Obama Birth Certificate

News today is that President Obama has released his long form birth certificate. The LA Times is also reporting that a "self-annointed leader of the so-called "birther" movement" still has doubts (no one should be surprised).

I'm hoping this issue can now be put to rest. But I have one question: The issue has been going on for over 3 years, why release the form now? Why wasn't it released 3 years ago?

I suspect that instead of resolving issues, new ones will come up....

School budget problems resolved - Auburn, Maine

Auburn Maine school department has found a way to solve their budget problems. Details in the accompanying article are sketchy (non-existent), but evidently it's true. Rather than spend public funding on more books, more material for the classroom or even more teachers or aides, the school department has decided that the money would be better spent on iPads.

The iPads have apps for "learning your letters from books, that can be read, (and) finger painting your name" so it's easy to see why Superintendent Tom Morrill sees why "it's absolutely something we must do." It's amazing that anyone was ever able to learn their letters in the past.

I know you're thinking that iPads cost a lot of money, but these only ended up costing the school department a little over $700 each - 285 for only $200,000. You're probably thinking you could have bought a lot of real books for that money and maybe even some blank paper and real finger paint, but wouldn't that get the kids' hands messy? Why you might even have to buy paint aprons and how many of those can you buy for $200,000?

Hiring another teacher is out of the question. Hiring teacher's aides for the classroom is out of the question (you know, those people who only make about $15k each? 10 more teacher's aides won't do as good as an iPad). If the money had not been spent on iPads I'm sure it would have been spent on another administrator trying to Race for the Top (while sinking to the bottom).

This "cutting edge technology will boost literacy rates from 62 percent to 90 percent in two years" (or it's hoped it will).

I'm not sure what they did to solve their budget problems, but I think every school district in the US should fly to Auburn to see what they've done and immediately implement the same plan. Times being hard, trips will be limited to 3 days and district employees will have to fly coach...

Memo to congress - thanks for doing your job

I say this almost sarcastically. Congress has finally done what they were supposed to do last fall. Apparently. There's still more haggling to come, the budget bill signed last night is really only for another week, the final bill will be hammered out in the coming week.

Understand that the main issue here is spending. We want it cut. It's not just because of the recent deficit (although that's what woke everyone up), we wanted spending to be cut before that. It's not just about the threats to cut military pay (which by the way were uncalled for), it's about planning and living by a plan. It's not about telling federal workers on Friday that they may not have a job on Saturday, it's about providing for the common defense and if a worker isn't doing that, he/she needs to find a real job that helps the US, not drags it down.

It's not about throwing women under the bus, it's about removing funding from an organization that doesn't fulfill the job it portrays to do and kills babies, protects rapists and hides pimps instead. It's not about which radio station you listen to it's about what radio station the government should pay for (I'll give you a hint - none) and which ones should be paid for with private funds (another hint - all of them).

I could go on an on, but I won't. Instead I'll say "Thank-you" to congress - "you did your job". However, most of us in the real tax-paying world understand that just doing your job once a year isn't enough. Now you need to go back in there and do your job AND MORE for the rest of the year. Remember, elections are coming!

Budget crisis solution - Mr. Pruitt style

Watching the mess in Washington made me think of a solution. It involves Mr. Pruitt - the teacher I had for wood shop in the 8th grade. I think some of his teaching solutions would help out.

Mr. Pruitt taught at Hughes Middle School and at the time, only boys took the class (I think my younger sister was the first girl to take wood shop. Mr Pruitt retired soon after that, I don't think he could handle girls). 8th grade boys being what they were, they would occasionally get in fights. When this happened, Mr. Pruitt would put the chairs in a circle and we would all stand around while he encouraged the two boys to go at it. They would walk around with fists up, looking at each other. Mr. Pruitt would push one towards the other and they would both back away. As Mr. Pruitt would say, one was scared, the other was glad.

I think his solution to the budget crisis would be similar. He'd get a group of citizens to stand around the Capitol and let Congress go at it until they finished the job we hired them to do. He'd push the Democrats and watch the Republicans back away. One would be scared and the other would be glad.

