Fifty Three: Blago Tax Withholding

Obviously, something must be done about the bizarre situation in Illinois to get rid of Governor Blago. Even for a corruption ridden culture like Chicago, Blago's criminal enterprises are setting new standards, not only for bad acts, but for blatant stupidity as well. What was once known as the "Second City" is fast becoming the "City of Idiots." Pity the poor souls who voted for Blago, not once, but twice!

The state constitutional processes for dealing with the situation have devolved into chaos. Politics has prevented a special election from taking place, because Democrats do not want to risk a secure Senate seat. The Illinois Supremes were petitioned to step into the void but demurred (those officials are elected to their positions, and thus susceptible to the same political pressures as the state legislators).

I propose a financial driven solution: Effective immediately, all payers of Illinois income and sales tax should direct payment of these taxes into an escrow account. The funds would be frozen in this account until Blago is removed from office. In the same way that the Federal Reserve takes over a failed bank, the Department of Justice could declare the entire state government a criminal enterprise and appoint a federal receiver (czar) to oversee state operations, similar to what was done in Iraq after Saddam was toppled.

It's radical, but what the hell?, nothing else seems to be working.

Fifty Two: Charlie Rangel's Christmas Present

Charlie Rangel is the luckiest politicians alive this week, and he should be sending Rod Blagojavich a huge thank you for Rod taking Charlie out of the spotlight as "Sleaziest & Stupidest & Most Arrogant Politician in the World (at least for the moment)." Charlie and Rod both displayed their idiotic paucity of tact by getting caught doing what politicians do every day - leveraging their positions and power for personal gain.

The difference thus far between these two dopes, is that Rod has spent his poltical career gleefully burning bridges, insulting friends and family, sporting one of the worst hairstyles in the 21st century. Charlie, while also not exactly one of the best coiffed politicos, has apparently not pissed off as many people as Rod. Charlie is also of course African American, which makes him less of a target in our hyper-sensitive politcally correct culture.

Finally, of course the national press is loathe to cover any story which could reflect badly on St. Barack, but the Blagojavich just couldn't be ignored. And because African Americans typically do not participate at the highest levels of Chicago graft, St. Barack gets a pass on this particular mess. So, both Rangel and BO will slide away from Rod and live to practice their trades another day.

Fifty One: Blago Speaks The Truth

If I were defending Blago, my defense would be The Truth. Everything that Blago allegedly said is true. Having the power to appoint a U.S. senator is a "valuable thing." And any politician who wields that power expects to "get something" in return. These are true facts that every adult knows to be true. Blago's mistake was getting caught uttering the truth on recordings made by the FBI. Of course Blago's other mistake was in pissing off practically every politican in Illinois with his particularly obnoxious brand of arrogance. But as to his supposed "corruption", I submit that virutally every poltician is "corrupt" in the sense that they never do anything in the public interest. They always do what is their own personal self interest and tell the voters bald-faced lies about their motivation. We all know this. If polticians were the selfless public servants they wish us to believe, we would have had term limits on Congress long ago. Instead, we have a House and Senate full of essentially high class welfar recipients.

Blago of course is screwed due to his stupidity. But he's no different from the rest of them.

Fifty: Ted Turner For Car Czar

Apparently, the politicians are going to give money to the autos, and of course politicians do things for political reasons, which is to say for their own personal advancement or to secure their next election. So, that horse is out of the barn. However, in order to justify giving away more of our (the taxpayers) money, the politicians will appoint some oversight body. My pick to head this oversight board is Ted Turner. Ted is probably one of least political citizens alive in this country today. He is also one helluva businessman. He doesn't need any money (he exerts a lot of effort giving money away). He has a reputation (whether deserved or not) which would and should send a shiver down the spine of every "car guy" in the industry.

Anybody second my motion?

Forty Nine: Car Industry Stupidity

How rampant is stupidity in the American automobile industry? If you need to ponder that question for more than two seconds, you either, a) have never purchased a car, or b) are employed in the car business. Everyone not directly or indirectly in "the business" ( and this applies to sycophants like Phil LeBeau at CNBC), sees the industry for what it is - a broken down hulk of festering problems which have compounded as a result of relentless management inbreeding, producing the current generation of severely intelligence-challenged manufacturing executives, dealers, and groupies (that's you again, Phil).

The only good news in the current situation is that eventually, despite the political triage which will triumph over common sense, the laws of economics will win out, and these bastions of stupidity will consume and waste all available resources and die. Waggoner and his ilk will then be forced into either investment banking or politics.

Forty Eight: GM's Cash Burn

Economists typically refer to the rate at which a company goes through cash as a "cash burn" rate. How very appropirate for GM. Actually, it would be better to take GM's remaining cash, and any cash gift currently contemplated by those idiots in Congress, and setting it all on fire. At least some heat would be generated, as opposed to simply flushing the money down the giant GM toilet.

