Wednesday, December 11, 2013

A Quick Program Note

Our Quick Program Note

There isn't one tonight. We were scheduled for our program to go on tonight (see previous post), and for some reason, I couldn't raise our producer. I assume there's a problem either caused by a storm or our server, or some combo, but I haven't heard anything yet.

The program was scheduled to be dark next Wednesday and on Christmas night, so we'll be off 3 weeks and return January 1, 2014, assuming all goes well. As they say, Watch This Space.

I'll see you on the radio.

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

The Inter-Holiday Edition

This edition of the blog is being written between Thanksgiving (and Hanukkah) on the one hand, and Christmas and Kwanzaa on the other. We'll talk about the latter, in a bit but a few other matters, first.

Radio

Our show will arrive on Wednesday, barring tech glitches or my death (though I suppose the latter could be described as one of the former). We start at 9PM Eastern, and about half-way through our guest will appear. This week, it's Steve Lyttleton, described in an earlier post. He's a friend and former co-worker of mine (we are both former bill collectors - eek!).

Steve and I will discuss politics and disagreements we have, as part of my effort to prove that you can disagree with someone in a civil manner - unless you're in Congress. It should be interesting if only for that reason. Among the things we may be discussing is guns, abortion, and Obamacare's misnomers.

As a side note, if you're reading this after December 11, you can hear the podcast of this and all of our earlier episodes. If you're listening live, tune in to http://GoingBeyondRadio.com and if you're seeking the podcasts (playable on your computer, smartphone, etc.), you just need to add the slash and my name: /JeffBushman

Some of our earlier interviews are really interesting, thanks to the guests.

On January 1, while you're recovering from the night before, join us in the evening at that same Bat Time, to hear me talk about the importance of starting your own business, whether you're in a great job or you're unemployed, or in a crummy job. You can start a lot of businesses for little or no money, and you can start earning money from them while you're still working for someone else. And your own business will give you a fall-back position in the event that something happens to your existing fabulous job (or maybe your not-so-fabulous job). I won't be trying to sell you anything but the idea. In fact I don't have anything I could sell you, except for my books and on that subject, please see below. But with regard to the program, none of my books deal with starting your own biz, so tune in for info without the "mercial."

We'll be dark (in case anyone isn't familiar with that expression, that means we won't be doing a live show) on two successive Wednesdays. That would be December 18 and December 25. I can't imagine anyone wanting to hear our kind of show on Christmas night, even if you're burned out by the holiday by that time, and the 18th is our usual "dark" third Wednesday.

Reaching Us

There are a few ways to make contact with us about this blog, the radio show, my books, etc. First, you can e-mail me at tjbRadio@gmail.com

You can also call and leave a message at 206-339-5905. Whether e-mailing, or leaving a voice mail message, tell me anything you wish to. If you want to appear on the radio show and would be available when we do the show, please leave me a phone number. If you leave the voice mail and would like an e-mail response, leave an e-mail address please.

A Few Words on Obamacare

First, as Steve Lyttleton (see above) reminded me yesterday, the Affordable Care Act is not a healthcare law; it's a healthcare financing law.

That said, what I think Republicans are really afraid of is the kind of reaction there was to Social Security and that of some people in states where the system is working. The system is working really well where there are state exchanges, such as Kentucky and California. The national exchange hasn't been as smooth, obviously.

The reaction to Social Security and other New Deal initiatives, however, was a generation of Democratic dominance in the White House and in Congress. In Kentucky, recently, a man walked into an office of the state where they were doing Obamacare registration. He said he has a wife and 5 kids and needed health insurance. He asked if they could help him. They took his info and told him that he could get coverage for himself and his family, and due to his low income and the fact that his wife doesn't work outside the home, he would receive the coverage free. He said that he guessed that from now on he was going to be a Democrat.

We can agree that his thought process might have been a little simplistic, but THAT is what the GOP is really afraid of, i.e., that people will get health insurance, will like it, and will credit the president and his party.

I also wanted to add that we've been in the process of signing up for our family, through the so-called "federal" exchange, because our governor is a Neanderthal. It's been cumbersome, but it looks like they're on the verge of getting it right and I think we'll be signed up by next week.

Amazon.com

It's the holiday season. If you're inclined to order gifts for friends, relatives or yourself, before you visit Amazon, directly, please come to this blog and click on the Amazon banner. If you go to the Amazon site through ours and end up buying something, they put some change in our pocket and don't take any extra from yours.

And if you order this year, I can promise that they won't deliver your products using drones.

This year.


Did I Mention My Column?

If your child is looking over your shoulder, you may wish to shield her/his eyes at this point.

I don't know if you know it, but I write a monthly column in a local lifestyle magazine, Scottsdale Health (http://AllYouNeedForHappiness.com). The subject is sex and is called The Scottsdale Sexpert. I didn't name the column. But if you'd like, please take a look. Also, some of the early columns are collected in one of my books, listed below, Amusing Sex, Funny Sex.


Trivia Questions

People don't realize the importance of trivia. And if they do, would that make them or the idea oxymoronic? Your guess is as good as mine, except when it comes to the following questions, because I already know the answers, which means my guess isn't really a guess. On the other hand, a tree falling in a forest when there's no one there to hear it, DOES make a sound. The answers appear well below this portion of the blog, so you won't be tempted to peek. Alternatively, if you're going to peak, please don't make too much noise.

1. Who was the presidential aspirant for the Democratic who became well-known for wearing brief swimming trunks and referring to Bill Clinton as a "pander bear?"

2. Name the only two brothers who served at the same time in the U.S. Senate.

3. During California Governor Jerry Brown's first two terms in office, who was his Lieutenant Governor?

4. What was the product for which President Carter's brother became well-known?

5. Besides George Washington, who was the first president who had not served as V.P.?

Books in Review

I've recently read a couple of books I want to share with you.

Two of them are from the same author, and one's from an author with whom you may not be familiar. In the latter category is Linwood Barclay and the book, the second one of his that I've read, is called Lone Wolf. Similar to an author whose work we've reviewed here previously, Harlan Coben, Barclay writes with great humor (Good Humor is in another category we don't touch upon here) and he can weave a suspense/mystery/thriller with the best of them.

The book starts with the protagonist learning that his father is missing and may have been eaten by a bear. The authorities ask him to come and identify the possible remains.

The story ends up involving some additional killing, a right-wing nut case group and a good deal of suspense and page-turning.

Barclay's written several books and if the others are anywhere nearly as good as the two I've read (and as you might have guessed, I currently can't recall the name of the other one), you could do a lot worse than picking up one or more of his works.

The same thing is true of the other author who's now become (perhaps) overly well-known. I refer to Lee Child, author of the Jack Reacher series of novels. In the book, Echo Burning, Reacher is hitch-hiking across Texas and is picked up by a woman who doesn't know him, but immediately wants to hire him to kill her husband.

Reacher refuses, but does agree to go to work for a brief time on the ranch belonging to her husband's family, and later thinks that perhaps he should have taken the first job. The husband's in prison for unrelated reasons and the woman's told Reacher that she's been getting beaten by him for several years. Child is a master at weaving plots in and out, and bringing the suspense to a fever pitch.

That's also evident in the other work of his, called Persuader. The title comes initially from a type of pistol, but also refers to how he sees himself. He gets hired, sort of, to help find a government agent who's gone missing and whose work was "unofficial." While in the process, he discovers that the primary party behind a crime ring is a guy that Reacher thought he'd killed a number of years earlier. He wants to complete that act and - as you know if you've read any of the Reacher books - plot twists and action proceed accordingly.

Speaking of Books...

As some of you know, I've written three (plus a pamphlet-sized short). With the exception of the pamphlet which details how to cure acne, and sells for 99 cents, each of the other full-length efforts sells as an e-book for $2.99.

I don't recommend the acne pamphlet as a holiday gift, but each of the others might be a good choice. YOU DON'T NEED A SPECIAL READER to read Kindle-format e-books. You can download a free app to your smartphone or a free Kindle reader to your Mac or PC and you can read Kindle books on either.