At the end of the day, we'd have a budget. It might not be the best budget, but it would be a budget. And no one would be pointing fingers. I think Mr. Pruitt could solve a lot of our problems.

Schools on strike

I have to confess, I haven't paid much attention to the issues in Wisconsin regarding schools and government employees and the right to collective bargaining. Living my entire life in the south, in a right-to-work state, I'm not affected by unions and don't know a lot. It just doesn't affect my day-to-day living. I admit to being somewhat ignorant. As a kid, I remember wishing my teachers would go on strike and I could miss school (never happened).

That's not the point of this post, so don't comment on that please. The point is I read an article about universities in Wisconsin joining the union. As a parent of a young adult in a university, it made me think about what would happen if his university professors joined a union and then went on strike.

As a consumer, I can choose where to spend my money. I can buy groceries at numerous grocery stores. If one store goes on strike, I can honor their strike or go to another store. It gets more complicated with schools. And universities.

So my question is, if the university goes on strike, do I get a refund? When I send in my $$ at the beginning of the semester, I'm basically contracting with them for 3-4 months' worth of education (although it's somewhat questionable if he absorbs that much). Aren't they obliged to fulfill their end of the contract?

Is it time to rethink my economic ideas?

I'm not sure rethink is the right word, but I do believe I may change some of my ideas. I'm a supply-sider and always have been. Watching Micheal Moore's documentary on capitalism had no effect on me, I've been a capitalist since before 1973 (my first year with a W2).

But I recently did some research on the HIRE act of 2010 (Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act - details here). Most of the people I've talked to didn't know anything about this law, signed by President Obama a litle over a year ago. There were attempts to extend the act into 2011, but those failed.

Basically, the law gave a break to small businesses who hired an employee who had been unemployed for at least 60 days. Employers would not have to pay the 6.2% Social Security tax for those employees for the remainder of the year and would be eligible for an additional $100 tax credit if the employee stayed a year. One small businessman I talked to (who had never heard of the act) explained that if you hired two or three employees that way, you might be able to hire another worker.

Had I heard about this law early last year, I would have agreed that it was good. (Yes, I would have agreed that an Obama plan was good). I've heard of plans like this before and always thought they were good. It gets unemployed people back to work. That's good. They pay taxes. That's good. All good.

But I never heard about the act then. And neither did my small-business friend. And apparently, neither did a lot of other people. Was it a lack of publicity? Or a lack of enthusiasm? I suspect the latter. And I'm beginning to believe that acts like this have little or no impact on the economy. Unemployment went up most (all?) of last year, this act should have reduced unemployment.

So my question is, what CAN we do to increase employment?

What does Michael Moore have in Common with the Tea Party?

Over the weekend, I watched Michael Moore's documentary "Capitalism: A Love Affair". It was the first Moore film I've ever watched and you're probably saying "Why is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative like Randy even watching such a film?" Well it wasn't as bad (or as good) as I'd been told about his films and it was interesting to hear his opinions first hand, rather than through someone else's filter.

As expected, the film was very anti-Bush, but also took some shots at several Clinton and current presidential appointees. One had to listen carefully to catch them, but they were there. Senators Dodd and Frank (both with a "D" after their name) were shown in a bad light, so both parties were skewered. There were several anti-Obama ads played that talked about Socialism. To me, the tie-in was weak, but the attempt was to show that Obama is not a socialist.

There were some random, seemingly unconnected portions of the movie, it focused on GM shutdowns, foreclosures, a group called the Low Income Families Fighting Together (see here) and a sit-down strike at Republic Windows and Doors (see here). Moore also had a segment on the low pay for pilots. To me, the main (only?) tie in these stories was that unions were shown in a positive light in each case, standing up for the little man against the big-bad company.

There was a segment on dead-peasant policies. To be honest, this puzzled me. Dead-peasant policies exist when a company, (Wal-Mart was highlighted) takes out a life insurance policy on their workers with the company as a beneficiary. Then if the employee dies, the company makes money. I'm trying to figure out why I should care. Assuming of course, the company doesn't do something to hasten the final event. In my case, I'd like the challenge to show the company that they would lose money on the insurance, I'd outlive their interest.

