The Lesser of Two Evils

Often in our history, presidential elections have boiled down to a choice between the lesser of two evils. The 2016 presidential election cycle is no exception.  In listening to the news I have been assaulted by a plethora of reasons why Clinton or Trump should or should not be elected.  Several concepts and issues keep emerging and re-emerging in my mind concerning this chaotic election cycle.

First it must be said that when it comes to electing someone to the office of president, character matters and it matters a lot. It must also be said, unfortunately, that this year both major party candidates seem to be seriously challenged in this area.  Be that as it may, we are still, whether we like it or not, left with a choice that is less than palatable.

Amidst the storm of accusations and scandals (“Locker room talk”; sexual inappropriateness; tax returns; temperament; medical disclosure; private email servers; quid pro quo; conflicts of interest etc.) I find myself looking for a life ring of relevance. While all these things are issues, I’m forced to ask myself if they are THE issues.

It seems to me that the vital issues for most people are things like the economy, national security, border control and immigration, healthcare, education. These are the issues which impact us all on a regular basis.  In light of these issues I have found myself, whenever I hear a new revelation or accusation, asking some specific questions:

  • What is the impact on national security or economics, if the Secretary of State has a private email server?
  • How does “locker room talk” or not disclosing ones tax returns affect economics or border control?
  • How do conflicts of interest within government affect healthcare or education?
  • How are all of these major issues which concern every one of us affected by the words and especially the actions of Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?

Frame these issues and questions against the backdrop of each candidate’s philosophy concerning the size and role of government, their view/understanding of the free market system, or their perception of the constitution and the differences become very real.

I’m forced to conclude that the past actions (which speak louder than words), and hence the likely future actions, of HRC are the most toxic and detrimental for our country, especially when one considers that most, if not all of those actions, took place while in public office. Those actions reveal exceedingly poor judgment, were taken with a calloused abuse of power, were either deceptive or dishonest, and were in some cases nothing less than illegal.

While Donald Trump may be brash, overbearing and obnoxious, neither his words nor his actions come anywhere close to having the damaging impact and cancerous endangerment that those of Hillary Clinton do. There are other issues in my mind but those will have to wait.  So I am left with a choice: to vote or to not vote.  Not voting is really not an option so my next choice, however frustrating, is evident.  Given her overwhelming credentials for disqualification and her pedigree of corruption Hillary Clinton will not be getting my vote.  Instead I will vote for the lesser of two evils.

 

An open letter to President Obama

Dear President Obama,

After listening to some of your comments in the wake of the Oregon shooting (specifically your reminder to us that more guns do NOT make us safer) I have a course of action which I think you should consider. This action, if implemented, would not only prove your point emphatically, removing any and all doubt as to the truth of what you are saying, but it would demonstrate, in the face of your opponents, true leadership by example.

Here is my suggestion: completely disarm the entire security force which surrounds you and your family on a day by day, moment my moment basis. Every high power sniper rifle, every hand gun, every high power and compact machine gun, every tactical assault rifle – loose it all.

I believe, as I’m sure you must, that the evidence of such action – that being a much safer environment for you and your family to live, work and play – would be immediately evident and that the obvious wisdom of such action would silence your critics once and for all, giving them and their argument no room to maneuver and no ground to stand on. It would be a perfect example, in microcosm, of how the principle works in macrocosm. It may prove to be so effective that even the NRA would find it hard to argue with the results.

This course of action seems to be very reasonable and logical and should serve you well both practically and politically. I urge you to consider my suggestion, though I know you have a lot of very smart people around you and I can’t help but think that some of them may have already suggested this.

Kindest Regard,

Hugo Lawrence

Published in: on October 3, 2015 at 10:21 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

Putin, Crimea and Ukraine

George Friedman, of Stratfor, (www.stratfor.com) recently wrote another stellar article concerning Russia and Ukraine.  I’d like to share some thoughts that this report did not mention specifically, although they may be written between the lines.  I’ve developed these thoughts and observations over the last 15 years while living in Ukraine.