GM has now taken to sending junk emails to dealers and employees, begging those people to in turn send out junk mail to their friends and family, trying to perpetuate the fiction that if GM goes into bankruptcy, the U.S. economy will lose hundreds of thousands of jobs. This is no more believable than assertions a few months ago (by GM) that GM had more than enough cash to carry it through it's current slump.

Two years ago GM posted an annual loss of $12 billion, and at that time had no realistic plan of turning the business around. They still have no plan. The "future" of GM is supposedly the Volt, which requires a $7,500 tax credit to get people to buy. This is the best that GM can come up with after spending $100 billion in capital.

If ever there was a company which deserved to be shot in head, it is GM.

Forty Seven: Education Is To Blame

In the midst of today's economic carnage, whether in banking, the auto industry, real estate, or the perennial state of gross inefficiency in government, one culprit in the finger pointing blame game has been missing, and that missing party is the one principally and often times exclusively, responsible for all of our current woes. I refer to higher education in general, and specifically, MBAs.

It is probably safe to assert that the vast majority of individuals in positions of authority and control in this country, whether in business or government (and many of these individuals move effortlessly between the two sectors) are products of the best academic institutions our educational system has to offer. These are the people who gave us credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, and other exotic forms of financial structuring which has led to today's mess. It is also a fact that the cost of a four college degree today is over 1000% more than it was 30 years ago.

I don't see any of my friends without MBAs who would have dreamed up economic calculations and scenarios in which borrowers with no provable income are enticed to get loans to buy real estate for 100% of the "appraised value" of the real estate, with the loan being guaranteed by a "government sponsored entity" (FNM FRE), and authorizing the GSE to borrow ten times the amount of these dubious loans to finance its own existence.

Higher education has been the death knell of common sense and fundamental understanding of physical and natural laws of resources and economics.

Forty Six: Will The Chief Justive Step Up?

Conventional civics curriculum teaches that the U.S. has three branches of government - the executive, legislative, and judicial. But practical experience actually shows us there is a fourth - the vast and sprawling and ever-increasing federal bureaucracy. The executive and legislative are now firmly in Democratic control, and the bureaucracy has always been, and will always be, a Democratic bastion. This leaves the judicial branch, which while leaning heavily Democratic in most lower courts, has a slight Republican edge with the Supremes. The question before the country now is, will Chief Justice Roberts accept the mantle and step up to assert his constitutional responsibility to be a moderating influence on the almost unfettered power of liberal Democrats?

The Barney Franks, and Christopher Dodds, and Harry Reids, and Charlie Rangels will work Barack Obama like a hand puppet. Government expansion in the next four or eight years will make the housing bubble look like minor pimple. Private capital will be sucked out of the economy and into government, and then distributed in the most inefficient ways possible to the individuals least likely to reinvest that capital in productive activities.

Mr. Chief Justice, will you do your duty?

Forty Five: Rewarding Incompetence & Irresponsibility

"It's not my fault," said the borrower who lied on his loan application, "the mortgage broker told me this was the best loan for me; besides, he knew I couldn't pay the loan, but said I could always refinance as the house price increased."

"It's not my fault," said the mortgage broker, "all I do is take the app; the underwriters decide who gets a loan."

"It's not my fault," said the underwrister, "Fannie and Freddie and FHA and Angelo Mozillo told us to make these loans."

"Its' not my fault," say the Fannie and Freddie executives, "Barney Frank and Chrisopher Dodd, and yes, even Barack told us to shovel this money out to people who really have no business owning a house, much less being on the hook for for a long term loan."

"I've got a great tan, don't I?" said Angelo, "and Chris Dodd is one of my very best friends!"

"It's not our fault," say Christopher and Barney, "or maybe it really is, but we don't give two shits, because at the end of the day, government is going to regulate, take over, and in general swallow this whole mess, which means an exponential spurt of government growth, which in turn means more Deomctratic voters, which further cements our positions as parasites for life, living off the ever-dwindling numbers of chumps who pay their taxes and bills and try to create something of value with their efforts."

The End.

Forty Four: The "Change" Prez?

For the past eight years we have had a President who, by all accounts, is not the brightest knife in the drawer, at least by traditional academic standards, which to my way of thinking are not all that important. However, for the sake of argument, I'll admit that BO is the anti-Bush when using those same standards. So where does that get us as a country? What will be the differences in how we are governed?

BO is going back to the traditional/Democratic well for his political appointments (Emanuel, Podesta, etc.). What kind of change will result from this? When we look back after four years, I suspect that government will have expanded in our lives at a significantly greater pace at the expense of our ever shrinking personal freedom and personal responsibility. Democrats do not really care about the private economy, because liberals live off the public sector. They take our resources in the form of greater taxes, fees, and regulations under the auspices of providing "services" which otherwise would have been provided by the private sector more efficiently. Those same services will now be administered with an onerous and generally incompetent layer of government bureaucracy.

