Sunday, October 16, 2011
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Friday, October 14, 2011
Junior Achievment
Junior Achievement Overview
Junior Achievement of Chicago
Junior Achievement Marks 90 Years of Business Education
Junior Achievement was founded in 1919 by Horace A. Moses, from Strathmore Paper Co., and Theodore Vail, president of AT&T, and Senator Winthrop Crane. It was founded to teach young people basic business principles. It's first program, the JA Company program, was offered to high school students on an after-school basis, and allowed teens the ability to start and run a real business under the mentorship of a volunteer from the local business community. Junior Achievement gives high school students a taste of what it means to run a business. One of the most apalling things I find in today's society is the level of ignorance by the average American on how a business should operate. America was built on capitalism, or the free enterprise system. Because of the free enterprise system, America has enjoyed unprecedented prosperity throughout the history of this country.
When I was in high school from the grades 10-12, I was involved in Junior Achievement in our local chapter. It was an exhilarating experience. I learned the basics of business and how a business should operate. Through the help of local business volunteers, we were able to establish a corporation, sell stock, and produce a product. We learned that in order for a business to be prosperous, it requires diligent labor and sales. There must be a healthy balance of supply and demand. Without supply and demand, business can't make a profit. I'm thankful for Junior Achievement and the influence it has in teaching young people the basics of starting and operating a business.
Within the last couple of months, I've been contemplating starting a series of posts on the mechanics of a business. I'm going to be writing posts about business and how it operates in a free enterprise system. I will be discussing the differences between a sole proprietorship, a partnership, and a corporation. I also will be discussing the concepts of capitalism, socialism, and communism, and the differences between the three. It's imperative that young people in our high schools understand how a business operates. What hope does America have economically if we raise a generation of ignorant youth who don't have any understanding on how to start and operate a business. The level of ignorance concerning economics among the average American is astounding. Many people possess this misconception that job growth stems from the federal government. Job growth stems from the private sector. The private sector grows jobs--not the federal government. It's time we start with the basic principles of Economics 101 and learn about the mechanics of business.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Congress Approves Free Trade Deals With South Korea, Colombia And Panama
Congress Approves Free Trade Deals With South Korea, Colombia And Panama Fox News
Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana)
On Wednesday Congress approved of three free trade deals with South Korea, Columbia, and Panama, ending a four-year drought in approving this bill. This bill once again will give the U.S. an incentive to outsource more jobs overseas. Congress and the President will go to lengths to pass free trade deals which will eventually result in America's jobs heading overseas but Congress won't do anything to help provide a favorable climate to keep manufacturing jobs in the United States. The stated purpose of forming these free trade deals is for the supposed purpose of stimulating America's economy and putting people back to work. Consequently, we heard the argument that NAFTA would be good for America concerning job creation back in the early 90's when former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton promoted this free trade deal. NAFTA made it easier for manufacturing jobs to exit the U.S. and go to Canada and Mexico. How does the United States compete with a country that doesn't abide by the same standard living as Americans do? How can our manufacturing sector compete with countries such as Mexico that doesn't pay the same rate of wages to their employees as we do in America and don't have to abide by the same type of regulations that American businesses face? These free trade agreements place America at a competitive disadvantage with countries that don't have to pass muster with the EPA.
According to FoxNews.com, in rapid succession the House and Senate voted on three trade pacts which the administration says could boost exports by $13 billion and supports tens of thousands of American jobs. None of the votes were close despite the opposition from labor groups and other critics of free trade agreements which argued these trade deals could result in the loss of jobs and ignore the rights of labor problems in partner countries.
Whenever you have two political parties coming together in the spirt of "bipartisanship", you can assume that they're up to no good. We hear much talk of the need for both political parties coming together in the "spirit of bipartisanship" to get things accomplished for the American people. They're not accomplishing things for the American people. They're accomplishing things that will harm the American people and put the United States at a disadvantage. Take a look at some of the legislation that was passed by Congress over the last ten years in the spirit of bipartisanship: The Patriot Act, TARP, Prescription Drug Coverage, etc. Bipartisanship hasn't been beneficial for America. The American people are on the raw end of the deal whenever Congress unites to pass some bill. I'm not a fan of bipartisanship simply because I know Congress doesn't have the best interest of the American people at heart.
How can America's economy be revived? In order to revive America's economy first of all, Congress needs to renege on these free trade agreements that have placed us at a competitive disadvantage such as NAFTA and CAFTA, to name a few. Is free trade wrong? No. Free trade is fine as long as it's fair trade. The problem is that American businesses aren't just competing against themselves--they are competing against businesses across the world. Hence, you see the phrase "global economy." If the United States engages in trading with a country such as China that won't play by the same rules as the United States, then the U.S. will be a competitive disadvantage. We'll receive all kinds of cheap goods from the Chinese but they won't buy very much of our exports. Those kind of trade deals won't work. Secondly, we need to place tariffs on our imported goods. During the early part of our nation's history, tariffs were placed upon imported goods to protect America's manufacturing base. The tariffs were used to fund the operation of the federal government prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913.
Secondly, Congress needs to remove the vast majority of regulations which stifle business. Many businesses are unable to compete in the marketplace due to the fact many of the regulations come from Washington or the EPA. The private sector needs the freedom to operate their businesses without excessive interference from the government. The private sector is much more efficient in operating a business than the government is. The private sector has to operate within a budget or it will go asunder. The government taxes its citizens and wastes money. The private sector has to be more cautious in handling money or they can't remain competitive. Lastly, the corporate tax rate needs to be greatly reduced. The more taxes a business has to pay, the less money it has to invest in its employees and the business itself. The type of measures I just mentioned will enable the economy to recover. The problem is that government wants to intrude upon the private sector and dictate what, how, when, and where it sells it's product. The government wants to control everything. The government espouses the concept of central planning, which is part of the communist playbook. Under central planning, the government chooses what the market will sell instead of the private sector. A recent example is the Obama administration providing stimulus money to Solyndra to create "green jobs" in solar energy. That's turned out to be a disaster. The government isn't designed to run the economy. The private sector is more efficient in running the economy than the federal government.