As the saying goes, “Russia with Ukraine is an empire, Russia without Ukraine is just another country”.  This saying and the national patriotic pride that accompanies it, I believe, weigh heavily on the mind of Vladimir Putin who greatly desires to see Russia restored to its former glory.

His motivations are also very practically political – enter Crimea.  Many, if not most, Russians will claim that “Crimea has always been part of Russia”.  While that is half true, the fact remains that Crimea – Sevastopol and the Black Sea Fleet specifically – has been a very critical part of Russia’s geo-political influence for many years.

With that in mind, much of what has happened in the past 10 years is not that surprising.  When I first arrived in Ukraine in early 2001, Russia had a relatively good relationship with Ukraine and the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol was secure.  In 2004 the Orange Revolution brought to power the more westward leaning Viktor Ushenko who announced that when the lease for the fleet in Sevastopol ended, in 2017, it would not be renewed.  This was not good news for Russia.  Five years later, Viktor Yanukovich, a much more pro-Russian president, came to power and renewed the lease until 2042.  Good news for Russia.  They had “their man” at the helm in Ukraine and things again were looking good.  That was short lived however and Yanukovich was eventually removed from power and a new government, much more west leaning, replaced him.  The pendulum again swings westward and a collective groan of exasperation can be heard from the halls of the Kremlin.

In the eyes of Vladimir Putin, seen through his glasses of patriotic pride and political practicality, the port for the Black Sea Fleet needed to be secured in such a way that it was no longer vulnerable to the unpredictable political climate in Ukraine.  There was really only one option:  Take Crimea.  Crimea is a non-negotiable in Putin’s eyes.  In order to keep Crimea (which is quite a different matter than taking it) the south-east portion of Ukraine is vital as it provides the land bridge by which Crimea can be supplied and maintained.  The strait of Kerch is adequate for minor and/or temporary supply, but will not do at all for long term sustained support; infrastructure and weather being the determining factors.

From my perspective I see Putin with three levels of desired success:

  1. Take all of Ukraine. If the west continues to mount a sluggish and tentative response, Putin will take as much as the west will allow, all of Ukraine being the ultimate goal. This would re-establish the Great Russian Empire and is, I believe, Putin’s best case scenario regarding Ukraine.
  2. Take the Crimean peninsula and the SE corner of Ukraine. This option is second best as it gives him Crimea and the land bridge he needs to maintain it.
  3. Take Crimea and figure out later how to supply it if he can’t get the SE corner of Ukraine. This option is clearly not the best but Crimea is simply not negotiable. If Russia is not able to get the SE corner of Ukraine, watch for some very significant development of the bridges and infrastructure at the strait of Kerch, which may begin in the spring of 2015 regardless.
Published in: Uncategorized on December 16, 2014 at 11:38 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

The Enemy Within is not Barack Obama

While in most wars, the enemy is easy to see and easy to target, the USA is in a war with an enemy which is not so visible; yet the results are very visible. A national deficit which has skyrocketed at an alarming rate; border problems which not long ago would have seemed inconceivable; government abuse and corruption which has flourished and grown in recent years; a strong and coherent international policy which is missing in action.  What could account for such a puzzle?  The answer: The enemy within.

Rather than looking at specific political, economic or moral issues let’s consider a few basic and very foundational beliefs which are having enormous impact on our country.  It is well known and documented that Barack Obama is a student and devout follower of Saul Alinsky and his ideologies.  Alinsky, many would argue, wrote the book on community organizing and, as it pertains to his writing, is perhaps best known for his book “Rules for Radicals” in which much of his ideology and beliefs are set forth.

Below are a few quotes from “Rules for Radicals” which reveal a dangerous and flawed ideology which is, in the hands of Mr. Obama and others (such as Hillary Rodham Clinton, another Alinsky follower) are wreaking havoc on America.