This makes me wonder about the business model of the life insurance company. Surely they have the actuarial numbers to show that over a large number of people, Wal-Mart can't make money in this game. Otherwise, the insurance companies are charging too little for this policy.


There was praise for FDR and his attempt to pass a 2nd Bill of Rights. The film said that Germany, Italy and Japan have these in their constitution. Frankly for me, that doesn't speak well. I for one, am not interested in emulating any of those countries. (As a side note, the film ends with Moore making the dramatic statement that he's not leaving the US, I'm guessing he's heard the people suggest he move to whatever country he thinks is better).

The movie ended saying that Capitalism is evil and should be replaced by democracy. It showed some companies that are run purely democratically. One was a small engineering firm, the other a bakery. It would be interesting to read more about these companies (sorry, I didn't get their name), to see how they got started, how did they manage their funds. How do they pay their CEO and how do they recruit given their democratic approach. I don't recall the companies names, so that research won't get done by me.

One of the questions I kept asking was about protection of property. Suppose I own a house and decide to sell it to you. After you've been in it for a few years, you find you can't make the payment. Shouldn't I have the right to foreclose? If you can't pay me what you owe me, can't I at least get my property back? Moore's film kept showing reasons that the big banks shouldn't be allowed to foreclose (and some were legitimate), but what happens to the bank's property rights? Do we stomp all over those? That question was never answered.

Oh and lest I close without answering the title question - what DO Michael Moore and the Tea Party have in common? Both are solidly opposed to TARP and think the whole fiasco was created by the Treasury Secretary and Wall Street. I wonder, will Moore show up at the next Tea Party Rally?

It's an odd month - Have you checked your credit report?

I decided a few years ago that I was going to check my credit report regularly. Each person is allowed to check once per year with each of the three agencies, and rather than pull them all at once, I like to spread them out. Combined with my wife, we can pull a credit report every other month. So, if you pull reports in odd months (January, March, May, etc), you'll be following my plan.

While there is a commercial with a catchy tune and funny costumes, regardless what they say their credit report isn't free. You end up signing up for a service. Instead what you want to do is go to www.annualcreditreport.com. Once there, you'll fill in your state, then some basic information. One option I highly recommend specifies that on printed reports, only the last 4 digits of your social security number are printed. You may not print your reports (I do), but there's no sense printing on paper, on disk or even on the screen your full social any more than required.

Next you'll select one of the three agencies. This could cause some people some grief. "Which one do I pull first?" you might be saying. The answer is simple - any one you want. If you haven't pulled a report in the last year, my suggestion is to take the one at the top. If you've pulled that report, take the second on the list. The order may change, so don't count on it being the same next time, write down which report you pulled.

Once you've selected an agency, you'll be taken directly to that agency. Here you'll be asked some questions to verify that you really are you. You may be asked about old addresses, old accounts, details on your mortgage or recent credit changes. It might be best to have access to your records at this point, to know what your mortgage payment is, who your banker is and where you have accounts.

Once you get your credit report, you should review it carefully, If you find mistakes, you should call to find out details on the mistake. If you want the information corrected, don't settle for a call, write the owners of the account. My approach is to write to the owners first, then write to the credit agency if I don't get resolution. You could write to both at the same time.

I keep a copy of the credit report, at least until I pull another one from the same agency (a year later). You may decide not to keep a copy on paper, but I'd recommend keeping a copy on disk in that case.

How to un-elect your local politician

Seems that in Florida, voters have gotten wise and un-elected their Mayor. Seems the Mayor was "politically tone deaf during troubled economic times", easily shown by raising taxes and raising the pay and benefits for public employees.

Citizens of Miami-Dae have overwhelmingly voted to kick this Republican, soon-to-be former Mayor Carlos Alvarez, out of office. Over 700 of the 809 precincts have reported in and 88% of voters favored the recall vote.

We should all take note of this action and we should print a copy of the article and mail it to our politicians. They can be un-elected.

(Full article is here)

Happy Pi day

Ok, I know I can be a bit of a nerd, but when two of the people in my family don't even get it when I send a text that says "Happy Pi Day", something's wrong. They had even seen comments (likely on Facebook, likely from teachers) talking about celebrating Pi Day and still didn't get it.

