Saturday, August 25, 2012

Romney's Military Status?

Romney: VN Vets "Thank You for Your Service!"

Click here for related story [Huffington Post]

The Democrats are now attacking Mr Romney because he didn't volunteer for Military Service during the Viet Nam era?

Bill dodged the draft -- and bragged about it!

How soon Democrats forget [rather, ignore] that Bill Clinton did not serve, and in fact, avoided the draft using academic and political deferments, plus bogus paperwork during the Viet Nam War. 

Or that Al Gore served his "combat tour in Viet Nam" as a REMF in an air conditioned office in Saigon -- well out of harm's way because his dad, Senator Al Gore, Sr, made special provisions for him so he would be safe -- but could claim military service for his political future.

Romney did not volunteer for the Military while a Stanford University undergraduate, although he did take a 30 month leave of absence in 1966 -- in the early days of the war -- and served as a missionary in France.  He resumed his college studies in 1969 and was deferred from the draft as a married student. 

Congress had, by then, demanded the end to the war and withdrawal of US troops.  Romney, married with two children, was in graduate school at Harvard and continued his "Student" deferment; his high draft number effectively excluded him from the draft. 

When he graduated, the war was essentially over, and the Military was demobilized.  There was neither incentive to serve, nor shame in not serving in the Military during this period.

The Left [today's Democrat Leaders] condemned US troops(c) Sodahead
Most young Veterans of today don't grasp the politics or the mood of the United States during the Vietnam Era. 

They're used to having folks walk up to them and say
"Thank you for your Service!". 

Not so during the Vietnam era.  Anti-war propaganda and virulent Leftist activism [Student Peace Union, the radical Students for a Democratic Society, and the violent Weathermen (which bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol, and plotted the murder of US Military)] spat upon and attacked US soldiers in uniform -- whom they vilified as being "baby-killers". 

Ayers/Dohrn introduced young Barack to Michelle
Notably several of the most violent of these radicals were highly influential advisors of the young Barack Obama -- some even ended up on the FBI's Most Wanted List for their violent anti-Military activities. 

Today, you'll even find some assisting in Mr Obama's campaign reelection campaign.


To give you an idea of how most young men of that era regarded Military Service in Vietnam, we've provided a letter [abbreviated] from a now-prominent draft dodger of that era:

"Dear Colonel Holmes,

"First, I want to thank you for saving me from the draft. As you know, I worked for two years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which gave me the opportunity of working every day against a war I opposed and despised with a depth of feeling I had reserved solely for racism in America before Vietnam.  I did not take the matter lightly, and there was a time when not many people had more information about Vietnam at hand than I did.

"The draft was justified in World War II because the life of the people collectively was at stake. Individuals had to fight if the nation was to survive, for the lives of their countrymen and their way of life. Vietnam is no such case. Nor was Korea, an example where certain military action was justified but the draft was not.

I am in great sympathy with those who are not willing to fight, kill, and maybe die for their country.  For years I have worked to prepare myself for a political life characterized by practical political ability. It is a life I still feel compelled to try to lead. 

"When the draft came, ROTC was the one way left in which I could possibly avoid Vietnam.  At that time, after we had made our agreement and you had sent my 1-D deferment to my draft board, I didn't see how my going in the Army and going to Vietnam would achieve anything.   So I came back to England to try to make something of my Rhodes scholarship.

"I am writing in the hope that you [will] understand more clearly how so many fine people find themselves still loving their country but loathing the military, to which you and other good men have devoted years, lifetimes, of the best service you could give. To many of us, it is no longer clear what is service and what is disservice; the conclusion is likely to be illegal. 


Bill Clinton"

For your historical reference, we've provided a summary of the Vietnam War era.  Admittedly, it's  brief and incomplete, but it will give you a slightly better understanding of the events of that period, and why the US was involved, why the US population opposed this war of Lyndon Johnson, and why the young men of America were not eager to join the Military during that period.
Originally, US participation was a noble cause, resisting Communism which was being foisted on Indochina [Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia] by the Chinese and the Russians.

The French had recaptured their pre-WW2 colony from the Japanese; the Vietnamese fought for and won their independence from the French; followed by a civil war which pitted the North [with Soviet and Chinese backing] against the South -- supported by the French and the US, and a treaty then divided the North from the South.

