Failure to understand

Failure of the campaigns
American political system is not working
No matter how Tuesday’s (Nov. 6) election turns out, at all levels, we will have those 21^st Century types that don’t understand how this venerable American political system designed in the 18^th Century is working actually the way it was designed, which really is an amazing tribute to the people who have shaped it over the last 225 years.
In both of the above referenced articles, the authors complain of the “failure” of the American political system. Apparently, if I am interpreting their rhetoric correctly, the failure is in that the government apparently is gridlocked and cannot agree on solutions. This is bad, according to them.
Well, count me among those who say maybe it isn’t so bad.
Yes, both sides of the political spectrum are being fairly obstructive, but then that is their jobs. Their jobs are to represent the people who voted them into office, not their constituency at large. Now, I am not saying that these people are not educated, or unintelligent, but I am saying that I don’t agree with their understanding of how a democratic republic is supposed to operate.
To that end, I am reminded of a line from one of my favorite movies: What we have here is a failure to communicate.
First, there is a failure to communicate exactly what Americans view as their expectations of the role government (especially the federal government) in their lives, in their finances, their health and nutrition, and in the economic affairs of the nation in general.
There is a great divide in America right now between those who see a big role for the federal government providing for welfare of the American people and those who are suspicious of the federal government intervening in the lives of individuals. That divide, unfortunately, is wide and probably can’t be reconciled, but it will have to be accommodated somehow.
Second, somewhere along the line, two concepts were missed in translation and apparently failed to be communicated to the generations in the 21^st Century. The first concept is that instantaneous gratification really is not possible, no matter how much we want to believe it is. Part two is that winner takes all is not part of the democratic equation; rather it sows the seeds of conflict in the future, especially in a country that has more than one vision of what that future ought to be.
So, we have people looking at the American system and saying “It is broken” or “It is dysfunctional” when they really mean that it is not providing the solutions that they think it should. That seems to be more a problem of their expectations than whether the system is broken or dysfunctional.
However, assuming that it is “broken”, I would be very curious as to what their “solution” would be. My question is that while they may think it is broken, could it not be that the “system” is thinking, trying to ascertain what the best solution might be.
You see, your first reaction sometimes is not the best reaction. Sometimes it is, and then again sometimes it isn’t. We used to value people in this country people who would take the time to consider their actions, rather than merely react to certain stimuli. I fear that carefully considered approach is waning, to be replaced by the demands of those who require instant gratification.
I mean, just look at our wired world today. Millions, if not billions, of people have the ability to access information nearly instantaneously, make a snap judgment on that information (as incomplete as it may be) and then move on to the next thing that may attract their attention.
It takes no thought to do that. I would call it reactionary, but I suspect that many of those who are addicted to the swiftness of modern communications would revolt at being labeled as such, particularly progressives who seem to be enamored with the benefits of such technology.
We seem to have forgotten that it takes time to lay foundations and to build new edifices to our dreams and hopes for the future. No, we seem to have lost that perspective … and this is not just a left-right deal or liberal/progressive-v-conservative argument.
It is more of a generational thing, where those who vaguely remember what life was like before television, cell phones and the internet can recall having to wait … and wait … and wait … sometimes. Not just for decisions, but for the information to base those decisions on. Patience is not a virtue that Americans have.
The election, whenever it is decided, will not change things immediately. I hope people realize that. The system will continue its slow, inexorable process toward resolution of issues large and small … and no, the world is not going to come to end on Dec. 21.
The system is not broken or dysfunctional … it merely is not spitting out solutions at the pace your video game has taught you to react to.

Curious events. … Alice through the looking glass

Explosions rocks arms factory in Sudan, no casualties

Sudan claims Israeli airstrike

Satellite imagery of damaged area

U.S. admiral recalled from Arabia Sea for lack of judgment

Interesting, Arty Johnson on Laugh-In would have said. Very interesting.

Ok, conspiracy theorists, let’s crank up the speculation machine.

First, explosions rock a field at an arms factory in the Sudan. In this field supposedly were, at some time, transport containers. Now, some people who have been following the conflict say that they count six bomb craters in satellite imagery they bought. The plant, known to work with the Iranians making rockets for use by Hezbollah and other Palestinian factions in their on-going rocket war against Israel and run by the government of the Sudan, initially says it doesn’t know what caused the explosions but that there were no casualties.