Real wealth creation (and hence tax revenue) will diminish, so government will have to fund itself with artificial wealth, better known as inflation (higher wages and prices for the same or lesser amounts of goods and services). This has always been the model embraced by government types who have never had jobs where your value is measured by the value you produce.

Forty Three: Good Credit Chump

As I go through my weekly ritual of paying all of my bills (on time, mind you) for business and personal matters, I feel a constant and overwhelming sense of being a gigantic chump. Those of us who pay our mortgages, taxes, and the endless blizzard of life-sustaining expenses are in fact making up for the other vast numbers of those who either cannot, or choose not to pay theirs. What value comes to us chumps? Is there a ledger somewhere that will someday pay us dividends? Or are we just idiots being taken advantage of by a system that rewards the reckless and irresponsible risk taking and consuming of an ever increasing portion of society?

Forty Two: Friends

One of the many blessings in my life has been the gift of friendship. Somehow, in early adulthood three men came into my life, became friends, and have stayed with me for more than 30 years. The respective backgrounds of the three amigos are diverse, and each of them deserves a separate post. But point of this post is that like any relationship, friendship takes a certain amount of work - mainly communication - to survive. My parents taought me at an early age to write, and this I have continued to do throughout my life. Writing in a relatinoship is like water to a plant. Wihtout it, the plant will wither and die. With it, the frienship will grow and blossom and bear fruit.

Forty One: Term Limits

Readers of this blog (I don't think there has ever been a "reader") will know this writer's penchant for a constitutional amendment to limit the number of terms for U.S. senators and representatives. Until this happens, no meaningful changes in the governance of this country will ever take place. As long as a position in the U.S. Congress is a "career" it is simply impossible for that body to make decisions based on the best interest of the country. The personal and constituent pressure to instead make decisions based on parochial or individual interest is overwhelming. Add to this the inherent selfishness and greed present in some individuals, and the result can be nothing less than disasterous. Witness the present economic debacle.

Forty: Paulson's Pity for FNM, FRE

In an interview this morning with Leesman on CNBC, Paulson said he "felt sorry" for the managements and directors at FNM and FRE. Paulson steadfastly refused to say one critical word about the two entities, and instead blamed the corporate charters approved by Congress decades ago.

Of course there is a nominal case to be made for this "no living person is to blame" argument. But for crying out loud, Hank, don't tell us you feel sorry for a bunch of multi-millionaires who rode the gravey train until the last stop. That was probably about the dumbest political remark of the decade, right up there with "I didn't inhale."

I think this just goes to show that just because a guy works at Goldman Sachs doesn't mean he's all that smart.

Thirty Nine: BO's "Great Humility"

Up until BO's acceptance speech last week, there was a decent chance of many people like me (fiscal conservative, social moderate) consdiering him to be a potential beneficiary of our votes. Then came the three words, "WITH GREAT HUMILITY!" Who in the hell proclaims himself to have "great humility?" Who in the world wrote that line? Isn't procliaming yourself to be humble the antithesis of being humble?

And then there is this disconnect between the qualifications of Palin versus those of Obama. Since when do we compare the Veep's experience directly with the Prez on the other ticket? The Washington, DC and NY press is really exposing itself to be blatantly anti-mainstream in this issue. The editorial comments of talking heads who are nominally suppposed to be "reporters" is disgusting.

Oh well. As Tony Soprano says, "Whatya gonna do?" There is probably not more than 1% of all the politicains in this country who are in office to actually do what's in the best interest of the nation. The other 99% and a like proportion of the press are simply out to what is in their own personal best interst, the country be damned.

Thirty Eight: O'Biden

I wonder why BO chose Biden? He's such a smart-ass. Biden probably goes down well with liberal types, and maybe even with the younger crowd. But I can't imagine the Biden pick will help BO very much older males, in other words, Republicans and independents.

Males in their 50s (like me) mainly remember Biden for two episodes. First, as a plageriest and liar from his first whack at presidential politics. SEcond, as a smar-ass Kennedy wanna-be from the Bork hearings.

Biden probably thinks he brings national security gravitas to the ticket, but corect me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he ever served a day in the military. So how he blunts the huge McCain advantage in that area is beyond me.

What looked a few months ago like a slam dunk Democratic victory in November, now looks like a pick 'em.

Thirty Seven: Senator Stevens, IL Senate

So another long-entrenched national political figure is caught using the system, flagrantly, for his personal benefit. The story makes national headlines - for about 10 minutes.

The Illinois legislature creates a system for giving itself pay raises which can only be stopped by both houses of the legislature passing a resolution to reject the pay raise. So, one house, the senate, decides to stay out of session until after the deadline for rejecting the pay raise. This issue receives virtually no press coverage at all.

