What the left, namely the mainstream media, cannot understand or refuses to recognize is that the people of this nation have any valid opinions at all. They see a collection of lowbrows, now gathering into a mob called the Tea Party. Haters and bullies that need to be put down.
Even while they are failing, the mainstream publications and networks going bankrupt and looking to the government for their own permanent bailout, they consider their journalistic crusade an historic struggle against... What? The people?
We? The people?
Yes the people established this nation and government and now the people have decided they don't want to buy what the main stream media has to offer.
And why is where the people are looking for their news, talk radio and what is now called the alternative media, being threatened by the government? The fairness doctrine appears for the moment to be out of favor but how long will that last, with the mainstream media and prominent democrat leaders making relentless, crude, and predominantly baseless accusations against what they see as their opposition.
The main stream media and government have left the people. They see us as unable to function without their malevolent, oops sorry, benevolent guidance.
We are called an echo chamber. Just mindless minions repeating empty slogans. But it is not an echo chamber, rather a resonance chamber. It is the resonance of truth. Like a tuning fork ringing, the vibrations spreading to others that share the same resonance. The people are responding to what they know deep in their hearts, what is truly important to them.
What is today called conservative ideals are a collection of ideas that ring true. Because they are based on truth. The testament to that being the countless ways they are applied to, expressed in, every level of the workings of America and the lives of its citizens.
The right is not an echo chamber. The ideas are stated from various endless perspectives because the truth permeates our lives. There is no repetition. Callers to talk radio, simple people, often make great points that rival the hosts. I believe I offer a perspective in most cases that is unique, and at times hit something out of the box that might deserve greater recognition. But I am not a professional commentator. And in my case, or that of a caller, the professionals simply don't have the time to cover every pertinent aspect of the issue, so it makes us stand out. They have to focus on what they see as the strong points on an argument or issue. And they all have varying perspectives all pertaining to the same truth. A truth with endless common sense connotations.
How different though in the mainstream media? I believe it is Rush Limbaugh that often puts together clips of the various main stream media outlets mindlessly repeating the same talking points on an issue. And there's the endless websites, blogs and others, that place something onto the Internet and then network to spread it thick. Repetition being their expression of professional ethics. There is the true echo chamber.
With the left, rather than nonsense going in one ear and out the other through that great void, their thinking is askew. On the way to the other side the nonsense runs out of alignment and bounces around in there until it finds its way out the mouth. Often slandering and libeling those on the right. But never having to apologize.
And the recent brew-ha-ha over the Shirley Sherrod story has clearly pointed out the gross vapidness and hypocrisy of the left, the main stream media. When Shirley Sherrod clearly called out Glenn Beck by name, in reference to the supposed attacks that led to her firing, it was clear to me that this was all a trap. A trap intended for a figure seen as the weak link, as he has the tendency to be brash and irreverent in style at times (and incredibly funny too)...(sometimes I just can't stop laughing). But Glenn Beck is obviously a professional. Wanting to lead with the story on his TV show, he didn't when the context of the statements couldn't be found.
And then it quickly broke down. Quickly. The main stream, having often slurred others on the right never retracting their statements or apologizing, rushing to point out how terrible it was to paint this person in a bad light unjustly. The apogee being Dan Rather's remarks that the main stream media actually verifies their stories.
Oh... Wait. That wasn't Dan Rather. I just don't follow the main stream closely enough to know all their names, unlike those professional commentators who I'm sure are familiar with his name. But I know it begins with an 'S' and is at least four letters.
Maybe I should have made a phone call.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Thursday, July 08, 2010
TV Viewership
Hmmm.
A topic that might not seem fitting for this blog, but let me share my unique perspective on the large drop in prime time TV viewing. A significantly larger decline than in the past.
It's unemployment. We do a lot of socializing in the work place and make an investment of brawn and intellect. You get home and you need some down time; TV time. Now if you're not working you're not being challenged on those levels and there is not much socializing going on throughout the day. Just the innate desire to interact on various levels with others and the greater society drives people to go out in the evenings, especially the long evenings, even if they don't have a lot of money. If you're not working evening is the most convenient time to get your social interaction fix.