Alinsky states the purpose for his book “Rules for Radicals” as follows:  In this book we are concerned with how to create mass organizations to seize power and give it to the people; . . .” (bold mine)  He also states that “The Prince was written by Machiavelli for “the Haves” on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”  Notice in these two statements that the focus is on the taking away from others and not the empowering of people “who have not” to “make their own”.  When anything is attained by simply taking it from others rather than by working for it or making it by one’s own means and strength there is a dignity that is lost, an appreciation that is absent and a sense of satisfaction that is forfeited.    The idea of “seizing power” to give to the people also reveals a remarkable degree of naiveté, especially from those who are supposedly well educated.  Have they never heard the maxim that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”?  To assume that the people who “seize power” even with the best of intentions will so easily “give it to the people” shows an incredible amount of childish idealism which holds no ground in reality.

Alinsky:  “A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage — the political paradise of communism.”  The notion that “all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists” is absolutely preposterous.  Exploitation is a fruit of a human nature that seeks its own above that of anyone else.  It can be accomplished by rich and poor alike; by “the haves” as well as by “the have nots”.  Alinsky and his followers also seem to miss the fact that “the capitalists” are those (like Levis, Starbucks, Sears, Boeing, Microsoft and so many others) who provide gainful employment for countless thousands of people by which they can honorably provide for their families.  THAT, my dear Mr. Alinsky, is how you “give to the people” who have not.  It is not by giving them the fruit of another mans labor, but by giving them the same opportunity to succeed and realize their own dreams.  Notice also that Alinsky moves from the supposed “exploitation” of the proletariat to the outright dictatorship of the proletariat.  For the working class that he claims to be “organizing” for, it is undoubtedly a step in the wrong direction.  As to the “political paradise of communism” look no further than eastern Europe and behold the disastrous results of this form of “political paradise”.  The only ones who benefit from this system are those who have “seized the power” and NOT those to whom it was to be given.

Alinsky:  “An organizer working in and for an open society is in an ideological dilemma to begin with, he does not have a fixed truth — truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing…. To the extent that he is free from the shackles of dogma, he can respond to the realities of the widely different situations….”  These statements are so full of contradiction that one barely knows where to begin.  Alinsky speaks of “prime truths” and yet here says there is no fixed truth.  How does one who professes to be a “radical” pursue the ideals (aka dogma) of Alinsky and progressivism if “everything is relative and changing”?  If there is no “fixed truth” how does one know if they are staying true to the ideals (or “prime truths” as they were called before) of radicalism.  L. David Alinsky said “Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008”.

In light of this, consider the teachings of Alinsky, of which Barack Obama is an ardent follower:

  • Not the empowering of people, but the taking from one group who have earned and giving it to another group who have not earned; foolish at best.
  • The naïve “seizing of power” ostensibly to give to the powerless; flawed from the start.
  • A world in which there are no absolutes or “fixed truths” (aside from a “prime truth” that has absolutely no semblance in reality) and hence nothing to serve as a point of reference by which to chart a beneficial course for the nation.

 

Is it any wonder that Barack Obama, seems to have no point of bearing or core values by which to guide him and our nation through the difficult times the world now faces? Syria, Ukraine, Israel, Iran; all turbulent winds and troubles of our times which require strong moral courage, confident conviction and stable “north star” of truth that does not waver. The rules for radicals and community organizers do not apply to the offices of CEO and commander in chief of a nation. Please don’t misunderstand me. I don’t think that Barack Obama is the enemy of the state. The ideology which he advocates is the enemy which threatens the very foundation of our great nation.The cherry on top of all this is Alinsky’s own acknowledgement in his book “Rules for Radicals” in which he says: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom —   Lucifer.” Even an honest atheist would tell you that the persona of Lucifer is the embodiment of evil. To give such a disturbing nod to Lucifer speaks volumes.  The question is: is America listening??

