McCain Loses Last Week's Point

One week and two hours ago, I published a post giving Senator McCain a point for decency. He has now lost that point as well as my usual habit of calling him 'Senator.' What changed? Well ... McCain changed. His mind. I have heard two 'robocalls' McCain is funding and approving that both lie openly about McCain's opponent. BOTH calls are aimed at stirring up fear and hatred and I have had eight years of W and Cheney living off of this nation's fear and hatred.

McCain, you have no decency. You have no integrity.

Everyone, I strongly urge you to send a penny to the McCain campaign. Please read my post http://sensenotnonsense.blogspot.com/2008/10/penny-for-your-thought.html from a couple weeks ago and send 'A Penny For Your Thoughts'. If we send McCain's campaign a million pennies, he will have $10,000 dollars that will cost him over $100,000 to process and another $100,000 or more to send you a receipt. That will be a net of negative $190,000! Do it, this madman is trying to scare the presidency out of the American people.

-jb

Points For McCain From An Obama Supporter

Senator John McCain,

I am a supporter of Senator Obama. However, I am going to give kudos to Senator McCain. For kudos to make sense I need to seem to trash the McCain Palin team slightly. In the last week or so, the GOP team has been using some very inflammatory statements directly associating Senator Obama with domestic terrorism. Their statements have been so inflammatory that chants of 'Terrorist', 'Arab', 'Off with his head', 'Bomb Obama', and 'Kill him' have erupted or been coaxed from the crowds. Calls have been coming from all circles on the political spectrum assailing the spirit or mood that has recently been exposed. Even staunch Republicans have threatened to 'jump ship' over the out of control crowds. I, for one, felt that Senator McCain had either lost control of his campaign or had lost his claim to integrity.

BUT!! Stop the presses!! On the afternoon of October 10th, in a town hall format, on two occasions McCain supporters with the microphone asked questions prefaced by statements defaming Obama. To Senator McCain's credit, and for what is the right thing to do, he denied the questioners' basic thesis and their hate-based questions. He responded (essentially) with a statement similar to this: 'Senator Obama is a decent family man and citizen. You don't have to worry about him. He is a fine man that I have fundamental disagreements with - and that is what this campaign is about.'

Bottom Line -- Senator McCain, the incident above was proper and did its part to make America a better place. Understand that there may be additional treatments needed... (look to your VP candidate?) and you have a string of folks from other cities that need to be attitude-adjusted.

Many people hold you in a serious place of honor, Senator McCain, and if one of the folks (I've heard media call them 'wing-nuts') who got wound up at a recent GOP rally, but without your personal adjustments were to go on to carry out an unspeakable crime against your opponent, his family, his staff, or his supporters - to some extent YOU would bear some of the responsibility.

Tip of the hat.
-jb

None Dare Call It Treason, None?

In the spring, Senator John McCain claimed he would be so happy to be part of a clean debate on the issues. 'A new brand of politics' was proclaimed! And most Americans said "Thank heaven."

During part of the time between the spring and the first week of October, he was true to his word and - whether you agreed with him on the issues or not - Senator McCain did usually stick to the issues. I think there were some attempts to enter subjects of age, education, and similar personal traits into the mix of issues; these were attempts that ultimately failed.

A self-described gambler, Senator McCain was observed at various times through the political season to seemingly 'roll the dice' and make decisions that appeared questionable to some people.

• He picked an unknown governor from a small (in population) state to be his running mate.
• He suspended his campaign to rush to Washington to contribute to the solution in the budget crisis and related bailout.
• Senator McCain identified his plan to use cuts in Medicare/Medicaid to save $1.3 trillion toward his health care plan.
• Some of his hunches appeared to be 'winners' while some appeared to be 'losers' - some started as winners and evolved into losers.

But, on October 5th and 6th, Senator McCain and Governor Palin squandered any respect I held for them. They ignored the Spring-time promise of an issues-based campaign and began a barrage of mudslinging. A Senator that escaped Federal Prison in the well-documented Keating Five scandal, a Senator that in his own words "wrote that his decision to meet with regulators on Keating's behalf was "the worst mistake of my life'' and that he had learned from the experience" intervened in the judicial process of a man ultimately found guilty and imprisoned. The public record is full of accounts where McCain actively pursued actions the public now considers identical to the perception of big financial fraud and obstructed justice in the instant sub-prime crisis and $700 billion bail out scandals that threaten to hit our collective wallets yet again in a matter of days or weeks.

I think the choice of Sarah "I can see Russia" Palin as his running mate was fool-hearty and reckless. But it was just a bad decision.

I think the decision to cut Medicare/Medicaid by $1.3 trillion to pay for health care was reckless and fool-hearty. (Relating this to a Florida campaign swing was stupid beyond belief or measure.)

But I think that any candidate that slings mud with the intention of labeling an opponent as a terrorist is - listen to this closely - sometimes treasonous.

1. My morals dictate that if a person has proof or even evidence that another person is a terrorist, he must take his information to the Justice Department, directly and discretely so that proper indictments can be prepared.
2. My moral position continues that if a person has proof or even evidence that another person is a terrorist, and he does not take his information to the Justice Department, directly and discretely so that proper indictments can be prepared, he becomes an accomplice.
3. Further, my moral compass indicates that if a person has proof or even evidence that another person is a terrorist, and he does not take his information to the Justice Department, directly and discretely but makes the issue public so that any potential perpetrators can cover up, suppress evidence, and perhaps escape or make the case unsupportable. Again, he becomes an accomplice.

Option 1 did not take place, or going public certainly broke the judicial processes. Both options 2 and 3 may have taken place and if they did, then McCain is as guilty as he indicates Senator Obama is.

There is another scenario. This new scenario is that there is no factual tie between Senator Obama and the old, former, reformed terrorist - or at least no 'terrorist' ties or 'terrorist' activity. In this scenario, McCain (formerly referred to as 'Senator' - but that dignity is discarded), McCain has lied: lied that there is a terrorist link; lied that he would run an issues-based campaign; and lied if this is all a sham to screen the news media from covering his raiding of the $1.3 trillion from Medicare/Medicaid coffers.

So, if there is truth to the McCain claims about Senator Obama, McCain must be tried on aiding and abetting; and for placing the Republic in danger, he should stand to a charge of treason!

If there is no truth to the McCain claims about Senator Obama, then the members of the GOP ticket are liars of the worst order and have earned the loss of the appellations Senator and Governor.