For those who don't know, Pi is one of those "special" numbers in math. They seem to turn up over and over, so someone, somewhere named it. Pi is used to determine the area of a circle. Most have heard the joke, Pi are squared - no Pi are round.

Anyway, the value if Pi is 3.14. Today is 3/14. Notice the similarity? Today, I was reminded of Pi day by an entry on Wikihow explaining how to celebrate Pi day. What better way than with a pie? They show some pictures with the symbol for Pi on the pie. Or maybe the numbers for Pi on the pie. Either approach is acceptable. If you want to get technical about it, you should celebrate the exact minute, at 1:59 today.

While I've never celebrated Pi day before, I think it's a good idea. We've celebrated Ground Hog day at my house along with some other obscure holidays. Any holiday focused on a desert can't be a bad idea. So, maybe I'll go out and buy a Pi (or is that buy a pie?) today. Apple sounds really good right about now.


Happy Pi Day everyone!

(I should also wish my brother and his wife a happy birthday. I wonder how long it took them to find someone with the same birthday to marry?)

Western Sky

Today I saw an ad for Westernsky.com. This is a company owned and operated by Native Americans. The ad offered about $2500 in a loan. They will put the money in your checking account overnight. No collateral is required and there are no fees for early pay off.

I was curious, this sounded suspiciously like payday loans I talked about here or the Cashwell company I talked about here. When I found their website, I saw that they claim to have lower rates than payday loans. From looking at their rates, they are lower than Cashwell.

But they aren't cheap. For a loan of $2525, you'll pay a $75 fee right off the bat. Then you start paying almost 140% in interest. If you pay it off over the required 36 months, you'll pay over $10,000.

The website explains that Western Sky operates "within the boundaries of the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation, a sovereign nation located within the" USA. I don't know if  that means they operate under different rules. I wonder if they can pursue US citizens who don't pay them in the same way US companies. Or maybe they get to play under US rules in some cases and their own rules in other cases.

It would scare me to work with a company that might not operate under US laws. It would scare me even more to pay 140% interest. (I should note that this was their least offensive loan. If you only borrow $1000, you'll pay almost 195% interest)

Bullying about road rage

Yesterday, I asked for statistics about the growth of road rage. So far, I haven't seen any (if you have some, please post here or on yesterday's post). But I have a theory and the theory is related to road rage. Let me explain.

Sometime in 1987 or 1988, some news reporters on TV coined the phrase "road rage" to describe the anger some drivers felt towards other drivers. AAA talked about how bad it was and called for investigations. Psychologists searched for reasons to explore the phenomenon. And police officers dutifully began reporting it when they saw it.

Road rage was real, but did these TV reporters create the wave that spread? Not just by encouraging copycats, (which they did) but also by reporting on something that had been there all along. The term didn't exist in 1986, so the statistical count was zero. The number of reported incidents incidents had no where to go but up. (for more on this media invention see here)

So, are we seeing the same thing with bullying? Certainly it is real and has been around a LONG time. But are we 1) creating copycats and 2) counting a problem we never counted before? Doesn't change the seriousness of it and I for one am glad parents are aware of it, but it doesn't make it a national problem.

Bullying statistics - Historical data

Has anyone seen any statistics on bullying that cover the growth? Specifically, if we look back 1, 2, 5, even 10 years ago, is bullying more prevalent today than it was then?

All of the numbers I've seen indicate how bad it is now, or stats from 2009 or some other year. The numbers are staggering and I don't mean to minimize them. I'm just looking for some historical perspective and haven't found it yet.

If you find a link, post it here.

What a difference a bank makes

This morning I called my small "home-town" bank because my debit card is broken. This bank has a feature where they transfer an extra $1 into savings every time you use the card. But they charge me a monthly fee of $5. Each time I use the card, they deduct 50cents from that fee, so if I use it 10 times, there's no fee.

Another reason I signed up for this account is that in March of this year (which started today), they are going to give me a bonus and match all of the dollars they've transferred to savings. I think in my case that will exceed the service charges I've paid.

