Smarter Than Thou!

WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS MISSING IS...

T BOONE Pickens (the T stands for “Lucky”) is a rich man who runs “commercials”(?) on TV advocating wind power.  Even if I agree with him, I do not then know what to do.  Am I supposed to go out, (to Kansas?) and buy some wind-powered electricity, and bring it home?  However, for purposes of this commentary, let me assume that his intentions are good. 

However, his reasoning is not. 

Pickens “warns” us that the USA’s dependency upon foreign oil sources is a bad thing.  He calls it a great (maybe even the greatest) “transfer of wealth” (from us to them).  That is, we in the USA give those Arabs and Canadians lots of our money.  And we get back, only, oil.  And this is terrible, according to Pickens, and should be stopped.  Our money should be kept here. 

Allow me to interject some intelligence here.  When we buy the oil we send these oil producers our money.  This money, unless we pay in coin, consists of a whole lot of small pieces of paper, upon which are nicely executed portraits of dead White Protestant Freemasons.  This is all our money is.  The ONLY reason why it has any value is that others are willing to accept it as having value.  This is called “fiat money.”  This is because it could be used to buy a Fiat automobile. 

Needless to say, any time “we” (the USA) needs more money, we can print it.  It is like when you play “Monopoly,” and you run out of game money.  You simply write up some more on any piece of paper.  The players accept it and the game goes on.  So what is happening is this.  The oil producers are accepting pieces of paper, and we are getting a commodity of great, great value.  And Pickens is objecting to this exchange.  He wants us to keep these pieces of paper, and not get the oil.  How do we run cars on paper?  I only hope and pray that no one else notices how we are swindling the world. 

By the way, in case you have not noticed, here is another reason why he is wrong.  By buying oil from foreign sources the USA preserves its own oil reserves.  Each gallon pumped by Arabia makes it poorer, in terms of a valuable thing, and less able to “influence” US policy in the future. 

If Pickens is so rich, then why is he not smart? 

You too can be smarter, and a little less rich, if you subscribe to the “A&E,” the only publication which you will receive when you subscribe to it.  $30 per year.      

WHAT IS SO SERIOUS?

TRIBAL Chief Obama, and others of his kind, such as the Clintons, have a mantra, which they recite when questioned about abortion.  They concentrate on the decision (and who makes it), and avoid dealing with what happens when the decision to abort is made.  This reason is obvious.  The procedure is horrible, and indefensible.  But this is not my point. 

This is like discussing smoking while ignoring the unhealthy results, and concentrating only upon the names of the cigarette brands.   

The mantra always includes the word “serious,” as in “this most serious decision.”  Interesting, is it not?  Why is it a serious decision?  How can it be?  There are only two possibilities.  Either there is no child within the mother before the abortion, or there is.  If there is no child, but “something else,” then this is not a very serious decision.  Imagine someone considering going to the dentist for a cleaning to be a “most serious decision…” taken only after consulting one’s clergyman and family, and after days of deep thought.  If there were no child then there is can not be any seriousness at all. 

Of course, on the other hand, if there is a child, then the procedure is simply the legally authorized private execution of another human.  In this case a whole bunch of other issues are raised, and they are serious.  And the pro-abort people can not deal with them.  So they repeat the mantra, and evade the real issue.  After all, if it were a serious matter, then should we not discuss what actually happens? 

On a related matter, it is interesting, also, to notice the use of language.  The pro-aborts, no matter how much they try, always say that the decision should be made by the “mother.”  Mother?  How can there be a mother without a child, her child?  The two are utterly interdependent.  And if she is a mother then the child is another human.  And this too is serious.     

Get serious and get a subscription to the A&E.  

THE PARTY IS OVER

I hold that we are on the edge of a big national change.  I hold that the party system, as we know it, is dead.  Clinton heavily wounded the Democratic Party.  Bush did the same to the Republican Party.  Now Bush has set up a situation to kill the Democratic Party.  These things will still exist and will still nominate people, but the old way of doing things is over.  And no one, except I, will notice it for years. 

I have commented on the destruction of the Democratic Party, and plan to do so again, soon.  Now, let me deal with the Republican Party. 

For a long time this Party has been considered the party of big business.  That is, it favored the man who made money, and tried to create circumstances which favored this effort.  However, this has changed.  I cite a particular example.  On a Public TV talk show (I think that it was “Think Tank”), two authors, one of whom is the son of Barry Goldwater, were attacking the current Republican “philosophy.”  There is a lot to attack, but their focus was most interesting.

They were raving opponents of “big business.”  They sounded like Communists, in that every big business, every time, is evil, corrupting, and kicks puppies.  However, at exactly the same time they “worshiped at the altar of small business.”  So they wanted the small guy to begin something in his garage, to work hard, to dedicate himself to his dream, and then… to fail!  God forbid that he should succeed and then become a big businessman running a big business. 