A topic that might not seem fitting for this blog, but let me share my unique perspective on the large drop in prime time TV viewing. A significantly larger decline than in the past.
It's unemployment. We do a lot of socializing in the work place and make an investment of brawn and intellect. You get home and you need some down time; TV time. Now if you're not working you're not being challenged on those levels and there is not much socializing going on throughout the day. Just the innate desire to interact on various levels with others and the greater society drives people to go out in the evenings, especially the long evenings, even if they don't have a lot of money. If you're not working evening is the most convenient time to get your social interaction fix.
Monday, June 07, 2010
Deterrents
Having grown up in the cold war I often wonder how the younger generations view the world; their fellow man. No longer is the world in a struggle, clearly defined by borders and alliances into the free versus communist world. A period where mutual shared destruction was the lock and key for nuclear arsenals, held then only by super powers. The ultimate deterrent. And it apparently worked.
Just the other night I saw the movie "Dr. Strangelove" and was really taken back. A movie I found disturbing in the past but now quite enjoyable. An insane commander sends his wing of B-52 Bombers to attack the Soviet Union and he alone holds the recall code. In the process of the movie the Soviet ambassador reveals they have created a computer controlled doomsday device impossible to turn off and that a nuclear attack within their borders will set it off killing all life on the planet. Dr. Strangelove, commenting on deterrents, explains the importance of fear in the process, but then points out that it doesn't work if you don't know the deterrent exists. The Soviets not having told anyone, wanting to surprise the world at an upcoming conference.
The Soviet Union is gone and Russia no longer the serious threat it was for launching a world wide nuclear war. China is still an evil communist power full of corruption and human rights abuses. But a new deterrent has risen out of China (and Russia); its people. Becoming interdependent with the world community for its peoples welfare and their growing standard of living, China can no longer consider military conquest part of its ideological goal of world dominion. They fear being overthrown by their own people when the hardships and suffering of war breeds dissatisfaction.
Again when I was growing up they had a TV commercial. A large group of old people in suits gathered in a field. Then, one walking up to the other, they started slugging it out. The message being; Why do our young people have to fight wars between leaders? And in todays world, where man is as far away as his computer from near most all other people of the world, where we hear the struggles and conflicts going on nearly in real time, most likely knowing people in our own lives who have lived or worked in those regions, we truly have become a world community. And most of the world, outside of tyrants and Islamic radicals, simply want to enjoy their lives with its inherent ambitions and dreams, and hope the same for everyone else in the world.
Yet violence grips our world still. Governments abuse their citizens and populations, fed with bitterness and resentment, set themselves against each other.
Iran threatens to destroy Israel with a nuclear strike. Are we to wipe out the Iranian people for their leaders evil intents? The people of Iran, without Obama's support, are apparently not enough of a deterrent.
North Korea too, sinking a South Korean patrol boat, threatens the world with nuclear weapons and a delivery system that may be able to reach the United States. Their people live in prison like conditions if not part of the party proper and those in power are not the ones who will suffer if we turn to greater sanctions.
In a world where rogue powers or terrorist groups could set off a nuclear weapon almost anywhere in the world what is a sufficient deterrent? Much like we target the leadership of terrorist groups with apparent success, governments of nations such as Iran and North Korea need to be targeted, not their people.
The first and preferred deterrent is to support the people. We missed a chance to support the Iranian people and can't let it happen again. The media and its extension, the entertainment industry, have failed to keep in the minds of the world on what North Korea is like. Don't think for an instance that the North Korean leaders are not empowered by the idea that no one in the world cares what they are doing within their borders.
Next we have to realize the nuclear climate has changed. Chances are very high that nuclear weapons will be used and not escalate to a world wide conflict. The possible attack(s) will most likely be singular events by terrorists or rogue nations that will extinguish their entire nuclear arsenal with their attack. And much like we used nuclear weapons against Japan to shorten the war and save lives maybe we should consider using them again. Todays deterrent should be that nations such as Iran and North Korea be promised the certain death of their government and military infrastructure, in short order, if they use weapons of mass destruction. Even to the point of using tactical nuclear weapons to guarantee that destruction.