Click on the above link from FoxNews.com to read the story about the free trade deals passed by Congress on Wednesday.
Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana)On Wednesday Congress approved of three free trade deals with South Korea, Columbia, and Panama, ending a four-year drought in approving this bill. This bill once again will give the U.S. an incentive to outsource more jobs overseas. Congress and the President will go to lengths to pass free trade deals which will eventually result in America's jobs heading overseas but Congress won't do anything to help provide a favorable climate to keep manufacturing jobs in the United States. The stated purpose of forming these free trade deals is for the supposed purpose of stimulating America's economy and putting people back to work. Consequently, we heard the argument that NAFTA would be good for America concerning job creation back in the early 90's when former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton promoted this free trade deal. NAFTA made it easier for manufacturing jobs to exit the U.S. and go to Canada and Mexico. How does the United States compete with a country that doesn't abide by the same standard living as Americans do? How can our manufacturing sector compete with countries such as Mexico that doesn't pay the same rate of wages to their employees as we do in America and don't have to abide by the same type of regulations that American businesses face? These free trade agreements place America at a competitive disadvantage with countries that don't have to pass muster with the EPA.
According to FoxNews.com, in rapid succession the House and Senate voted on three trade pacts which the administration says could boost exports by $13 billion and supports tens of thousands of American jobs. None of the votes were close despite the opposition from labor groups and other critics of free trade agreements which argued these trade deals could result in the loss of jobs and ignore the rights of labor problems in partner countries.
Whenever you have two political parties coming together in the spirt of "bipartisanship", you can assume that they're up to no good. We hear much talk of the need for both political parties coming together in the "spirit of bipartisanship" to get things accomplished for the American people. They're not accomplishing things for the American people. They're accomplishing things that will harm the American people and put the United States at a disadvantage. Take a look at some of the legislation that was passed by Congress over the last ten years in the spirit of bipartisanship: The Patriot Act, TARP, Prescription Drug Coverage, etc. Bipartisanship hasn't been beneficial for America. The American people are on the raw end of the deal whenever Congress unites to pass some bill. I'm not a fan of bipartisanship simply because I know Congress doesn't have the best interest of the American people at heart.
How can America's economy be revived? In order to revive America's economy first of all, Congress needs to renege on these free trade agreements that have placed us at a competitive disadvantage such as NAFTA and CAFTA, to name a few. Is free trade wrong? No. Free trade is fine as long as it's fair trade. The problem is that American businesses aren't just competing against themselves--they are competing against businesses across the world. Hence, you see the phrase "global economy." If the United States engages in trading with a country such as China that won't play by the same rules as the United States, then the U.S. will be a competitive disadvantage. We'll receive all kinds of cheap goods from the Chinese but they won't buy very much of our exports. Those kind of trade deals won't work. Secondly, we need to place tariffs on our imported goods. During the early part of our nation's history, tariffs were placed upon imported goods to protect America's manufacturing base. The tariffs were used to fund the operation of the federal government prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913.
Secondly, Congress needs to remove the vast majority of regulations which stifle business. Many businesses are unable to compete in the marketplace due to the fact many of the regulations come from Washington or the EPA. The private sector needs the freedom to operate their businesses without excessive interference from the government. The private sector is much more efficient in operating a business than the government is. The private sector has to operate within a budget or it will go asunder. The government taxes its citizens and wastes money. The private sector has to be more cautious in handling money or they can't remain competitive. Lastly, the corporate tax rate needs to be greatly reduced. The more taxes a business has to pay, the less money it has to invest in its employees and the business itself. The type of measures I just mentioned will enable the economy to recover. The problem is that government wants to intrude upon the private sector and dictate what, how, when, and where it sells it's product. The government wants to control everything. The government espouses the concept of central planning, which is part of the communist playbook. Under central planning, the government chooses what the market will sell instead of the private sector. A recent example is the Obama administration providing stimulus money to Solyndra to create "green jobs" in solar energy. That's turned out to be a disaster. The government isn't designed to run the economy. The private sector is more efficient in running the economy than the federal government.
Click on the above link from FoxNews.com to read the story about the free trade deals passed by Congress on Wednesday.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
The 2012 GOP Debate in New Hampshire
Cain Leapfrogs Romney To Vault To Lead In Poll Fox News
Within the last two months, former Godfather's CEO Herman Cain's stature has risen steadily within the last two months. Just a few months ago, Herman Cain was an unknown GOP candidate who appeared to be a long shot at best to have any chance to win the GOP nomination for president next year. Within the last two months, he's become a top-tier candidate within the field of GOP candidates and voters ranked him above presumed frontrunner Mitt Romney in a poll today. Cain has picked up momentum as a result of GOP voters becoming disenchanted with Texas Governor Rick Perry and voters being very wary of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. In order to read the full story, click on the above link "Cain Leapfrogs Romney to Vault to Lead in Poll" on the Fox News website.
Yesterday, the GOP debate was held in New Hampshire. Bloomberg/Washington Post hosted this debate. Posted below is the YouTube video of yesterday's New Hampshire debate.
Bloomberg/Washington Post Debate
Within the last two months, former Godfather's CEO Herman Cain's stature has risen steadily within the last two months. Just a few months ago, Herman Cain was an unknown GOP candidate who appeared to be a long shot at best to have any chance to win the GOP nomination for president next year. Within the last two months, he's become a top-tier candidate within the field of GOP candidates and voters ranked him above presumed frontrunner Mitt Romney in a poll today. Cain has picked up momentum as a result of GOP voters becoming disenchanted with Texas Governor Rick Perry and voters being very wary of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. In order to read the full story, click on the above link "Cain Leapfrogs Romney to Vault to Lead in Poll" on the Fox News website.