Now, of course, witness say they saw four jets in the sky … at night … and presto, it is obvious the Israelis did it. Not that they probably don’t have cause, but bear with us here.

The rationale behind the attack is to demonstrate to the Iranians that the Israelis can mount a long range raid to attack a target about the same distance as it is from Iran to Israel (as the crow flies).

Then, the U.S. admiral in charge of the carrier strike group sitting out in the Arabian Sea between Iran and the Sudan gets recalled for exercising poor judgment.

Most wheels turn, thinking either the admiral mouthed off at the wrong time or it had something to do with the Libyan deal. Unfortunately for that tale, is that the ship only got on station three weeks ago.

Ok, fellow buffs, how about this scenario:

The Israelis do fly a strike. Of course, they have to skirt the radars in Eqypt, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, without raising anybody’s alarm. It is a long way, so whatever bombers they use will most likely have to refuel in the air.

Now, the U.S. carrier, the USS Stennis, is doing its thing out in the ocean. Let’s say it picks up these aircraft. If the admiral does nothing, then he is going to piss off one group back in the District. If he tries to warn the flight off, then well, that causes other problems with another group. Or did he send up his own refuelers to help the Israelis? Or maybe it wasn’t even the Israelis by the U.S. spec ops people in Djibouti who snuck in and called in the strike from the Stennis, ala Bill Clinton’s bombing the aspirin factory back in 1998.

Then again, a really smart bunch would have just infiltrated, ala James Bond, and set charges all over the field to make it look like an airstrike.

And considering that most airstrikes these days by both the Israelis and the U.S. don’t find aircraft flying all that low to the ground, since usually the bombs are either GPS guided or laser guided and can be dropped from a pretty high altitude (they even work better when you do that, because the guidance package has more time to refine its flight path to the target coordinates).

But then again, if it was a practice run for Iran, maybe they were practicing their nap of the earth skills.

Just think of all the different permutations of this you can come up with. It really is fascinating … and right before an election too!

WOOF! WOOF!

Those evil insurance companies are going to get it

Insurers prepare for Hurricane Sandy

If you are an insurance company, how do you prepare for the “Storm of Century” or whatever they are going to call what happens when Hurricane Sandy joins the cold front in the Ohio Valley?

Well, you can report on the superficial things, like getting teams of adjusters ready, etc., but the real impact is going to be at the end most people never think about: Their investments.

Hurricane Sandy/Frankenstorm is predicted to cost about $3 billion in insurance claims … and that is before it even hits. While a big chunk of that probably will be paid by federal flood insurance claims, still the insurance industry, coming off a really bad 2011 (remember all the tornadoes in the US and Hurricane Irene), is about to get hammered again.

Little exercise in insurance economics: Where do insurance companies come up with all that money after a “disaster” to pay for all those claims?Yes, they get a lot of their money from those premiums (fees, really) that people pay on the off chance that they might be damaged by something that is covered under the policy/contract.

However, a bigger chunk of those funds come from investments made by those insurance companies (called capital gains). Now, since we have been in a recession, those returns are not as high as they once were but, still, insurance companies have big reserves … they have too (usually, it is part of the laws that regulate them).

What you are going to see now is one of two things: A) Insurance companies are going to borrow whole heck of a lot of money against the collateral of their investments or B) insurance companies are going to have to sell a lot of those investments in order to generate the cash to pay out all those claims. (Don’t even think they are just going to crack open a piggy bank and come up with that much ready cash because there is no piggy bank)

This means, either the stock market is going to take a dip (from all that selling) or lending rates are going to go up. I may be wrong, but that is what economics tells me.

Oh, and premiums also will go up … have to restock the piggy bank, ya know.

People do so love their conspiracies

GOP is stealing elections

I do so love progressives and their belief that if they aren’t winning then it obviously is the result of a conspiracy.

According to the British, a retired American National Security Agency (NSA) analyst proves that the GOP has been stealing elections Arizona, since the state has gone computerized vote counting and machines.

