Showing posts sorted by relevance for query the penny. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query the penny. Sort by date Show all posts

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Dominoes Fall, Clack-ity Clack, Clack, Clack As Humanity Is In Utter Awe Of Inflation Deflating Our Economics

Long Live The Penny

Is it major that Canada officially discontinued production of their penny primarily because pennies cost more to make than they're worth? First, of course, it bends me out of shape whenever I hear or read how the penny has been rendered useless. Because however pragmatic it is that coins are less useful in the digital age, the reality still doesn't change that pennies represent one hundredth of one dollar and that's a value being lost. 
There was more dignity to money when the phrase "living on pennies" applied, rather than for those, it remains true for today, who're possibly, just barely, "surviving on pennies." The decline of the least of our money does not bode well when, needless to say, soon, nothing will be worth a nickel that people would accept three cents for. 

There'll be foreseen or even unforeseen calculations to come, and maybe even a master plan behind all our devaluing of money and losing the penny is just the beginning. One hundred dollar bills for everyone! The pennies' discontinuation makes pennies scarcer and inevitably more valuable than the deflated less than 1 cent they no longer supposedly represent. Certainly not the gold the coin was for most of us over fifty when we were children and the first coin I ever worked for was a penny. 

Seriously. That its cheaper not to mint pennies barely scratches the surface of our financial problems. Ignoring the penny is essentially just a shrug of our collective shoulders as it is, after all, just a penny. But believe me. If the day ever came that Canada announced they were re-minting pennies again, a good guess is that might sound best for all of us rather than less pennies for the unfortunate reduced to living without them. 

Just where is money going from here? It doesn't matter that the United States still subsidizes the penny. As Canada goes so goes America, and its all just smoke and mirrors anyway as what really matters is how we've allowed the penny to become virtually worthless when it is and always will be the first and last number involved in any exchange.
Any worth their weight mathematician could explain the rationality behind the uselessness of pennies, but I also doubt worthy mathematicians could explain how its better for us if pennies aren't valued at what they were intended to be worth. 

If money isn't make-believe we should stop pretending there isn't enough and make sure the penny is worth every red cent it is meant to be. 

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Little Surprise Julian Assange Knew To Pick: Ecuador