Americans obviously either, a) like having corrupt and arrogant leaders, or b) this kind of behavior is so systemic in politics that it is the accepted and expected norm. In the case of Stevens, he had to be so blatant and arrogant and persistent that it was impossible not to call him on the carpet. And big deal. So an 84 year old guy who has fleeced the system for decades will have to retire.

It seems to me that any taxpayer who does not agressively seek to wrench and twist every piece of the tax code, and every government regulation so as to reduce the amount of revenue being sucked out of our incomes, is an idiot.

Thirty Six: President By Popular Acclaim

So, BO, having dispatched Hillary and Bill, which so many of us are and will continue to be so grateful for, now goes off on a mid-east and European tour, looking and sounding all the while like the actual President of the United States. The press dutifully reports BO's every move, meeting, and statement. Network anchors beg to be seen with "him" so they can self-aggrandize by then "reporting" on their "exclusive interviews.

Doesn't any of this smack of the least bit of impropriety to professional observers? Isn't this the kind of trip normally made by a President-elect?

My guess is that the strategy and thinking employed by BO and his political advisors (mainly Axelrod) to secure the Democratic nomination is not the same approach required for the general election. What works on Democrats does not necessarily work on independents and certainly doesn't work on most Republicans. For the most part, Republicans need something more than a picture. And in this case, the picture which probably does work for Democrats (seeing BO appear to be Prsident), may actually hurt BO with Republicans by coming across so presumptuous.

Maybe Hillary was right? Maybe he's not electable?

Thirty Four: Government and Big Ideas

So two corporations, Pfizer and Ranbaxy, have agreed delay the marketing of a generic version of Lipitor. The upshot of this agreement is apparently that Pfizer will preserve about $13 billion per year of revenue for a couple of years. Do you think that Ranbaxy will somehow, some way, see some of this money?

More importantly, what is the ethical and moral calculus behind two private enterprises (albeit publicly held) deciding to limit the availability of a drug which all medical experts agree is a life extender and saver? Pfizer will no doubt argue that the massive profits it pulls in from Lipitor are helping to fund the research and development of other future "Lipitors."

But I submit that this is exactly the kind of issue where the feds should step in and make a decision. Who, besides the federal government, has the clout to wrestle with these two corporate giants and the lack of a vested financial interest?

As I sit in my office filling out forms to comply with ridiculously trivial regulations promulgated by countless and nameless bureaucrats, it strikes me how seriously off course government has gotten. There are certainly Big Issues that government can and should deal with. Let's hope in the early years of Obamaland the idealists will tackle some of these areas before the system inevitably turns them all into short-sighted and self-absorbed parasites.

Thirty Five: Newspapers

Is it finally happening? Are newspapers gasping their last breaths? It sure looks that way. The New York Times has been running the same television ads for the past three years, trying to convince young, hip people that in order to be really cool you have to subscribe to the weekend Times editions, and then you will be popular, good-looking, and successful. McClatchie is hemoraging. Thomson has been shedding local newspapers for years.

And it doesn't end with newspapers. Publishers of trade magazines are following the newspapers into the swamp. The problem is that they are all chasing a smaller and smaller amount of dollars being spent on traditional print media, while the larger chunk of the ad budget goes into electronic media, most notably the web.

Advertising dollars have always been, and probably always will be, fickle. Who really knows how effective advertising is? Since the answer to this question is "no one," it is really easy to cut back on advertising budgets when time are tough.

One thing is certain: people don't read as much as they used to. Information dissemination is more and more accomplished via viusal and audio methods.

Thirty Three: Looking Ahead to Obama

At this juncture, a little less than 5 months before the general election, the odds seem to favor Obama. So let's take a minute and speculate on what an Obama presidency will mean for the middle class.

Will Obama raise taxes? The answer is a solid "yes" at least indirectly, and more probably, both directly and in the form of fees, excise taxes, regulatory fees, etc. Obama will lead a surge in growth of government at all levels. All of the interest he has generated in his change movement, although genuinely idealistic, will nonetheless swell the ranks of government bureaucracies. Any government is a drag on private enterprise, so increased government intrusion in commerce will be bad for productivity. The business resources devoted to compliance with government regulation will be less time and assets available for producing goods or services. So, overall economic growth will slow as government intrusion into private enterprise increases.

Think about the countless college kids who have drunk the Obama coolaid. A certain percentage of them will wind up in Washington, D.C., or state capitals. Most of them will eventually get married and have families. Once this happens, their priorities will change from the idealistic to the practical. At that point these one time government reformers become lifelong government parasites, interested only in increasing their salaries and benefits and seeking guaranties of jobs. And how does government find the revenue to pay these parasites? Taxes.

Thity Two: The Clinton Mystery

Why do Democrats (and some Republicans) fear the Clintons? As Hillary continues to execute her twin strategies at the end of the primary race to a) inflict the most damage to Obama, and b) position herself for maximum personal political and financial gain, many Democrats are bending over backwards to be respectful of Hillary's feelings, lest she should embarrassed by her failure to get the prize she not only coveted, but thought she was owed.