The premise of this person’s argument is that the larger the precinct the more the vote count is skewed electronically toward a particular candidate (favored by the Republican Party elite, which apparently have corrupted the software). From what I gathered from the story, the assumption is that a candidate’s support should be a flat line, rather than one that gyrates wildly from precinct to precinct. Having covered a plethora of elections over four decades (most without the benefit of voting machines, which have been around for more than a century), I find his thesis a bit strange. If you plot precinct by precinct totals, your graph most likely is going to gyrate rather wildly, especially as larger precincts report in. This is not a conspiracy. This is reality.

My progressive friend out west who provided the above link, says to drive them crazy and vote anybody but Republican. But, if “they” control the software, then it shouldn’t matter who you vote for, the result is predetermined. So, what he is telling you doesn’t make a lick of sense.

Of course, there is the usual conspiracy nonsense about all the voting machine makers being in the hip pocket of the Republicans, but does that explain the documented reports of machine malfunctions in some Eastern states that were switching votes to the Democratic candidate.

Granted, paper ballots are – to a point – the most secure way of casting ballots. Of course, there is a long history of stuffed ballot boxes, lost boxes, found boxes, etc.

It would seem to me that it would take some really sophisticated programming to go without detection, at least at the levels I witnessed over the years.

I am not saying it is not possible. I am saying I am tired of progressives trying to discredit the election process before it even happens.

Batten down the hatches

Hurricane Sandy

Halloween Frankenstorm

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration forecaster Jim Cisco, who coined the nickname Frankenstorm, said: "We don't have many modern precedents for what the models are suggesting."

Ok, not to belittle the weather event forming up in the Atlantic, along with the cold front that sweeping through the Midwest, but … so what? We are going to have a bad storm.

Alright, my point is exactly what NOAA forcecaster Jim Cisco said: We mere 21^st century humans don’t have all that many precedents upon which to base our forecasts. Like that is a no-brainer.

Hello, we peoples down here on this little planet have been keeping fairly accurate records for maybe 100 years, and have actual satellite data (which is a step up from ground records) for maybe 30 years … on a planet that is 4 billion years old. That is not a wealth of data to choose from when you look at it.

We can infer a lot from what we can get from ice core samples from glaciers and the Polar Regions. We can estimate a lot from analyzing geological samples from years past, but real actual hard data to plug into our relatively recent inventions called digital computers is pretty doggone hard to come by.

So, before you go jumping off any cliffs because we are going to get a bad storm, don’t. The weather guys and other folks mean well, but they really are talking just possibilities and probabilities. What they want you to do is to use your common sense and take sensible precautions. In other words, don’t do something stupid and be prepared for changing circumstances.

Now is not the time to run around like a chicken with your head cut off and expecting the end of the world to happen. It ain’t … at least until Dec. 21, when we have it on good authority that all sorts of cultural catastrophes are going to happen … or then again maybe not.

The reality of the situation is that if we get a bad storm, it will be a bad storm. Lots of people will be without power and generally very inconvenienced. How we all react to that will be of more importance than what the weather does or does not do.

In most cases, unless you do something stupid or silly, you will survive and will have yet another tale to tell somebody who wasn’t there.

Weird report: What plane crash?

Strange story
Ok, summary of the link above by the Associated Press: Military vote outreach officials are telling voting officials in various states that a plane crash on Oct.19, 2012, in Afghanistan apparently appears to have allegedly destroyed 4,500 pounds of service members’ mail, but they are not sure. Included in this load were an undetermined amount of absentee ballots. Would they send out new ones?
Now, this is not outside the realm of possibility. However, having said that, why do none of the public affairs offices in the theater make any reference to such an accident? Hello, these are the people who write press releases when a coalition aircraft makes a hard landing, much less gets its cargo burned up in a crash.
I have gone through my “usual” suspects when I am trying to find out about what the military is putting out, just to check to see if I missed something, but I can find no reference to said crash. Interesting, however, is the ISAF Joint Operations release for the next day now is missing, but that is just interesting.
I am not crying foul, but my experiences with the Military Postal System do not give me much faith that “replacement” absentee ballots will get to Afghanistan and back in anywhere near enough time. Makes one wonder exactly how many absentee ballots were on that “alleged” plane.
Something about this story is funky, and I don’t know what it is, but it is sending off all sorts of warning bells in my mind.
If anyone can find a reference to this accident dated prior to Oct. 25, 2012, I would surely like to read it, because I can’t. In addition, none of the military public affairs sites reference any aircraft losses on Oct. 19: ZIP, zero, nada, zilch; and no crashes with or without casualties.