  The New York Times headlined, Ecuador Grants Asylum to Assange, Defying Britain, printing Ecuador announced it was granting political asylum to WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange who has been holed up for two months awaiting the decision in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London. Leaving Mr. Assange with protection from arrest only on Ecuadorean territory. To leave the embassy for Ecuador, he would need cooperation Britain has said it will not offer. RT reported, where Mr. Assange was, the announcement was met with celebrations outside the Ecuadorian embassy as his supporters began chanting “Hands off Ecuador” and “Assange freedom fighter.”
  The Times assessed thus that the: decision adds to sharp strains between Ecuador and Britain. Just before the announcement of asylum in the Ecuadorean capital, Quito, President Rafael Correa said on his Twitter account: “No one is going to terrorize us!” The night before, Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño said that the British authorities had threatened to force their way into the embassy, to which he responded: “We are not a British colony.”
  Mr. Patiño announced the asylum decision, reading from a government communiqué, at a news conference. “The government of Ecuador, faithful to its tradition of protecting those who seek refuge in its territory or in its diplomatic missions, has decided to grant diplomatic asylum to Julian Assange.” Adding, “There are indications to presume that there could be political persecution,” and that Mr. Assange would not get a fair trial in the United States and could face the death penalty there. Mr. Patiño said he hoped Britain would permit Mr. Assange to leave the embassy in London for Ecuador. A request Britain has rejected, saying it has a binding, legal obligation to extradite Mr. Assange to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning over accusations that he sexually assaulted two women. RT additionally printed, ”Ecuador has confirmed Assange does not have enough protection from Australia where he holds citizenship,” Patino said. “We think [Assange’s] extradition is viable to a country outside the EU. Judicial evidence clearly demonstrates that given an extradition to the US, Mr. Assange would not have a fair trial, he could be judged by special or military courts, and it is not unlikely to believe he would be treated in a cruel and degrading way, that he would receive a life sentence or death penalty, with which his human rights would not be respected.” Patino also reiterated Ecuador’s offer to allow Sweden to interview Assange in their embassy in London, which was turned down. Stockholm would neither guarantee that the WikiLeaks founder would not be extradited again once he is on Swedish soil. Still Mr. Patino’s hope was, “We trust that the UK will offer as soon as possible the guarantee for the safe passage of asylum for Mr Assange and they will respect those international agreements they have signed in the past.”
  But the British Foreign Office said it was disappointed by the Ecuadorean announcement, but remained committed to a negotiated outcome to the standoff. Sweden’s foreign minister, Carl Bildt, rejected the suggestion that Sweden would be involved in any kind of persecution. “Our firm legal and constitutional system guarantees the rights of each and everyone,” he wrote on Twitter. “ We firmly reject any accusations to the contrary.”
  Yet, the fact Mr. Assange is subject to extradition over a desire for questioning and not an outright charge seems to substantiate the Assange defenders’ point. Semantics? Sure. But as extreme as Mr. Assange’s original flight to the Ecuadorian Embassy seemed, the benefit of the doubt tilts toward his caution, because however much it’s preferable to think the American Government is always right, blind faith is the worst assumption our government can make on our behalf. Sure, I’ll buy the government is right, but sell it to me first. Don’t just say it’s talked about when just mentioned.
  British news reports said Mr. Patiño’s news conference was broadcast live on British television and Mr. Assange watched the announcement as it happened, before telling embassy staff members, “It is a significant victory for myself and my people. Things will probably get more stressful now.”
  So did Mr. Assange just get his signals crossed over the difference between fame and infamy? Or really think the world won’t improve enough until deceiving the public is a business we can afford to lose? Because that’s why this issue really matters. Sure, it is terrible a security secrets thief might not spend the rest of his life in jail, though he’s enduring already months of house arrest. And sad the government can’t lighten up when as experts saw from the beginning it was the government’s fault the secrets were available for distribution ease. But secrets could destroy us as long as they are necessary to a world run by absentee landlords. Oops, sorry, no, fat cat government officials.