President Eisenhower sent over US Military observers; the Communists provided military advisors and advanced weaponry.  The North Vietnamese Army [NVA] dispatched guerrilla units [the Viet Cong] into the South to disrupt the country to overthrow the government.

Special Forces Advisory Team                (c) Sean Linnane
Ike then sent in advisors and positioned warships off the coast.  When the NVA moved four Army regiments into Laos, JFK dispatched US Special Forces to the region and increased the size and capacity of the US Military Advisory Group [MAG].  By now, Indochina had become a proxy battle in the Cold War, pitting Communist China and the USSR against the US. 

This proxy contest was contained until President Johnson politicized it and manipulated the conflict into a full scale war by violating Vietnam's territorial waters, drawing fire, and then declaring the North Vietnamese had committed an act of war.  Congress thus authorized him " take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force" resulting in the escalation of the Draft, and the deployment of hundreds of thousands of reluctant US draftees to fight in a Vietnamese civil war which lacked definition for US participation.

Congress condemns the VN War 1967

By 1967, Congress had determined that Johnson had staged and provoked the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and, reacting to massive objection to the war by the American public, demanded a drawdown and withdrawal of US troops.

"The Tet Offensive" of 1968 demonstrated that the US had lost control of the war, but General Westmoreland demanded still more troops to regain the initiative.

Left blames Nixon for Johnson's war
Nixon inherited the war and attempted to scale it back and draw down the US presence.

By 1971, anti-war organizations, many of whom were sponsored and funded by the Soviet Union's KGB [the Communist Russian intelligence arm] which promoted Agitprop, [political dissidence and propaganda] into the anti-war message eagerly carried by the Press and promoted by the Left, blamed Nixon for the war!

By the time the war ended in 1975, the United States had been ripped apart by the Extreme Left's propaganda, demonstrations, and anti-Military rhetoric. 

Vietnam Bonus
The Military was completely demoralized with little to no esprit, and the units which have served proudly in the Middle East wars were in absolute shambles.  The 82d Airborne Division was a shadow of today's unit; the Air Force was stripped of its honor, the Navy was reduced to a skeleton force, and the Marines sought to regain their dignity. 

When the Democrats put Jimmy Carter in office, he cut the Military budget, and blocked any pay raises -- until his reelection campaign, when he sought the Military vote [which voted as a block against him].

Rolling Thunder Vet welcomes Sarah Palin - the Patriot the Left hates

Vietnam Veterans are proud to have served their country -- even in an unpopular war, but are totally baffled that some of today's veterans of our wars in the Middle East want to support the reelection of a President advised by the very radical Democrats who sought to destroy the United States -- and the US Military in the Vietnam Era.

Those who forget history are doomed to relive it!

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

DC Crime Wave

Capitol Hill: High-crime area - with thousands of cops on the scene

Click here for related article (Washington Post)

Theft, muggings, beatings, stabbings, shootings, murder
Once again, Washington, DC, the world's most prominent city, the Capital of the most powerful country in the world, is undergoing a crime wave -- in and around Capitol Hill.
[from purse and cell phone snatching to armed robbery, to beatings and muggings, and murder!]

Not one in a thousand cops available

The latest victim was nearly beaten to death -- on the front porch of a US Senator -- within walking distance of the US Senate!

We have an army of Law Enforcement officers on Capitol Hill, yet crime has increased nearly two-thirds in the last couple of years.

Mayor Gray:  Unconditionally Corrupt  (c) Atlanta Black Star

Crime has been rising in direct relation to the lawlessness and corruption scandals emanating from the Mayor's office -- a situation so egregious that even former Mayor Marion Barry, the king of corruption, has condemned Mayor Gray.

Chief, don't mess with my union thugs!

Gray has undercut DC's famed Police Chief,  Cathy Lanier, and undermined her authority with her unionized police officers, to the extent that she now has difficulty controlling or directing them.  Her senior staff, with Mayor Gray's backing, openly defies her.

We have to assume there is a correlation between Mr Obama's Administration, in which corruption and scandals abound, and DC's wave of corruption and scandal.

Normally, the solution would be to "put more police officers on the scene", or "hire more cops".

Public Safety: Not in their Job Descriptions
Except that there are almost as many police already on Capitol Hill as there are residents and workers.