Yesterday, the GOP debate was held in New Hampshire. Bloomberg/Washington Post hosted this debate. Posted below is the YouTube video of yesterday's New Hampshire debate.
Bloomberg/Washington Post Debate
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
If You Desire to Succeed in Life, You Have to Look For Opportunity
Cain Tells Occupy Wall Street Protesters to 'Blame Yourself' - ABC News
Two GOP candidates running for the 2012 presidential nomination next year had some harsh words for the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney claimed the Wall Street protests were "dangerous" and "class warfare." Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza and a 2012 GOP presidential candidate, said to cut out the "class warfare" and "blame yourself" for being poor and jobless. "Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself!" Cain said. "It is not a person's fault because they succeeded, it is a person's fault if they failed. And so that is why I don't understand these demonstrations and what it is they're looking for."
I know it's easy to point the fingers at various forces because America's economy is in the shape it's in today. I won't deny there are certain forces involved in collapsing our economy such as the Federal Reserve, Congress, and the president of the United States. I know that unbridled capitalism isn't good for America. I am aware of the fact there is corporate greed in some multinational corporations and I know there are those on Wall Street that have made deals that haven't been good for the business climate in America. I'm aware of that. I don't uphold all the actions of certain individuals at Wall Street. However, a person can't go through life pointing the finger at Wall Street or the federal government because of the shape he/she's in financially. Even though it may be difficult in some areas to find a job to provide a livelihood for one's family, a man has the responsibility to look for a job to meet his and his family's financial needs. Jobs don't fall from the sky. They don't fall from the sky like rain. Jobs are created in the capitalistic system as a result of demand. First of all, there must be a dream. There needs to be a dreamer/entrepreneur who can come up with a product idea that would be useful in improving the lives of people. There has to be a demand or a desire for a particular good. Then there's a need for an innovator to come up with a product idea to sell. Then after that he/she must have the capital and goods to produce that product. Following that the entrepreneur can put his product to market. There are certain factors of production that are needed to put that entrepreneur's plan to action. The factors of production are land, labor, and capital.
In a capitalist system, the free market sector determines supply and demand, not a group of central planners. There are numerous people in our society that don't have any concept of how the capitalistic system is supposed to work. There are numerous people today who are employed that possess this mentality that they should be paid simply because they "show up" on the job. In order to produce a product, land, labor and capital are necessary in order to start a business. In order to maintain a business, there must be labor and demand. A business will not survive with deadbeats nor with a lack of demand. If there's a lack of demand for a product, then there will be fewer sales and the costs associated with operating that business will rise unless reductions are made in the cost of operating a business. A business that has deadbeats will have a difficult time in meeting production demands on a timely basis. Neither one bodes well for business. It's very difficult for a business to operate, even more so with the burdensome regulations the federal and state governments place upon businesses today. It's not feasible or possible to create jobs in the private sector when there's no demand and there isn't sufficient land, labor and capital to start a business.
The Bible has much to say about "labor" or "work." I will give two scriptures for this particular post. Ephesians 4:28 says, "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labor, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth." It's God's will that man labor for his bread. Proverbs 6:6-8 says, "Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest." The Bible tells the sluggard to learn a lesson from the ant and take notice of how the ant prepares for winter. The ant has more sense that the average man has today. The ant has enough common sense to prepare for winter. That's what they do. They labor diligently in the summer to make sure they have sufficient sustenance for the winter. They don't sit around until the last minute to make provision for food. It's ingrained into them that they must make preparations ahead of time. The problem with many Americans today is a lack of ambition. If we desire to have opportunity to make a living, we must look for opportunity. There are a number of creative ways to generate an income. It takes time and searching in the right places to find opportunity to make a living. It's true that finding a job at the present isn't as easy as it once was.
One of the problems that many Americans are facing when it comes to the state of the economy is structural unemployment. There are numerous jobs in the area of manufacturing that have exited the United States over the last seventeen years as a result of NAFTA in 1994 and CAFTA in 2005. As a result, it's become more difficult to find a job where you can be paid $20.00/hr. for 40 years and retire with a nice pension and all your health expenses are paid for. The days of finding a job like that in the automobile industry today is over with for the most part. A person's not going to be able to find a job at General Motors and earn the kind of salary that GM employees once made. Today's economy requires an educated workforce who knows how to operate a computer and knows how to use the internet. We live in a technological, information age society. We also live in a society where there's a demand for doctors and nurses with an ever-increasing aging population. If a person is going to make a living, they must take time to look for career opportunities in various fields in order to make a living. If you desire opportunity, you must look for it whether it be through the internet, the medical field, or vocational education. There are jobs out there but a person must be willing to take the time to prepare themselves to be marketable for various types of jobs. Opportunities don't normally fall in a person's lap, you must hunt for them.
Two GOP candidates running for the 2012 presidential nomination next year had some harsh words for the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney claimed the Wall Street protests were "dangerous" and "class warfare." Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza and a 2012 GOP presidential candidate, said to cut out the "class warfare" and "blame yourself" for being poor and jobless. "Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself!" Cain said. "It is not a person's fault because they succeeded, it is a person's fault if they failed. And so that is why I don't understand these demonstrations and what it is they're looking for."