-jb

Penny for Your Thought

Penny for Your Thought

I am tired of campaigns going negative. I am tired of any campaign wasting my time with negative statements about their opponent. I am tired of it. Each time, although it costs 42 cents for postage, but I am going to donate one penny to the campaign that goes negative. It costs me 43 cents but it costs them much more to process and receipt it.

They have to receipt me, they spend much more than a penny to handle this contribution, and they get immediate feedback that something they did offended me.

To contribute to John McCain
Mail to: John McCain 2008
P.O. Box 16118
Arlington, VA 22215

To contribute to Barak Obama
Mail to: Obama for America
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, IL 60680

+--------->8-------------------------+
| Please find my $0.01 contribution__|
| attached to this note._____________|
|____________________________________|
| I sent a penny because I would_____|
| like to encourage you to give______|
| me your thoughts on the issues_____|
| instead of your negative___________|
| thoughts about your opponent.______|
|____________________________________|
| _________+------------+____________|
| _________|___________ |___________ |
|_________ | Attach ____|___________ |
| _________| Penny Here |___________ |
| _________|___________ |___________ |
|__________+------------+___________ |
|____________________________________|
| Please, do not waste my valuable __|
| time with negatives.______________ |
|____________________________________|
| Receipt to: ______________________ |
|____________________________________|
|____________ ______________________ |
|____________________________________|
|____________ ______________________ |
|____________________________________|
+------------------------------------+

Why? Why do this? Will it make a difference? Right now, the campaigns 'go negative' with impunity. They may sway some people with negatives, but they do not know how unhappy 'going negative' makes some of us feel.

Suppose that a candidate makes a ridiculous claim that the opponent is Satan himself. If he soon receives thousands, or even tens of thousands, of pennies, he might realize that going negative is not without consequences.

Every contribution of a single penny will not be mistaken and the message will be crystal clear - stay positive or shut-up.

Please print this off and send it in in response to negative ads or campaign statements.

Only 30 days left.

-jb

Your Bill of Rights, A Quick Distillation

Whether it is 1948, 1988, or 2008 the following is true. It may be more relavent in the days of the Patriot Act and a presidency that has trouble differentiating between the president and vice president.

________________________

If you allow anyone to burn or ban someone else's book, yours gets a number and is put in line. Period. End of sentence.

If you allow the compromise of anyone else's Freedom of Speech, your thoughts are on someone's list, somewhere, to be muffled. Period. End of sentence.

________________________

Protect the other guy's rights as though they were your own. They are.

-jb

Might it Might or Might it Not?

I came by a communication that was startling - but because of the addressees, I cannot show the content, not even passages, without potentially revealing my source. I can give approximate flow of the framework.

~~~~~
Wed 01 Oct - late afternoon, clampdown on all SP communications before 5pm Eastern. By 6pm, transport out of all view.

Wed 01 Oct - 9pm Eastern, JL will appear on FOX to tell how moving and 'substantial' the entire [and make the plans expansive] wedding. Emphasize 'forming a family' 'missing older brother' 'transition to adulthood' 'prepare for overwhelming responsibilities parenting' 'tenuous pregnancy with health challenges' drop any all, build rhythm. 10pm, MR on CBS interview about sanctity of marriage, taking it seriously.

Thu 02 Oct - 1030am Eastern - leak to Plain Dealer that there may be a family event happening. KC Star, hint SP may have a noon or 1pm Eastern announcement - no questions.
~~~~~

I am not free to explain more. these are not the actual contents, but are extrapolated from the actual text. What is shown amounts to about 35%-40% of what I was shown. I was allowed to touch the document, read the entire page, but not copy it. I have years of working with full email headers and these looked extraordinarily real.

I do not have enough to say firmly, but I will be watching the Plain Dealer and the Star as well as Fox and CBS live and websites.

Do as you need to do.

-jb

One Debate Down

So you understand my perspective, I watch virtually all of both conventions, virtually every primary debate for both (or all) parties, and all the presidential and vice presidential debates during the campaign. I expect a lot from both parties and almost always feel disappointed by each party. This is just how I feel about politics as it is practiced in our country these days.

This submission will do two things today. First, I will say what I like about debates and second, I will share what I dislike most about debates. I think that what I share will be examplar of what I think of the campaign process.

• I Like: I particularly like seeing candidates respond when it is clear that they need to 'think on their feet' - when a question is not too well rehearsed and requires the development of an actual idea and the words to express the idea.
• I Dislike: I particularly dislike attacks or negative comparisons. An utterance that begins with "Unlike my opponent, who is in favor of people starving ..." has lost my respect immediately. And a statement like "My opponent can not possibly be [reasonable, patriotic, American, believed, or ...], but I can" turns me off.

So, last night, who best thought on their feet? I thought both candidates did well at quick thinking. I did think Senator McCain sometimes went to the well of History too often. I wish he would frame talk of Viet Nam era events in the light of ill-concieved and badly-administered war. I could never dimish the cost the senator paid, but that cost was not a down payment on the presidency. If that were the case, fellow-hero Jeremiah Denton may be in line with or even ahead of John McCain.

I thought that mainly based on his speaking ability, Senator Obama was very ableto think on his feet - to the surprise of few. However, I wish that the senator had capitalized on his opportunity by being able to dive to specifics. I am still a fan of the pre-"Change" mantra, "Hope", and wish there were more specifics of plans that will bring Hope. We have all endured eight recent years punctuated with fear and hate. Others may not, but I certainly need release from fear and hate and I need a reason to hope.

In the area of my dislikes, I think both senators launched attacks. But, I believe that Senator McCain did more and 'lower' attacks - and he did them in a manner that infers he is more patriotic than Senator Obama.

So, how can a candidate 'fight back', you might ask? What I consider to be a 'fair' fight-back happened when SenatorMcCain used a segment form his stub speech where he indicates a bracelet (from the mother of a deceased soldier) that he wears in honor of a fallen soldier - with his promise to the mother to not let her son have died in vain. Later, Senator Obama indicated that he, too, wore the bracelet for a fallen soldier - a bracelet also given by a mother, with the plea to not let anothe mother go through what she was going through.

So, all in all, I think the debate was essentially a technical tie. But on tie-breakers, Obama was more 'Presidential' by being less petty. And, the real victory might turn out to be that Senator Obama appeared to undecideds like a very reasonable and intelligent human, equally patriotic, that cares about his country just as much as Senator McCain, even if through differing strategies.