The only reference I can find to a crash on the airbase is this one Afghan report of helicopter
"US helicopter crashes in Shindand airbase HERAT, Oct. 21 – Officials of Islamic Emirate reporting from Herat province state that a US helicopter crashed inside Shindand airbase due to technical difficulties. The helicopter is said to have crash landed at dusk time Friday inside the mega base, catching fire upon impact and killing all the invaders and crew aboard. It is worth reminding that a couple of days earlier, a UNAMA helicopter also crashed in Bamyan province due to technical issues, killing all the foreigners and hirelings aboard."

Off the radar screen.

Egypt refers case to trial
Does the name Ahmed Mohammed Abdullah ring any bells? Well he is the radical Islamist Egyptian imam who tore up a Christian Bible in front of the U.S. Embassy back in the middle of September.
He reportedly was arrested under Egyptian blasphemy laws. At first he was supposed to go to the local court Sept. 25, then Sept. 30, then Oct. 14, then Oct. 20 … and as far as I can tell, it still hasn’t gone before a judge. Now, those of us in the U.S. are used to these things dragging on in the court system for years, because that is how it is done here … but that is not how it is done in the Middle East. Even on relatively serious crimes you get a very speedy trial (if you are not an international celebrity, and even then it might be dicey) and if convicted, the sentence usually is carried out rather rapidly.
However, in this case, I guess the clerks of the court have lost the paper work and everybody else is distracted by the elections in the US. I think our defendant in this case has just walked right back to his TV studio to resume his life.
The question I have is: where are the riots here in the US demanding he be held accountable for insulting Christianity. Oh. that is right, Christians can’t be insulted in an country following Islam’s Sharia law.
Just thought I would point that out in passing.

PS: The Feds still are holding the alleged  producer of the allegedly insulting YouTube  video in jail on charges of parole violations. No hearings yet. That will have to wait until after the election.

Missed opportunity

Romney on Detroit auto industry bailout

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney said that General Motors and Chrysler should have gone through the bankruptcy process without the injection of $60 billion in taxpayer money that didn’t keep the companies out of bankruptcy court in the end.

Well, in this case, back in 2009, I was siding with Romney, but I understood the stakes. Yes, the American economy was going to go through a really rough shakeout, but I had foreseen that 30 years earlier, but I am not going to go back over what I was saying editorially back in the 1970s and 1980s.

No, something President Barack Obama said during the debate set off a cascade of thoughts in my head in relationship to the U.S. auto industry.

First, President Obama wasn’t talking about how he saved Detroit; he was talking about how the country had changed since 1916. Romney had pointed out that the U.S. Navy is smaller than it was before World War I and the president was saying a lot had changed, from bayonets (which are still used, Mr. President) and horses to aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines.

It was the horses’ thing that triggered my thoughts. Even though Special Forces guys rode to victory in Afghanistan (proving that even horses are not quite obsolete yet), it was the image of horse drawn carts that leapt into my mind.

In 1916, the U.S. (along with the rest of the world) was on the cusp of shifting from a horse-drawn world to a internal combustion engine-powered one, something like the world is facing now.

Ok, this is a stretch, but think about it. Detroit is heavily invested in internal combustion engines that run on things that burn, right? That is a no-brainer. Of course it is. I can think of more than one movie plot that has the “auto industry” in conjunction with the “oil companies” conspiring to suppress breakthrough technologies that revolutionize the auto industry.

Now, stop and think a moment. Why were GM and Chrysler doing so badly? Might it be that not only that they were stuck with union contracts that were sucking the life’s blood out of the industry but also because they were stuck with an old business model? Are they not still trying to sell horse-and-buggies to a world that needs Mr. Ford’s Model Ts.