  Outside the embassy, a small redbrick apartment block behind Harrods department store in the upscale Knightsbridge neighborhood, a protester with a megaphone provided sporadic updates on the Quito news conference. When it became clear Mr. Assange won asylum, the response was muted joy, printed The Times. A youth worker, 21, who gave his name only as James, said, “It’s great news. As long as Britain honors his right to asylum.” He added, if the British government would allow Mr. Assange to leave the country without arresting him. If that did not happen, he said, gesturing to the protesters around him, “this will only get bigger.” Like many protesters, the youth worker said he believed that the accusations of sexual abuse and rape against Mr. Assage were part of a conspiracy to silence WikiLeaks. “Textbook character assassination,” he said.
  Apparently many news sources made much of how Mr. Assange might escape. Uh huh. Just the Stop and Frisk alone when caught brings to mind how horrible it is that civilization just hasn’t quite become civilized yet.
  The Times said Mr. Patiño said his government had made its decision after the authorities in Britain, Sweden and the United States refused to give guarantees that, if Mr. Assange were extradited to Sweden, he would not then be sent on to the United States to face other charges. Seriously, the United States government answered that question truthfully? I just can’t see the problem as being bad as everyone else can. There was(is) a time when any government felt any lie was justified on their own behalf. Why WikiLeaks was purportedly founded. That should be Julian’s next show broadcast by RT. Instances of when governments haven’t lied that surprise us. Anyway, this is a tough situation here. Imagine the billable hours lawyers are salivating over. A pretty penny that should more than compensate those large investments in their educations. Tourism folks, it can only grow and become cheaper through competition. Out of tragedy will come prosperity, yet it’s shameful how serious this is that governments choose scapegoats. Remember from grade school when the idea of honesty was shoveled down our throats by adults who knew we’d find out the hard way?
  Mr. Assange arrived at the embassy on June 19, seeking to avoid extradition to Sweden. Jérémie Zimmerman, a friend who has spoken with him recently, said Mr. Assange had found the narrowing of his horizons hard. “It is quite difficult not to be able to get out in the street for all this time. He lived for so many years free, without even a home to limit him. And now he is isolated.” The WikiLeaks founder sleeps on an air mattress in a small office that has been converted to a bedroom, according to accounts of those who have visited him. He has access to a computer and continues to oversee WikiLeaks, his lieutenants have said. Reporters outside the building have seen food being delivered from nearby restaurants. but his presence is a challenge for employees of the embassy. One British government official, citing a conversation with a member of the embassy staff, said that the situation was surreal.
  A diplomat familiar with Mr. Assange’s situation said that he spent his time in a back room, which gets no direct sunlight. Several weeks ago he had a bad cold and appeared depressed, the source said. “He can’t get outside to see the sun,” his mother, Christine Assange, said in a recent interview conducted in Quito for BBC Mundo, a BBC Web site. “I’m worried about his health, as I would be for anybody who is having to stay indoors and not get exercise and have sunlight.” She said some of Mr. Assange’s friends have encouraged him to put on music and dance as a way of getting physical activity and that they had also brought sunlamps.
  On Thursday ahead of the Ecuadorean decision, WikiLeaks issued a new, unsigned statement describing Britain’s warning that it might suspend the embassy’s immunity as part of an action to arrest Mr. Assange as a “resort to intimidation” and a breach of the Vienna Convention governing diplomatic relations between states. “We remind the public that these extraordinary actions are being taken to detain a man who has not been charged with any crime in any country,” the statement said. Adding: “We further urge the U.K. government to show restraint, and to consider the dire ramifications of any violation of the elementary norms of international law.”
  Diplomatic WikiLeaks? Is not dire ramifications a threat? Cornered, even governments make rash accusations that in the light-of-day are seen to not produce a better understanding. The very goal WikiLeaks was supposedly founded on. I’d rather an evil hand defeat WikiLeaks than authoritarianism be taken down by nefarious means.