Of course this is sheer lunacy.  However, in case you have not noticed, this is precisely John McCain’s message.  He boasts of taking on big business.  Sara Palin has attacked “big oil.”  Of course, at the same time the Republicans expect this same evil big oil to drill the US out of the energy “problem.” 

My point, here and now, is that, although Parties often include and tolerate “diverse” points of view, a party can not utterly oppose itself, and still actually exist. 

Keep looking here for why the Democrats are not in any better condition. 

And keep looking for the A&E in your mailbox.  Subscribe.      

AN END TO ALL CONFUSION

THE recent economic and financial “difficulties” may have confused you, and thus have imposed upon me an obligation to clear up matters.  First, keep in mind that the financial market (which deals solely with money) is not the same as the economy (which deals with goods and services, and how they are obtained and exchanged).  The two are related, of course.  However, failure in one does not mean the other will also fail. 

Now let me explain what is good news and what is bad news.  There are two bad financial “areas.”  The first is the mortgage market managers, and the second are those financial firms and banks, which have problems.  The mortgage problem arose because various borrowers (i.e. people) were given loans which they had no way to repay if things went wrong.  That is, the collection of not properly secured debts is the road to disaster.  That is, these people did not have the money to pay their debts at that time.  This kind of loan is bad, unnecessary and imprudent.  To make these loans causes problems. 

Now let me move to the other reason why the financial firms are in trouble.  They, being connected to the failing firms, can not now deal with “commercial paper.”  These are short term loans which financial firms arrange, when companies need money to meet short term expenses, like salaries.  This is why you heard “reports” of businesses failing one or two days after the big crash (but before the Federal bailout bill passed).  You see, short term loans to businesses, who then can not come up with money to pay their debts, at that time, is good, necessary and prudent for the economy.  And failure to make these loans cause problems.   

Now, you may have noticed that this analysis may SEEM to be self-contradictory.  It seems that exactly the same kind of loan causes disaster, while not to make these loans causes disaster.  Allow me, your expert, to explain.  What is good for businesses is bad for people, and vice versa.  This is because, as you need to know, businesses are not run by people, but by aliens from Mars.  OK?

And, in case there is any doubt regarding my pronouncement, please notice the following.  When the bail out bill first failed, the Stock Market fell massively, because its passage would have been a good thing.  Then, when it seemed that the bill was going to be resubmitted, and passed, the market soared because, of course, this bill was good.  And when the bill did pass, the market crashed, because this bill was really bad. 

So the news is wonderful and horrible.  Is everything clear now?  Good.  You’re welcome. 

Clear up all of life’s mysteries.  Subscribe to the A&E for only $30 (which will soon buy a good house in many markets).  

 

MARINES, LET'S GO!

  HERE is the background.  Some time ago a number of Marines were involved in an “incident” In Iraq.  Some reporting of it, by Media which wants America to be defeated, indicated that these Marines justifiably killed some people.  A Congressman, named Murtha, took the floor in the house and declared these men to be “cold-blooded murderers.”  Keep in mind that this was before any investigation took place.  It was based upon NBC “news” (sic) reports.

 

 Recently the Marines in question were cleared.  That is the military court (which ALWAYS assumes defendants to be guilty) totally exonerated them.  Despite being asked to withdraw his accusations, Murtha has refused; in fact he has run away from anyone who asked him about the issue.  One of the Marines has filed a slander suit against Murtha. 

 

Let me be clear in my own position, before I got to the mockery.  I believe that Murtha should be whipped with razor wire.  He is a filthy, evil and degraded human being.  I utterly disapprove of what he said and I have empathy (first hand!) for the Marines.  

 

If asked about why he is risking his life in Iraq, I am certain that the Marine would then answer that he is there because some bad people want to attack our lifestyles.  That is, they resent us Americans with our many freedoms, etc.  And, of course, one of these is our freedom of speech.  Have you got that? 

 

The Marine was not, to my knowledge asked this.  However he WAS asked why he filed the suit.  He said (close paraphrase), “I want to show that a Representative can not say whatever he wants, and get away with it.”  Huh?  I see, so after risking his life for freedom of speech he now wants to end it in his own homeland.  Double huh?

Of course, I, like all intelligent people oppose freedom of speech.  I do thank God that we are civilized enough not to have it.  As Voltaire so wisely put it:  “I may not agree with what you say, and if I do not then I am not going to do anything to defend you, as I have better things to do.” 

 

Subscribe  to  the officially authorized, by the government, publication “A&E” for only $30 per year.  Subscribe now and beat the price reduction which follows the forthcoming Depression.