As it happens, there are also some public domain books (e.g., Alice in Wonderland) that you can download free after you download that app/program.

The books include The Mobile Millionaire, suitable for the would-be investor on your gift list. It's a guide to investment in mobile homes. Also, Amusing Sex, Funny Sex, which we briefly discussed earlier in this post, is a compilation of the columns on that subject that I write for a local lifestyle magazine, here in Arizona. Finally, there's a mystery novel for the mystery fans in your life: Bobby's Been Shot. In brief, the novel details the attempt to solve a 20-year-old murder that may be connected to the murder of Robert Kennedy. The links appear below. The lynx is a big cat.

Additionally (unfortunately, it won't be ready for this holiday season) is a book on good health connected to weight loss. Naturally, I'll announce here, and everywhere else, when that becomes available. My tentative next project involves a biography of a little-known president.

 
 
Acne Cure: http://www.amazon.com/The-Cure-For-Acne-ebook/dp/B007QI4YLK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335109195&sr=8-1
War on Xmas

I'd prefer, due to the length of this post, to save this until next time, but that may be after the holiday, so we'll cover it now.

Some conservative commentators have talked last year and this one, about the supposed War on Christmas. They say that those advocating political correctness have pushed stores, merchants, and others to wish everyone "Happy Holidays" when they should be saying "Merry Christmas."

If that's a War on Christmas, I want to sign up with the Revolutionaries.

This isn't a Christian nation. Our constitution says that the government cannot favor or discriminate against particular religions. And we weren't founded by Christians, either. The majority of our founders were Deists, not Christians. Although our founding documents refer to a Creator, nowhere do they talk about God or Jesus or Mohammed, etc.

We are a country that firmly established (see the Federalist Papers if you have any doubt) that religion and government should be and are separate from each other.

While no one is suggesting that the government's behind this supposed war (though some will find a way to blame Obama, I suppose), many are suggesting that Christmas should be substituted for all references to "the holidays."

Really? When you tell me Merry Christmas, I appreciate your good wishes, but they also carry a level of presumptuousness. You're assuming that I'm Christian. Whether I am Christian or I'm a member of another faith or of no faith, that's bloody obnoxious. Your religion is none of my business and vice versa. Your pushing your religion on me, as the old saying goes, is like persuading someone of the beauty of music by hitting her over the head with a violin.

To those who say Merry Christmas wishes have nothing to do with religion, my response is that they either don't understand English very well or they have a poor knowledge of Christianity (same with Christmas trees).

So, if in order to win your favor by allowing you to presume you know about my religious beliefs, or the lack of them, I'll do without your favor.

But you can do me a favor. Have a nice holiday. Or don't. It's your choice and as I said, it's none of my business. If you feel differently, it could cause a war.

Trivia Answers

1. Senator Paul Tsongas from Maryland, who has since died.

2. Robert Kennedy of New York and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. Though Robert was the older of the two, when he was elected to the Senate, the younger brother had more experience in that body.

3. Republican Mike Curb. Curb was a record producer and created the group, The Mike Curb Congregation, which was several years before he became Lt. Governor, and well before another Hollywood celebrity would become governor of that state.

4. Billy Beer

5. James Madison. Jefferson served under Adams, to the displeasure of both, and Adams was the veep under Washington. Madison, of course - and as you knew - was our 4th president.


Adios Muchachitos

That's it for this edition, thankfully (it's much too long, but there's something for everyone). In the meantime, I'll see you on the radio.

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

A Quickie


Intro

This posting will be brief. We'll review some books that I've recently read and have some trivia questions on our next posting.

Our Show

We'll be back on this Wednesday and next. Tomorrow's guest is author Larry Hancock and he'll be talking about his new book relating to American shadow warfare. We'll also discuss his visit to Dallas to observe the 50th anniversary of the killing of our 35th president. You can tune in at http://GoingBeyondRadio.com

The following week, we'll have someone who isn't nearly as well-known, my friend Steve Lyttleton, to discuss civility among those who differ politically. Since we do, you can tune in to see how well that works out.


Other Radio

On our companion site,  we talk about our program, of course, but also other things going on with radio. I'd urge your review of that site. As Yoda would say, "Like it you might." That's http://JeffOnRadio.blogspot.com

Some of the content there, duplicates things you'll see here, but some is different. This week, I've posted a note regarding AM radio and the FCC's intention to improve it. Dropping Limbaugh might be a good start, but I don't think it's what they have in mind.

Outta Here

That's all folks. I'll see you on the radio.


Monday, November 25, 2013

More on Radio, Contact Info, and, A Bit On Books

That Doggone Radio Program....Again


The station and its website (http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com) are back and we'll be back on-air on the first Wednesday in December (the 4th) with the guest we were supposed to to have on, during our most recently scheduled program, Larry Hancock.

Producer Chuck was unavailable for a couple of weeks, but he's back now and arrangements have been made to make sure the station doesn't go South if he goes on vacation, becomes ill, etc.

When we come back, Larry will join us for the full hour. We could do a show on this coming Wednesday, but since it's the night before Thanksgiving in the U.S. we'd likely only have our listeners who are in other countries. So, it's 12/4.

Also on the following Wednesday, we'll have a long-time friend of mine, Steve Lyttleton, as our guest. Steve and I will talk about civility and our differing political views, though I suspect we'll agree on enough things to surprise both of us.

We'll then be dark again on 12/18 and 12/25. The 18th is because of my book club meeting and the following week is for some holiday or other. On January 1, 2014, I'm planning on doing a show alone - and not just because everyone else will be recovering from a hangover. The plan is to talk about the need for people to start businesses and avoid being "wage slaves."

In connection with that, I'm a major believer in business and capitalism and after some major effort, I'm making a living (sort of) while not being employed by anyone. That said, when the sign in the men's room says that employees have to wash their hands before returning to work, I wash my hands anyway.

Reaching Us

Now there are a couple of ways to contact us. The big question: why would you want to reach us? Actually, I can think of a couple of reasons.If you've read any of my books or listened to the radio program, you might want to tell me what an idiot I am, or you may wish to express an opinion that's different from mine on a given subject. Or maybe you want to suggest a guest. If you know an author that's self-published a book and it's not about religion, you can let me know how to reach her/him. Or, perhaps you know someone who was involved in early television. We'd probably love to talk to that person.

As is true of most of you, there are two ways to make contact: phone and e-mail. As to the latter, the e-mail address is: tjbRadio@gmail.com

You can now call and leave a message, as well. The number is: 206-339-5905. Please keep your message short, and if you'd like to be on the air to express your opinion, please leave a phone number where you can be reached on a Wednesday evening between 9 and 10 PM Eastern time. If you're not reachable then, but still want your call on, leave your name, number, and when you can be reached. We may call and record your conversation (after you give permission) for later broadcast.

Trivia Questions

You didn't think we'd forget trivia did you? The answers are at the end of this posting, so you don't have to cover them with your hand.

1. What office did Richard Nixon run for between his defeat for President in 1960, and his victorious run for the same office in 1968, and who was the opposing candidate?

2. Ronald Reagan won the presidency in 1980, of course, but he sought the GOP nomination in 1976, unsuccessfully, losing to Gerald Ford. Reagan took the unusual step of naming the man who would be his VP candidate if he won the Republican nomination (as a means of assuring some voters that his conservatism wasn't to be feared). Who was that Republican senator who would've been Reagan's running mate?

3. Who was FDR's vice-president following the 1941 inauguration for his third term?

Books

We'll do a mini-review of a couple of books in a moment, but first, let's talk about my books. If you'd like to take a look at the books I've written, go to Amazon, by clicking the banner at the top of this page, and look up my name "Bushman" without quotes.

If you prefer, you can look up any of the individual books, through the links below.

Acne Cure: http://www.amazon.com/The-Cure-For-Acne-ebook/dp/B007QI4YLK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335109195&sr=8-1

Reviews

I've recently finished Downsize This by Michael Moore and Lee Child's The Persuader.

Some of Downsize This is dated, which is understandable since it came out over 10 years ago. But a good deal of it is still relevant. A lot of middle-of-the-road commentators tend to be dismissive of Michael Moore as some kind of radical nut job. Conservatives do this too, but a lot of them said the same thing about Mit Romney and John McCain.