I know it's easy to point the fingers at various forces because America's economy is in the shape it's in today. I won't deny there are certain forces involved in collapsing our economy such as the Federal Reserve, Congress, and the president of the United States. I know that unbridled capitalism isn't good for America. I am aware of the fact there is corporate greed in some multinational corporations and I know there are those on Wall Street that have made deals that haven't been good for the business climate in America. I'm aware of that. I don't uphold all the actions of certain individuals at Wall Street. However, a person can't go through life pointing the finger at Wall Street or the federal government because of the shape he/she's in financially. Even though it may be difficult in some areas to find a job to provide a livelihood for one's family, a man has the responsibility to look for a job to meet his and his family's financial needs. Jobs don't fall from the sky. They don't fall from the sky like rain. Jobs are created in the capitalistic system as a result of demand. First of all, there must be a dream. There needs to be a dreamer/entrepreneur who can come up with a product idea that would be useful in improving the lives of people. There has to be a demand or a desire for a particular good. Then there's a need for an innovator to come up with a product idea to sell. Then after that he/she must have the capital and goods to produce that product. Following that the entrepreneur can put his product to market. There are certain factors of production that are needed to put that entrepreneur's plan to action. The factors of production are land, labor, and capital.
In a capitalist system, the free market sector determines supply and demand, not a group of central planners. There are numerous people in our society that don't have any concept of how the capitalistic system is supposed to work. There are numerous people today who are employed that possess this mentality that they should be paid simply because they "show up" on the job. In order to produce a product, land, labor and capital are necessary in order to start a business. In order to maintain a business, there must be labor and demand. A business will not survive with deadbeats nor with a lack of demand. If there's a lack of demand for a product, then there will be fewer sales and the costs associated with operating that business will rise unless reductions are made in the cost of operating a business. A business that has deadbeats will have a difficult time in meeting production demands on a timely basis. Neither one bodes well for business. It's very difficult for a business to operate, even more so with the burdensome regulations the federal and state governments place upon businesses today. It's not feasible or possible to create jobs in the private sector when there's no demand and there isn't sufficient land, labor and capital to start a business.
The Bible has much to say about "labor" or "work." I will give two scriptures for this particular post. Ephesians 4:28 says, "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labor, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth." It's God's will that man labor for his bread. Proverbs 6:6-8 says, "Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest." The Bible tells the sluggard to learn a lesson from the ant and take notice of how the ant prepares for winter. The ant has more sense that the average man has today. The ant has enough common sense to prepare for winter. That's what they do. They labor diligently in the summer to make sure they have sufficient sustenance for the winter. They don't sit around until the last minute to make provision for food. It's ingrained into them that they must make preparations ahead of time. The problem with many Americans today is a lack of ambition. If we desire to have opportunity to make a living, we must look for opportunity. There are a number of creative ways to generate an income. It takes time and searching in the right places to find opportunity to make a living. It's true that finding a job at the present isn't as easy as it once was.
One of the problems that many Americans are facing when it comes to the state of the economy is structural unemployment. There are numerous jobs in the area of manufacturing that have exited the United States over the last seventeen years as a result of NAFTA in 1994 and CAFTA in 2005. As a result, it's become more difficult to find a job where you can be paid $20.00/hr. for 40 years and retire with a nice pension and all your health expenses are paid for. The days of finding a job like that in the automobile industry today is over with for the most part. A person's not going to be able to find a job at General Motors and earn the kind of salary that GM employees once made. Today's economy requires an educated workforce who knows how to operate a computer and knows how to use the internet. We live in a technological, information age society. We also live in a society where there's a demand for doctors and nurses with an ever-increasing aging population. If a person is going to make a living, they must take time to look for career opportunities in various fields in order to make a living. If you desire opportunity, you must look for it whether it be through the internet, the medical field, or vocational education. There are jobs out there but a person must be willing to take the time to prepare themselves to be marketable for various types of jobs. Opportunities don't normally fall in a person's lap, you must hunt for them.
Monday, October 10, 2011
The 15th Anniversary of the Fox News Channel
Murdoch, Ailes mark 15 years of Fox - MJ Lee - POLITICO.com
Friday, October 7, 2011, marked the 15th anniversary of the Fox News Channel. Fox News was first launched on October 7, 1996, just a month prior to the 1996 presidential election pitting President Bill Clinton vs. Republican candidate Bob Dole. Rupert Murdoch, the media mogul who owns Newscorp and the Wall Street Journal, own Fox. Roger Ailes is the Chairman and CEO of the Fox News Channel. Here are some YouTube video clips marking the 15th anniversary of Fox News.
Fox News symbol 
Bill O'Reilly on the O'Reilly Factor presenting his "Talking Points" memo.
Sean Hannity 
Megyn Kelly
Brett Baier 
Chris Wallace
Britt Hume 
Shepherd Smith
Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade on "Fox and Friends"
Rupert Murdoch (owner of Fox News) 
Roger Ailes (Chairman and CEO of Fox News)
Glenn Beck (formerly on Fox News) 
Jenna Lee on "Happening Now" 
Jon Scott on "Happening Now" and "Fox News Watch" 
Juan Williams (Fox News contributor)
Brett Baier, Bill O'Reilly, Shepherd Smith, and Greta Van Susteran have thoughts on 15th anniversary
Early footage of Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes on "Hannity and Colmes"
The first episode of the O'Reilly Report
Excerpt from the O'Reilly Factor 9/13/2001
Allison Costarene in 1996
The O'Reilly Report in 1997
Fox News Sunday in 1998 with Tony Snow
Special Report Tribute and Sign-off (Brit Hume)
Fox News Coverage of the 9/11 Attacks
Fox News 9/11 Coverage
Friday, October 7, 2011, marked the 15th anniversary of the Fox News Channel. Fox News was first launched on October 7, 1996, just a month prior to the 1996 presidential election pitting President Bill Clinton vs. Republican candidate Bob Dole. Rupert Murdoch, the media mogul who owns Newscorp and the Wall Street Journal, own Fox. Roger Ailes is the Chairman and CEO of the Fox News Channel. Here are some YouTube video clips marking the 15th anniversary of Fox News.