But, there is no central coordination to link them in their efforts, nor is there an evident interest on the part of these police forces to prevent crime on the streets.

The union response is:  "That's not in my job description!"

Here's a "partial" list of police agencies patrolling Capitol Hill and the federal district of Washington (about 40 blocks).

Available police officers to prevent crime in and around Capitol Hill:  Several thousand.
Visible law enforcement:  Only against political demonstrators.
Overall Crime-Fighting Effectiveness:  Zero!

District of Columbia Police Force                               [3,800 officers; 600 civilians]
US Secret Service (uniformed police)                        [1,300 uniformed officers patrolling DC]
US Capitol Police (Congressional Federal Police)     [1,800 officers]
Federal Protective Service                                         [2,100 employees:  $610 Million budget]
   (Civilian police force for DHS federal buildings)

In addition:

Supreme Court [federal] Police
US Park Police (Patrol National Parks, to include The Mall, monuments,
        all national park service properties in DC and surrounding region)
US Transportation Police (Amtrak/Union Station)
US Smithsonian Police
US State Department Diplomatic Security Service (Police)
US Naval Criminal Investigative Service
US Army Criminal Investigative Command
US Army Military Police
US Air Force Office of Special Investigations
US Coast Guard Investigative Service
US Mint Police

There are roughly 100 cops available to keep an eye on every city block in the federal district portion of Washington, DC.

But, their focus is not necessarily on public safety, but protecting us all from Democracy.

But crime is going up!

Monday, August 20, 2012

Romney - Job Creator?

Companies create jobs; Not the government
[HINT: Romney has built hundreds of companies]

[Disclaimer:  For this post, we draw on published facts.  We also draw on our lectures for a 6-credit hour course we taught at the University of Maryland University College in International Management.]

So, is Bain Capital a villain -- or hero?

Who created more jobs:  Obama, or Romney?
Sorry, Romney gets the Gold Medal; Obama gets a kick in the pants!

Bain Capital created companies which generated tens of millions of jobs directly and indirectly.
Obama spent nearly a TRILLION dollars to create Three Million -- at a cost of $275,000 each.
He also spent the same amount in loans and subsidies to Green companies which hired, then laid off thousands of workers -- who had produced no salable products.  Each of these workers thus cost the American taxpayers millions of dollars.

Millions of jobs created at home and abroad by Bain Capital 
Mr Obama accuses Mr Romney and Bain Capital of shutting down US companies, or worse, shipping US jobs overseas.

The reality is the opposite.  Bain Capital funded the formation and growth of hundreds of companies, creating jobs both in the US AND internationally.

To clarify the contribution to US employment Bain Capital has made, we've taken the liberty of listing a few of the many companies created or enhanced through Bain's investment; notably, these companies created millions of jobs directly and indirectly in the US and internationally.

Friends of Obama

Not one of the Bain-funded companies was created using federal subsidies or loans; all were created or enhanced through venture capital investment -- at risk -- by Bain capital.  Not all the companies Bain Capital invested in were successful, and some went belly-up, and workers lost their jobs; then again, without Bain's investment, they likely would have failed sooner, and the workers would have been unemployed earlier.

The companies listed below are only a few, but are representative of the companies created with Bain Capital investments; the employees are direct hires, and so don't count the millions of employees hired in the supply chain -- all those companies which provide products and services to these companies:

Nearly 400,000 New Jobs

Burger King:           34,000 employees,   12,400 shops
Domino's Pizza:   145,000 employees,     9,700 shops
Dunkin' Donuts:  200,000 employees,  10,000 shops

500 Theaters + the Movie Industry

AMC:                                        21,000 employees,  5,000 theaters
Guitar Center:                        10,000 employees,     228 stores
Sealy:                                         4,800 employees
Burlington Coat Factory:       28,000 employees,     360 stores

Plus seasonal hires

Sports Authority:  51,000 employees,    450 stores
Staples:                   90,000 employees, 2,000 stores
Toys "R" Us:          70,000 employees,    600 stores

Doctors, Nurses, support staff,
medicines, medical equipment, etc.