Fear of the Clintons is the only way to explain why Democrats have not long ago abandoned these characters who have done so much damage to the Democratic party and its traditional principles. But for the Clintons, Al Gore would have president for the past eight years. But for the Clintons, national health care would have been a reality.

Since most people, and almost all politicians, always do what was is in their own immediate and personal best interest, it must be assumed that Democrats believe the Clintons can either help those Democrats achieve their interests, or that the Clintons can prevent those same Democrats from getting what they want. This misguided belief can only be explained by ignorance.

When Bill Clinton first came on the national scene in 1992, intelligent people saw him for what he was (and is) - an educated used car salesman (apologies to all of you used car salesmen out there). When the Clintons arrived in DC with their entourage of slime balls and low-lifes, it quickly became apparent that national service to the Clintons meant "personal enrichment." Patriotism, tradition, family, and personal integrity had no place in the Clinton repertoire. The Democrats, and most of the country followed this example right through the dot-com boom and the Greenspan cheap-money-fueled housing fiasco.

In the waning days now of Clinton II, perhaps Hillary is unintentionally doing what ironically is best for the country - paving the way for a leader who understands and practices what is so utterly foreign to the Clintons - patriotism, service, sacrifice, and honesty.

Thirty One: The Future of Clintons

The obvious question is, how can any U.S. voter, or observer of U.S. politics, ever believe anything published or uttered by the Clintons or their surrogates, especially Wolfson or McCaulif? The obvious answer to the obvious question is itself so obvious, that one more question must be asked. What is the true interest of the Clinton campaign? After all, it defies belief that even those Clintonistas who have "drunk the coolaid" could be live that continuing her campaign will result in her getting the nomination. This "anything can happen" strategy is ridiculous. If she dropped out now (or a week ago), she would be in exactly the same position to be the default candidate if "anything" happened.

So, the potential real interests are: playing for Veep; trying to destroy Obama so as to position Hillary for 2012; trying to suck more money out of contributors before throwing in the towel.

But I return to the original question, of how any moderately reasonable person could ever believe anything said by the Clintons. It's a mystery to me.

Thirty: Hillary For Veep - NOT!

Dear Senator Obama:

Although I have voted primarily Republican since I cast my first vote in 1972 (for George McGovern), I am leaning heavily towards voting for you this November. My tendency is to vote against all incumbents. I am in favor of: Term limits on all of you pirates; flat tax; and mandatory government service for all Americans. My favorte politican during my lifetime is Daniel Patrick Moynihan, which is of course one reason why I so deeply despise Mrs. Clinton, as if I needed another reason. The most destructive, self-absorbed politicans of my lifetime are the Clintons. Which brings me to my point.

As your bean-counters are no doubt telling you, you have a great chance to pick many thousands of votes from folks like me disenchanted with Bush II. About the only thing you could do to blow your chances with me is to select Clinton as your VP. Even now as she, and the media, begin the early negotiations to keep Hillary's face in the public trough, you need to understand how visceral the feelings are of us who have endured all these years of Clinton. Those of us who love this country and have served this country and have children who are serving this country, see very clearly how much damage has been done by the Clintons and their minions. Please don't allow this to continue.

Twenty Nine: WSJ Against Obama

Well, after what all objective (that means all non-Clinton brainwashed) observers see as the last gasp of Obama's opponent, what does the WSJ have as its lead story and viusal - Hillary Clinton. Either the Journal really does hate Obama, or they figure that Clinton will be easier to beat. Whatever the case, the paper's reputation for objectivity and fairness is pretty much out the window.

Twenty Eight: Sotto Voce Racism

Obama trounces Clinton in NC. Clinton ekes out win in IN. Obama increases his delegate lead, and popular vote lead. Clinton has yet to deliver a decisive, blow-out primary victory in any state since Obama became the delegate leader in February. Every rationalization Clinton has produced for continuing her scorched-earth campaign has fallen flat.

Yet in most new stories, whether print, broadcast, or web, the headline and visual begins with Clinton. Those same stories always seem to have an underlying sympathy for Clinton. She has never been asked to explain what her "experience" advantage really is. Despite being forced to admit that she has lied about her record, the press and her supporters seem unaffected.

The press reports that Obama received 90% of the black vote in NC as almost a negative for Obama. The press reports that Clinton received 60% of the white vote in Indiana also as a negative for Obama. The press continues to play up the Reverend Wright story, even when the interviewees make no mention of it, and then the press reports that the story "just will not go away."

What reason for this is there besides an insidious, sub rosa, sotto voce, racism? Why won't people who don't want a black president simply come out and say so. I suspect that Bill and Hillary are among these people.