Bottom line. Become informed, get registered, and vote VOTE VOTE!

-jb

If A Bowling Ball Fell Out Of John McCain

If a bowling ball fell out of John McCain, and it had a note attached, written in lipstick, signed by Thomas Jefferson himself, telling me to vote for McCain/Palin - I'd write my own note back to my friend Thomas telling him to get his head examined. And then send the bowling ball back.

That's the view from here. And Whutt a view it is.
-GW

Note:
Today's comment is sent by my friend Guss Whutt and is not intended to be taken seriously. Seriously, this is so.
-jb

What Does It Really Cost YOU??

Like you, I have been sitting listening to the news mention various bailouts, loans, and other prop-ups to mismanaged companies, purportedly to help or save our economy or even that of the world.

Bear Stearns, AIG, Fannie, Freddie, FHA ... you have heard it also. I felt that I needed to do some math to see what was really happening. It was an eye-opener!

According to the 2000 census, there are 105 million households in the US. Each household represents an average 2.6 persons. So things will change if you have 3 kids or if you are single, but start your calculations with these estimates.

I started by wondering what it meant when I heard the word "Billion." So I divided one billion by 105 million and computed that every 'Billion' actually means a real $9.52 to your household.

I was onto something, and looked up what has been reported in the government rescue funds for the Wall St. fat-cats. (Please note, that reports vary and I chose not to fight the noise and took the first source I found that showed all five companies: Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, and FHA.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/18/news/economy/bailout_tally_taxpayer/index.htm

[COMPANY] [PROP-UP (in Billions)]

Bear Stearns	29
Fannie	200
Freddie	200
AIG	85
FHA	300

Then I added the prop-ups and applied YOUR $9.52 to see that we have spent, loaned, or committed $814,000,000,000 and that means $7,752.38 of your household's money. Feel like coughing that up tomorrow? Next week, month, or maybe next year?

This is a single big bill, but I went on to wonder about something else: Iraq.

There are conflicting numbers of $10-12 Billion per month spent in Iraq. (SUPPORT the troops, this is not about the troops, this is about your household monies!)

Every month that we spend $10 Billion, your household is being indebted to the tune of $95.24 and if it is $12 Billion, your bill is 114.29 per month! That means that your annual bill for Iraq is $1,142.86 to $1,371.43.

Makes a person think that they actually have a tangible part in these happenings.

Peace someday.
-jb

Open Question to Obama/Biden Ticket

Gentlemen, Last week I asked some questions to the GOP ticket and this week it is your turn. This will have to be quite short, so you will temporarily receive brief questions and I will come back and edit them by adding more context dialog, expanding on the questions to be fair with both parties.

1. With all the financial 'bailing out' such as with Fannie and Freddie, should not someone go to jail? My question is who and why?

2. The last 8 years has seen drastic erosion in several of the Rights we have expected from our Bill of Rights. Which will you completely restore to us, when and why? Which will you not restore completely, and why?

3. Will you make an absolute public stand against any and all torture, and live up to it?

4. We have a large group of 'detainees' - I want them to get justice and if guilty be punished. When will this happen?

As I said, I will expand and expound on these questions, but this is probably sufficient to get some answers...

-jb

Seriously not funny

While you might find it amusing, it is not a bit funny.

-jb

Nationalized Medicine, WHUTTT !?!?!

I got into a conversation with a couple just the other day and when I mentioned that I am probably going to vote for one candidate over the other, the lady asked "Are you really in favor of nationalized medicine?"

I took a moment, I am sure I looked at her quizzically, and responded that I was totally unaware of any candidate from either party proposing nationalized medicine.

What followed was a brief, but fruitful, discussion of medical care philosophies.

I am not an expert, but I hope to have enough expertise to vote well in November. However, in my understanding, 'nationalized medicine' is the situation where all medical providers (doctors, nurses, technicians, etc) actually work for the government - more specifically, in 'nationalized' systems they would work for the Federal government.

It is my understanding that what is proposed as the health care reforms is actually 'insurance reform.' That is, steps will be taken such that insurers will not be allowed to refuse to cover the 47,000,000 individuals they refuse to cover today. In addition, for the highest-risk patients, a government pool will be established to fund part of the costs of their relatively more expensive health insurance and care.

Now, I will be the first to acknowledge that forcing insurers to cover everyone is interfering to some degree with free enterprise. It is exactly equivalent to the situation if states forced auto insurers to offer liability coverage to all car owners, even if they are high-risk drivers.

WHOA! Wait! Every state already DOES require insurers to offer insurance to all drivers. But we don't have 'nationalized auto ownership' or 'nationalized accident repairs' or 'nationalized body shops' to the best of my knowledge.

I am one of those people that cannot get insurance on my own. And even when I get it through employment, I pay about $1600 per month! Because of past health issues and present chronic conditions, insurers won't insure me. I have to pay exorbitant rates to try to reduce my risk of bankruptcy at the hands of medical bills. Medical bills are teh number one cause of bankruptcy claims!

No, I do not want nationalized health, I want a fair shake at being assured the chance of obtaining affordable health insurance and only one candidate offers that to me today.

-jb

Open Letter to the McCain/Palin Ticket

Open Letter to the McCain/Palin Ticket

At this point I will not be voting for your ticket, but I want to leave open some questions that will give you the option of removing my concerns and allowing me to reconsider my vote. These are in no prioritized order, simply a list of important concerns in a random order.

1. Mostly for Governor Palin, but a concern for you both - I worry about the issue of those who would ban books. I worry about any censorship in my home (or community services like libraries), when that censorship comes from others outside my home. I do not want to argue one book or another, ANY book should not be banned, burned, or suppressed. If I choose to read or not read "The Catcher In The Rye", this is up to me. I absolutely refuse to force someone else to read any book, it is not my place. But, I also absolutely refuse to accept someone else banning a book for me, it is not their place. This is not a qualitative statement or negotiable. An assurance that "The Catcher In The Rye" is not on a target list is not adequate. NO book should be banned. Nazi's burned books and I have an openly acknowledged prejudice that I view all book burners as resembling Nazis. So, Senator and Governor, can you assure me that voting for you would result in a constitutional philosophy I could live with?

2. A famous Republican was quoted as promising to 'get government off our backs.' I basically think this is a good ideal to work toward. However, I have concerns that come from both of you about what it means to get off my back. I have heard that both of you would limit (or even ban?) birth control medicines and devices. Specifically, I have heard that both of you would move to limit or ban condom use, even among married couples.