What would have happened if the fossil-fuel based auto industry had been forced into bankruptcy? It might have had to reinvent itself. That is what the buggy makers did 100 years ago. Some made the transition to cars, but a lot didn’t. That is what happens in a truly progressive world where the world progresses and inspires innovations and new industries.

President Obama talks a big line when he talks about turning to alternative energies in the future, but when he had a chance to really change things, did he do it?

But no, our government was more concerned about doing the bidding of the auto unions. Don’t believe me? Then why did the unions get rescued, while those bond investors – who by law came first on the list of creditors – basically got the shaft and the door?

You see, one of the great things about the United States is that we used to be a nation of laws. Those laws applied to everybody and the president wasn’t busy waiving their application against this group or another.

You want to know why I have a problem with President Obama and his administration. The answer is right there: Its refusal to apply the laws of the nation equally, regardless of social status, economic status, racial status, religious status, etc.

Don’t complain about the wealthy not paying their share when 1 percent pay something like 40 percent of the federal income tax. Sorry, but that dog just doesn’t hunt.

Don’t grant states waivers to unpopular laws, while suing other states for trying to apply federal laws within their jurisdiction.

Don’t tell defense contractors they don’t have to abide by federal law and that the federal government will reimburse them for their violations if they get sued because they didn’t.

The U.S. missed a huge opportunity three years ago when it could have stood up and taken the body blow that would have hit the auto industry in Detroit. That auto industry could have taken that opportunity, as provided under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, to reorganize itself, reconfigure the industry and come out with a more forward looking product.

Nope, we missed out chance, because we were too afraid that the unions might take a hit and some people might get hurt.

Well, getting hurt is part of life. What marks the type of person you are is what you do when you get hurt, get knocked down, and then get up again. What you do then is the true indicator of the type of person and type of nation you are. What are you? What are we?

Initial debate reaction – Obama v. Romney

Well, the 2012 presidential debates have come and gone.
My gut level is that Romney has come off better than Obama.
Why?
First, he was able to hold his ground with the president. Not only was Mitt Romney able to hold his ground, but he also did it in a much more “civil” way than President Barack Obama. That has made Romney appear “more likeable” in many ways, and I read somewhere that the likeability factor goes a long way in these races.
Romney did not “attack” Obama “personally” as was not the case going the other way. Repeatedly, Obama attacked his challenger for his personal wealth, attacked him not for his policies as a former governor, but because of actions taken, all within the law and quite legal, by groups of investors who were seeking to rescue businesses from total financial collapse. The president, much to the delight of his supporters I imagine, was in his bully pulpit – quite literally. The Canadian half of my household was much disturbed by that behavior that was in such marked contrast to that of the challenger.
Second, at least to me, Romney also projected a more positive vision for the future. Words do matter and positivism, as was illustrated by Franklin D. Roosevelt, can do much to help a nation lift itself out of economic problems.
I don’t know if it will mean a lot in the overall scheme of things, but I personally like positivity more than negativity.
The problem I have with the President’s view is that he returns to the tired canard that only if the “wealthy” would pay more, then all the nation’s economic problems would be solved. Unfortunately, that is not true. You could confiscate all the billions and millions of people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros, the Waltons, the Koch brothers, Donald Trump and you would do only two things: 1. Not even eliminate the budget deficit from one year, right now, much less the $16 trillion in national debt that we owe; and 2. By confiscating all that wealth, you would, in essence, kill the golden goose because there would be no more wealth to confiscate.
You see, in my humble opinion, we ask far too much of our federal government and therefore it spends far more than it should. Education, really, is not a federal responsibility. It is not the federal government’s job to go out and hire teachers or set educational curricula. It is not the federal government’s job to build elementary, secondary and post-secondary schools.
It really isn’t the federal government’s job to decide what medical care is available where and for how much.
It is not the federal government’s job to decide what economic choices businesses and individuals should or should not be allowed to make.
I know that, among a lot of people, those are not popular positions, because they make solutions difficult … and outcomes different for different people.
As far as foreign policy between the two men, I see very little difference, except maybe in how they want America to be perceived. One (Romney), wants to see the U.S. strong and assertive in its leadership, while the other (Obama), seems to want to see the US deferential, cooperative and respectful, if not necessarily strong and assertive. These perceptions are definitely different; although exactly how that would play I have no clue.
I do know that the quest to be both loved and respected is a bit Quixotic. It is a wonderful romantic goal, but totally illusionary. I also know it is what Americans want and can’t understand why we aren’t.
As for the election in that essentially ends (we all hope) in about two weeks, I have no predictions. I have no grand suggestions. Heck, I don’t even have any recommendations to anyone. I can’t tell you how to vote, even if you have a vote (which considering how many non-Americans read this is considerable), but then I wouldn’t even to presume to tell you how to vote. That is an individual’s decision. Each of us has to make up our own minds as to whom we are going to vote for and why.
It comes down to what we expect from our government (at any level) and which candidate will work (and not necessarily accomplish) toward ends that we think are in our best interest, as well as those of our communities and our nation. We have to understand that neither of the candidates will be able to deliver on many of their “promises” because it really is not in their power to do so in the American federal republic. Presidents are not gods, nor absolute rulers. Presidents have to find compromise and common ground. The more you see done by executive order or fiat, the less you are seeing our republic at work.
In the end, our choices at the ballot box do have consequences and those consequences, good or bad, will reach far and wide. I know the world is watching Americans with bated breath, because the United States does play such huge role in not just the affairs of its citizens but for people around the world, good, bad or indifferent.
But Americans now have to consider their own counsels. They have to look to themselves and decide what, in the final accounting, which candidate will indeed serve their own interest … because in the end, whether you agree or not, it is the individual who counts and not the village, not the province or state, not the nation, not the world, but the individual.
Without the individual, with respect and dignity for all, then there is nothing. We all become slaves, compelled to live for others.