  But nothing is cut and dry with this issue. The Times points out that: It struck many as odd that Mr. Assange, who shot to fame as a fighter for media freedom, chose Ecuador as a potential refuge as Ecuador’s President Correa has presided over a crackdown on journalists there. But when Mr. Assange arrived at the embassy, he issued a statement saying that Mr. Correa had invited him to seek asylum in Ecuador during an interview for Mr. Assange’s TV show on Russia Today, an English-language cable channel financed by the government of Vladimir V. Putin.
  Reuters meanwhile also printed Ecuador’s decision is likely to deepen a political dispute. Britain has said it could use a little-known piece of legislation from 1987, introduced in the wake of the shooting of a British police officer outside the Libyan embassy in London, to strip Ecuador’s embassy of its diplomatic status.
Patino of Ecuador replied, “This is a sovereign decision protected by international law. It makes no sense to surmise that this implies a breaking of relations (with Britain).”
  So, “We are disappointed,” a British Foreign Office spokesman said. “Under UK law, with Mr Assange having exhausted all options of appeal, the British authorities are under a binding obligation to extradite him to Sweden. We shall carry out that obligation.” So what would supporters shout, other than, “The people united will never be defeated!” While waving Ecuadorian flags and holding posters showing Assange’s head, reading “no extradition.” And a Reuters reporter saw at least three protesters being dragged away by police before the decision was announced after tussles with police.
  The Ecuadorean government has bristled at the warning: its foreign minister said Britain was threatening Ecuador with a “hostile and intolerable act”, comparing the action to Iran’s storming of Britain’s Tehran embassy 2011.
  Outside the embassy, an historian, Farhan Rasheed, 42, wearing an “I love Occupy” badge, said, “I’ve lived, worked and travelled in places with proper dictatorships and nowhere have I seen violations of the Vienna convention to this extent. Here we have a government which claims to be a government of law and justice, stretching and possibly about to break a serious binding international agreement.”
  Britain’s threat to withdraw diplomatic status from the Ecuadorean embassy also drew criticism from one of its own former diplomats who said it could lead to similar moves against British embassies. “I think the Foreign Office have slightly overreached themselves here,” Britain’s former ambassador to Moscow, Tony Brenton, told the BBC. “If we live in a world where governments can arbitrarily revoke immunity and go into embassies then the life of our diplomats and their ability to conduct normal business in places like Moscow where I was and North Korea becomes close to impossible.”
  Per E. Samuelsson, one of the lawyers representing Assange, who talked to Assange after the decision, said, “The reaction he has is that he wants to underline that this (asylum) is a measure that is aimed at the U.S. and not against Sweden. He has sought political asylum in order to eliminate the risk that he will spend the rest of his life in prison in the United States.”
  Claes Borgstrom, the lawyer representing the two Swedish women, told Reuters, “It’s an abuse of the asylum instrument, the purpose of which is to protect people from persecution and torture if sent back to one’s country of origin. It’s not about that here. He doesn’t risk being handed over to the United States for torture or the death penalty. He should be brought to justice in Sweden. This is completely absurd.” Meanwhile, Sweden has summoned Ecuador’s ambassador slamming Assange asylum decision. “We want to tell them that it’s inacceptable that Ecuador is trying to stop the Swedish judicial process,” Stockholm Foreign Ministry spokesman Anders Jorle said.
  And Ecuador claimed they received a “direct” written threat on Wednesday that authorities in London are prepared to storm the Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Assange if he is not delivered into their custody. The note was delivered to Ecuador’s Foreign Ministry and ambassador in London, Patino said.
  “You need to be aware that there is a legal base in the UK, the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, that would allow us to take actions in order to arrest Mr. Assange in the current premises of the Embassy,” the letter said. “We sincerely hope that we do not reach that point, but if you are not capable of resolving this matter of Mr. Assange’s presence in your premises, this is an open option for us.”
  The decision to strip the Ecuadorian Embassy of its diplomatic protection has not yet been taken, the spokesperson said: “Under British law we can give them a week’s notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection. We are not going to do this overnight.”
  So WikiLeaks spokesperson Kristinn Hrafnnsson told AFP, “The threat to storm the Ecuadorian Embassy was “extremely serious” and illegal.