At this stage, it is crystal clear that Hillary is running for president in 2012. In order to do so, she will do whatever she can to destroy Obama in the general, and then say, "I told you so." And the racists will be happy too.

Twenty Seven: MSFT/Hillary

What do MSFT and Hillary have in common? They are both chasing deals which ultimately, whether they win or lose, will be self-destructive and harmful to the general environment in which they respectively operate.

If MSFT succeeds in getting YHOO, Ballmer will have decimated employee morale at both companies. What he cannot or will not understand or admit, is that left alone, YHOO will continue in slow decline to lose its contest with GOOG. GOOG was actually doing MSFT a favor by beating the pants off of YHOO before MSFT made its stupid offer. MSFT could and would do much better to put its cash and brand to work in non-advertising sectors where it is historically strong and dominant.

Hillary, likewise, whether she succeeds or fails in her self-absorbed quest to be the leader of the world, will alienate at least a couple of generations from the Democratic party. By pursuing her scorched earth strategy against Obama, she has created huge doubts about herself and Obama which would never have existed but for her raging ego-driven quest. If she had graciously bowed out and supported Obama, she would have attained great stature within the party, and positioned herself to be the party savior when and if Obama fails (either in the general election, or as president).

Both Hillary and Ballmer are like jilted paramours. Once rejected, or failed, they cannot now back off and accept a self-perceived lesser partner, or lead a single life while searching for love in other places.

Twenty Six: Elected Judges

In general, elected state court judges are by and large, incompetent. They routinely allow parties and clients to severely abuse the discretion of the court, especially when the clients are pro se. If the pro se party appears slightly deranged, the judge allows even more leniency which leads to further abuse.

Let's face it - the U.S. jurisprudence system does not exist for the dispensation of justice, or to find remedies, or to resolve conflict, or to find basic fairness in the affairs of men and society. It exists to perpetuate itself, like any other bureaucracy. The parties are grist for the mill. The lawyers and judges do a kind of dance which they all think is solemn and dignified. Actually it is a joke at the expense of the parties it is supposed to serve.

The judges, especially at the state court level, are the bottom of the barrel amongst lawyers. When you go to law school, you can tell who the judges are going to. They're the ones with their hands constantly in the air trying to show the professors and other students how much they know. The need for recognition is obvious.

The moral to this story is plain: Stay the hell out of court unless the alternative is prohibitively expensive or otherwise unavailable. Once you're in the system, there are no winners, except of course for the judges and the sycophant lawyers.

Twenty Five: Today's Youth

OK, so I'm officially "old" now that I'm complaining about young people. Specifically, my employees, who stroll in at 9 or later in the morning, take an hour for lunch, are late whenever they feel like it, and seem to expect that their paychecks and jobs will be around as long they want them. Pretty soon there is going to be a rude awakening.

When I got my first job in the private sector after my Peace Corps tour, I arrived at whatever time was necessary in order to make me the first one at work. I frequently came in on Saturdays, at least for the morning. That kind effort was not unobserved by my superiors. I acquired a reputation for diligence and dependability. I just don't see that kind of commitment today. Asking someone to come in on the weekends is like asking them to donate an organ. Same thing with asking for an early arrival. They look at me and say, "I can't." And of course in their own minds, they really believe that whatever is going on in their lives is so dreadfully important that they really can't get to work before 9 o'clock. This is pitiful.

There is definitely a sense of entitlement with the younger generation today. Even their parents never really had to do without. Most of them were unaffected by Viet Nam. There only sense of patriotism is watching some spoiled athlete parade around the Olympic games desecrating the American flag.

This is probably a natural progression as this country gets farther from its roots. Those roots developed and took hold from the days of the founding fathers through probably WWII. Since then, the U.S. has had pretty much the run of the globe. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were a speed bump. We consume, we vacation, we procreate, we are entertained by a myriad of sensory advertisements all designed to get us to consume, vacation and procreate some more.

Where is the value in all of this?

Twenty Four: O(ye of little faith)bama

Leahy, Richardson, Kennedy, Kerry, Durbin, the list of Obama endorsements from mainline Dems goes on and on. Why? Well, of course there's the fact that most Deomcratic regulars are sick and tired of the incredibly self-absorbed Clintons. But more than that, is a sense that a generational page has turned, and if you want to be with the winner, then you'd best throw in with Obama. Problem is, predictably, Hillary refuses to be a good Democrat, and instead is willing to take the party down in a desparate and narcisisstic claim to the Dem nomination.

Presumably the McCain is preparing for either opponent, and his strategy should be pretty the same relgardless of whether it's Her or Him. Neither one of them has any significant experience, no matter how much Hillary bleats about hers.