Global leadership

Realistic prism of the cost of global leadership
Interesting article linked above … and the author probably is right. You know, it is expensive being the world’s policeman … even if you aren’t really elected to do it.
He may have a point. Maybe the time has come for the United States to stand down and let China take a larger role. I mean, for sure, nobody else will or is in the position to do anything about it.
Of course, it would help if the United States was totally independent of the world energy market, and definitely not dependent on Chinese imports to supply our consumer economy and Chinese investments in Federal Treasury Bonds to keep the federal government afloat with all its deficit pump-priming (that sure doesn’t seem to be working all that well).
Of course, we could hope that everyone is going to bury their swords and pick up plowshares and peace will rule the planet. Who knows, stranger things have happened … or have they?
Nope, just look at the world today (and don’t blame the US for all the conflicts, they would be there whether or not the US did or does anything). Seriously, look where there are conflicts: Across Asia, Africa, South America, North America, even Europe. About the only continent that doesn’t have an active conflict going is Australia (We won’t count the Whale Wars down south of it).
And if it is not wars, conflicts, then how about riots and demonstrations that routinely turn into fiery melees with burning cars and people getting their heads busted.
Nope, sorry, try all you want, you can’t blame the Americans for all that violence. It ain’t our fault. I know our progressives take their cues from various and sundry demagogues in this culture and that who claim if it wasn’t for “Western” influences – particularly those of the Great Satan that is America – that all would be peace, tranquility and happiness throughout the world, but if you believe that … well, I am afraid you may have serious problems.
As I have often pointed out: The Americans are powerful in many ways, but they neither are omnipotent nor omniscient. Besides, people in other countries always have a vote in how things go, whether they are in power or not.
The problem I have with the Americans stepping back behind our moats of the Atlantic and the Pacific and erecting our own castle walls along the Rio Grande and parts west, as well as from Puget Sound to the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, is that would be an exercise in futility. We just can’t wall ourselves off from the rest of the world, however attractive that might seem.
Yes, folks, I am just as frustrated with the turn of events around the world as probably anybody else. I feel like screaming Rodney King’s famous line: Can’t we just get along?
But, unfortunately, people, man is not like that. I wish we were, but we aren’t.
In the end, somebody has to step up and lead … or as we used to say when I was in uniform: Lead, follow or get the heck out of the way!
Leading ain’t fun. It ain’t easy. It ain’t cheap. However, sometimes, in the long run, it turns out to be in your best self-interest.
In the end, I guess, what price do we want to put on our liberty, our freedoms, our way of life … as well as those of others?