Moore is a really intelligent, and very funny man. He sometimes goes a little overboard in some of his ideas and with regard to his antagonism towards corporations, but he's absolutely on target about some of the nonsense our laws allow.

If you can get a copy of the book (and a used copy or a library wouldn't be a bad idea), it's worth reading and has a lot of laughs.

The Persuader is - of course - a Jack Reacher novel. By now, you've heard everyone and his mother complain about the casting of Tom Cruise in the Jack Reacher film that came out earlier in the year. This is one of those rare cases, of course, where everyone and his mother are right.

But the books are great entertainment even if the protagonist, an American former military man occasionally uses a British expression (the author's from the UK). I've never heard one of my countryman refer to a K-Turn the way Child (and Reacher) uses that expression, but Reacher does. I highly suspect the meaning is the same as a U-Turn, but maybe I'm wrong. But the start of this paragraph tells the story.

The Reacher books are compelling and when they're arching towards the climax of the plot, they're page-turners and the covers have glue (you can't put the books down). In this one, Reacher's put into the position of going to work for a gun runner in order to kill a villain he thought he'd killed 10 years earlier. The title has several meanings, but one of them refers to the large pistols that Reacher uses at the beginning of the story's unfolding.

I've never read a Reacher book I wouldn't recommend, and this one's not an exception even though it didn't have enough sex.

Trivia Answers

1. Governor of California and he ran against the father of the current California Governor. That current Governor is called Jerry Brown, but he's really Edmund G. Brown Jr. His father, Edmund Sr. was known as Pat Brown. He beat Tricky Dick, which was not a disease.

2. Pennsylvania's Richard Schweiker, and like most vice-presidential nominees, he was never heard from again.

3. Don't feel bad if you didn't know this. Almost nobody gets it right. It was Henry Wallace. Wallace had been in Roosevelt's cabinet. When FDR decided to run for an unprecedented and unrepeated third term, his then-VP wanted no part of another 4 years in that position. Roosevelt went with Wallace. Henry Wallace was substantially to the left of most Democrats at the time and was replaced in 1944 by Truman. When Truman ran in his own right in 1948, Wallace ran against him as head of the Progressive Party.

Ciao For Now

That's it for this edition. Thanks for joining us and we'll see  you on the radio.

Monday, November 18, 2013

What Happened To That Radio Show?

Radio

Today's November 18, 2013. Hardly momentous by most standards, of course, but I'm writing that to place this post within a time frame.

Last Wednesday, we were supposed to go live on our radio program aired on GoingBeyondRadio.com. Instead, when we tried to go on, what happened was nothing. It was really too bad, because our guest, Larry Hancock (who you've heard before if you've been a long-time listener) was all ready.

Larry is an author who's written about the JFK and MLK assassinations along with the secret wars of the CIA and he's a great guest. We and the audience always have a great time. He's very bright and the fact that he's also a really nice human comes through during our conversations.

In any event, when I tried to go the website of Going Beyond Radio, we found that the website couldn't be loaded (and I probably should've been). After a few days of this, and my e-mail not generating a response from our inimitable leader and producer, Chuck Manning, I'd assumed that my recent order of business cards had killed the station, just as sure as a car wash generates a rainstorm.

It appears that the truth is somewhat less melodramatic. I spoke to the station's other principal today, who said that Chuck had to be away and that the server went down, and no one else was around to bring it back up.

Therefore, we should be back up, shortly on Chuck's return.

That said, I was planning on not doing a show this coming Wednesday since it's my once a month Wednesday off, to attend a club meeting and I was also going to be dark (not just from the AZ sun) the following week because it's the night before Thanksgiving.

So, if all goes according to plan, we'll return to air on the first Wednesday in December and Larry Hancock is scheduled to join us then.

The above portion of this post will also appear on our other blog - JeffOnRadio.blogspot.com

Books

This site has "books" in the title, so we should probably talk about them, right?

I should probably refer to my mini-reviews as "used book reviews" since I don't really review newly published books as many reviewers do. I read books that were published earlier, that I'm just getting around to reading.

Before that review section, however, I want to invite you to go to Amazon.com (we have a banner at the top) whenever you're thinking about buying anything that they might possibly have. If you go through our banner, while not costing you anything extra, you'll be supporting this blog because they give us a small percentage of the money you spend there, when you go through our site's banner.

And while you're there, please do a search for Jeff Bushman (who?) and you'll find the books that we have on Amazon's site. Oddly, our books have been doing rather well and if you're one of the people who bought one or more of them, thank you.

Back to other people's books now.

Confessions of an Ex-Secret Service Agent by George Rush is an interesting read in the sense that it talks about the life of the ex-agent inside and outside of the Service, both during and after his time with them.

That said, the time spent on discussing his life outside the Service, comes at the cost of not providing more insight into the work and peculiarities of that organization. I would've liked to have seen more of that and a bit less about him spending his time in discos.

It's still worth a read, but it would've been better - in my opinion - if the concentration were different.

***

As readers of this blog know (and I'm speaking to both of you), I've become a big fan of Harlan Coben. That "fandom" was re-justified by two books of his that I've just read.

Play Dead, in the edition I bought, contains an author's note, just inside the front cover. In it, he urges readers who've never read any of his other books, to not read this one first. He says it was one of his early ones and he wishes he could re-write it with what he knows now.

His concern is unjustified. The book involves a basketball player and his model-turned-business phenom wife who are crazy about each other. They go on their honeymoon to Australia. She has a business meeting and he leaves her a note about going swimming. She later finds out he's drowned. After that, things get spooky and peculiar. I had part of the mystery figured out pretty early, but I never did get the whole thing, until the author revealed it.

It's a hell of a read and I recommend it.

***

The only reservation I have about recommending Coben's other recently-read (by me) book is that it's become dated. It's not giving away too much to say that Miracle Cure involves AIDS, but it was written before all of the anti-viral drugs were created to treat the disease.

For those who don't remember that period, AIDS was a death sentence instead of a chronic, mostly-treatable ailment.

So, reading the book will require you to suspend your knowledge of current treatments, but if you can suspend disbelief, suspending knowledge shouldn't be a problem. And if you can't suspend disbelief, you probably shouldn't be reading fiction.

Miracle Cure is very well-written and sports a variety of interesting characters. While it's not a great measure of whether a mystery is good or bad, this one isn't easy to figure out until about the last third of the book and has some interesting twists. You could do a lot worse than spending your time with this one.

TTFN

At this point, we'll leave the scene with a thanks for joining us and next time, we'll include some trivia. And, at some point in the near future, I'll see you on the radio.

Monday, November 11, 2013

Major Big Deal and Some Trivia

Radio

Hello. This Wednesday will be November 13. That's nine days prior to the 50th anniversary of President Jack Kennedy's assassination. This is the major big deal referred to in our title.

If you lived through it, you'll never forget that day. If you didn't you have nothing (so far) to compare it with. September 11, 2001 was a shock, a disaster, and a tragedy. But it was very different from living in a country where we were accustomed to things going along normally and well.

That said, on Wednesday, we have as a guest on our radio program, Larry Hancock. If you've heard Larry on our show or elsewhere, before, you know what a great guy he is and what a fascinating guest. We'll discuss his latest book, as well as the one he wrote specifically about the president's murder, Someone Would Have Talked.

At the risk of being overly self-promoting, if you want to look at Larry's books, go to the Amazon banner at the top of this page and click there. Should you buy any of Larry's books (or anything else for that matter), Amazon will throw a few coins our way, without costing you anything.

But however you look at Larry's books, you should do so.

Larry will be with us for the full hour, and if you have questions of him, you'll be able to call in. The program starts at 9:00 PM, Eastern Time, and is well worth your time. If you should miss it (some people, I suppose, may have to work during that time), you can catch the podcast, beginning the next day. Tune in at http://GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman (if you're listening life, you don't need the slash or my name).

Larry will be attending a conference next week in Dallas relating to the assassination, but we've got him first.

Trivia Questions

As you might have guessed, this is the trivia.