Now, I am very worried that it appears you may condone climbing into my bedroom in spite of, or because of, the concept of 'getting government off my back.' I fail to see how banning birth control gets government off my back. Does the ticket have any wisdom to impart to me about how I will personally be better served by a ban on birth control medicine and devices?

3. I am extraordinarily worried about the condition of our national security as it is portrayed by your ticket. I hear repeatedly from your ticket that 'the Surge worked and that your opponent refuses to acknowledge this.' You would think it would be a stretch that this makes me worry about national security. But my concern is the interpretation of 'success.' My memory is that the Surge was designed to accomplish a reduction in the violence and thirteen (13) major points, like agreement on sharing oil profits, local elections, some very specific legal actions, etc.

These 13 points were determined to be essential to the effort of the Surge and actually having impact on our national security. It is my understanding, that your ticket has completely abandoned those 13 points. This makes me concerned for your ticket's tenacity in following up on our national security. Your opponent has freely admitted that the violence was reduced by the Surge, but views the other 13 points that have not been successfully addressed as constituting important influences on our national security. When future lists of national security objectives are defined, will meeting just one or just some of the listed objectives be all it takes to satisfy your administration?

What can you tell me to help me better understand your ticket's commitment to national security?

4. Probably mostly for Senator McCain, but also Governor Palin to some extent: The final concern I have to request help understanding is about the economy in general and specifically about health care. I do not feel that you understand what it is like to have health care not be available to me, today. I am not talking about the end of the next administration, I mean today. I do not mean tomorrow or next week. I have chronic issues that need to be managed and I have waited for years and years and heard Presidents say, we will fix the market and it will happen. It hasn't happened. It has gotten worse. In the early 90's it was a serious problem when over 15 million people were without adequate health care and we have reduced that number to 47 million today! WHAT!?!?

Waiting for the market to adjust and for insurance companies and health care providers to do the right thing has not worked for the last 16 years. I have NO belief that it will work any time soon. Senator, you are covered by Medicare, VA, and Congressional health plans. If I lose my job, I will be bankrupt. This is a disconnect and I do not see how you can possibly understand - or care about - my situation.

What can your ticket tell me that will help me feel that a vote for you on November 4th will improve my situation on January 20th?

I am sincere in stating that I do not believe that either ticket will substantially help with my concerns on January 20th, 2009. But I will listen to both tickets. I intend to write a similar open letter to the Democratic ticket next week.

-jb

George Bush in a Wooden Box

I do not even know how to title this. I am nearly overcome by grief. I make no mis-statement that past issues have troubled me. They have. But I am immediately concerned for a current issue that brings me to tears.

It was revealed that we are keeping certain people captive in boxes. Three foot, by six (3x6) foot boxes.

Two things I want to comment on: Mr.Bush, this is happening on YOUR watch. And, this is happening in our name. I am appalled that you think this is acceptable. I am appalled that you think I accept this decision with you. I don't. According to SPCA guidelines and policies, you are not treating these human beings with even the rights of animals. How dare you? Even if they have done bad things, these persons are God's creation.

Of course, you might not believe in God. Or maybe you don't believe God created everything and everyone.

Mr. Bush, treat ALL of God's creatures as YOU would like to be treated. You have only 6 months left to serve and cannot be re-elected, please use common decency for the next half of a year. Please?

And a couple of ancillary thoughts:

1. What is next? What else, Mr. Bush, have you not told us?
2. What is the justification for treating a human being worse than we would accept for a dog?

Back to you Mr.Bush. I (as a particle of 'We the people') - I ask you as your boss, "What is happening in our name?" "What are you doing in our name?" For God's sake do the Christ-like thing!!!

How's Our Constitution, Senator McCain

Recently, the Supreme Court made a third ruling on detainee rights, specifically affecting detainees at Guantanamo. Like the other three rulings, the court once again stated that these individuals do have some basic rights to access courts.

John McCain blasted the ruling as one of the worst rulings ever. I am most concerned by this.

When I went to school, I was taught that Judges, Senators, Presidents, the military, gosh - a whole ton of people - were sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States. Of course, I could be wrong. I may not have the most recent copy of the Constitution, so there may have been changes since my copy, but mine states: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

Wikipedia says "The United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in the Suspension Clause, located in Article One, Section 9." This makes me think the authors were pretty well set on its importance, intent, and use.

So, I ask you, Senator McCain, were the framers of the Constitution in error? Perhaps they were not serious? Maybe they were really not thinking of today's world - they may have been afraid of the autocratic power of King George? Aren't autocrats always a problem?

Senator McCain. I am more afraid of Presidents and lawmakers abusing many, many humans than I am of Guantanamo detainees getting due process. NOBODY says to let them out willy-nilly. But, Senator McCain, due process has worked well for us for 219 years. We were an open society, a country of laws, a leading culture - they attacked - we knee-jerked away the rights of all people. HMMM, sounds like they won.

Give me Habeas Corpus. Give me the Constitution.

-jb

Sue For Peace

One of the translations of scriptures uses the term "sue for peace" to describe diplomatic efforts. This phrase evokes in me the image of discussions that struggle, but ultimately may achieve Peace despite fits and starts and setbacks.

One of the distinctions between presidential candidates is that one candidate advocates talking to our enemies from a position of power while the other says we must refuse to talk to enemies until the knuckle under to our power or until they submit themselves to us without conditions. One of those paths is a continuation of the path taken and policy espoused by a well known "C student" and has been in place recently.

It is rather odd that the second candidate above referred to the situation between Israel and Hamas as sworn enemies and how you can't talk with someone that wants to drive you into the sea. And he goes on to label the first candidate's position as immature.

After such a candidates' exchange recently, it was revealed that sworn enemies Israel and Hamas were conducting secret talks, after all. More recently, a cease-fire was announced. Now that cease-fire may or may not hold. History holdsdim hope for the final outcome of the cease-fire. BUT! Even dim hope is more hope than existed when rockets, suicide bombers, tanks, and missles were the only interchanges - more hope than when death was the currency of the dispute.

"Sue for peace" evokes images of really 'working' at. It infers that Peace is not easy, yet remains a worthy goal. Even a C student can buy bullets, but maybe it is time for someone that can give even a slim Hope. As immature as that might sound.

-jb

Things Have Changed My Life

I think I have a very diverse life story. I think that a great deal of what has happened to me has created a wonderful mix of things inside of me.