Anyway, back to replacing my debit card. Martha at the bank was very nice and was ready to send me a new card. Then she told me there was a $5 charge. I told her to hold off.

Then I called one of the big credit card companies and told them that the card I have for them is broken (I'm rough on cards in my wallet). Michele was very nice and offered to send one out right away. I talked to her about the rewards program and she offered to upgrade my card in two different ways. The first was no charge (I pay no annual fee now) and would give me trip cancellation benefits (not a big deal, but if it's free). The second would give me more rewards, but cost an annual fee of $59. I declined the second and accepted the first.

My point here is this: people like to bash the big credit card companies and praise the little guy, but my experience is the opposite. What's your experience?

Should I itemize on my taxes?

One of the most frequent questions I get from the folks who come to me to have their taxes done is "Should I itemize?" A lot of these clients don't even know what the question means, but they ask anyway. And the answer I always give is that we will look at their situation and determine the best answer, because the answer is different for everyone.

To explain what it means, the IRS gives everyone a standard deduction. You can choose to take the standard deduction or itemize. Typically, you will choose which ever gives you the best tax break (while it sounds silly, there is at least one good reason not to choose the best, but I'll ignore that for now). This deduction is the amount of your income that is not taxable. Supposed you're single and make $50,000 a year income. You won't have to pay taxes on the entire income, the first $5700 is not taxable.


The standard deduction as mentioned about is $5700 for single people or for married people who file separately. For married people who file together, the deduction is exactly twice the single deduction or $11,400. There is another class of people, Head of Household and their deduction is $8400. I won't go over those choices in this blog post, I'll assume you know which filing status you fall into.

In order to decide on itemizing, you can simply look at your items and see the total. If they total more than the standard, you're better off itemizing. So what items are significant? My experience is that home mortgage interest is typically the larges. If your home is mortgaged, you should get a from from your bank that tells how much interest you paid.

People of faith also tend to have charitable contributions. And of course we all pay state taxes, you can choose to deduct your state income tax or state sales tax. Don't forget real estate taxes and property taxes on your automobiles. If the total of all of these items exceeds the standard, by all means itemize.

There are two other areas that are common: Medical expenses and miscellaneous deductions. Each of these is subject to some minimums. For example, medical expenses that exceed 7.5% of your income are deductible. For the person listed above making $50,000, that's $3750. If your expenses are less than that or are covered by insurance, you can't deduct them. If your expenses are higher, you can only deduct the difference. For example, if your expenses are $5000, you can only deduct $1250.

For miscellaneous expenses (job travel, union dues, etc), these have to exceed 2% of your income.

I purposely omitted Casualty and Theft losses as they aren't that common. By all means you should study the law yourself and not take my comments as always true. But hopefully, this will help you decide if you want to itemize.

Twenty-one years ago

Twenty-one years ago, my wife was pregnant with what was to be our third child. Everyone (except me) thought it would be sweet if the child was born on Valentines Day. We woke up that morning with my wife thinking this was the day. We hurriedly got our two girls up and gave them their Valentines presents, knowing we may not be home that night. Then we called a neighbor to take care of the girls before and after school.

We hadn't chosen a girl's name yet (which turned out not to be a problem). I had decided that if the child was a boy, he should inherit my middle name as his middle name. I hadn't made that decision with the first two, which was ok, since both girls would have seemed silly with James as a middle name. During the labor process, my wife thought about changing the first name, but all her choices started with "J" and the idea of JJ just didn't seem right. Little did we know, even without the JJ moniker, we were due for some dynamite (the link shows my age).

A few hours later, we were in the delivery room, still with no girl's name, but at least settled on a boy's name. Ultrasounds were not common and we didn't know what to expect. We had experienced similar but opposite problems the first two times around (no boy's name chosen back then). When our pediatrician told use we had a "little Muggsy", we knew we didn't have a problem this time either. I guess with what the doctor charged for his short time in the room, he could afford to be a big Hornet's fan.

After the birth, I went to the nurse's station to get some ice & water. OB nurses are always excited and asked "what did you have?" New dads (even experienced new dads like me) can be counted on to say something stupid, my answer was "just some water." After they laughed and explained their question better, I told them we had a boy.