Following are some questions and below that will be the answers. What a novel arrangement.

1. Who was President Nixon's Secretary of  Defense during his first administration?

2. One of the Secretaries in the president's cabinet is the Secretary of Health and Human Services. What did that Department used to be called?

3. What was the one cabinet department created in the administration of Lyndon Johnson?

4. What was the cabinet department created in the administration of George W. Bush?

5. Who was the youngest President of the U.S.?

The answers appear below our next section, so you don't have to be tempted to cheat by having the answers right below the questions.

Speaking of Books

If you'd be so kind, take a look at the books I've written (BTW, we're working on another one - regarding health and weight loss). Go to Amazon.com (need I re-mention the banner above?) and do a search on my name and you'll see three books (and a "short"). If you're not interested in the books, that's fine, but if you are, they're available for y our computer or e-reader.

Trivia Answers

OK, here we go.

1. Melvin Laird

2. Health Education and Welfare

3. The Department of Housing and Urban Development

4. Homeland Security. Frankly the name of this Department has always bothered me. Use of the word "Homeland" sounds somewhat like it came out of Germany in World War Two. I'm not saying George W. Bush is a Nazi or even a fascist, necessarily. I'm just saying....

5.TR. If you said JFK, that's understandable, but the was the youngest person elected president, at age 43. When Teddy Roosevelt took office at 42, it was because he ascended to that position on McKinley's assassination.

Hasta

Thanks for checking in. We'll see you on the radio.

Monday, November 4, 2013

There are definitely options

Mortgages

No, this isn't an ad for mortgage companies, or cheap home loans. When the economic collapse hit in 2007 and 2008, one of the biggest problems is that many homeowners found that the value of their homes was less than they owed on their mortgages.

Many walked, many didn't.

But many folks are still "under water." The banks refused to reduce the amounts due on their mortgages and as a result more people walked away from their homes than would have otherwise. These were called "strategic defaults."

What the banks didn't do, didn't have to be the end of the story.

The city of Richmond, California has decided to take action. They have exercised the right of eminent domain to take possession of all the mortgages on homes in their city. I'll explain that in a moment, but in brief it means the city government took the mortgages from the banks but the city is required to pay the banks fair market value.

What's fair market value? The value of the homes. The city will then be the lender and homeowners will make their payments to the city.

Eminent domain has existed since before the U.S. was a country, but it was formalized in our Constitution's 5th Amendment (which is also the one dealing with the right to not incriminate yourself in testimony). The government can take property, but it's obligated to give fair value for that property. The taking has to be for a government purpose (rather than revenge or some other petty motive).

The city has already won the first court battle against the banks, who sued after the taking of the mortgages, and the case is now under appeal.

But it's interesting at the very least.

The "taking" is clearly a government purpose. The city has an interest in keeping homeowners in their homes to avoid urban blight (see pictures of Detroit, for example). The payment of fair value is a bit tougher to figure out, but one way of assessing value is what the bank would get for the property if the mortgage was defaulted on (the homeowner stopped paying) and the bank was forced to sell the property. Clearly it couldn't get more than the value of the home, so the argument is that the value of the home is the fair value of the mortgage.

The arguments against that last position,  go two ways. On the one hand if many of the mortgages suffered a default, the value of the homes could be significantly less than the current market value, and even if the defaulted mortgages only numbered a few, when someone's going to default on their mortgage loan, they generally don't maintain the property as well as someone who's going to stay, so again, the value could be less.

On the other hand, it could be greater. If the homeowner stays, the value of the mortgage is the loan plus interest for the length of the loan. Clearly the banks' position is that most people will stay in their homes and pay the total amount of the mortgage.

The real value, in my opinion, of what the city's done, is that if the banks lose all their appeals, at the very least, they should be ready to come to the bargaining table so they can keep their mortgages and collect interest, which they'd only be able to do by reducing the mortgage to current value, or perhaps a bit more.

Stay tuned on this one.

Trivia Questions

The answers will appear below, so you don't have to look at the answers until you're ready.

1. Who wrote Ulysses Grant's autobiography?

2. Speaking of writers, who was the first writer to submit a novel to his publisher after typing it (on a typewriter, as contrasted with sending it in, in handwriting)?

3. Spiro Agnew, of course, resigned in disgrace. What vice president was charged with murder?

4. Richard Nixon ran for president the first time in 1960 and lost. Who was Nixon's running mate?

5. Members of the U.S. Senate are elected directly, by the people of their state, but it wasn't always like that. Before a constitutional amendment mandating direct election, how were U.S. senators chosen?

The Big Show

This Wednesday evening (program starts 9:00 PM Eastern Time), we'll be talking with author JT Sather. He recently wrote a very funny piece about almost being charged with kidnapping. While I know it's hard to believe that could be funny, it is, so please give a listen at http://GoingBeyondRadio.com

If you're reading this after Wednesday (11/6/13), you can still hear the show as it was recorded at the same address, with the addition of a slash and my name: http://GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman

You can also hear our earlier shows at the same location. The following week we interview Larry Hancock, the author of "Someone Would Have Talked," among other works. That book was about the JFK killing and Larry's joining us in observance of the 50th anniversary of that assassination. The following week, he heads to Dallas. If you listen to the show, you can also call in and ask Larry your questions.

Books

I want first, to recommend a very good book to you. Miracle Cure was written by Harlan Coben, before we had the drugs we have today, so it's a bit dated, but it's a really good mystery novel with a lot of twists. I think you'll enjoy it. Obviously, because of its age, you can find it at a library, a used book store, or on Amazon.com. It's worth the read.

...And Speaking of Books

Let me tell you about mine and where to find them. But first, let me talk to you about Amazon.com. If you want to order anything from Amazon, please go to the top of our page and click anywhere on the Amazon banner. It doesn't matter where, because if you go to Amazon from our page, even if you click on books and buy cosmetics, or vice versa, we get some credit for it. It won't cost you anything, and we'll get a couple of kopeks.

But, about my books -


Mobile Millionaire is a guide book to mobile home investment. Amusing Sex, Funny Sex is a compilation of some of the columns I've written for Scottsdale Health Magazine, and Bobby's Been Shot is a mystery novel.



Acne Cure: http://www.amazon.com/The-Cure-For-Acne-ebook/dp/B007QI4YLK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335109195&sr=8-1


Trivia Answers

1. The obvious answer is wrong, though he is buried in Grant's Tomb. Though he told his story to the author, the actual writer was Mark Twain.

2. If you didn't cheat, you may have guessed. It's the same answer - Mark Twain, but the next several answers won't be Mark Twain.

3. Aaron Burr. He was Jefferson's veep and he killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel, after dueling had already become illegal (and very messy). Also, as far as we know, Burr had nothing in common with Mark Twain.

4. Henry Cabot Lodge. Lodge was from Massachusetts as was the man who defeated Nixon, JFK. Kennedy had beaten Lodge for the Senate seat that ultimately put Kennedy in position to run for president.

5. By an election by the state legislatures. The change was thought to make members of the Senate more responsive to the desires of their constituents.

Final Words

If you're still reading this, thanks very much and please listen to the radio program. We're aiming towards doing some additional programs and we'll announce that here and at our other blog, http://JeffOnRadio.blogspot.com but in the meantime, we'll see you on the radio.

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Immigration Reform Ain't Too Likely

Intro and Housekeeping

Before we go into detail on our topic, I wanted to mention a couple of things.

First, on our last post, we received a comment. Its author is a long-time friend. As you'll see from the comment (about which I'll comment in a second), he's a very bright guy. What you won't see he's that he's even more intelligent than the comment suggests. He's got a great sense of humor and is someone you could talk to for hours. All-in-all a terrific guy.

And of course I think you should read his comment.

Now I'll say why I disagree with part of what he said.

To compare Reagan's situation with Obama's really isn't fair, in my view. Reagan had Tip O'Neill to deal with. Obama has John Boehner. That difference is important. If O'Neill made a deal with Reagan, O'Neill's caucus went along with him. Boehner's tried to make several deals and his caucus doesn't go along.