Teachers and preachers. Days, todays, yesterdays, and tomorrows. Places I have been and places I haven't been. Things that have happened and things that have not happened. Many things have changed my life.

Sometimes the things that have changed my life saw the changes happen immediately. Sometimes the changes took awhile to happen.

One change happened immediately and I thought I recognized it then. But in fact, I recognized it this year.

In 1968, in May, I shook hands with a man. Simple action, happens all the time. In June, a man was shot and bled on the kitchen floor of the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. Horrible action, happens all the time. It was the same man. I shook his hand and three weeks later, he was assassinated. I knew then that it changed my life.

Forty years later, I realized that it did change my life.

-jb

Truth Chests

I am not sure that women do this anymore, but it used to be that every young lady had a Hope Chest. My fear is that this tradition has been replaced by young ladies 'hoping for a chest,' so to speak. So if you do not know what a Hope Chest is, stop! Go ask someone you know and care about to explain it to you.

Welcome back. Now that you have an understanding of the Hope Chest as a concept, I want to introduce the Truth Chest.

Just like the Hope Chest was a literal chest the sat at the end of a lady's bed or next to her dresser, the Truth Chest is something that everyone carries with them mentally. It sits at the foot of their theology, or next to their religion.

Does a Hope Chest contain all hope? Of course it does not. I have a friend with cancer and I hope for a cure for cancer. But the cure for cancer is not inside a Hope Chest. I hope the world ends the problem of starving children. But ...

But the Hope Chest does contain Hope. That is, the chest contains things that bring hope to the young lady. Hope for a nice, clean home, hope for a happy family, and hope for a fulfilling marriage for instance. These are the stuff of hope and they are inside the chest, things that bring hope.

The Truth Chest is sort of similar. Can a Truth Chest contain all Truth? Of course it cannot. There is more truth than can 'fit' in a mortal person. My Truth Chest is a part of me, a portion of me, a mortal person. Since all Truth cannot fit in me because I am not the Divine God, rather the mortal Jim, then it cannot fit into a portion of me, my Truth Chest.

But in my Truth Chest, are things that are true or bring me close to the truth of the immortal and divine. And in Sam and Sally there are Truth Chests that can bring them close to the truth of the immortal and divine. The contents are all things that bring Truth, but are not Truth itself.

But wait, there is more. The contents of the three Truth Chests all bring Truth, but these may not all be the same. In fact, they may seem to mortals to conflict. And that is really okay. For instance I live in San Antonio, Sam lives in Minneapolis, and Sally lives in Denver. If we all need to go to Kansas City, we can look in our Truth Chest for what is true and find a map to Kansas City. But if we try to apply our truth to each other, our maps disagree, could confuse, and do conflict.

I tell Sam to get to Kansas City by taking I-35 North because that is the truth for me. In fact, that is a tried and true fact that I have tested and can testify to. If Sam does that, though, he will end up in Canada. Sam's truth would be similar, but would be confused because what he says and knows is to take I-35 South, a way he has tried, tested, and proven.

Our truths seem to confuse us, yet BOTH are true. Both are accurate. God gave mankind, through cartographers, geographers, and others the ability to document true facts of the geography of God's creation such that both our Truth Chests contain God-given information that is simultaneously accurate and confusing.

But wait, Sally looks in her chest and her directions conflict totally with ours. Her directions are to take I-70 East. Not the same path, not the same direction, not even the confusion of the Jim-Sam, North-South variations, nothing is the same. Sally is in total conflict with Sam and me.

But all three of us possess God-given information. We possess information designed to literally guide us. We all can literally look at another and accurately say that their truth is confused or in conflict with our truth. And we would all be correct, and at the same time, we all possess correct information. We all possess God-given information that literally works, tried, true, tested and proven accurate.

And the mystery grows because once, I was in Denver and when I was there, my truth Chest contained a scrap of information, that was true, that was different than my Truth Chest contains now. It contained information that told me to get to Kansas City by taking I-70 East. I did, and I tried it, I tested it, and I proved it - I got to Kansas City by doing it.

My very own Truth Chest contained accurate truth then that worked and properly guided me and yet conflicts with my accurate information now, which works and which properly guides me, today.

And when I explored further, with some modifications my truth was helpful, but not totally accurate, for friends in McAllen, Dallas, and Wichita. And Sam's essentially worked for folks in Sioux Falls and Des Moines. Sally's could be tweaked and help folks in St Louis.

• So what does all this mean? I have some thoughts I want to share:

• Truth is bigger than can fit in one person's truth Chest.

• Truth must be updated as our spiritual, physical, and temporal location changes.

• My Truth, tried-tested-proven, may confuse someone else.

• My Truth, tried-tested-proven, may conflict with someone else's Truth. And BOTH may be correct.

• Truth does not change over time or location; we do change in both time and location.

• Total Truth is greater than the truth of consolidating truth from any number of people.

• I do not have sufficient truth to lend to all others, but my truth may be help some others, not if the truth is flexible, but if they are.

When I hear a radio preacher or a TV preacher, or a guy in a coffee shop talk as though their Truth Chest is 100% accurate in always and in all ways - I doubt. When I here one of them or one of theirs try to expect my Truth Chest to look like theirs or compare them in other ways - I steer clear. When I hear one of them or one of theirs or someone thinking like them try to apply their Truth Chest to me or to others - I cry.

-jb

The Worth Of Your Best

The Worth of Your Best

Especially when times are hard, it is easy to get folks to concentrate on what they don't have. But they (or we) do this at our peril, because it ignores or devalues something every one of us DOES have: 'Our Best.'

When we evaluate our situation by possession or lack of items, we measure on a ruler of quantity. That ruler has no metric or valuation for quality. When we measure on a ruler of quality, our metric of quantity (possessions and/or lack thereof) means little.

Today, I stopped for lunch at a new café touting 'Burgers and BBQ' on its sign. Never having eaten at this restaurant, I was gathering my first impression.

I ordered a bacon cheeseburger with mustard, pickles, and tomato. Now it turns out there is a national tomato-scare happening, so I was informed that there was no tomato, and I understand how things are and said I'd like the rest of my order, repeating "a bacon cheeseburger with mustard and pickles" just to be sure.

The gentleman asked me if I wanted onions and lettuce and I said that I preferred not to get them, so he gave me a receipt and a glass and sent me to find a table.