Today, my youngest celebrates his big day. We've been through a lot together. I have the privilege of taking him on baseball trips every few years, camping now and then and other father-son experiences. He's seen enough changes to last him a lifetime, but I'm sure more changes are on their way. Hopefully, these changes have prepared him for a bright future. He certainly deserves it.

Adam is now a student, a bass player in a Christian band (when he can), and more than that, a young man. Happy Birthday Adam! Enjoy your special day. We love you.

procession of presidencies - part 2

It took me longer to get back to this than I thought. When I last left off, I had explained my theory on presidential elections. Basically, I had gone through presidents from JFK to JEC showing that the results of each election was predictable. It's almost as if some "invisible hand" was guiding not just economics, but elections too.

The last president I covered was President Carter. He took over after Ford, the only un-elected president we've ever had. America wasn't too happy with America. We'd been through the Vietnam war, then a crooked president. Then a president who tried to patch things up (Ford), but never seemed to do anything of note (except the Mayaquez incident). Inflation was high, unemployment was high. And things didn't get much better after Carter stepped in.

The hostage crisis in Iran sealed President Carter's image. Fairly or not, Americans felt defeated. A rescue attempt failed, costing the lives of 8 servicemen. The hostages were taken deeper under cover and were not released until after Carter left office.

America need to regain confidence in American. Ronald Reagan was the man for the job. Reagan was every man's grandfather. It didn't matter what he said, you just liked him. He believed in himself and he believed in America. He wanted to take the country back. I heard back then, that there was a huge boost in the sales of American flags. With him in office, America recovered. The economy got better, we ended the Cold War with the Russians and we actually made progress. We bombed Libya (on my birthday) and showed we would not put up with terrorism. Reagan surrounded himself with some very smart people, he may have been the last president to do so.

After 8 years of Reagan, control of the presidency went to his VP, George H.W. Bush. His time was lackluster. And his timing was worse. Americans had 8 years of Reagan and saw Bush as a continuation. They made fun of his "points of light" and everything else he did. When it was time for re-election, the economy was down and he seemed to not care.

In walked Bill Clinton. Like JFK, he held a Prince Charming appeal. America wanted a younger person in office, someone with charisma (a value Bush never was accused of). Sure, he was a womanizer, but he was a good looking womanizer. Men would laugh, women didn't care. And he said he would fix the economy.

At the end of his first stint, the economy looked good, so he was reelected. But after eight years, America decided it wasn't just the economy that was important, it was credibility also. They were tired of the snickers and back room jokes. Tired of the womanizer or maybe he had just grown too old? American wanted credibility again an reminisced about the days of a man named Reagan. He wasn't available and his VP Bush hadn't been all that good, but another Bush stepped in.

On George W. Bush's first presidency, 9/11 happened. Americans everywhere were convinced he was the right man for the job. There was even a political cartoon that showed Tipper Gore saying she thought he was a better choice. He was locked in for 8 years, primarily on the vote of Obam Bin Laden.

Americans can't be patient with anything and at the end of 8 years, the economy was again in a bad situation.Terrorism was no longer considered as big a threat as in 2004 and the reminiscing of Reagan fell flat. America wanted a change again, someone younger. A fresh view of the world. Someone who wasn't a cowboy. Someone who could negotiate.

In a perfect storm, a young candidate named Obama showed up. Not just a change, THE change. He wasn't Bush and he wasn't Clinton. He cared about people. He was a minority, but not too much of one. Americans could identify with him.

So what does this mean for 2012? Well predictions are easy in hindsight. It's the forward looking predictions that are hard. But I believe most presidential elections revolve around the economy. If the economy rebounds, President Obama will have no trouble getting reelected. If there is another 9/11 attack and if President Obama responds, he will have no trouble getting reelected. (I don't think there will be another 9/11, Bin Laden has no incentive) If on the other hand, the economic recovery still lags (and I think it will), the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan still linger and we have new issues crank up (Korea, Tibet, etc), I think he will face strong opposition.

It will be up to his opponents (both Democrats and Republicans) to surface a new face, one that shows confidence. One that shows patriotism (I think we're headed back to that).