Also, O'Neill didn't refuse to bring something to the full House unless a majority of his party was in favor of it, as Boehner has largely done until it's obvious they have to cave to Obama and the Democratic party in the Senate.

In the present situation, we have a GOP that sponsors legislation, and when it turns out Obama favors that legislation, they turn against it. That didn't happen in Reagan's era.

Also, to give Reagan his due, he was a lot more effective than Obama because of his social skills which Obama doesn't appear to have.

But he was primarily more effective because there was someone to deal with.

Also, I agree with Steve that when there's a problem, there are usually two players both of whom share some of the blame.

Usually.

But not in this instance as I see it. First the majority of the House was in favor of a resolution to fund the government. Boehner, as is his right, chose not to bring it to the House. Had he done so, all of the costs and aggravation caused by the shutdown wouldn't have happened. That aside, they were making a demand that everyone knew wouldn't be acceded to by the Democrats - the dismantling or delay of Obamacare.

Karl Rove said it wouldn't fly. The Wall Street Journal said it was dumb. The Koch brothers distanced themselves from it. Finally, the House Republicans changed strategy, but by then it was clear that the Democrats were united and felt they'd already given something up by only seeking funding at the "sequestration" levels.

Still the House delayed.

If there's a Democratic Party action here that puts some blame on them for the shutdown, I don't see it.

Are the Democrats responsible for other problems in legislation and inaction? Hell yes. But I just don't see it on this one.

Radio

Tonight, we'd scheduled a guest who had to beg off due to pneumonia. We wish her a speedy recovery. Meanwhile, we'll talk about romantic matches based on astrological signs with the lovely Alicia Bushman who happens to be my bride. She's really knowledgeable on the subject and if you listen live, you can call in and tell her your sign and that of your would-be mate, and she can give you an idea of whether you'd make as good a match as you believe.

Next week, JT Sather who's written what's called a "short" about an experience he had a number of years ago that almost resulted in him being charged with a federal crime. It's actually very funny and entertaining reading. The following week we'll be joined by assassination author Larry Hancock.

Immigration

Speaking of legislation where a Republican sponsors it and then withdraws support when Obama's for it, we come to immigration.

The law that's been passed by a bipartisan majority in the Senate would reform immigration law and border security. It was written and offered by Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who everyone expects to contend for the GOP nomination for president in 2016. He's now withdrawn his support.

He hasn't said why and the only changes to the legislation since he introduced it are those that strengthen border security.

Congress only has about 19 working days left in the session, so the prospects of the House passing this legislation are slim to the point of anorexic.

Trivia

No time for trivia this week, so tune in next time.

Commercializing

If you wish to help the radio program and this blog, when you want to shop at Amazon, please come back here and click on the Amazon banner at the top. Anything you buy, while costing you nothing more, will put a few coins toward the show.

Also, if you look at our immediately prior post, there are links to take you to our books on Amazon which you can look at and buy if you wish.

Conclusion

That's it for this time. Don't go away mad, please. We'll see you on the radio.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Was I Right? Also Big Guest In A Few Weeks and Trivia Questions Again

Was I Right?

In our last post, I talked about how if the federal government were to default on its debts, among other concerns was the worry that gas prices would go up (see immediately preceding post for the reasoning).

The government, as you know, didn't default, so the theory may be just that. However, the government came close to defaulting, the non-funding of the fed agencies lasted two weeks, and investor confidence in the country may have been reduced, all because of the GOP nonsense.

Today, the dollar went down to a 2-year low against other currencies, and what's called Brent North Sea Crude oil went up in price. Coincidence? I think not.

A Word From Our Sponsor: Me

In earlier posts, I made reference to our first post on this blog as an access point to get to our books. To make such access easier (and to make it simpler for you to buy those books, should you wish to do so), I decided to give you the list of links to get to those books, so you can preview them and make a decision. The work on curing acne is an inexpensive pamphlet.

Mobile Millionaire is a guide book to mobile home investment. Amusing Sex, Funny Sex is a compilation of some of the columns I've written for Scottsdale Health Magazine, and Bobby's Been Shot is a mystery novel.



Acne Cure: http://www.amazon.com/The-Cure-For-Acne-ebook/dp/B007QI4YLK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335109195&sr=8-1

All of these are e-books in Kindle format. You can - but don't have to - buy a Kindle reader. Or, you can download a free Kindle reader for your computer or smart phone. See the note in the far right column of this blog to find out more.

Trivia Questions:

More questions follow on the subject of presidential elections, etc. I hope you like this stuff. If you do, or don't and want to let us know, or contact us about something else, our new e-mail address appears below. Or, you could listen to the radio show and call in. Info on that below as well. So do the trivia answers.

1. What was Thomas Jefferson's middle name?

2. Who was Lincoln's Vice-President in Abe's first term?

3. JFK and another president each had a secretary whose last name was the same as the last name of the other president. In case that's not clear, if the other president were Johnson, Kennedy would have a secretary named Johnson and Johnson would have a secretary named Kennedy. It wasn't Johnson, so which president was it?

4. Who was president when Hawaii became our 50th state?

5. Who was the only president born in New Hampshire.

How To Reach Us:

The new e-mail address that works is: tjbRadio@gmail.com  The "R" doesn't need to be capitalized. I just did that to make it clearer. Also, the second letter in the address is a "j" in the event that's not clear, i.e. tjb radio.

The Radio Show And Our Special Guest

Many of you have listened to our radio program. Thanks. While I'm inclined to ask why the rest of you haven't, I'll restrain myself. But if you'd like to hear the program, please go to http://GoingBeyondRadio.com

If you'd like to hear the show live, we do that at 9:00 P.M. Eastern time on Wednesday nights. We have great guests coming up on this Wednesday and the following one (two scientists who are part of Popular Science magazine's "Brilliant Ten"), and on the second Wednesday in November, in recognition of the 50th anniversary of JFK's murder, we have a return of Larry Hancock, the author of several books having to do with political assassinations and U.S. government dirty tricks in our history. Larry will be speaking at a convention of assassination historians in Dallas the week after our show, but you get to hear him first.

If you'd like to hear some of our past shows (with Larry and others), go to the same site with the addition of my name after a slash, i.e., http://GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman


The Next Time You Order From Amazon

Ordering from Amazon is easy, right? You go to Amazon.com, sign in, search for what you want and order it with your credit card and await delivery.

BUT WAIT!!!!!

You could help us and not cost yourself an extra nickel. At the top of this page is a banner from our friends at Amazon. It doesn't matter what you want. You can click on any of the categories on that banner, then when you're at Amazon.com, you can search for what you want (and sign in of course) and when you buy it for whatever you'd normally pay for it, we get a small commission, which helps support the radio show, this blog and the insatiable appetite of Autumn, our chihuahua.

And for what it's worth, you'll have my appreciation.

Trivia Answers

1. Thomas Jefferson had no middle name. Most people didn't in those days.

2. You may have thought this was a trick question. It isn't. I know you know that his Veep in his second term, the man who took over when Lincoln was killed, was Andrew Johnson. But in his first term, Abe's VP was Hannibal Hamlin. Yes, that's quite obscure. But if it ever comes up again, and that's awfully unlikely, you can at least remember his last name. The last syllable of Abraham and the first syllable of Lincoln equal HAM LIN.

3. Lincoln had a secretary named Kennedy. Kennedy had a secretary named Evelyn Lincoln.

4. This one actually was a semi-trick question. If someone looked up Hawaii's admission date, they'd see it was 1960. Some people associate Jack Kennedy's presidency with that year, but that was the year he was elected. All presidents are inaugurated in odd-numbered years - in this case 1961. Dwight Eisenhower was still president in July, 1960 when Hawaii came in.

5. New Hampshire's claim to presidential fame was Franklin Pierce who's really not famous for anything else. He was our 14th president.

Ciao

That's it for now. I hope you enjoyed this and I'll see you on the radio.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

The Country's Debt Default CAN Affect Us

OK, we've all heard a lot of drivel about how the country's debt default - if it occurs - won't be a big deal for most Americans on a day-to-day basis.

Let me point out how that's wrong - probably.