And it must be known, as Dr. Strangelove so clearly pointed out. Yes, there would be collateral damage of the population with the use of nuclear weapons. But if the public knows a nuke will be dropped on their leader(s) within 24 hours guaranteed, what are the chances they wont capture or kill their leaders themselves?
It must be known. And if the United Nations cannot put together such a resolution, maybe the traditional nuclear powers, those that showed some sense of responsibility in holding the power, the United States, Russia, and China should make that clear to powers that preach violence and destruction.
Our current President has made the consequences of using weapons of mass destruction completely unclear and we find we are being challenged around the world. Our casualty rates are rising in our war zones, and North Korea is threatening.
Deterrents work. Iran needs to be targeted.
Is it the best course of action towards North Korea? North Korea is at a critical turning point. North Korea is on the verge of either retreating into deeper isolation and/or launching an invasion, or speeding up its excruciatingly slow opening to the rest of the world.
The attack on the South Korean patrol vessel has brought conflict to the South, as those opposed to the government reject the claims that it was an act of the North. The death of so many sailors has threatened the 'Sunshine Policy' many in the South have worked hard for. And the North is using the event to consolidate power among the Kim regime. Power that is backed by the military.
So would promise of nuclear retaliation against the members of their government be helpful? The North may use the threat to further bolster the position of Kim's brother-in-law, promoting that the west is in fear of his prowess, accomplishing beyond all hope the goal of the attack on the South. If they chose to look at it that way. And it will be an action that may assuage the rage of the South without any concrete change in current programs working to united the two Korea's. Both results could clear the air to resume relations and the slow opening of the North, or not. You never know what North Korea will do. And they like it that way.
I wrote a piece on uniting the two Koreas, some years ago now, and shortly afterwards the idea of amnesty for the leaders of the North, not a new idea, became well publicized in the South. My idea was Sanctuary, not amnesty.
Fear as a deterrent works well against tyrants who put their own well being above all others. But it can be a double edged sword. The greatest factor in liberating the North is to guarantee its current rulers that they will not face retribution for their actions against their own people and that they will also continue to prosper financially. The idea of sanctuary, where these leaders and those acting on their behalf would be consolidated, confined in many ways, to the capitol and its surrounding province is the most practical way to guarantee their well being. Already a party friendly region a separation between the offended and those who did the offending is the best way to guarantee their safety.
Ultimately the greatest deterrent against tyranny should be the people, as our founding fathers so well understood. North Korea is surrounded by populations more empowered everyday in China, Russia, and South Korea. I believe the younger generations have no interest in the divisive natures of the past. The liberation of the people of North Korea should be the goal. Looking to substantially punish the North, its communist leaders, with sanctions will only only hurt the people of North Korea and hamper the goal of unification as things stand today. And waiting for time, the new generations to gain power, to resolve the issue is an enormous and unjust cost for the people of North Korea to pay.
Just the other night I saw the movie "Dr. Strangelove" and was really taken back. A movie I found disturbing in the past but now quite enjoyable. An insane commander sends his wing of B-52 Bombers to attack the Soviet Union and he alone holds the recall code. In the process of the movie the Soviet ambassador reveals they have created a computer controlled doomsday device impossible to turn off and that a nuclear attack within their borders will set it off killing all life on the planet. Dr. Strangelove, commenting on deterrents, explains the importance of fear in the process, but then points out that it doesn't work if you don't know the deterrent exists. The Soviets not having told anyone, wanting to surprise the world at an upcoming conference.
The Soviet Union is gone and Russia no longer the serious threat it was for launching a world wide nuclear war. China is still an evil communist power full of corruption and human rights abuses. But a new deterrent has risen out of China (and Russia); its people. Becoming interdependent with the world community for its peoples welfare and their growing standard of living, China can no longer consider military conquest part of its ideological goal of world dominion. They fear being overthrown by their own people when the hardships and suffering of war breeds dissatisfaction.