What do you think?

procession of presidencies

I have this theory that our choice of presidencies for the last several years has been overall very predictable by the circumstances at the time. This probably isn't popular with the R's or the D's because it says that the next one will be just as predictable. But let me expound.

My theory starts in the early 1960's. JFK was a young, handsome president, everyone's Prince Charming. A beautiful wife and beautiful children. After his death, Johnson took over as president. When reelection came a year later, America's love for JFK held over to his successor and Johnson was elected in 1964.

In 1968, Johnson refused to run for reelection. America was tired of the war in Vietnam and wanted us out. After RFK's assassination, the Democrats chose Hubert Humphrey to run against Nixon. But again, the demand for change won out. After 8 years of increasing violence in Southeast Asia, riots in the streets and a seeming status-quo, Americans elected a Republican.

Nixon lived up to his promise of getting the US out of Vietnam. But his paranoia led to his downfall. Watergate is the single event most people remember about Nixon. Exactly what he did or what anyone else did seems irrelevant. Americans remember that despite his statements, he was a crook. After his exit from office, Gerald Ford became our first unelected president. Most Americans can't remember anything about him except that he pardoned Nixon. For that and more, he didn't stand a chance for reelection.

In 1976, the Democratic candidate was James Earl Carter. In response to the Nixon presidency, Congress went out of it's way to emasculate the role of the President. The economy was in the dumps and America was too. A small nation that most Americans couldn't find on the map abducted some of our citizens and held them hostage. This became Carter's defining moment. But it lasted longer than a moment and America went further into the dumps.

Tomorrow I'll conclude this story. You know how it turns out, but do you agree with my reasoning?

Climate advisor steps down - Who should replace?

I just read this news article that says Carol Brown, the president's climate advisor, is resigning from her post. Now you may be like me and didn't realize we had a climate advisor. But even though I didn't realize there was such a position, I'm impressed.

Obviously, this lady has done her job well. We in SC, have had more snow this year than in 4 average years and we're in the middle of a month long snap. Brown has advised away all effects of Global Warming in the two short years she's been in the job. (I'm assuming she took the job in 2009, I really don't know)

I have a suggestion to President Obama regarding her replacement. I think he has an opportunity to show his leadership skills, show is fiscal strength and show his climate change knowledge all at the same time. When he studies the matter and looks for a replacement hopefully, he will heed my advice. Next candidate for climate advisor? Nobody.

State of the Union Preview

About a week ago, I made a joke about a mayor's "State of the City" address. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the humor came through. But it seems like it must be a slow news cycle because all of the internet is buzzing about something that hasn't happened yet, President Obama's third State of the Union speech.

There's discussion on which Supreme Court Justices will show up. Last year, the president took the Constitution-required speech and added political comments criticizing the Supremes. If they don't show up, it won't be the first time, but it's sure to garner a lot of attention.

And there's a lot of talk about what the President will say. So I thought I'd lay out my predictions:

- One of the survivors of the Tucson shooting will be present and the President will early on offer support for Rep. Giffords. The President will talk about civility, words that heal and not hurt, etc. There will be a moment of silence for the Federal Judge and others who lost their lives.

- The President will talk about the Obamacare law, how good it is and how the congress should not repeal it. He'll vow to fight for the law

- The President will talk about jobs & the economy. He'll talk about how he inherited this mess and it's much worse than anyone thought. But he'll say that he's accepting responsibility for fixing it.

- The President will say something about the recent Chinese President Hu Jintao.This will be related to economics and will make the president look good.  (I think this will be something that no one expected).

- After 30-45 minutes of applause, etc, the President will spend 1-2 minutes talking about foreign policy, Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea and other countries of the world.

- There will be a Republican presponse to the State of the Union. They will focus on the economy, repealing Obamacare and say some nice things about Rep. Giffords and the Tucson shooting.

- No one will talk about gun control. It's a topic no one wants to touch.

- Republicans may talk about TARP and other past stimulus packages.

So, watch the speeches and give me a score.. If you want to make your own predictions, feel free, I'll score you also...

*Update* I'm also predicting Pres. Obama will speak preemptively about the debt ceiling. By doing so, he will box Republicans in a corner.