  Assange supporters took to Twitter and other social media to urge people to gather in front of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, to stop British authorities from raiding it. A 20-strong group of demonstrators gathered outside the embassy on Wednesday, and organized a livestream from the scene. According to their reports, the livestreams from the embassy suffered from DDoS attacks. London police later moved in on the embassy after a press conference led by Patino. The foreign minister confirmed on Twitter feed that the police presence around the embassy was growing.
  Now here’s the other side of this, where the Assange example leaves wiggle room for countries to control freedom of speech in ways such as this: Bahrain jails prominent activist Rajab for 3 years RT reports Bahraini Human rights activist Nabeel Rajab has been sentenced to three years in jail for “participation in an illegal assembly” and “calling for a march without prior notification.”
  Rajab has been in police custody since June 6 over comments he made on Twitter critical of the Bahraini Prime Minister, which called for him to step down. Rajab was sentenced on July 9 to three months for the remarks, raising concerns worldwide among free-speech activists. Rajab, a prominent human rights activist, led several anti-regime demonstrations in recent months. The activist is also affiliated with international rights groups such as Human Rights Watch.
  Before his arrest, Rajab appeared as a guest on episode four of ‘The World Tomorrow’ on RT, hosted by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. In the interview, he criticized the US-led invasion of Iraq, as well as US refusals to take action during the Bahraini protests and the wider Arab Spring. “The Americans, from the beginning, didn’t want to change those regimes, they didn’t want to change the regime in Egypt, they didn’t want to change the regime. You see now for example, Bahrain is a good model. Iraq is maybe the closest to us democratic state but Americans are against democracy in Bahrain now.” Rajab was arrested May 5th, days after his appearance on the show, leading many to believe it was a government reprisal against his protest actions.
  So. Basically the debatable premise in the Assange case is whether or not the United States of America wants to imprisonWikiLeaks’ founder, Julian Assange for the rest of his life. On the surface Mr. Assange seems to being taking an almost hysterical out-of-proportion stance, while the U.S.A. says virtually nothing while waiting to deal with whatever comes, with the back of its’ hand, in perfect diplomatic composure. When there’s even the least little doubt, there’s no choice but to be – suspicious.
  Granted, Mr. Assange could or should have been much more suspicious of his own intentions when the purloined private government communications came into his possession by way of the sad conscience-torn, Private First Class, Bradley Manning, Unit – 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division. Awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and Iraq Campaign Medal.
April 8 - ? ?, 2019
Little Surprise Julian Assange Knew To Pick: Ecuador
8/16/2012 concluded: Granted, Mr. Assange could or should have been much more suspicious of his own intentions when the purloined private government communications came into his possession by way of the sad conscience-torn, Private First Class, Bradley Manning, Unit – 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division. Awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and Iraq Campaign Medal.
Quite The Spies, Aren't We?
Everywhere's kingpins as if the planet's one huge bowling alley avoiding getting knocked off if at all possible. Success reaping its own set of disadvantageous values. The right and need to know never quite reaching the right mix with the incentives all fouled up in the first place. 
Trumptology's Trumptologists' Trumptologisms
  Beliefs that run contrary to espoused assumptions, probably occur more often than any of us would be proud of. It's those aspects of people in glass houses and that defaming cliche about assumptions to start. 
  It's that being comfortable wasn't in the cards. When weakening an enemy is all that matters, then that's all there'll ever be. Not that vigilance is shattered, but that there's no other way to see. The great disappointment's surpassing expectations. Now isn't that just great?   
  One jail for another Mr. Assange could believe. Life itself is choosing our own prisons and none of our confines are exactly like each others. Even for those locked up in the same institutions. All experience is different, no matter how many countless ways we try to make everything the same for our conveniences. Jails themselves are somewhat escapist as they rationalize punishment as an end-all, when the problem is, after all, the fact of damaging people to begin with. 
Something Else
  Uh hum. 
  News cycles come and go. The intent theoretically isn't to trivialize, but magnify. Bringing about a lament that good intentions often go awry. 