Again when I was growing up they had a TV commercial. A large group of old people in suits gathered in a field. Then, one walking up to the other, they started slugging it out. The message being; Why do our young people have to fight wars between leaders? And in todays world, where man is as far away as his computer from near most all other people of the world, where we hear the struggles and conflicts going on nearly in real time, most likely knowing people in our own lives who have lived or worked in those regions, we truly have become a world community. And most of the world, outside of tyrants and Islamic radicals, simply want to enjoy their lives with its inherent ambitions and dreams, and hope the same for everyone else in the world.
Yet violence grips our world still. Governments abuse their citizens and populations, fed with bitterness and resentment, set themselves against each other.
Iran threatens to destroy Israel with a nuclear strike. Are we to wipe out the Iranian people for their leaders evil intents? The people of Iran, without Obama's support, are apparently not enough of a deterrent.
North Korea too, sinking a South Korean patrol boat, threatens the world with nuclear weapons and a delivery system that may be able to reach the United States. Their people live in prison like conditions if not part of the party proper and those in power are not the ones who will suffer if we turn to greater sanctions.
In a world where rogue powers or terrorist groups could set off a nuclear weapon almost anywhere in the world what is a sufficient deterrent? Much like we target the leadership of terrorist groups with apparent success, governments of nations such as Iran and North Korea need to be targeted, not their people.
The first and preferred deterrent is to support the people. We missed a chance to support the Iranian people and can't let it happen again. The media and its extension, the entertainment industry, have failed to keep in the minds of the world on what North Korea is like. Don't think for an instance that the North Korean leaders are not empowered by the idea that no one in the world cares what they are doing within their borders.
Next we have to realize the nuclear climate has changed. Chances are very high that nuclear weapons will be used and not escalate to a world wide conflict. The possible attack(s) will most likely be singular events by terrorists or rogue nations that will extinguish their entire nuclear arsenal with their attack. And much like we used nuclear weapons against Japan to shorten the war and save lives maybe we should consider using them again. Todays deterrent should be that nations such as Iran and North Korea be promised the certain death of their government and military infrastructure, in short order, if they use weapons of mass destruction. Even to the point of using tactical nuclear weapons to guarantee that destruction.
And it must be known, as Dr. Strangelove so clearly pointed out. Yes, there would be collateral damage of the population with the use of nuclear weapons. But if the public knows a nuke will be dropped on their leader(s) within 24 hours guaranteed, what are the chances they wont capture or kill their leaders themselves?
It must be known. And if the United Nations cannot put together such a resolution, maybe the traditional nuclear powers, those that showed some sense of responsibility in holding the power, the United States, Russia, and China should make that clear to powers that preach violence and destruction.
Our current President has made the consequences of using weapons of mass destruction completely unclear and we find we are being challenged around the world. Our casualty rates are rising in our war zones, and North Korea is threatening.
Deterrents work. Iran needs to be targeted.
Is it the best course of action towards North Korea? North Korea is at a critical turning point. North Korea is on the verge of either retreating into deeper isolation and/or launching an invasion, or speeding up its excruciatingly slow opening to the rest of the world.
The attack on the South Korean patrol vessel has brought conflict to the South, as those opposed to the government reject the claims that it was an act of the North. The death of so many sailors has threatened the 'Sunshine Policy' many in the South have worked hard for. And the North is using the event to consolidate power among the Kim regime. Power that is backed by the military.
So would promise of nuclear retaliation against the members of their government be helpful? The North may use the threat to further bolster the position of Kim's brother-in-law, promoting that the west is in fear of his prowess, accomplishing beyond all hope the goal of the attack on the South. If they chose to look at it that way. And it will be an action that may assuage the rage of the South without any concrete change in current programs working to united the two Korea's. Both results could clear the air to resume relations and the slow opening of the North, or not. You never know what North Korea will do. And they like it that way.
I wrote a piece on uniting the two Koreas, some years ago now, and shortly afterwards the idea of amnesty for the leaders of the North, not a new idea, became well publicized in the South. My idea was Sanctuary, not amnesty.