Not terribly later, a young lady brought my order out and it clearly had lettuce on it, which I am willing to sweep aside, but I was somewhat bothered by why it had this and told her I had said I didn't want onions or lettuce and her response was there are no onions on the burger …

I am capable of removing onions, or lettuce, or most anything I don't care for, but that is not what this is about.

After I ate, I stopped by the counter and since there was nobody else in line or around, I talked to the young lady:

"This is my first time here and this was your chance to impress me, to 'Wow' me. I can get a burger anywhere in town, but today, yours was the only place that had a chance to impress me and make me happy. Now if you don't ask me how I want my burger, I feel that you don't care if I am happy or not. But if you ask me how I want it and then you bring it some other way, I am
convinced that you REALLY don't care if I am happy or not.

A burger is a burger and costs about the same to make anywhere or to buy anywhere. Selling me a burger is no big deal and easy to do. But what makes me come back is a feeling of being glad that I bought my burger from a place that made me happy.

Now, if you measure success by selling me a burger, you may or may not see me again, but if you give me your best service, showing that you care about my satisfaction, you will see me again.

This goes for burgers, accountants, taxis, doctors, lawyers, and candle makers. The most important thing you can give is your best. It is invaluable.

My Question for Clinton Supporters

All,

This has been an exciting Democratic campaign and I am glad it is over. I would like to make a statement and ask a question.

My statement is that many state that 'if you are for someone other than Senator Clinton, than you are sexist'. I believe that this ~might~ be true IF, and only if, the complete sentence is 'if you are for someone other than Senator Clinton, based on gender, than you are sexist', but not in the shortened form. In fact, I am doubly proud that our country has a campaign that breaks both racial and gender barriers. I can equally state that someone favoring Senator Clinton is a not racist and that someone favoring Senator Obama is not a sexist.

In fact, the 'ists' are generally not going to show up in the list of supporters, but in the list of detractors - that is those that are against someone.

Some of Senator Clinton's supporters have been heard to say that they will now vote for Senator McCain. Now that one or the other of these two preferred candidates has emerged ahead and the other not, my question is this: "Is your candidate, or someone else of their gender or race, more likely to win the next White House race if Senator McCain wins or if Senator Obama wins?"

I think that however one feels about the just-ended race or how they feel about the coming national race, if they will answer the above question, everything will work out.

Please: Independents, Republicans, Democrats, and all others - please vote. Vote for the candidate of your choice, but VOTE.

I would rather see my candidate lose an election with 100% of voters participating than to see my candidate win with only 50% of the populace voting.

-jb

Senator Clinton, It Has Now Become "Not Now, And Not Ever"

An Open Letter to Senator Hillary Clinton.

Senator Clinton,

To be perfectly honest, you were never my first choice, and maybe not even a rational second choice. I began this nomination season supporting (former) Senator Edwards and continue to wish he was still part of the potential November ticket. Senator Obama came to my attention very favorably through his address to the 2004 convention. My wife and I tried to watch all speeches of both conventions and his was head and shoulders above all the others. By the way, former Senator Frist was far and away one of the worst speeches I have ever endured. After Senator Obama's speech, I commented that that man will be President of the United States one day, probably thinking 2012, 2016, or further in the future.

When he emerged as a viable candidate this year, Senator Obama was an easy favorite when things didn't go well for Senator Edwards. I voted and caucused for Senator Obama and I support his candidacy.

All of the preceding explains that you were never my first choice and, at best, you were a second or third choice I would not be disappointed about.

However, your behavior as a Democrat in the face of a November show-down, your personal attacks on fellow Democrats (reference Ronald Reagan's 'commandment'), your refusal to accept the math and unite with the party, and your inconsistency (every vote in Florida, but deny votes in parts of Texas?) - these issues all make me feel that you are 100% committed to one thing and one thing only: personal power.

Service to this country is not about personal power, it is about personal servanthood. I can now clearly state that I will not vote for you, "Not Now, And Not Ever."

-jb

Israel and Their Reckless Appeasement

First President Bush clearly stated that talking with enemies is appeasement - even likening it to pre-WW2 appeasement of Hitler. (It is not for me to tell a C+ student to use a dictionary and look up 'appeasement', so I won't - he said it.)

Later, John McCain further clarified the act of talking to enemies as 'reckless appeasement'.

In both cases, Syria has been mentioned by both of these astute men as one of the nations qualifying as an enemy - and therefore off-limits for talks.

Senator Obama claims that a strong America should never fear to talk with other countries and that talks can be tough and still be diplomatic - but not be any kind of appeasement.

This week it is learned that Israel, one of the most earnest of enemies with Syria is in talks with Syria.

This places a terrible burden on Mr. Bush and Mr. McCain to need to warn Israel that what they are doing is 'reckless appeasement'.
_______________________
Several years ago, a couple of women in Ireland had the fortitude to insist that the IRA and the UDF and representatives of Great Britain (forces that had been blowing each other to smithereens for generations), sit down and talk, or was it 'reckless appeasement?'. No, I think it was just talk with their enemies. How's Northern Ireland doing these days?
______________________
Several years ago, South Africa ended Apartheid and Nelson Mandela and Bishop Desmond Tutu, and others insisted on non-violence and held Truth Commissions, and repatriated those that were in internal exile. They won Nobel Peace Prizes and accolades and awards worldwide.
_______________________
It is now time to put aside the simple minded rules of the last 8 years and build rules of peaceful existence for the next 80 years and beyond. Give our children a world where diplomacy starts wit human respect and moves to mutual national respect.

-jb

President Bush is TOO busy

President Bush is TOO busy. I know he is too busy and I can prove it.

First, recall that everyone in their right mind agrees that Nelson Mandela, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is not allowed to travel to the US without special waivers because he has been, and is still, on the United States' Terrorist Watch list. This is the source of great embarrassment to the US on the world scene.

I have timed it and it would take President Bush five seconds to utter the words "I want Nelson Mandela off the Terrorist Watch List within an hour." If he took those five seconds, it would happen. Since it hasn't happened, that is how I know that he doesn't have the time.

-jb

Open Letter to George Bush

Mr President,

When will you learn that bullets and bombs are the problems, not the solutions?

Appalling Silence

I feel energized by the challenge that confronts me from the following quote.
____________________________________________
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people" Martin Luther King Jr.
____________________________________________

Why do I feel challenged by this? Because I do truly believe that if we are silent about a wrong that we see, then we become guilty not for its inception, but for its continued life. We become complicit in promulgating the wrong we otherwise do not approve of.