Fox News symbol Bill O'Reilly on the O'Reilly Factor presenting his "Talking Points" memo.Sean Hannity Megyn KellyBrett Baier Chris Wallace Britt Hume Shepherd SmithSteve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade on "Fox and Friends"Rupert Murdoch (owner of Fox News) Roger Ailes (Chairman and CEO of Fox News)Glenn Beck (formerly on Fox News) Jenna Lee on "Happening Now" Jon Scott on "Happening Now" and "Fox News Watch" Juan Williams (Fox News contributor)Brett Baier, Bill O'Reilly, Shepherd Smith, and Greta Van Susteran have thoughts on 15th anniversary
Early footage of Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes on "Hannity and Colmes"
The first episode of the O'Reilly Report
Excerpt from the O'Reilly Factor 9/13/2001
Allison Costarene in 1996
The O'Reilly Report in 1997
Fox News Sunday in 1998 with Tony Snow
Special Report Tribute and Sign-off (Brit Hume)
Fox News Coverage of the 9/11 Attacks
Fox News 9/11 Coverage
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Dottie Rambo: The Gifted Songwriter of the Twentieth Century (Part 9)
My Altar
The New Beulah Hand
Stand by the River
I Just Came Into His Presence
Father Dear I'm Coming Home
Sometime around either 1963 or 1964, one of the members of the Gospel Echoes left the group because she married an evangelist. As a result of Shirley Bivin's departure, that created a void for a soprano in the group. Buck and Dottie brought in Pat "Jones" Green to replace Shirley Bivins. However, there was a huge problem: Pat couldn't sing the parts. Buck and Dottie would be rehearsing with her the parts she was to sing time and time again. They rehearsed for weeks. They were scheduled to be singing in an upcoming concert with the Statesman and the Goodmans. On one particular day, Reba, Buck and Dottie's daughter, told them that she knew their songs and she knew how to sing them. So Reba demonstrated before Pat how the part was to be sung. It was through that process that Buck and Dottie recognized how talented Reba was in singing. Buck had finally asked Reba to consider singing as a replacement for Shirley Bivins for temporary. Reba consented. As it turned out, a replacement never was found and Reba sang with Buck and Dottie on a regular basis until sometime around the mid-70's. However, there was one change they needed to make. Buck and Dottie never was satisfied with the group titled, "Gospel Echoes." They decided since they were Rambos to call their group "The Singing Rambos." Then approximately 6 years later they shortened it and later called themselves "The Rambos." They started singing as The Singing Rambos around 1964 when Reba was 12. A year later, they recorded their first album with Benson Company in Nashville, Tennessee with the Heartwarming label. It was around 1964 that they moved to Nashville. I would guess they moved there because they wanted to be close to the recording studio where they recorded their albums. Over the years they would record several albums with Benson.
In 1964 The Singing Rambos were singing in churches at the time. They weren't a very well-known group yet. The Rambos sang in churches when they first begun as the Gospel Echoes in the early 1950's. However, they didn't sing nationwide in major concerts. Dottie started gaining publicity for her songwriting when Jimmie Davis paid Dottie $3000 dollars to publish her songs. Her songs were in demand when singers became aware of her songwriting. But the group as a whole wasn't a major southern gospel group until 1964 when The Singing Rambos visited the National Quartet Convention for the first time in Memphis, Tennessee. They came as spectators not expecting to sing. However, J.D. Sumner from the Blackwoods, if my memory is correct, said, "I hear you can all sing a little bit." Dottie replied, "They say we can sing a little bit. He said, "Let me hear you sing a little bit." So they stood of in a corner and sang acrapella and Sumner was impressed. So later the Rambos performed on a stage with a crowd of hundreds of people for the first time ever. They sang one of Dottie's brand new songs entitled, "He Looked Beyond My Fault and Saw My Need." The crowd enjoyed their singing. What was so marvelous about their singing was the fact the Rambos didn't use a bass singer in the group. Theory had it that in order to be classified as a genuine southern gospel group, you needed a bass singer. The Rambos consisted of Dottie, Buck, and Reba. However, they harmonized exceedingly well. They would become one of the biggest powerhouses ever in gospel music. Their sang using inverted harmony. They helped each other out. Whenever the lead became too high for Dottie, Reba could pick up where Dottie left off. There were times they would switch parts, too. They all sang together and it provided a melodious harmony among the trio.
As a result of their performance on the National Quartet Convention in 1964, they were booked at all types of singing conventions and other types of singing outlets. They would even sing in State Fairs. Life for the group changed. As a result of that convention, Buck booked concert dates for the next year for this new group.
Next week I'll be discussing the background behind two of Dottie's songs, "He Looked Beyond My Fault and Saw My Need" and "In the Valley He Restoreth My Soul."
I've Seen All This World
Don't Take My Cross Away (solo by Dottie Rambo on her album "Good Ole' Days)
The New Beulah Hand
Stand by the River
I Just Came Into His Presence
Father Dear I'm Coming Home
Sometime around either 1963 or 1964, one of the members of the Gospel Echoes left the group because she married an evangelist. As a result of Shirley Bivin's departure, that created a void for a soprano in the group. Buck and Dottie brought in Pat "Jones" Green to replace Shirley Bivins. However, there was a huge problem: Pat couldn't sing the parts. Buck and Dottie would be rehearsing with her the parts she was to sing time and time again. They rehearsed for weeks. They were scheduled to be singing in an upcoming concert with the Statesman and the Goodmans. On one particular day, Reba, Buck and Dottie's daughter, told them that she knew their songs and she knew how to sing them. So Reba demonstrated before Pat how the part was to be sung. It was through that process that Buck and Dottie recognized how talented Reba was in singing. Buck had finally asked Reba to consider singing as a replacement for Shirley Bivins for temporary. Reba consented. As it turned out, a replacement never was found and Reba sang with Buck and Dottie on a regular basis until sometime around the mid-70's. However, there was one change they needed to make. Buck and Dottie never was satisfied with the group titled, "Gospel Echoes." They decided since they were Rambos to call their group "The Singing Rambos." Then approximately 6 years later they shortened it and later called themselves "The Rambos." They started singing as The Singing Rambos around 1964 when Reba was 12. A year later, they recorded their first album with Benson Company in Nashville, Tennessee with the Heartwarming label. It was around 1964 that they moved to Nashville. I would guess they moved there because they wanted to be close to the recording studio where they recorded their albums. Over the years they would record several albums with Benson.