Hospital Corporation of America (HCA):

180,000 employees,
273 hospitals/centers

Let's take a look at the Supply Chain employment resulting from these companies:

For example:
Burger King, Domino's Pizza, Dunkin Donuts
all need the components for their food products; here's a sampling of the suppliers involved --all with their own tax-paying employees:

1) Farmers and ranchers grow/provide beef, chicken, dairy products, and vegetables
2) Bakeries provide the dough for buns, pizza, and pies; to serve the cooked/baked products
3) Specialty companies supply plastic trays/cups/glasses/ice cream holders, spoons/forks/knives;
4) Paper companies supply plates, bags, napkins, place settings.
5) Specialty suppliers provide spices, flavorings, cooking oils, salt and pepper and sugar.

Warehousing & Transport

And, think of how many secondary suppliers support each of these primary suppliers.

Finally, think of the supply process in which these products are warehoused, after which thousands of trucks, trains, and planes transport these goods to these company outlets. And, think about how many of these truckloads of these products are used by each of these companies, at each location, seven days a week.

We're almost finished -- other spin-offs.
Think in terms of how these millions of employees spend their wages:

Consumption -- Not Conspicuous
Gasoline/bus/subway fares
Rents/Mortgages -- apartments/condos/houses
Groceries/snacks/coffee/bottled water
School tuition/housing/

Last but not least, every one of these companies and employees pays taxes -- to the city, the county, the state, and to the federal government.

Now, let's take a look at the type of employment Obama created:

No Jobs, No Tax Revenue
It cost taxpayers $500 Million -- 1,100 workers their jobs
Government funded/guaranteed Green companies like Solyndra:

A few executives who pocketed tens of billions of dollars and parked the cash in off-shore accounts

The employees hired went on unemployment benefits when these companies collapsed; they stopped all but the most critical consumption -- and paid no taxes.
Cost taxpayers $275,000 per worker

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act spent $825 BILLION to employ approximately three (3) million workers in shovel-ready jobs, supposedly to maintain the infrastructure.  When those funds run out, these workers will be unemployed again.

That works out to expenditures of $275.000 per employee; had Obama simply written a check for $200,000 to these employees, they'd have gone on consumption spending sprees and boosted the sales of retail stores throughout the country, causing them to hire more employees and boost their suppliers.

And, the government could have used the unspent $225 BILLION to pay down the government debt!

Reduced Market Share = Fewer Jobs

Or, the hundreds of billions of dollars that went to keep GM and Chrysler afloat, to keep the unions from losing their membership; in essence, had these companies folded, other companies would have moved in and purchased their assets, and hired the non-union workers actually interested in working.

Currently, the United Auto Workers Union has replaced corporate management as part of Obama's program -- sort of like selecting the inmates to run the asylum.  Or more like the old Communist run car companies of Eastern Europe like the Yugo [a low point in the history of Fiat] and the Zil and the Gaz.

In essence, Mr Obama's economic recovery program in reality, created few -- if any new jobs, but instead, maintained unproductive unionized employment at taxpayer expense.

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Is Obama Targeting US Citizens?

We've reviewed the long series of Mr Obama's Executive Orders [EO], many of which seem aimed at dissolving the guarantees of the US Constitution.  The EOs have capitalized on the dismantling of the US Constitution begun with the Patriot Act and bolstered by the NDAA [National Defens Authorization Act.

You have no rights now!

Mr Obama's 135 EOs have systematically addressed every aspect of the economy as well as establishing the mechanisms to seize control of the US infrastructure, to include the power grid, the transportation system, the health care system, and most recently, the telecommunications system.  

[Since this post was written, we've learned that NSA has illegally collected massive amounts of information on us.]

Mr Obama discovered nukes under his bed
The capstone to this consolidation of power in the Executive Office was his declaration of a National Emergency which was based on the existence of Soviet nuclear weapons left over from the Cold War -- which have been closely monitored for the past 50 years. 

This EO allows the President to declare Martial Law, and implement all the measures he has created in all of his previous EOs -- enabling him to seize total control of all aspects of government, the US military, and the key aspects of the Private Sector.

These actions create a disturbing theoretical threat to the Constitution and to US citizenry; and, for the most part, few in the US could conceive that total control of our country could be seized in any manner.

But, now, new revelations are factoring into the equation which raise our concerns, 

Obama stockpiles for anticipated Civil War?
Notably, various elements of the US Government are making illogical, but massive purchases of ammunition -- ostensibly for "target practice"!