Hugo

Published in: Uncategorized on July 24, 2014 at 1:54 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , ,

Team Obama/Kerry vs Team Putin

Imagine, if you will, a criminal going before the judge for a crime, say murder, bank robbery or the like.  Upon admitting his guilt, and being unrepentant concerning the crime, it is time for the judge to make his ruling.  At this point the judge says: “if you commit another crime like this or similar to this there will be a penalty to pay!  Case dismissed!”

What would be the problem in such a situation?  First, and perhaps most fundamentally, it would ignore the very nature of the law which says that for certain unacceptable actions there is a corresponding response.  In the scenario above that basic relationship is completely ignored and is replaced with another.  The new relationship says “for any possible future action there will be an as yet undetermined and undefined reaction”.  Aside from providing absolutely NO dis-incentive for the criminal to never again commit crime it puts the court on the defensive which is the wrong place to be.

The old adage which says “the best defense is a good offense” applies to sports, games, politics and war.  In the case of the criminal vs. judge, the judge is automatically on the defense since the criminal has made the first move.  It is now the responsibility of the judge to gain the upper hand; to go on the offense so to speak.  The judge needs to make a move that will pre-emptively stop or significantly hinder the criminal from repeating his behavior.  That’s why the criminal is usually thrown in jail, fined etc.  In prison it’s difficult to rob a bank again and doing time should serve as an unpleasant dis-incentive which will cause the criminal to say “I don’t want to try that again.”  Take away that dis-incentive and the probability of the criminal repeating the crime is very high.

It’s also important to remember that the law meets out punishment in response for a crime ALREADY COMMITTED.  The law does not issue threats for possible future actions.  President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are acting like the judge who, abdicating his responsibility and duty in the eyes of the law, have issued threats of future possible action instead of real and tangible consequences for crimes already committed.  Are sanctions good?  Yes.  Are they enough?  Not even close; especially when, according to President Obama, the sanctions are aimed not at Putin, the main force behind all this, but at those around him.  There must be proactive and tangible actions that say “here is the cost for what you have already done; the cost for further actions will be even higher.”  The collective response of the west in general and of the USA specifically, should be much more proactive and stern.  Unfortunately President Obama and John Kerry together amount to nothing more than a one legged man in a butt kicking contest, telling Putin to stop kicking or else.

Hugo

Published in: Uncategorized on March 17, 2014 at 11:17 am  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , , , ,

Ukraine Crisis: What language is the west speaking?

What language is the west speaking?  While Vladimir Putin invades Crimea, and yes it IS without any doubt an invasion (a violation of the boarders of another sovereign state) the west continues to talk of diplomacy and sanctions.  The talk of sanctions and the freezing of bank accounts of certain Russian oligarchs is ridiculous.  Putin, it may be said, understands the language of force.  More to the point, and perhaps more accurately, he understand the language of ACTION.  Consequently the mere talk of sanctions is fluff.  As soon as Putin invaded Crimea there should have been  IMMEDIATE action taken.  Russia should have been immediately kicked out of the G8, G20 and any other G-something group of which they were a part.  Bank accounts of key people should have frozen, visas revoked, military support sent, financial support sent etc.  Instead, what we heard was “if you do . . . then there will be a cost”.  What are you talking about?  THEY’VE ALREADY DONE IT!!  The response of the west does not need to be violent aggression, but it most certainly needs to be action and not threats which, based on recent history, don’t carry a lot of weight.  Putin is more than happy to let the west talk and threaten and bloviate.  It gives him that much more time to ACT.