If Hillary does destroy Obama and gets the Democtratic nod, I only hope that McCain has the gumption to go toe to toe with her. I mean really take the gloves off and beat her into a bloody pulp. She will cry, and her feminist supporters will rally round her, citing her suffering at the hands of John, Bill, and every other man on the planet. Forget the fact that she did the same thing to Obama. It's OK for a woman to mug a man. But woe to the man who dares to point out the legitimate shortcomings of Hillary.

If John in fact does what he needs to do, perhaps we'll finally have what this country has needed for a long time - a battle of the sexes which confirms that men and women are different, and have different strengths and weaknesses.

Twenty Three: Clinton Media Bias

Call me crazy, but as a keen observer of politics, I cannot understand how anyone who is even remotely interest in, or has casually followed the Clinton/Obama race, can deny that there is a palpable bias among the media in favor of the Clintons. I mean just look at the number of pictures in various mainstream media of Clinhton versus Obama. Even though Obama has been the delegate leader for several months now, Hillary is treated as the front runner. Her incessant bleating about her "experience," even when said experience turns out to be manufactured, is treated with kid gloves. Even her real experience, which is scant and really no greater than Obama's, recieves no scrutiny.

Perhaps the media, like so many other intellectually flaccid Americans, yearn for the good old Clinton days (I did not have sex with that woman; The cleaning people must have taken the billing records; The pardons had nothing to do with the campaign contributions; The health care task force needs to be secret because only Hillary, and the people she chooses, are fit to make decisions about America's health care; It depends on what your definition of "is" is; I would have bombed Libya anyway, even if I were not under the threat of impeachment; the list goes on ad nauseum). I guess I have answered my own question here. The media, like lawyers, needs conflict and uncertainty and controversy. The media (probably rightly) thinks Hillary will give us all three.

Twenty Two: Open Letter to Callaway

Dear Mr. Fellows:

Having read the feature piece on you and ELY in the April issue of The Economist, I must express my sincere hope and desire that you fail miserably in your plans. I am devoted amateur golfer. At the age of 56 and after a lifetime of playing, watching, and learning the game of golf, I have gotten my index to 11.4. I enjoy everything about the game: Being outside with nature; camaraderie with friends and others I have never met; knowing that once I step onto the course, I will be isolated from the outside world for four hours; submitting myself to the rigorous rules; and perhaps most importantly, committing myself over a prolonged period to becoming a better golfer and person.

As I understand your philosophy, you want to change the game of golf to better support your company's balance sheet. Your backwards approach is precisely why you will fail. Instead of ELY serving "the game," you believe the game should serve ELY. It is one thing to manufacture equipment and clothing which golfers need and want. It is quite another to infect the game with non-golfers to line your own pockets.

Golf is not a "mass consumer" business in the traditional sense. It is more of a niche market, closer to the religion industry than to the deodorant and tampon business. It was probably a mistake for ELY to go public. Had the company stayed private, it would likely have provided a comfortable livelihood for its owners and employees, not to mention supplying good equipment for golfers. Now, you are beholden to hedge funds and quarterly profits, rather than the rules of the game.

Twenty One: Steinway For Sale

Since I have never had a single response to any of the prior posts here, I thought I'd try something different. No politics, golf, business, or parental whining. This is a personal ad.

Steinway, Model B, concert grand, ebony, vintage circa 1987 (what was known as the "CBS" period), for sale. Piano has never been moved since delivery to the Chicago area, and was maintained up to pitch until about 2001. Since then it has not been played, and thus will require some work. The instrument was a bonus from Steinway to me for my work at CBS Musical Instruments (Steinway, Fender, Lyon & Healy, Gemeinhardt, Leslie, Rodgers).

Interested parties can send a comment to this blog, or email me directly at todonnell@od-law.com.

Twenty: CBS (Probably) Dumps Couric

The obvious question is: What took so long? I suppose the first thing to understand about network "news" is that these productions have extremely minimal "news" value, as they are primarily entertainment and editorial in nature. The days of the media as a "reporter" of facts and events are long gone. As is commonly understood, the primary purpose of the "news anchor," whether on a national or local show, is to attract a certain demographic of viewer, thereby allowing the media company to charge proportionately more for its advertising. A secondary purpose, depending on the media outlet, is to present the "news" in such a way as to invisibly sway public opinion, while appearing to be neutral.

When CBS hired Ms. Couric, it was also widely understood that she was being hired because she was: a) female, b) a household name by virtue of her role as a host of the Today Show on NBC, and c)inoffensive (and hopefully attractive) to the desired advertising audience. Unfortunately for the inept and incompetent network managers at CBS (and of course CBS shareholders), the majority of the audience of the CBS Evening News and the other network news shows, has yet to comprehend that the producers of these "news" shows don't give a rat's behind about the news, and instead are simply trying to shove pretend "news" down viewers throats, while drug companies try to convince the same viewers that they need a lot of drugs to be happier, healthier, richer, and better looking. So the objectives of the network execs and the advertisers are both totally frustrated, because the audience still thinks they seeing and listening to an objective presentation of the news. And what the audience does fully comprehend, is that Katie Couric has as much connection to serious news as the the average Joe has to brain surgery.