But, there are so many wrongs, which do we fight against? We need to pick the most important ones first. Every day hunger kills small, innocent children - - pretty important. Every day children are passed along from grade to grade without being taught - - pretty important, but perhaps not as instantly critical as hunger. Every day otherwise decent people 'break into' the U.S. to work to send money to where ever home is - - not good, but also certainly not quite as important as starving children.

Well, all things have some importance, but we absolutely must find the things that are MOST important and do something about them. If we don't, then Dr. King's professing our need to repent is true and accurate.

One more thing ... I am very saddened by the repeated reference to Dr. King as an 'agitator' (with negative inferences) by a dear friend that I otherwise admire greatly. Yes, he did agitate us. He agitated decent people to not stand by and accept the unfair oppression of brothers and sisters by other brothers and sisters. It just isn't right to allow it.

But much like a washing machine, without an agitator, your clothes don't get clean and soon you start to stink. America needed a dose of clothes cleaning. Still does. We needed an agitator, and we still do. You, go and BE an agitator for the cleaning up of some wrong in the world. Pick what is MOST important and dig in on fixing it. Our repentance will be demonstrated by the loving words and actions of the good people that will not accept the hateful words and actions of the bad.

-jb

Iraq Needs a Better Business Bureau

We had a deal. We would 'Surge' to cause an easing of tensions and Iraq would work on their 13 or so milestones.

We surged and eased tensions. Iraq has hit ZERO milestones.

That's a bad deal. We got a raw deal. Call the BBB! Now!

-jb

College Logic 101 Exercise 14

Logic Proof
(sometimes called a 'Waterfall')

1. In the last February debate, Sen. Clinton promised she would share her tax returns.
2. In March, Sen. Obama says Sen. Clinton should fulfill her promise.
3. Sen. Clinton says Sen. Obama is acting like Ken Starr.

This is LOGIC? T / F <circle one>

Go in peace. (with permission to scratch your head...)
-jb

Fear Not

To Christians, the birth of Jesus was a special point in the relationship between God and mankind. We may not (we absolutely don't, actually) live up to the label 'Christian' but we intend to try to make the world a better place and bring about a sense of community in all God's creation. We try to maintain a sense of the 'created' - that is a sense of the purpose to which we were created.

So, if we want call ourselves a Christian nation, or, more inclusively and properly, a God-fearing nation, then should we not chastise ourselves for the sense that brothers and sisters born elsewhere are less deserving of the rights we demand (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness) because there skin and language differ somewhat?

Should we not chastise ourselves for thinking that anyone from certain lands is either a terrorist or a pre-terrorist?

The angels trumpeted Jesus' birth and began their announcement with the statement "Fear not, for unto you is born this day, in the city of David ... " and it makes me think that our message, as believers has slipped. When we share with others, what we share should begin and be centered around the thought to "Fear Not."

-jb

The "P"-cubed Principle

There are three stages to the "P"-cubed Principle. The principle follows a path of individual growth; I'd like to walk this path with you and perhaps entice you to take the journey of the Peace-maker. We view Peace not as absence of war, but as the presence of one-ness between the Creator and his creation.

1 - Permit Passive Peace-making

In this phase of the journey, we realize that peace-making is a nice thing and we all ought to allow people interested in bringing about a more peaceful world to do so. We support peace-makers, sometimes we actually join in a peace-making activity if the peace-maker seems to have an attractive goal or message.

2 - Power of Premeditated Peace-making

After we have seen some peace-making make effective changes in society, we realize that there is a power in having some peace-making 'tools' available to use day to day. To do this, we need to prepare in advance and learn certain peace-making skills, then we can pull them out and put them to work when situations arise. There is a wonderful power in going around with planned ways that we can make the world better when opportunities arise.

3 - Practice Preemptive Peace-making

In the mature portion of the journey, we realize that there are forces in the world that move towards or away from Peace. We realize that the forces against Peace are powerful. Peace-makers need to actively go out, in advance of opportunity, creating opportunities to build Peace. We need to build Peace in order to pre-empt the power of those that would destroy the world God created and His precious children.

The Peace-maker's journey takes the steps above; recognize the need for Peace in our world, recognize the power Peace-makers wield, and preemptively go about building Peace. Peace is one hallmark of the Kingdom of God. Actively cause communities of Joy, Hope, Love, and Peace to bring about the Kingdom that is without borders, exceeds political ties, and accepts all creation in citizenship.

Bless your efforts - jb

Leaders Desperately Need Imagination

During the '04 campaign, Cheney bellittled anyone that sees the world situation different than he does by saying they can't 'wrap their mind around a terrorist with a dirty bomb.'

Well, Cheney, that is a horrible thing and we do need to protect against it, try our best to prevent it, and be prepared to survive or overcome it if it happens. But I believe it is a small person that is limited to where that is ALL they can wrap their mind around. Leaders must have a vision of 'Better' not just a fear of 'Worse.' What is your vision of 'Better' - imagine it and then convey 'Better' to me.

In addition to the above 'down side' event, we need leaders that can also wrap their minds around how we can successfully live with diversity, love our brothers in all countries, respect those with diverging ideas, embrace those the would rather live in the hope of a better world instead of in fear of a worse world.

From the get-go, I have refused to live in the FEAR spouted by certain of our leaders. I still refuse to. Rather, I navigate from the perspective that I am driven to create a better world today than we had yesterday.

I challenge you to consider that it may be true that even if you end up in the same position, it is better to navigate from a point of positive hope than from a point of hopeless fear.

God bless good people everywhere that want to love God and ALL God's children and work out the details from that central point.

-jb

Sleazy!?!? Karl Rove?

Why would I consider Karl Rove sleazy just because he wanted to see pictures of a Democratic governor having sex? Since when is it sleazy for a total idiot to seek higher education?

Any president that had a top adviser with these tendencies should be totally embarrassed. But any president with greater than a C+ average would probably not have a top adviser like Karl Rove.

Cheers to all - jb

Loser Campaign Phrases

I thought I'd share the campaign phrases or phrasing I most dislike. I am only covering the three most likely candidates right now, but if you insist I address others, let me know. In alphabetic order:

Hillary Clinton: "Day one." Ma'm, day one is going to be day one for every one the same. You have NEVER been president and experience can not be injected. Sorry, but DROP the DAY ONE.