The saying goes: Russia without Ukraine is a country; Russia with Ukraine is an empire.  While this weighs on the minds of some but not all Russians, it weighs HEAVILY on the mind of Putin and is a big part of his emotional and patriotic psyche.  Ukraine is important to Russia/Putin for emotional and psychological reasons, but there are also strategic reasons that are very real.  The Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol on the Crimean Peninsula; the gas pipelines that transit Ukraine which connect Russia with its customers in Europe; the mineral/agricultural resources in Ukraine (long known as “the breadbasket of Russia).  With that as a back drop, consider:

  • Sevastopol, on the Crimean peninsula, has long been home to Russia’s Black Sea fleet.  This is a VITAL port for Russia as it is Russia’s only warm water port for its navy.
  • In 2004 the Orange Revolution brought to power Victor Uschenko, a west-leaning president who stated that the contract between Ukraine and Russia for the Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol would not be renewed when it expired in 2017.  NOT good for Russia
  • In the next election (2010) pro-Russian Victor Yanukovich is elected and controversially extends the contract for the Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol until 2042.  Good news for Russia and yet during Yanukovich’s term Russia begins handing out Russian passports like candy in Crimea.  They did the same thing in Georgia in 2008.
  • 2013/14 after MAJOR betrayal and years of corruption, Yanukovich is ousted amidst dramatic and violent opposition and another pro-western government comes to power.  This again puts the Black Sea fleet in jeopardy.  In Putin’s mind this kind of instability is unacceptable, and from his point of view I totally understand that thinking.  So how does one secure the use of Sevastopol so that it’s not prone to such instability?  If you are Putin you don’t waste time in diplomacy, you take it!  And what better time to take it than when Ukraine is in the middle of difficult transition?

The bottom line is this:  Putin wants ALL of Ukraine.  He wants to restore Russia to its former glory and take back as many of the former Soviet states as possible and Ukraine being the crown jewel.  If he can’t have all of Ukraine right now he’ll take the south and eastern portions along with Crimea.  If he can’t have that, he’ll take Crimea.  If the international community thinks that diplomacy and sanctions alone will convince Putin to pull out of Crimea they are SORELY mistaken; and if they think he will take only Crimea and be satisfied with that they are naïve.  He may settle for that in the short term but he’ll bide his time and make a move for the rest later (though I think he’ll do it sooner), but rest assured he wants it all.  If you give a mouse a cookie he’ll want a glass of milk.  Putin wants the whole fridge; but Crimea is an extremely critical need for Russia and is not negotiable.  Whether President Obama knows it or not the cold war, in the mind of President Putin, is not over.

The only way out of this mess where Russia gets what it wants and Ukraine gets what it wants is if Russia pulls completely out of Crimea.  The only way that will happen is if Ukraine grants Russia’s Black Sea fleet PERMANENT access to the Sevastopol port.  Even with that, I’m not sure Putin would agree, as a withdraw would make him look weak, which is something that I’m not sure Putin’s ego could abide.  Also, as I said before, Putin wants it all, and backwards is not a direction he is accustomed to going.  Convincing Putin to pull out of Crimea will take some serious muscle and leverage on several fronts.  The kind of action that is needed for that is action that the west seems unwilling to make.  So it seems that the west is willing to give the mouse the cookie, naïvely trusting that the mouse will not want the glass of milk as well.  With that the Ukrainian people will be threatened, Putin will be emboldened, and at some point in the future we’ll have to go through this all again.

Hugo

Published in: Uncategorized on March 7, 2014 at 5:19 pm  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Who is protecting whom in Ukraine

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1099314

The above link is a good article concerning Ukraine.  I also posted a reply there which I’ve included below.

I can confirm what MaiaKiev says.  As a foreigner living in Ukraine for the past 13 years I see 99.9% of the people see language as a non-issue.  Ukrainians are not anit-Russia.  They want to have the freedom, like any other country, to pursue relations with other nations IN ADDITION to Russia, not instead of Russia.  Many have family in Russia and have no ill will towards their Russian neighbors.  Putin, on the other hand, is a different animal and wants to see “the glory days” of Russia restored, which means possession of Ukraine.  He wants it all.  If he can’t have that he’ll settle for Crimea and the south/west.  If he can’t have that he’ll take Crimea but the world is naïve if they think Putin will settle only for Crimea.  He will use any and all propaganda and lies and excuses he can.  Threats of not being included as part of the G8 (an other such actions) don’t frighten him.  The international community MUST stand with Ukraine with strong and tangible ACTION, not just words.