A Moment of Silence For Notre Dame

  ... article

The Financial Benefits of Wiping the Slate Clean

Something Else Continues
  No doubt news has never been all that impartial to ever assume any of it has really been the opposite of fake. 
  Redacted, edited, what's the difference? No evidence of collusion repeated enough dwarfs the concept that no evidence of direct collusion is omitted. How dare people address the harsh reality that narcissistic buffoonery's become as valid for this country as any self-serving state of authority. Pound that United States Constitution all you want. Unfortunately the pounding's happened so much it's becoming virtual hamburger meat. That, ironically, a certain someone and others have a declared preference for. Ba dump bump. 
  Encouraged but so chagrined the words to describe my upset ness just aren't coming yet ... ? ...
Just In Case Anyone’s Not Seen The
that continues Chapter IV, by Roy Cohn's 68th Street townhouse doorstep, the First Tuesday following the 2016 Presidential Election. Followed by my Summer of 2017 Sit-In, reading from inside 
The Mulberry Street Gang Exhibition 
49 East Houston Street, NYC

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Can Electoral Outrageousness Be Blamed On The Constitution Too?

  The New York Times, among many publications, reports the Presidential Election is in sync with how successful Hollywood blockbuster films are calculated. Not facing of course, the astronomical amounts of money raised ticketing Americans demonstrates how little our money is worth. Leaving this political forum bickering over clichés from a lack of imagination that’s paid well enough, if, and, or otherwise, anyway. 
  The Founding Fathers were among the rebels’ wealthiest and could have bought elections for themselves, but chose a system of one person/one vote rather than how many shares one owns in the marketplace. Left for future generations to endlessly haggle over. The Times said: In the battle for political cash, President Obama is in an unaccustomed place during the final months of the 2012 campaign: he is losing. Mitt Romney and the Republican National Committee easily outraised the formidable Obama money machine for the second month in a row. A nonstop schedule of high-dollar events around the country brought in $106 million during June to Mr. Obama’s $71 million, giving him and his party four times the cash on hand that it had just three months ago. But at least this a way to bounce-pass and re-circulate some money among the public? Supposedly Mr. Obama’s fund-raising deficit in part reflects Wall Street and traditionally right-leaning industries swinging hard back to the Republican Party and Mr. Romney, whose promise to curtail regulation and cut taxes has drawn a lot of five-figure checks. Mr. Romney also had success in June drawing small donors, Obama’s traditional strength. The Times figures this reflects conservative anger over the recent Supreme Court decision upholding the president’s signature health care law. Mr. Romney and the R.N.C. now have about $160 million in cash. Reflecting, as this season’s other aspirants demonstrated, there’s no business like a presidential candidacy. 
  For instance the career of Mike “The Entertainer” Huckabee. Mr. Romney’s finance chief, Spencer Zwick, said in a statement, “This month’s fund-raising is a statement from voters that they want a change of direction in Washington.” How either political persuasion changes much of anything while propped up by ideas worn to the bone is a debate neither can afford the public facing. So money, in fact, could tend to hide that people are forced to accept there are no actual alternatives. R. Donahue Peebles, a New York businessman who has raised more than $100,000 for Mr. Obama, said, “It’s the perfect storm for Republicans,” as they, “and independents who supported the president financially thought they would see a change in how Washington worked. What they see now, and it’s not necessarily the president’s fault, is a lot of partisanship in Washington and a struggling economy.” Could that be because taxpayer bail out money cannot be re-invested at a level which might weaken the recipients? In New York City you can never hear enough great news about how rising real estate values mean the economy could be resurging. Technically: the abused golden goose that got us in this trouble in 2000? Or while partying like it was 1999? 
  So Mr. Obama had significantly outspent Mr. Romney’s advertising in swing states, but since Mr. Romney’s campaign has barraged airwaves with anti-Obama advertisements the president’s campaign is forced to spend its own money to match. Where is the book chronicling these trails of cash? You’d think by now with these sums the subject has earned some scrutiny. Where does all the advertising money go? To carpenters who build and rebuild the media titans fantastic homes? Or does a whopping 6% become donated so local charities stay afloat? The grudgingly acceptable socialism celebrities attach themselves to and show the public how much they care for their attention. And why is it never an issue for more than half-a-day how much candidates gave to charities themselves in the previous years? Because the electoral process is a domain of business and to rationalize otherwise is a crock. 