In 1964 The Singing Rambos were singing in churches at the time. They weren't a very well-known group yet. The Rambos sang in churches when they first begun as the Gospel Echoes in the early 1950's. However, they didn't sing nationwide in major concerts. Dottie started gaining publicity for her songwriting when Jimmie Davis paid Dottie $3000 dollars to publish her songs. Her songs were in demand when singers became aware of her songwriting. But the group as a whole wasn't a major southern gospel group until 1964 when The Singing Rambos visited the National Quartet Convention for the first time in Memphis, Tennessee. They came as spectators not expecting to sing. However, J.D. Sumner from the Blackwoods, if my memory is correct, said, "I hear you can all sing a little bit." Dottie replied, "They say we can sing a little bit. He said, "Let me hear you sing a little bit." So they stood of in a corner and sang acrapella and Sumner was impressed. So later the Rambos performed on a stage with a crowd of hundreds of people for the first time ever. They sang one of Dottie's brand new songs entitled, "He Looked Beyond My Fault and Saw My Need." The crowd enjoyed their singing. What was so marvelous about their singing was the fact the Rambos didn't use a bass singer in the group. Theory had it that in order to be classified as a genuine southern gospel group, you needed a bass singer. The Rambos consisted of Dottie, Buck, and Reba. However, they harmonized exceedingly well. They would become one of the biggest powerhouses ever in gospel music. Their sang using inverted harmony. They helped each other out. Whenever the lead became too high for Dottie, Reba could pick up where Dottie left off. There were times they would switch parts, too. They all sang together and it provided a melodious harmony among the trio.
As a result of their performance on the National Quartet Convention in 1964, they were booked at all types of singing conventions and other types of singing outlets. They would even sing in State Fairs. Life for the group changed. As a result of that convention, Buck booked concert dates for the next year for this new group.
Next week I'll be discussing the background behind two of Dottie's songs, "He Looked Beyond My Fault and Saw My Need" and "In the Valley He Restoreth My Soul."
I've Seen All This World
Don't Take My Cross Away (solo by Dottie Rambo on her album "Good Ole' Days)
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Sarah Palin Says She's Not Running for President
Ending months of speculation, Sarah Palin says she won’t run for president - The Washington Post
Former Alaska Governor and vice-presidential candidate has made it official that she's not running for president. In a statement to reporters, the 2008 vice-presidential nominee says she won't seek the Republican nomination for president by already entering what is already a crowded field. Palin says she can be more effective by helping other Republicans win office "from the nation's governors to congressional seats and the presidency."
According to USA Today, most Republicans hadn't expected Palin to run for president since Republican Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota tossed her hat into the ring and soared to the top in the Iowa straw poll. However, Bachmann's appeal has dropped considerably since the Iowa straw poll. However, Palin's path to the Republican nomination would've been complicated by the presence of Texas Governor Rick Perry, as well as other candidates such as Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich. Palin's entry would've more than likely split the conservative vote within the GOP.
Prior to being picked by Senator John McCain to be his vice-presidential nominee in 2008, Palin was an obscure first-term governor of Alaska. She was the surprise vice-presidential candidate in 2008 on the even of the 2008 Republican National Convention. Click on the above link from the "Washington Post" to read the full story.
Former Alaska Governor and vice-presidential candidate has made it official that she's not running for president. In a statement to reporters, the 2008 vice-presidential nominee says she won't seek the Republican nomination for president by already entering what is already a crowded field. Palin says she can be more effective by helping other Republicans win office "from the nation's governors to congressional seats and the presidency."
According to USA Today, most Republicans hadn't expected Palin to run for president since Republican Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota tossed her hat into the ring and soared to the top in the Iowa straw poll. However, Bachmann's appeal has dropped considerably since the Iowa straw poll. However, Palin's path to the Republican nomination would've been complicated by the presence of Texas Governor Rick Perry, as well as other candidates such as Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich. Palin's entry would've more than likely split the conservative vote within the GOP.
Prior to being picked by Senator John McCain to be his vice-presidential nominee in 2008, Palin was an obscure first-term governor of Alaska. She was the surprise vice-presidential candidate in 2008 on the even of the 2008 Republican National Convention. Click on the above link from the "Washington Post" to read the full story.
Is House Speaker John Boehner the Polar Opposite of President Barack Obama?
ESPN Cuts Hank Williams From Monday Night Football Over Obama 'Hitler' Remark Fox News
Hanks Williams 'Hitler' comment on Fox and Friends
Country music singer Hank Williams Jr. was a guest on Fox News' "Fox and Friends" early morning show on Monday October 3, 2011. The "Fox and Friends" panel, which consists of Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade, were asking Williams to give his views on the GOP candidates for the 2012 presidential election. One of the points he was making during his discourse with the panel was that it was a huge mistake for House Speaker John Boehner and Ohio Governor John Kasich to play golf with President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden earlier this year. He compared Boehner and Obama playing golf to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and German Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler playing golf. As a result, the liberal Progressive media went crazy and said that Hank Williams Jr. was comparing Obama to Hitler. That wasn't Williams' point. Williams was stating it doesn't make sense for supposed political enemies such as House Speaker Boehner and President Obama playing golf together when they supposedly don't have anything in common politically. He was saying both Boehner and Obama were polar opposites.