The biggest single way that a debt default could affect everyday folks, every day, is in a way you might not expect. I mention it because I haven't heard anyone else talk about it. That effect? Gas prices.

OK, how can gas prices be effected by the country being unable to pay its debts? Well this gets a little clunky, but let me try.

Investors throughout the world invest their money where they think they'll get the most return, i.e., make the most money on their money. So if you're a big-money person in England and you buy Euros with your Pounds, because you believe Euros will go up in value and it turns out you're right, you've made money. If Euros go down, when compared to Pounds, you've lost money.

If lots of investors buy Euros, the value of the Euro will go up (all currency values go up and down and the value of those currencies are as compared to others). If very few investors buy Euros, the value of the Euro reduces. Currencies are, in this way, like any other commodity. If demand is high the price goes up. As an example if a lot of Americans want to buy Euros and are willing to spend their dollars for them, the Euro (and I'm making up these numbers) might be worth $1.10. If very few Americans buy the Euro, it could be worth 95 cents.

OK, the same thing's true of dollars.

So if the government issuing Dollars, the U.S., defaults on its debt, there's less confidence in that economy in the rest of the world. The result is that the dollar is worth less (not worthless, just worth less) than it would otherwise be.

So what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? A great deal, actually, but we're talking about the price of gas in the U.S., and it has a lot to do with that, as well.

Oil prices are - by international agreement and custom - denominated in dollars. The price of anyting, or its value works the same way as currencies. A loaf of bread we buy from France could be worth $3.00, but if a Dollar were only worth half as much as it is, that same loaf would cost $6.00.

As by now you're perceived, the same thing is true of gas. If the Dollar is worth less, as it would be after a default (or after the threat of a default is really serious as it isn't yet, as of this writing) the value of oil - and thus of gas - is worth more against that Dollar, so the price of gas goes up in "dollar terms."

There are other ways that such a default can affect us, but you've probably heard about them already, e.g., increasing interest on home loans, etc.

But I'm not applying for a home loan this week and I suspect you're not either. But my suspicion is just as strong that you'll be buying gas.

Thanks for reading and let me invite you to two other places. First, please check our posting in April of last year to get to our magazine columns and books that are available on Amazon. Also, the radio program that we do on Wednesday nights is available at http://GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman  We won't be on live this Wednesday night, but our archived shows are all there.

If you'd like to write to me, please do so at tjbradio@gmail.com. Thanks again.

Thursday, October 10, 2013

More Trivia, But Then What Isn't

Another Presidential Trivia Quiz. Are you thrilled? Again, there'll be some space after the questions so you're not required to look at the answers until you want to.

1. Who was the only president who was never elected as President or Vice President?

2. Prior to Barry Goldwater's loss to Lyndon Johnson in 1964, who lost by the biggest margin in a presidential election?

3. OK, this isn't presidential, but what was the name of the church in Atlanta from which Martin Luther King Jr (and Sr.) preached?

4. Who was former Vice President Al Gore's father?

5. Who was the only president to serve non-consecutive terms?









Answers

1. Gerald Ford. He was appointed by Nixon as Vice President and approved by the Senate, after Agnew's resignation. He became president, of course, when Nixon resigned.

2. Alf Landon lost to FDR when the latter won his 2nd term. Landon was governor of Kansas. His daughter Nancy Landon Kassebaum later represented their state in the U.S. Senate

3. Ebenezer Baptist Church

4. No points if you said "Mr. Gore." However if you remember that the ex-VP's full name is Albert Gore Jr., part of the answer becomes simple. His father was - naturally Albert Gore Sr., but additionally, he was a Senator from Tennessee, long before his son was.

5. Many of you knew this. It's Grover Cleveland. He was one of a handful of men who have been their party's nominee three times. The first time he ran, he beat Benjamin Harrison. The second time, he lost to Harrison. He then came back and beat Harrison. Harrison also ran three times as did Nixon.


If you'd like to let us know how you did this, let us know at tjbradio@gmail.com. Also, please tune in to our radio program at http://GoingBeyondRadio.com

Thanks.

Monday, October 7, 2013

Government Shutdown, Day 7

Sometimes I think that I wish there were some adults in the White House.

Things were looking good. The president had said there wouldn't be any negotiations over the resolution to fund the government at the same level (the CR - continuing resolution) or on raising the debt ceiling. That's the right answer to the Republicans attempting to extort concessions in exchange for the country continuing to run and not causing an international economic crisis.

Then the White House issued a statement today saying that the president might consider it acceptable if the lifting of the debt ceiling were for an amount that would carry borrowing for a period less than a year.

Are you bloody kidding (the word "bloody" by the way is a British usage and is designed to avoid the use of the word we in America commonly know as "f'ing" but with the letters between the "f" and the "i" filled in)?!!!!!!

No negotiations means no negotiations. You don't give stuff away, particularly if you're not getting something in exchange. What are they getting in exchange? Nada, zip, gornisht (look it up). Adults don't negotiate when a child is holding its breath.

Colin Powell used to state the Bull in the China Shop rule: you broke it you own it. The House Republicans have broken the government by shutting it down. They don't own the government, but they do own the shutdown and they should have to pay for it. The democrats don't need to help them.

A couple of notes worth noting about books. First, if you'd be kind enough to look at the post I did in April of last year, you'll see a way to get to my books on Amazon. In brief, one's a mystery novel, another's a guide to mobile home investment, and the third is a compilation of my columns on the subject of sex, that I do for a local magazine.

Secondly, there are a couple of books I've read recently I want to share with you. One is called "Six Years" by Harlan Coben. Coben's an amzazingly good mystery/suspense writer who includes humor with his storytelling. Brilliantly done. He has a series of books of which this book is not a part. That series involves a sports and talent agent who solves mysteries. This book is about a man whose true love dumped him to get married to a former sweetheart of hers. He accepts the invitation to the wedding and sees it take place. She asks him not to contact her. Six years later, the groom's obituary appears and the protagonist goes to the funeral and sees the widow from a distance, but it's not the same woman who married the dead man.

Everything happens after that. It's an amazingly compelling story.

The other book I wanted to recommend is "Void Moon" by Michael Connelly. This doesn't involve his series character, Harry Bosch, but it's a great story about a woman who was convicted for manslaughter and is now out of jail. She went to jail for that crime because she was involved in a robbery in Las Vegas in which her lover and co-conspirator died. Most states have a felony-murder doctrine, but whether Nevada's is different (manslaughter rather than murder?) or Connelly used literary license, is unclear. In any event, she's out of jail, selling cars and decides to try one last score, again in Vegas. The title refers to the stage of moon known as Void Of Course. Read the book. If you don't like it, I'll give you twice what you paid ME for it (2 times zero.....hmmm).

Meanwhile, give a listen to our radio program this Wednesday night on GoingBeyondRadio.com. We're live at 9PM Eastern, and you can hear the archived editions anytime. Thanks.

Presidential Trivia

We've promised this for a while, but here are some questions and answers. I've added some space between the last question and the first answer so you can block your screen and give yourself an honest quiz. But first, if you didn't hear last week's show, we interviewed Scott Collis and you can hear that show (as well as our prior ones) at http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman

Also, if you'd like to see our books and other writing, please go to our posting in April of this year. And next week's show brings Alicia Bushman (my lovely bride) to the program (9PM Eastern time is the start time for the program) to discuss how to be a happy, healthy, and wealthy (sort of) consumer.

Questions:

1. From April 13, 1945 until January 20, 1949,who was the VP of the U.S.?

2. We know about the father-son presidents - Bush and Adams. Who were the only presidents who were grandfather and grandson?

3. Who was the only incumbent president to run for re-election and to come in 3rd in the voting? Bonus question - what year was this in?

4. What was Harry Truman's middle name?

5. What was the first name of our president between March (that's when we used to inaugurate presidents), 1913 and March 1921?

OK, here come the answers. COVER UP THE ANSWERS BELOW UNTIL YOU WANT TO CHECK YOUR ANSWERS





Answers: 1. We didn't have a VP. Until the 1960s, there was no constitutional provision for choosing a vice president when the sitting VP took the presidency on a presidential death, as Harry Truman did on April 12, 1945.