John McCain: "Real, existential threat (radical Islamists) we face." Sir, until you and many others understand how we can prevent creating this group, encouraging this group, and multiplying this group, we will need face the fact that terrorists exists. Period. But we also need to understand that the problem is 'extremists' of any strip, Christian, Islamic, Atheist, Buddhist, WHATEVER. Extremists are a problem.

Barack Obama: "I don't belong here." Sir, I know what you are trying to say. But you are there because you are running for president and doing OK with it, so drop the self-deprecation.

That's all. And it's only my thinking.

Now VOTE, folks, VOTE. Primaries, General, any election you qualify for: VOTE!

-jb

Christianity and Platitudes

There is a saying that comes from the level we call 'platitude'. It goes something like this: "If any man is not free, no man is truly free."

Sometimes platitudes are difficult to apply to actual daily life, because we almost want to hear them reworded. We might hear the above with our ear, but our heart might instead hear "If any one I personally know is not free, my personal freedom might be shaky."

I know this is a somewhat loose rewording, but it illustrates the fact that if something is not personally apparent, it might not seem real.

The fact is that we live in a global world and the original statement makes perfect sense if we evaluate globally and if we consider all persons as brothers and sisters regardless of gender, pigment, citizenship, language, circumstances, etc.

When a couple in the Middle East is caught inappropriately alone, for instance, and the woman is sentenced to be stoned and the man is not judged, am I at risk? Is it personal or is it just the distant and somewhat abstract brother or sister that is at risk?

Ultimately, if we think globally, we can see that someone that would create and condone a society where the woman can be stoned might want to spread that society to my land. As unlikely as that possibility coming to pass might seem to be, it is still somewhat a threat to me. And in degrees of separation, I may have gone to college with that woman's brother, father, or cousin. Or her accuser or judge.

Please try not to get to wrapped into depending on a circumstance of unjust stoning. Try to understand a larger schema. The statement "If any man is not free, no man is truly free" actually means that if tyranny, slavery, or other injustice is present, it does threaten everyone. If a man in that distant country can use the logic of injustice to enslave someone, the same calculus might be adjusted and applied by a man in this country against me.

I could use all of the above for the basis of many statements. But I want to make a statement to folks identifying themselves as Christians and I will base it on the above proposal. I want to frame the statement with two precepts for motivation. Christ gave us two overriding laws, first, we are to love God with all of our heart, and second, we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. With these in mind, I suggest that Christians are called to bring about a community that is the Kingdom of God on Earth.

In the Lord's Prayer, we pray 'Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on Earth as it is in heaven...' Let us live to that prayer. Let us live to the needs of all God's children throughout the world.

Vote. Vote for the candidate that best helps you be a Kingdom builder.

-jb

Shame on Mitt Romney

Mr Romney,

Your speech suspending your campaign was not what I would expect of a gentleman citizen that would run for President.

You hinted that Senators Obama and Clinton would turn the country over to terrorists. I know of NO American that wants to turn the country over to terrorists. I know Americans differ on how to fight the battles of terrorism. But their differences do not imply lack of patriotism. You  are not less patriotic for your belief, they are not less patriotic for theirs.

Unfortunately, I think you made the statement to avoid facing the actual truth. You lost in the primaries. Plain and simple, you suspended your campaign NOT because the Democratic candidates are less American; but because you got fewer votes. Period. Plain. Simple. Fewer votes.

jb

Just About 2 Years Ago ...

It was just about this time, early in 2006, when Bill Frist had the Republican majority clamoring about suspending the 200 year old Senate operating procedures to make it such that it would only take 51 votes instead of 60 votes to pass legislation. Those rules had been in place a long time and many leaders with less than 60 votes were able to 'cross the aisle' and work with the opposition to achieve progress.

History, for example, indicates that Lyndon Johnson and Everett Dirksen where respectful adversaries that developed a personal rapport that helped them come to agreement. (You may use this link: http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/huleve.html.) Words or terms that were heard were 'statesman, log rolling, crossing the aisle, negotiation', etc. These indicated that neither side totally 'got their way' and both sides won some progress.

Well, the Democrat leaders are now in the Frist shoes. How would the public feel if, again, we heard rumblings of suspending the rules?

I hope that NEITHER party ever decides to depart from the 60-40 rules the Senate has used for over 200 years. I would rather that BOTH parties identify and elect statesmen (and women) to the houses of Congress. Instead of 'My way or the highway,' we should be hearing cooperate, collaborate, progress, and advance.

Just a thought. Try it on. And ... Where is Frist now?

Finally, Senators, Members of Congress, grow up because you are working on our dime.

jb

Question Political Analysts

On Super Tuesday night I heard analysts of both Republican and Democratic races make statements such as 'A percent of conservative independents chose Obama over Clinton' or 'More conservative Democrats picked Huckabee over both McCain and Romney.' The statements were couched as though it were the end all of everything to cover the group mentioned and that if the person they voted for were not to win, they were out of the November equation.

The fact is that someone that voted for Romney in the primaries where McClain is likely to win, is pretty likely to vote for McCain in November. They are not likely to say "I wanted to support Romney, but since he didn't win the primaries, I think I'll vote for Obama instead of the Republican candidate." And, they are not likely to say "I voted for Edwards in the primary, so in November I will vote for McCain instead of the Democratic candidate."

I need you to think of it for yourself, but I think the November vote will look more like the Republican voters for Romney, Huckabee, and McCain will vote for McCain; and the voters that voted for Edwards, Clinton, and Obama will vote for Obama (or Clinton). What will make a difference is that some of the Independent votes may rearrange. And maybe not.

So, my thought ends up as your assignment: try to see if you can be more critically analytical than the analysts. Be skeptical of what analysts say and apply your analysis.

jb

Pink slips coming

The boss, known as WTP regularly issues pink slips every for or eight years and fires the crew at work. It isn't generally with malice, but it is never the less effective. WTP will take this step even for employees performing admirably.

The employees that get walking papers starts with the President of the United States, the Vice President, and everyone that works for them. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents - this just happens. And it is supposed to.

It is this ritual firing that reminds all of us that even the most powerful man or woman on earth works for WTP. And while We The People generally do not make much about our being the boss, every four years we are reminded that We The People is the most important job to be had, even more important than George W., Bill, George Sr., Ronnie, Jimmy, ... and you get the picture.

Your job as a citizen is critical and ultimately more powerful than the President. Get involved. Become informed. Read the Constitution. Steer the ship of state. Study the field and vote for the person you want in the oval office.