I want to draw your attention to the phrase "polar opposites." The online definiton of polar opposite is that which is conspiculously different in most important aspects. House Speaker John Boehner would like to make us think that the vision Barack Obama has for the country vs. the vision the Republicans have for the country is starkly different. The question I'm going to pose is are John Boehner and Barack Obama polar opposites? Are there any obvious distinctions between the Republicans and Democrats in Congress in general? Are there any distinctive differences between Boehner and Obama? When I pose that question I'm not referencing the political rhetoric that John Boehner uses during the election season, such as the 2010 midterm election. Boehner knew that he was just an election away from becoming House Speaker if the Republicans regained the House. He knew the political climate was ripe last year so he campaigned like he was a conservative who believes Congress needs to rein in federal spending. He also promised that Obamacare would be repealed as well. He even presented the document entitled, "A Pledge to America" stating what Republicans would do once they regained the House. He knows how to use political rhetoric. Consequently, you can't guage the sincerity of a politician just by words only.
In examining the actions of House Speaker Boehner, his actions tell a different story. John Boehner is a RINO. He's nothing but a go-to-guy for President Obama. Boehner is a go-along-to-get-along man. He hasn't done anything to stop the Obama administration's socialist agenda. When he replaced former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as the new House Majority Leader in 2006, Boehner never stood for anything. He never opposed the excessive spending under the Bush administration. He just filled in a position. However, he wasn't influential as House Majority Leader.
Nevertheless, the House Republicans have a golden opportunity to defund several spending programs from the Obama administration. The House hasn't made any moves to defund Obamacare. Early this year Congress held a symbolic vote to repeal Obamacare, but Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor knew that Obamacare wouldn't be repealed with a Democratic Senate and a Democratic president. It's nothing but a game. The House hasn't used their power of choking off funding to drastically reduce the size of government. Right before the 112th Congress began its session in January, Boehner promised that he was going to start cutting spending by reducing Congress's budget. I seriously doubt that's happened. Congress has done nothing to eliminate wasteful spending. Instead, both Houses of Congress compromised and voted to raise the debt ceiling, create a supercommittee of 13, and make promises to reduce spending over a 8-10 year period. The Republicans are just going through the motions. They aren't serious in drastically reducing spending and the size of government. It just a good campaign issue for them.
Let me repeat the question I asked earlier. Is John Boehner the polar opposite of President Barack Obama? What does it mean to say that two individuals are polar opposites? If two politicians are polar opposites, then it means there are distinct differences between the two in both words and deeds. I hear a lot of political rhetoric from those who tout the conservative label on the Republican side, but their deeds don't indicate they're polar opposites. In order to be a polar opposite from another individual, your words and actions must be noticeably different. For example, since President Obama is a huge spender, then in order for Boehner to be a polar opposite of Obama, he must go the opposite direction and eliminate every unnecessary spending item on the budget. He will push House members to defund any spending bill that's unconstitutional. In other words, only necessry items will be on the spending budget. Instead, Boehner has caved in and compromised on his principles. Congress still continues its spending ways. The House has done nothing to choke off funding for Obamacare. That's not being a polar opposite. Mr. Boehner, if you cave in to your principles and become compromised, then how can you label yourself as being drastically different from President Obama? If you're doing nothing but bailing out the president, you're not standing up to your "convictions."
To give an honest assessment of both political parties, there's hardly any distinction between either political party. The Republicans stand for nothing. They have done nothing to stop President Obama's socialist agenda. I can recall how key Republicans were complaining about the health care bill that was pushed through Congress in 2009. The question I have to ask Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell is why didn't you Republicans stage a filibuster to block the monstrous health care bill from being passed? It's because you weren't serious about stopping the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda. You're co-conspirators with the Democrats. You Republicans are worthless. You'll allow President Obama and the communist Democrats to run roughshod over the American people and you Republicans won't take a decisive stand against the globalist agenda. You are all puppets on a string being manipulated by the puppetmasters. Polar opposites aren't stand-for-nothings. If I was a genuine conservative Republican Congressman and I stood true to my convictions, then I would stand out like a sore thumb to the socialists in Congress. I would utilize all my powers to stand against the forces of Nimrod that are trying to push a new world order agenda upon the American people. I would utilize all my resources to oppose that which is anti-God and unAmerican. I would do that providing I'm a genuine Congressman that stands up to my guns. Of course I'm not a Congressman and I don't think I have what it takes to stand. That's why I don't entertain the thought of running for Congress. You can't be a polar opposite unless you take a stand and take the hit. I believe a Congressman that is a genuine patriot will be ridiculed, ostracized, and probably even killed. Former Georgia Congessman Larry McDonald was one example of a Congressman that stood for his convictions and eventually he was killed on a plane fight to South Korea on September 1, 1983.
I don't believe that House Speaker John Boehner is ideologically driven. I for one don't believe if left to himself Mr. Boehner would ever push for and vote for the Affordable Care Act of 2010 or Obamacare. However, he's a go-along-to-get-along guy. He doesn't stand his ground and take his hits for what he claims he believes in. You can't cave in and become compromised and be a polar opposite. A polar opposite is just that--a polar opposite. A polar opposite stands their ground in both words and deeds. They'll do what it takes to stand for truth regardless of the personal costs. The tragedy today in Washington is there aren't any polar opposites. Both parties have their talking points but when it comes to substance, but there's no substantive difference between either party. John Boehner sadly is a compromised politician. It's time for a Republican to oppose him in next year's primary in Ohio's 8th Congressional District.
Hanks Williams 'Hitler' comment on Fox and Friends
Country music singer Hank Williams Jr. was a guest on Fox News' "Fox and Friends" early morning show on Monday October 3, 2011. The "Fox and Friends" panel, which consists of Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade, were asking Williams to give his views on the GOP candidates for the 2012 presidential election. One of the points he was making during his discourse with the panel was that it was a huge mistake for House Speaker John Boehner and Ohio Governor John Kasich to play golf with President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden earlier this year. He compared Boehner and Obama playing golf to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and German Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler playing golf. As a result, the liberal Progressive media went crazy and said that Hank Williams Jr. was comparing Obama to Hitler. That wasn't Williams' point. Williams was stating it doesn't make sense for supposed political enemies such as House Speaker Boehner and President Obama playing golf together when they supposedly don't have anything in common politically. He was saying both Boehner and Obama were polar opposites.