Fear as a deterrent works well against tyrants who put their own well being above all others. But it can be a double edged sword. The greatest factor in liberating the North is to guarantee its current rulers that they will not face retribution for their actions against their own people and that they will also continue to prosper financially. The idea of sanctuary, where these leaders and those acting on their behalf would be consolidated, confined in many ways, to the capitol and its surrounding province is the most practical way to guarantee their well being. Already a party friendly region a separation between the offended and those who did the offending is the best way to guarantee their safety.
Ultimately the greatest deterrent against tyranny should be the people, as our founding fathers so well understood. North Korea is surrounded by populations more empowered everyday in China, Russia, and South Korea. I believe the younger generations have no interest in the divisive natures of the past. The liberation of the people of North Korea should be the goal. Looking to substantially punish the North, its communist leaders, with sanctions will only only hurt the people of North Korea and hamper the goal of unification as things stand today. And waiting for time, the new generations to gain power, to resolve the issue is an enormous and unjust cost for the people of North Korea to pay.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Thursday, May 06, 2010
Harley Davidson
Over the Winter I commented on one of my more generic blogs about a Milwaukee based tea company that was striving for excellence, as so many companies in Milwaukee have been known for. I accentuated the idea with comments on Alterra Coffee, another company of high standards, built by some of my high school classmates. By those committed to the area, their roots.
When I was young and we moved to the suburbs, whether you call it white flight or suburban sprawl, when we wrote our return address on letters (do you remember when we used to write letters?), we always wrote 'Milwaukee' as the city, as did most everyone I knew who was in a similar situation. So strong the commitment to the area by its populace. I speculated that if not for such a commitment we would be Michigan, economy wise.
And now Michigan is attracting more jobs than Wisconsin. And an icon of Milwaukee, Harley Davidson, may be leaving Wisconsin altogether. The tax and environmental regulation corporate hell Wisconsin has become did not happen overnight. Companies have been leaving for some time and more are planning to as each month passes. Perhaps the loyalty of its citizens has become a detriment as Wisconsin is so far gone. I see little hope of keeping Harley Davidson in Wisconsin. And with Harley Davidson having worked hard to establish their museum here in Milwaukee over the last several years, you have to wonder if this withdrawal from the Milwaukee labor market, and all of Wisconsin, has been planned for some time. Building a substantial presence, substantial ties to the city, without having to tolerate union wages and a smothering tax burden.
Their closing of Buell Motorcycles, a company many believe had potential, may be part of the same plan. They still own the intellectual property, as I understand it, and could restart the company in another state or country.
And as citizen devotion has carried Wisconsin far beyond the point of no return, keeping market forces from responding to failed government policies forcing a correction, so has California's domination of our Pacific coast taken it to the same point. In Wisconsin, the continual loss of tax revenue generating jobs and companies along with a growing government that awards its employees with extravagant benefits and pensions far beyond what they put in, has already destroyed my beloved Wisconsin. Bankruptcy is not a potential future for our state, we have gone past that point. The state has done its best to cover up the fact but the reality can no longer be denied. Yet even now our Wisconsin government is creating incredibly large future obligations on the tax payers by looking to build mass transit that no one will ride.
Greece, and in part Spain and others with similar policies, has gone bankrupt with incredible ramifications for the EU that can be felt all over the world. How will the inevitable collapse of the economies of Wisconsin and California, as well as several other states, hurt the United States? And the ramifications for the rest of the world will be far more severe than those created by Greece.
So are the liberals, socialists or what ever label you want to give democrats just stupid, incompetent, without any idea of what to do, chasing LaLa Land dreams looking to leave the country in a complete state of collapse? Yes! And more unfortunately no.
Glenn Beck and others have been warning of massive inflation. Or possible deflation. There is no or. President Obama and the democrats are working to create massive inflation. Yes, they will claim they aren't, but that is only so they can blame corporate greed and the republicans when it arrives. After pulling a majority of the population into government jobs, or jobs that depend on government funds (what company doesn't?), the financial burden, not to mention the national debt, is to be relieved by shrinking their salaries through inflation. And with a depressed economy where else could anyone find another job, locking everyone in place, under complete government control.