So the CBS bald-faced attempt to skip the charade of pretending to present "news" has failed because the audience they think is too stupid to listen to real news and form their own judgments and opinions, has done exactly that.

Nineteen: Goodbye, Elliot (and good riddance)

So, another hypocrite bites the dust, and unfortunately all Elliot's victims are left with is ashes in their mouths, a bitter result. What goes around, comes around. Do unto others... Those who live in glass houses... What's good for the goose... The adages and folk wisdom seems so true, and in this case so apropos.

The press reported that Mrs. Spitzer was the party encouraging Elliot to try and stay in office. Where on earth do men find these women?

Eighteen: Hillary & Power

Most, if not all past U.S. presidents, and their families, have found the post-presidential years to be variously relaxing, fulfilling, fun, profitable, and stress-free (relatively speaking). Think of our recently retired presidents:

Clinton – globe-trotting speaker in search of six figure appearance fees to pay legal bills and replenish family finances. Also gets him away from Hillary, which comports with their notion of a “business marriage.”
Bush the Elder – spending time with family, parachuting, enjoying life.
Reagan – riding horses, enjoying life.
Carter – building houses, writing books, being a sanctimonious twit, enjoying life.
Ford – hitting people with golf balls, definitely enjoyed life.
Nixon – writing books, legacy repair.

After having what must be the most demanding job on the planet, ex-presidents (and their families) seek refuge wherever and however they can or wish. But not the Clintons. They want more. Why? One reason and one reason only. Power. Shear, unadulterated, unfettered, unadorned power. Bill of course, just wants to party, which comes with the power thing. But Hillary is driven and obsessed by her belief that only she can make decisions and allocate resources in the best interests of all Americans. It’s the same kind of thinking which allows her, for example, to at the end of the Texas debate say she is “honored” to be on stage with BO, and then less than 12 hours later, thrust a stiletto between his shoulder blades. It’s the same sort of thinking which allows Hillary to crow about her “lifetime of experience” (which incidentally consists of being a marginally competent lawyer, and then First Lady) while insinuating that BO has been teaching daycare his whole life, when in fact he has a much longer record of public office holding.

If Hillary is elected president, we will have the closest regime to a dictatorship than anything ever experienced before in the history of the U.S.

Seventeen: What Has Hillary Offerred Obama?

First Hillary just assumed that because she is smarter than 99% percent of the rest of us, the Democratic nomination would be handed to her as her political birth rite. Next, she assumed that because we are all desperate to have her idiot husband back in the White House, she would be showered with cash and endorsements, and any other interloper's campaign would shriver up for want of money and attention. Finally, she resorted to simply spewing outright lies about her record and Obama's which, of course, most Democrats believe (just like the "vast right wing conspiracy"). So far, the political judgment of the Clintons has proved amazingly (for them) unsuccessful.

But the Clinton arrogance and self-absorption knows no limits. After trying all of their other tactics, and unleashing all of their political attack dogs, they must certainly now be trying to buy off Obama. The question is: What are they offering him? VP? Cash? Guaranty of the 2016 nomination? You can bet your boots that Hillary has already tried extortion. So buying him off is really the only option left, provided of course that she does not somehow steal Ohio and Texas in the next 48 hours.

And after all, isn't this really the definition of politics, using public assets and resources for one's own personal gain? That is certainly the Clinton definition, of course justified by a smug sense of superiority.

Let's hope that 48 hours from now, this great country will finally get a reprieve from the Clinton curse.

Sixteen: MOT v NOK - a Tale of Two Telecoms

On January 21, 2007, I wrote about the miserable state of affairs at MOT. Nothing has changed. Yes, Zander is out and Brown is in. But from all appearances, Brown does not have the inclination or gumption to do what needs to be done - spend the next two to five years selling off MOT assets. In other words, liquidate the company. There is simply no way for MOT to recover from the past decade of mismanagement.

MOT stock is today valued at the same price as it was in 1996. NOK, on the other hand, is valued at roughly 1,500% more than 1996. What's the difference? People. The people at MOT opened the door for NOK in the mid-nineties when what was then AT&T (ATW) Wireless wanted in to the cell phone business. ATW first went to MOT and asked for specific phones at specific times. MOT did what MOT has always done, at least for the past 30 years - they dissed the customer, telling ATW what MOT would provide and when. ATW said "thank you very much" and walked down the street to NOK and made the same request for phones and delivery times. NOK said, "Yes Sir and Yes Ma'am!" NOK has never looked back, except to see MOT choking in NOK's dust. MOT has never understood, and perhaps never will understand, the concept of "the customer is always right."

So, what's the future? MOT will be the equivalent of an Alzheimer's patient in a nursing home - slowly but inevitably withering away.