A case, though very thin, could be made for the Department of Homeland Security to purchase "hollow-point" ammunition for target practice, although few familiar with handguns or rifles would use hollow points for target practice; this ammunition is used primarily against large animals, or humans -- but not for target practice.

We have now been informed now other agencies are making similar purchases; but we are somewhat bewildered that the Social Security Administration would make such extraordinary purchases of such weaponry.

Here's a partial listing of the unusual ammunition and explosives purchases:

Department of Homeland Security:  
a)  1,000 pounds:                Explosive Nitrates
b)  450 MILLION Rounds:  .40 caliber Hollow Point for
                                                   Sig Sauer P226 pistol
c)  209,000 Rounds:            #00 Buckshot  cartridges
                                                 for 12 Gauge shotguns
d)  2 MILLION Rounds:     .357 for Sig Sauer P226 pistol
e)  1.1 Million Rounds:       .223 Remington 64G Soft Pt
[2019 purchase of 1.6 Billion rounds of ammunition]

Terrorist Fish
National Weather Service
[corrected to National Marine Fisheries Service]:

 a)   46,000 Rounds: .40 Caliber 180 Grain JHP
 b) 100,000 Rounds: .40 Caliber 125 Grain

Social Security Administration:

174,000 Rounds .357 Sig 125 Grain B Hollow Point

Ultimately, we examine the need of the Social Security Administration for 174,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition.

As one wag noted, perhaps they are preparing for an onslaught by hundreds of octogenarians storming the Social Security offices when their benefits ran out.

 It would appear the DHS is stocking up for a major war, but since the terrorist activity which we've seen in the US usually consists of groups smaller than ten persons, we have to wonder whom their targets will be.   Although the ammunition has been declared for "training" purposes, we're not quite sure what types of training they have in mind.

Hollow point and soft point rounds are designed for the primary purpose of killing large animals or humans by inflicting massive damage to internal organs and bones.

Using these rounds on a paper or composite target would likely make it a one time usage.

Inquiries into these extraordinary purchases have been met with some fairly convoluted explanations to include five-year projections for extended training by a broad range of personnel.

At best, it was a stretch for DHS since the ammunition purchased would likely have supported training every police officer in the United States for the next ten years -- if they were engaged in gun battles five days per week.

There has been no logical explanation why the Fisheries Service would need as much ammunition as they purchased, unless the Service was worried about being attacked by rabid Salmon.

Ultimately, we examine the need of the Social Security Administration for 174,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition.  As one wag noted, perhaps they are preparing for an onslaught by hundreds of octogenarians storming the Social Security offices when their benefits ran out.

We're here to protect you 
-- from terrorists

Humor aside, though; we have to wonder how many of these purchases have gone unnoticed, and where the ammunition is destined.

We've heard rumors of a private army being created by the Administration, and have even noted earmarks for funding in the ObamaCare package to create such an organization.

Bottom line:
What is the purpose of all this ammunition, and is it intended to be used against the American citizens in the event Mr Obama exercises his options under the provisions of EO 13159 [Declaration of a National Emergency].

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Comcast - Villain?

Does Comcast Control You?                   [(c)]

We've been having a running battle with Comcast for a while now over its faltering WiFi service.

At first, it appeared to be just another glitch [similar to the many we've routinely dealt with over the last 10 or 15 years [all the way back to the days of Thomson Cable].

And, in the past, a phone call to the Comcast techies usually resolved the problem quickly as the "techs" could skim a manual, identify the problem, and try a variety of remedies -- one of which eventually would correct the problem.

Sometimes, it would take a visit by a live tech who would eventually determine that the problem originated at the neighborhood cable distribution point.

Comcast's best techs are in Canada, their worst in Eastern Europe. 
[We've been dealing with Eastern Europe of late.]

Let's Communicate for $$ (c) Warner Bros
But, now, as the prison warden told Paul Newman's character [in Cool Hand Luke],
"What we have here is a failure to communicate!"

Hmm.  Four calls; four disconnects.

It seems that this time, our request for support zipped right through the first tech, who advised he couldn't fix the problem and immediately transferred us to an electronic message offering three options, the primary of which was to sign up for an expensive WiFi Service Support Package. 

This seemed odd since the WiFi problem derived from the diminution of Comcast's signal, rather than from our quite new and very high end equipment.  So, why should we have to pay a surcharge for a Service which Comcast seemed to be disrupting.