  The Times goes on pointing out Mr. Obama easily outraised Mr. Romney through much of the last year, as Mr. Romney fought for the Republican nomination while Mr. Obama exploited his incumbency to raise large checks in conjunction with the Democratic National Committee. New nominees typically take in huge influxes of cash as major donors come off the sidelines at the end of a nominating fight, as John Kerry did during the early months of the 2004 general election campaign against George W. Bush. Come November, the final tally between the two candidates could be close to a draw. So once again the final numbers, that we can apparently only calculate closely, will come down to half the country’s choice, whether it’s a majority or not. The Times goes on as if there’s not much difference between an election and sports section, saying, yet money flooding into Mr. Romney’s campaign suggests that even Mr. Obama, the most prodigious fund-raiser to date in political history, can be beaten. Ooo. And Democratic-aligned outside groups, including those investing heavily in races for the House and the Senate, are far behind their Republican counterparts in raising and spending money. What is this really? A game where resentment is fomented both for and against the poor whose climb from poverty has really been stifled by the mastering of inflation by interests able to do so? Republican candidates, party committees and outside groups have spent $269 million on broadcast advertising, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, compared with $133 million for Democrats. Totals don’t include tens of millions of dollars Mr. Obama invested early on data mining, technology and campaign infrastructure Mr. Romney is now seeking to match on the fly. On the fly? That’s a catchy phrase the Times used, but for these prices we’re being played for fools that anything could ever be done in that spirit in such a divisive national campaign that ours have become. The Times notes Mr. Obama is being outraised despite a more intense fund-raising schedule than any of his predecessors. He was scheduled for two events on Monday in Washington, bringing the total to 174 fund-raisers since formally beginning his re-election campaign last year, according to CBS News. Beautiful that no one can pinch-hit for the big drawing name who should probably sleep more as our president. Then without using the phrase, sounding desperate, the Times said Mr. Obama sought to rally supporters on Monday with a blunt e-mail from Ann Marie Habershaw, the campaign’s chief operating officer. “We could lose if this continues,” Ms. Habershaw warned. Meaning all is lost without your money whether or not you vote? This what the chauvinistic expression “one man one vote” evolved to mean? Several top Obama donors said privately Mr. Obama’s attacks on Mr. Romney’s private equity career, handling White House relations with business leaders and his criticisms of tax rates for the wealthy made it harder for allies to raise money on Mr. Obama’s behalf in the financial sector and other industries. Good. Because what’s really outrageous is the tax revenue raised is not enough, and it’s not because a lot hasn’t been raised but the issue never faced is the economy is distorted out of proportion. Tell a child gum used to cost a penny and they’d probably look at you as if you were the one from Mars rather than their being the ones born here on this foreign planet of our own making. 
  One Obama backer, who declined to be identified because of his campaign relationship, said, “He (President Obama) will not have the same level of support from the business community as last time. Either in endorsements, money or support. That’s clear.” And Mr. Peebles, the Obama fund-raiser, echoed objections among some other Democrats with financial industry ties, over unreasonable attacks on the wealthy by the Obama campaign. “I just got back from Rhode Island on my boat,” Mr. Peebles said, referring to criticism of Mr. Romney’s much-photographed vacation boating last week on New Hampshire’s Lake Winnipesaukee. “I can hold 12 people on my boat. I don’t feel that I’m out of touch with Americans or that I am a bad person. I find it offensive, and I’m a supporter.” Really? The millionaire President Barack Obama personally complained about the wealthy? Doubtful as this president is documented compromising with that reality as it is true, the more who are rich the merrier.
June 13 - July 7, 2017
Can Electoral Outrageousness Be Blamed On The Constitution Too?

