing America abroad 'n' the problems o' dealing with terrorism 'n' drugs 'n' illegal immigration 'n' raising two young girls in the public spotlight 'n' trying to house train a new puppy without damaging anything in the Lincoln bedroom, now he has to figure out how to juggle running a media empire, hosting a top TV show, 'n' being the leader o' the free world, as well. Good thing he's got two heads 'n' four hands, 'cause he's gonna need all of 'em.<br /><br />Now, I know y'all want to just sit back, take a deep breath, let the past year slide quietly into the history books, 'n' gather your strength over the next two months so you can start griping 'bout what a lousy job the new guys doing soon as he takes office, but I got one more bit o' campaign information to share with you. 'N' this ain't 'bout the campaign that just ended, but the one we get to look forward to in another three years er so. Don't worry, it'll be quick 'n' painless.<br />All I want to say is, let's just skip the whole thing next time 'round. I ain't no supporter of Oprahma's, but I predicted this result way back last year when I first heard he'd th'owed his hat into the ring. I said to myself at the time, "Well, there's your next President." 'N' I was right. In fact, I been right 'bout ever' President since Carter, when I first started paying attention to these kinds o' things. I may not know much 'bout "cultural shifts" er "pendulum swings" er even politics in general, but I can smell the next President coming at least three months 'fore the conventions even get under way.<br /><br />So, take the hint from me 'n' don't even worry 'bout next time 'round just yet. We didn't just elect the President fer the next four years: we just elected the President fer the next eight years. That's right. I'm already predicting an Oprahma win in 2012. All he's got to do is live through the next four years, 'n', given American history, that may be the toughest job of all he'll have to face.arandomchildhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05746172074293188944noreply@blogger.com0