2. William Henry and Benjamin Harrison. The latter served between Grover Cleveland's 2 non-consecutive terms

3.William Howard Taft in 1912. Wilson was first, Teddy Roosevelt in an attempted comeback was 2nd, and Taft didn't do too well.

4. Harry didn't have a middle name. His parents only gave him an initial: S

5. Yes, I know you figured out that the president was Wilson, but Woodrow was his middle (and his mom's maiden) name. His actual first name was Thomas.

See you on the radio

Monday, September 2, 2013

Bobby Would Say Something

As some of you know, we do a radio show on the Internet (http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com) on Wednesday evenings. A couple of weeks ago, a news story came out that talked about an upcoming documentary that ridiculously suggests a Secret Service agent may have fired the second shot at President Kennedy.

That caused us to re-interview Sherry Fiester, a forensics expert who's studied the JFK killing in great depth. That, of course, made me think of the Kennedys and the so-called Camelot period in U.S. history.

A few years after the president's assassination, Robert Kennedy ran for the presidency, from his position in the U.S. Senate. Bobby Kennedy toured the country and went to some of the poorest areas of the nation (including Appalachia) to bring attention to how the country was neglecting the poor, whether they were poor Whites, Blacks, Browns, etc.

The problem of homelessness wasn't very common in the 1960s, but it became very noticeable in the 1980s and many people talked about the people who lived on the streets for the next 10-15 years. There were news stories, magazine pieces and documentaries.

But no one's talking about this problem anymore.

So we obviously solved this problem, or people would still be concerned, right?

Apparently not. If you go into any reasonably-sized community, especially those in the sunbelt during the winter, you'll see them. The folks who live on the streets and are or aren't on drugs, who are or aren't mentally disabled are around us. The nicer people among us may give them a quarter or a buck from time-to-time, while the rest of us tell them to get a job or claim we lack sufficient resources to give them anything.

Many of us just ignore them.

But more shocking, in at least the last two election cycles, no one's mentioned the homeless. No one, whether liberal or conservative seems to give a damn about either these people or the social problems their existence represents.

If this were 1968, surely someone would say something. If no one else, it would've been Bobby. For those who think assassinations don't have much effect on history, let them look at homelessness. Let them look at Bobby. Let them see Appalachia.

Syria - Additional Thoughts

That the United Kingdom, through its Parliament, decided it would not intervene in Syria (at least for now) by striking against the government for use of chemical weapons, comes as no surprise.

What was a surprise and disappointment is that President Obama decided to seek Congressional approval before we made a move against Assad's government.

While I generally support Obama, this step demonstrates (dare I say "again"?) a lack of courage or intestinal fortitude. The other phrase isn't suitable for work or children. We don't have a parliamentary system. While Congressional approval should be sought in many situations, every other president has stated that the War Powers Act that was passed after the Viet Nam insanity, in unconstitutional.

The fact that the president isn't required to seek Congressional approval for this strike is clear. We are not going to war; we're talking about a single bombing or drone attack.

All of the above said, I recognize that some very intelligent people, including my lovely bride, think we shouldn't attack Syria. While I disagree (see immediately prior post), I understand. These people (other than those who disagree with anything and everything Obama wants to do, just because it's Obama who wants to do it) fear that Syria may react against Israel, for example - or that Hezbollah or Iran may - and that would require a response from us and Russia and China could respond, etc.

While that's possible, it's obviously unlikely that China and Russia would want to be involved, directly or by proxy, in a military engagement with the U.S. Still, there are dangers connected to an attack on Syria.

My opinion, however, is that there's a greater danger in doing nothing.

As said in the prior edition, if we allow chemical weapon use to go unpunished, it encourages - or at least fails to discourage - those who will be tempted in the future to use them. And that's a very unacceptable risk.

Getting back to the president. I understand that he wants Congressional approval so that no one can later claim, should the situation deteriorate, that he was acting on his own. But he doesn't have to run again, and leaders with courage act.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Two little bits of self-advertisement here. Since internal links don't seem to work, if you'd like to take a glance at my three e-books, please go to the first posting in this blog. It will let you see those books and order them, if you'd like. The three books are a guide to mobile home investment, a compilation of the columns I've written on the subject of sex for a local magazine, and a mystery novel which kind of involves Robert Kennedy. Unrelated to that novel, so does my next posting. Secondly, if you haven't please give a listen to our radio program. It's at http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com. We're live on Wednesday nights and you can call in, if you listen live. You can also listen to the archived recordings of the show at any time, though you obviously can't call in if you're not listening while we're "on air."

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Syria - Part One?

I titled this as "Part One?" because I have a hunch it won't be the last time we visit this subject.

I agree with those who think we need to do something about the government of Syria using chemical weapons, assuming that can be established as fact.

I'll go into my reasoning for that (and it's mine, since I haven't listened to the talking heads on TV and radio on this subject - so if it agrees with someone else I didn't copy it) in a moment, but first, if you'd like to see my other writing (including books), please go to the beginning of the blog or the post of April 22, 2013

Also, on the date this is written, 8/28/13, it's before the radio show we're doing tonight with Morgan St. James and Bella Capo. The latter is the subject of and the co-author (with Morgan) of La Bella Mafia, which is about to be published. The interview should be fascinating, in spite of the interviewer. Tune in tonight at 9:00 PM Central, 6:00 Pacific, or listen to the recorded program afterwards. http://GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman.

Now to the posting....

In the mid '80s, Iraq fought a war with Iran. We "tilted" towards Iraq, led by Saddam Hussein so when he used chemical weapons against Iran, we didn't object. In fact, when the Iranian representative brought evidence of the chemical weapon use to the UN, he couldn't get anyone to listen.

It's my belief that if we had done something meaningful then, Syria wouldn't have used chemical weapons now. But we didn't.

If Syria used chemical weapons, that country should receive a meaningful punishment. My suggestion would be to use a drone or other un-staffed weapon to damage their command and control capability or we should severely damage their government offices or the home of Assad.

But something.

If we don't, there's a better-than-even chance that in some future war, at some future time, these chemicals will be used against American people or the people of one of our allies.

While there's a good argument that punishment of one person doesn't work as a deterrent for others, when it comes to countries it's a bit different. If the world sees that those who use chemical weapons will die or be severely damaged, those who might consider the use of such weapons in the future, will decide against that approach.

Maybe.

What we have is a group of bad choices, but some attack, without troops seems to be the least bad option.


Tuesday, August 20, 2013

More Idiocy - Guns

I'm among the group of progressive thinkers (though to call me a "thinker" might be overly praising) who believes that Americans ought to be able to own guns of almost any variety. I say "almost" because I can't see a reason to own an Uzi or other machine gun. Other than that, though, I say enjoy it and please don't shoot me.

But we have to do something about the morons like the guy today who went and fired shots at a Georgia (the U.S. state, not the country that used to be part of the Soviet Union) elementary school. The fact that no one was hurt and the shooter was taken alive, was amazing and rare. The latter fact suggests that the police there deserve a lot of praise.

But come on. I don't know if this guy was certifiably insane prior to the shooting, but if he was and we don't have background checks on gun buyers, why not? Lots of people objected to the legislation last year that would require buyers to be background checked, even when the purchase takes place through a private sale or a gun show.

Why the objection? People already have to get background checked if they buy through a dealer and most sales take place at dealers.

Do those who object to background checks just feel more secure because they know they could obtain some serious firepower without the government knowing about it?

As we all now know, if they listen to your phone conversations and read your e-mail through the NSA, they'll know anyway.

But aside from that, the gun show and private sale exceptions mean that a nut can go buy a gun. A person who's got a serious felony record can buy a gun. Someone who's been convicted of domestic violence can purchase a gun.

I believe you should be able to buy a gun if you perceive you need one. I don't think you should be able to buy a gun and then qualify for food stamps or that you should be able to buy a gun and have the taxpayers support you with disability payments, but I think otherwise you should be able to get a gun.