I want to draw your attention to the phrase "polar opposites." The online definiton of polar opposite is that which is conspiculously different in most important aspects. House Speaker John Boehner would like to make us think that the vision Barack Obama has for the country vs. the vision the Republicans have for the country is starkly different. The question I'm going to pose is are John Boehner and Barack Obama polar opposites? Are there any obvious distinctions between the Republicans and Democrats in Congress in general? Are there any distinctive differences between Boehner and Obama? When I pose that question I'm not referencing the political rhetoric that John Boehner uses during the election season, such as the 2010 midterm election. Boehner knew that he was just an election away from becoming House Speaker if the Republicans regained the House. He knew the political climate was ripe last year so he campaigned like he was a conservative who believes Congress needs to rein in federal spending. He also promised that Obamacare would be repealed as well. He even presented the document entitled, "A Pledge to America" stating what Republicans would do once they regained the House. He knows how to use political rhetoric. Consequently, you can't guage the sincerity of a politician just by words only.
In examining the actions of House Speaker Boehner, his actions tell a different story. John Boehner is a RINO. He's nothing but a go-to-guy for President Obama. Boehner is a go-along-to-get-along man. He hasn't done anything to stop the Obama administration's socialist agenda. When he replaced former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as the new House Majority Leader in 2006, Boehner never stood for anything. He never opposed the excessive spending under the Bush administration. He just filled in a position. However, he wasn't influential as House Majority Leader.
Nevertheless, the House Republicans have a golden opportunity to defund several spending programs from the Obama administration. The House hasn't made any moves to defund Obamacare. Early this year Congress held a symbolic vote to repeal Obamacare, but Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor knew that Obamacare wouldn't be repealed with a Democratic Senate and a Democratic president. It's nothing but a game. The House hasn't used their power of choking off funding to drastically reduce the size of government. Right before the 112th Congress began its session in January, Boehner promised that he was going to start cutting spending by reducing Congress's budget. I seriously doubt that's happened. Congress has done nothing to eliminate wasteful spending. Instead, both Houses of Congress compromised and voted to raise the debt ceiling, create a supercommittee of 13, and make promises to reduce spending over a 8-10 year period. The Republicans are just going through the motions. They aren't serious in drastically reducing spending and the size of government. It just a good campaign issue for them.
Let me repeat the question I asked earlier. Is John Boehner the polar opposite of President Barack Obama? What does it mean to say that two individuals are polar opposites? If two politicians are polar opposites, then it means there are distinct differences between the two in both words and deeds. I hear a lot of political rhetoric from those who tout the conservative label on the Republican side, but their deeds don't indicate they're polar opposites. In order to be a polar opposite from another individual, your words and actions must be noticeably different. For example, since President Obama is a huge spender, then in order for Boehner to be a polar opposite of Obama, he must go the opposite direction and eliminate every unnecessary spending item on the budget. He will push House members to defund any spending bill that's unconstitutional. In other words, only necessry items will be on the spending budget. Instead, Boehner has caved in and compromised on his principles. Congress still continues its spending ways. The House has done nothing to choke off funding for Obamacare. That's not being a polar opposite. Mr. Boehner, if you cave in to your principles and become compromised, then how can you label yourself as being drastically different from President Obama? If you're doing nothing but bailing out the president, you're not standing up to your "convictions."
To give an honest assessment of both political parties, there's hardly any distinction between either political party. The Republicans stand for nothing. They have done nothing to stop President Obama's socialist agenda. I can recall how key Republicans were complaining about the health care bill that was pushed through Congress in 2009. The question I have to ask Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell is why didn't you Republicans stage a filibuster to block the monstrous health care bill from being passed? It's because you weren't serious about stopping the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda. You're co-conspirators with the Democrats. You Republicans are worthless. You'll allow President Obama and the communist Democrats to run roughshod over the American people and you Republicans won't take a decisive stand against the globalist agenda. You are all puppets on a string being manipulated by the puppetmasters. Polar opposites aren't stand-for-nothings. If I was a genuine conservative Republican Congressman and I stood true to my convictions, then I would stand out like a sore thumb to the socialists in Congress. I would utilize all my powers to stand against the forces of Nimrod that are trying to push a new world order agenda upon the American people. I would utilize all my resources to oppose that which is anti-God and unAmerican. I would do that providing I'm a genuine Congressman that stands up to my guns. Of course I'm not a Congressman and I don't think I have what it takes to stand. That's why I don't entertain the thought of running for Congress. You can't be a polar opposite unless you take a stand and take the hit. I believe a Congressman that is a genuine patriot will be ridiculed, ostracized, and probably even killed. Former Georgia Congessman Larry McDonald was one example of a Congressman that stood for his convictions and eventually he was killed on a plane fight to South Korea on September 1, 1983.
I don't believe that House Speaker John Boehner is ideologically driven. I for one don't believe if left to himself Mr. Boehner would ever push for and vote for the Affordable Care Act of 2010 or Obamacare. However, he's a go-along-to-get-along guy. He doesn't stand his ground and take his hits for what he claims he believes in. You can't cave in and become compromised and be a polar opposite. A polar opposite is just that--a polar opposite. A polar opposite stands their ground in both words and deeds. They'll do what it takes to stand for truth regardless of the personal costs. The tragedy today in Washington is there aren't any polar opposites. Both parties have their talking points but when it comes to substance, but there's no substantive difference between either party. John Boehner sadly is a compromised politician. It's time for a Republican to oppose him in next year's primary in Ohio's 8th Congressional District.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)