[Could Comcast be a subsidiary of ObamaCare?]

I am from the city of Vermont  (c) HHenly

To confirm our suspicions, we made a fifth call, reaching "Erik" a tech whom we had conversed, and then arranged a conversation with his supervisor "Jake" [#615], whom we asked specifically if it were necessary to sign up for Comcast's WiFi Support Service to get Comcast to fix their transmission problem.  He eventually admitted the disruption in service could only be solved by signing up for Comcast's new Xfinity Signature Support service.

We then forwarded a complaint to government regulators on this apparent coercion, and we received calls from Jackie Dieter and a "Marie Schuler" from Comcast's Executive Customer Care Team -- deeply concerned that we had a problem, with assurances that a Comcast Tech Rep would be in touch to resolve the problem.  Oddly, there has been no such contact, much less, resolution.

                                       (c) MaximumPC
Our conversation with government regulators regarding Comcast's seeming monopoly status was quite revealing, but not very satisfactory.

We learned that government regulators take a "hands-off" approach to Cable companies since they have no jurisdiction over the Internet or WiFi signals, leaving Comcast, et al, to misbehave and to be abusive to their customer base.  Then again, we learned that there are class action suits against Comcast
[e.g., Behrend v Comcast] which will likely be reviewed by the Supreme Court.

In fact, although they cannot interfere with Internet and/or WiFi signals [and we're very glad of that], government regulators can regulate the carriers of those signals over their equipment.  We have a very heavy duty coaxial cable leading into our office which carries the signal to the Comcast Router, which is supposed to then route Internet to our computers and project a WiFi signal to wireless locations at our location. 

But now, the signal for both is minimal -- in contrast to Comcast's recent proclamations that they had "upgraded" their Xfinity service -- perhaps the small print was that the upgrade isn't free; and, the "upgrade" might be tied to a recent "downgrade" of one's existing service.
[And, Exfinity seems to be a pseudonym for the infinitesimal wait for a usable service signal]

So, what's the story here?

$7.99/month for the best TV series
Well, following recent disruptions in our Internet service [they seem to be more routine now], we commented to the repair people [who tried to sell us an upgrade to Comcast TV] to which we no longer subscribed since it was inherently cheaper to cancel the TV service and simply "stream" via BlueRay the NetFlix array of TV program series as well as its vast array of movies.

"Netflix represents more than 20% of downstream traffic during peak times.

We also learned that NetFlix is not alone, and that more companies have these offerings, all at monthly pricing significantly less than Comcast
[e.g., Comcast TV service is roughly $80 per month; NetFlix streaming is $8.00 per month; hmm, easy choice!].

So, are we facing a situation where Comcast is deliberately disrupting service to its clients to force them to use their TV service, or to interfere with the "streaming" capability which enables NetFlix?

It certainly seems that way.

In the old days, we would refer to such an abuse as extortion; but, in today's environment of mega-companies which arrange for quasi-monopoly service contracts with government eye-winking and large campaign contributions, coupled with private lunches among providers in which they divide up the consumer territory, we fear that the consumers just don't have the clout to fight back. 

We learned that there is no government allocation of territories at all; it is the companies themselves which allocate territories.  So, theoretically, you could have a Cox Cable connection next door to a Comcast connection -- but when's the last time you saw THAT happen.

David Cohen EVP - Comcast Cable        [Wikipedia File Photo]

Now, we're certain that David L. Cohen, Executive VP of Comcast Cable, is an honest man.  He is, after all, a "close confidant of Pennsylvania's Governor Ed Rendell" -- the General Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Law School [we believe with no linkage to their sports program].

Pa Gov Rendell   [Wikipedia Photo]

So, we're certain David would be appalled if he were to be accused of market manipulation.

Given the advantage Comcast enjoys in this situation, we'll exercise our own political options. 

Residing in the US Capital does have its advantages since 40+ years of exposure to Hill contacts, both politicians and staffers, has some merit.  Politicians come and go; staffers stay forever.

If we combine these contacts with a few zealous Journalists looking for a great scandal in an election year, we just might be able to make a dent in the armor of the Cable industry and the stranglehold it has on consumers.

And, an unregulated Internet will allow us to disseminate this story.