Unless you're a convicted felon or a spouse-beater or certifiably nutso (on 2 of those 3 my ex-wife might be prohibited). Then you shouldn't be able to get a firearm. And if you agree with that (and why wouldn't you?), I don't know how you can be against the legislation that would've required those background checks. I guess the question can best be put as: What Is Your Problem?

Please tune in to our radio program, The Jeff Bushman Show at http://GoingBeyondRadio.com on Wednesday evenings, starting at 9:00 PM Eastern time, or the archived programs, anytime. Also, if you'd like to see our other writing (on the subject of Radio), let me invite you to: JeffOnRadio.blogspot.com.

Thanks.

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Please - No PDR

Today's post is about something we've all run across and of which I have an enormous dislike.

Before that, however, if you'd like to see my other writing (including books), please click here


The PDR is taken from what's been referred to as PDA - Public Displays of Affection. I have mixed feelings about affection in public. I suppose it's okay as long as everyone's clothes stay on.

PDR, however is different. It's Public Display (or Discussion) of Religion. I suppose I don't mind Christmas displays or Easter observances that don't hit viewers over the head, but some people apparently believe that you and I are vitally interested in their religious views.

I'm not. At all.

I was brought up in a society where it was considered rude to ask someone their religion. That was private (of course, what someone paid for a house was private too, and that seems to have gone away, too). If someone's from a specific country, I might make reference to her/his religious background, but other than that, I'm more concerned with someone's character than where they go to a mosque, temple, synagogue, or church.

Two recent incidents, however, suggest that if I'm not in the minority on this, I'm in a diminishing majority. Recently, I was involved in a minor business transaction with someone and he asked me if I was a Christian. I said I don't discuss religion or politics.

As a side note, I discuss a lot of the latter on my radio program, which you can find at http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman.

He was a bit insistent, but so was I and he eventually got the message that I wasn't answering his question. But the fact is that the question was rude and an imposition. What business was it of his, what my religion is, or if I have one? I understand that if I'd answered in the affirmative, he'd have established a type of rapport, but it's still rude. It's even ruder after the first time I said I didn't want to discuss it.

There's the milder form of the same thing when someone tells me that "the Good Lord will take care of that." Oh, please. I don't doubt the sincerity of your beliefs, but why impose them on other people?

There's also the more harsh version of publicly displaying or discussing religion, and I got a dose of that recently, too. I'd given a ride to a lady and as she was getting out, she offered me a "God Bless You." I said "thank you," and didn't point out that I hadn't sneezed (great self-restraint). She seemed hesitant to get out and I wished her a good day. She then told me that Jesus had died for my sins (which was somewhat prescient of him, if true, since I hadn't committed any yet). I said, "that's nice, thank you. Have a good day."

She then, in a louder voice told me that he shed his blood for me.

Also, at the risk of being accused of wanting to war against Christmas, if it's November or December and you want to wish someone a happy holiday, do so. Please don't wish me a Merry Christmas or a Happy Hannukah. I don't want to assume I know your religious beliefs, and you shouldn't assume you know mine. More than half of the people in this country are agnostic, atheistic, or a member of a religion other than Christianity.

Hearing Merry Christmas is a small thing, but it's still an (admittedly unintentional) act of presumptuousness and rudeness.

PDR is wrong, unless someone invites it. If you feel you must evangelize, ask if someone's interested and if they're not, please follow the simple rule: STFU. If you don't know what that stands for, my guess is you could Google it.

Thanks for reading this and Allah/God/Buddha Bless.

Monday, July 1, 2013

Voting Rights

As promised, and now that some time has passed, let's discuss what the U.S. Supreme Court did with regard to the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Before that, however,if you'd like to see my other writing (including books), please click here


Getting back to the decision, the Court didn't kill the Voting Rights Act, but they did emasculate it to some extent. Prior to the decision, several states (mostly in the deep South and Arizona), and parts of others, had to get clearance from the Justice Department before implementing changes in their voting rules or laws.

The decision said that because much has changed since 1965, the pre-clearance section was unconstitutional.

While that makes no sense (what harm would it do anyone to get pre-clearance?) to me, neither - I think - is this a disaster for voting rights of minorities.

If it's still illegal - and it is - to pass a law that restricts the rights of African-Americans or Latinos to vote, people can bring suit and seek an injunction to bar the law from going into effect.

The reality is that states do try to restrict voting rights. Whether a state requires identification or closes polling places in minority areas, that works to restrict voting rights of racial minorities and/or poor people. Typically, these laws are passed by Republican legislators to reduce the number of votes in favor of Democrats.

But that doesn't matter.

If you restrict the right to vote, you're wrong, and should be subject to legal action based on the Voting Rights Act.

Another decision made recently by the Supreme Court established that an Arizona law requiring identification to vote in federal elections was contrary to the constitution, because it interfered with the federal law requiring less.

What next? Who knows? But this issue is not dead.

By the way, please listen to our radio show. We're live on Wednesday evenings, starting at 9:00 PM, Eastern time. You can hear us at http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com (not case sensitive). If you miss the show, you can hear the recording afterwards at http://www.GoingBeyondRadio.com/JeffBushman. You can also download us through the smart phone application (app), Stitcher.

Thanks.

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

The Supremes - June 2013

In two days, the Supreme Court of the U.S. issued three momentous decisions. One was to strike a portion of the 1965-enacted Voting Rights Act, and the other two had to do with same-sex marriage. I'll address the Voting Rights Act in a later post.

But first, if you'd like to see my other writing (including books), please click here

For now let's talk about DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) and California's Proposition 8. Both decisions were seen by most commentators as positive results for gay and lesbian rights.

DOMA - The court ruled as unconstitutional the provision that stated that even if a same-sex couple was legally married in a state recognizing such marriages, the couple would receive no marriage-related benefits from the federal (national) government.

Another provision of the Act not dealt with by today's decision also allows State X which doesn't recognize same-sex marriage to disregard a marriage performed in State Y which does.

The case the court decided stems from the death of one member of a lesbian marriage, resulting in an inheritance by her spouse and a huge estate tax bill that would not be charged if the marriage were recognized. The court ruled that the federal government had no right to not recognize the marriage that was allowed by law in the state where the couple lived.

In part, that's because other states and the federal government are obligated to give "full faith and credit" to the laws of the states, so long as those state laws are constitutional. The full faith and credit provision is part of the constitution.

My only quarrel with the court's opinion is that they should have ruled all of DOMA unconstitutional. If a gay couple is legally married in Vermont, Maine should have no right to choose to not recognize that marriage. That question is left unresolved by today's decision.

Proposition 8 - The ballot proposition was victorious in a statewide election in California. Prior to Prop. 8, the state's supreme court had ruled that the ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, and gay and lesbian couples were allowed to wed.

Prop. 8 was supported by various religious groups and was designed to do away with same-sex marriages.

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which includes California and some other states ruled that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional on equal protection grounds. The constitution says that all citizens will receive equal protection under the law.

Normally, when a state passes a law by legislation or initiative, the state defends that law if challenged in court. In this case, two governors of California - one from each party - believed that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional, so refused to defend it in the courts.

A group consisting of folks who'd sponsored the proposition stepped in.

The Court of Appeals, as indicated above, ruled Prop. 8 unconstitutional. The Supremes did something different. In a 5-4 decision, they dismissed the appeal from the Court of Appeals' decision, because the people representing the initiative didn't have "standing" to defend the proposition.

Standing is a legal concept that says you have to be a party who's "aggrieved," i.e., you have to be more at risk than any average citizen. The Court said that the state would have a right to defend the proposition, but the defenders who stepped in - to the extent there is/was a risk to anyone - were no more at risk than any other citizen.

While the Court was right and many of us applaud their decision, the reason for that decision is a bit troubling (I wished they had ruled as the appellate court did). Let's imagine voters in the state of Texas deciding through the initiative process, that there should be no additional restrictions on a woman who wants an abortion. If that were challenged in a lawsuit, it's a fair guess that Governor Perry of that state wouldn't defend it. Does that mean the will of the voters is shot down because no one else has standing to defend the new law?  Based on today's reasoning, the answer would be yes, that's exactly what it means.

Thanks.