7/10/2012 concluded: “I can hold 12 people on my boat. I don’t feel that I’m out of touch with Americans or that I am a bad person. I find it offensive, and I’m a supporter.” Really? The millionaire President Barack Obama personally complained about the wealthy? Doubtful as this president is documented compromising with that reality as it is true, the more who are rich the merrier.
attention's manipulated
"... the more who are rich the merrier."
  Political watchers salivated over the State of New Jersey's soap opera over what political weight thrown around means when the governor sat for a time on the beach that the rest of the citizens were precluded from occupying. Buck stopped where?
  Another petulant era's aura dominates the political arena of tier upon political tier of power presuming Stalin's preferences. Not Law and Order Lite but leverage by all means the most important thing of all. Reality. No doubt. But ethics seems the level, where lines have to be drawn beneath to acknowledge humanity's forgiven frailties: purchasable for a mere - ... yada yada yada ...
  Oops. Again reduced to adding a perspective punchline from an op-ed in The New York Times. By Stephen Fry

Happy Birthday, America. One Small Suggestion 

"Let's all go to Jersey." Phil Logos of FLEET 
in documentary 5th, Park and Madison
This is where I'd like to take the hammer and cycle 
Bike Shop Book Tour
The Political Tapestry's A Mirage 
  Politics, like life, probably isn't fair. Why there are rules. ... 
The Senate Commercially Live Redux
  United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions' 6/15/2017, 2:30 PM, testimony before the US Senate Committee on Intelligence. 
See Soapbox View
The Senate Commercially Broadcast Live
for comments about preceding, related, testimony from former FBI Director James Comey, pictured here with General Sessions. 
  What Politics shakes loose from all this, won't be much other than the business of spectacle holding sway. A brazenness on steroids a professional comic should hopefully always be able to say. 
  Television Network attendance may have been across the board for Comey, but not Fox for Sessions. Somehow don't specifically remember during Comey and would be surprised if I hadn't looked. 
       The New York Times feed reduced to a 3 minute 40 second highlight reel. left nothing on YouTube from their feed. 
Mr. Attorney General. Cue me, please? 
Senator Burr: Begins by commending the Secretary for his service ... and pontificates, then lists and hopes and pledges this whole affair will uphold the values of truth and self-honor.
Vice-Chairman Warner: Commitment to cooperate. Your role in campaign was as strategic insider, Senator Warner cites. In the Senate, when the stage is yours, ya better take it. But the fact that they, each Senator, have to retain the stage while they have it, precludes directly answering points as cited. Hence - exacerbation. Think maybe that contributes to the curly-cue delivery from so many people of such national importance?
  I love the oath. Jury Service is the 2nd best instance I've ever taken one.
  ... ta da -
US Attorney General Jeff Sessions: ... I appreciate the opportunity to respond ...
Soapbox View: He was not personally involved in a spurious conspiracy with Russian commercial interests.  
US AG Jeff Sessions: "have never colluded ... and served this country with honor for 35 years." 
Soapbox View: In the world of going before the public? This is a free throw.
US AG Jeff Sessions: "earned a reputation"
Soapbox View: Fine.
  Wonder what's planned for ACT III? Get out your lollipops. The Fireside Chat's tweeting controversy. No? At least not not, I guess. 
  One thing about the art of Public Relations is just about anything, properly described, can be made palpable. 
Senator Burr: "I recognize myself for ten minutes."
Vice-Chairman Warner: "provide documentation"
  What a life. 
  Still listening. Ooh, just questioned Comey's competency. 
  Destined for Broadway.

Something To Say?

  Apologies to those offended by my citing something from a so-called "liberal newspaper." Though on WBAI, one June morning, a guest, noting their, and the station's own, traditional radical position, said the newspaper hardly leans left. A morass results from a jargon fueled arena. 

  Anyway, in The New York Times, in Philip Galanes' TABLE FOR THREE column, in conversation, Mr. Galanes voiced an especially impressive, concise, accurate, appraisal of George Orwell's 1984. PG: "Isn't that what "1984" explores, the chaos and fatigue of nonstop propaganda?" 
  To indulge, or not's a question?
  Arrogance delivers such pain. 
  Real Estate's more precious than land, water and clean air. As approximately 38% of America agrees. How the conspiracy pays off is in satisfaction. 
  So. I do make an effort not to be impressed. But another essay - Black Deaths, American Lies, and digitally titled longer as Sacrificing Black Lives for the American Lives, is a topic looming over all our lives in variously, interpreted, ways that appeared in The New York Times, Sunday, June 25, 2017. Disagree as the mantra's been these many years. But there's not a base the author, Ibram X. Kendi didn't touch. If only applause for him were for all of us.
  Specifically why, how, or whatever, hardly matters. But tellingly, on a Sunday Morning, June 25, 2017, News Interview Show, Kellyanne Conway said, "gazillions of dollars."
  A presidency brought to the heights of self-parody? Hardly the issue either when the irony's the belief in being above all that. How dare anyone regard themselves above the human condition! 
  An economy priced for only the relatively rich to afford, is doomed to failure while wreaking havoc getting there. There's not really any such thing as profit margin, when gouging the customer you have is the business model. Amen.
The Hour Hammer and Cycle Messenger Service coming soon to -