That is how they see it, and of course it will fail. They have far overreached because control has always been their goal, not helping those they claim to be fighting for. There will be no private sector that could possibly be taxed enough to support this system (not to mention the retired baby-boomers social security and medicare), even with raising government salaries slower than the rate of inflation, all the while declaring these public employees heroes for their sacrifice. Their will be no motivation to invest in the United States. And Harley Davidson and other companies will eventually go elsewhere. Why would Harley Davidson keep the 'American Made' image as a marketing tool. No one here will be able to afford one.
When I was young and we moved to the suburbs, whether you call it white flight or suburban sprawl, when we wrote our return address on letters (do you remember when we used to write letters?), we always wrote 'Milwaukee' as the city, as did most everyone I knew who was in a similar situation. So strong the commitment to the area by its populace. I speculated that if not for such a commitment we would be Michigan, economy wise.
And now Michigan is attracting more jobs than Wisconsin. And an icon of Milwaukee, Harley Davidson, may be leaving Wisconsin altogether. The tax and environmental regulation corporate hell Wisconsin has become did not happen overnight. Companies have been leaving for some time and more are planning to as each month passes. Perhaps the loyalty of its citizens has become a detriment as Wisconsin is so far gone. I see little hope of keeping Harley Davidson in Wisconsin. And with Harley Davidson having worked hard to establish their museum here in Milwaukee over the last several years, you have to wonder if this withdrawal from the Milwaukee labor market, and all of Wisconsin, has been planned for some time. Building a substantial presence, substantial ties to the city, without having to tolerate union wages and a smothering tax burden.
Their closing of Buell Motorcycles, a company many believe had potential, may be part of the same plan. They still own the intellectual property, as I understand it, and could restart the company in another state or country.
And as citizen devotion has carried Wisconsin far beyond the point of no return, keeping market forces from responding to failed government policies forcing a correction, so has California's domination of our Pacific coast taken it to the same point. In Wisconsin, the continual loss of tax revenue generating jobs and companies along with a growing government that awards its employees with extravagant benefits and pensions far beyond what they put in, has already destroyed my beloved Wisconsin. Bankruptcy is not a potential future for our state, we have gone past that point. The state has done its best to cover up the fact but the reality can no longer be denied. Yet even now our Wisconsin government is creating incredibly large future obligations on the tax payers by looking to build mass transit that no one will ride.
Greece, and in part Spain and others with similar policies, has gone bankrupt with incredible ramifications for the EU that can be felt all over the world. How will the inevitable collapse of the economies of Wisconsin and California, as well as several other states, hurt the United States? And the ramifications for the rest of the world will be far more severe than those created by Greece.
So are the liberals, socialists or what ever label you want to give democrats just stupid, incompetent, without any idea of what to do, chasing LaLa Land dreams looking to leave the country in a complete state of collapse? Yes! And more unfortunately no.
Glenn Beck and others have been warning of massive inflation. Or possible deflation. There is no or. President Obama and the democrats are working to create massive inflation. Yes, they will claim they aren't, but that is only so they can blame corporate greed and the republicans when it arrives. After pulling a majority of the population into government jobs, or jobs that depend on government funds (what company doesn't?), the financial burden, not to mention the national debt, is to be relieved by shrinking their salaries through inflation. And with a depressed economy where else could anyone find another job, locking everyone in place, under complete government control.
That is how they see it, and of course it will fail. They have far overreached because control has always been their goal, not helping those they claim to be fighting for. There will be no private sector that could possibly be taxed enough to support this system (not to mention the retired baby-boomers social security and medicare), even with raising government salaries slower than the rate of inflation, all the while declaring these public employees heroes for their sacrifice. Their will be no motivation to invest in the United States. And Harley Davidson and other companies will eventually go elsewhere. Why would Harley Davidson keep the 'American Made' image as a marketing tool. No one here will be able to afford one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)