Published in: Uncategorized on March 3, 2014 at 4:36 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , ,

Open letter to John Boehner and other conservatives in the government.

Dear Speaker Boehner and all you who consider yourselves or call yourselves conservatives. I, like countless others in our country, are growing VERY weary of watching Mr. Obama deliberately weaken, emasculate and erode our country and the foundations upon which it was founded.

Specifically on my mind today is Mr. Obamas purposeful debilitation of our military by the removal of high ranking officers. U.S. Army Gen. Carter Ham, Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, Army Major Gen. Ralph Baker, were all “dismissed” for their critical comments concerning the Benghazi attack. Six others were fired for a variety of convenient situations. Army Brig. Gen. Bryan Roberts – charged with adultery (ala former president William Jefferson Clinton); Navy Vice Adm. Tim Giardina – removed for allegedly using counterfeit gambling chips while playing poker at a Iowa casino. ARE YOU SERIOUS!!?? Air Force Maj. Gen. Michael Carey – fired for “personal misbehavior” but no one has said what that was. Most notable perhaps was Army Gen. David Petraeus – “relieved” for adultery. Adultery I can understand. I think that anyone and everyone in high position should be held to a high moral standard. Gen. David McKiernan – didn’t go along with a counterinsurgency strategy; Marine Corps Major Gen. Charles M. M. Gurganus – questioned, for very valid reasons, having to use Afghan security patrols alongside American patrols.

And where, might I ask, is your collective objection to such an obvious purge? Simple logic dictates that you are either aware of these situations and the true nature of what’s happening or you are not. If you are not aware of these situations – RESIGN IMMEDIATELY. If you are aware, then logic dictates that you are either unwilling or unable to do anything about it. If you are unwilling to do anything about it – RESIGN IMMEDIATELY. If you are unable, then I suggest that you find the ability to do something about it. First on the list: let the public, us your employers, know what’s going on. No more behind closed door deals where truth and justice die a quiet and whimpering death at the hands of political compromise. Make it public!! Personally, I find it hard to comprehend that you personally as Speaker of the House, as well as your colleagues who all hold positions of influence and authority, would find it difficult to obtain a public forum in which to make public this despicable conduct on the part of Mr. Obama who, despite his rhetoric, seems bent on the weakening, and eventual downfall of our great nation.

So I am challenging you, Mr. Speaker and all of your colleagues: FIND YOUR BACKBONE!! Stand up for what is right! Stand up for US your employers and for this nation which you have sworn to protect and serve! Stop playing politics and making decisions that will best serve your career; make decisions that are RIGHT for our nation. Decisions that best serve your careers are often the very things which have caused us to distrust you. Earn back that trust by doing what’s right for the country.

Hugo

Published in: Uncategorized on October 29, 2013 at 11:34 am  Leave a Comment  

Government Shutdown? Why the panic??

I’m confused!! 

There was the government operation called “Fast and Furious” which was probably ill-conceived and was undeniably ill-managed.  When that blew up there was the “hidden bean under the coconut shell game” of blame, ignorance, lies and deceit in an attempt to cover up the government ineptitude.  Then there was the IRS Exempt Organizations Unit, under the direction of Lois Lerner, targeting conservative groups and giving them all sorts of uncalled for grief and problems.  Coconut shell game ensues yet again.  Of course we can’t forget the Justice Department’s seizure of Associated Press phone records.  Have I mentioned the governments Benghazi debacle which was followed by governmental smoke screens, bald face lies, misinformation ad nauseam (aka yet another shell game)?  Of course how can we overlook Obamacare, the most divisive and potentially damaging piece of legislation in history, which was crammed down our throats and then opted out of by the feckless politicians who force fed us the monstrous anathema? 

So I was surprised to see yet another headline screaming, much like the blonde damsel in the clutches of King Kong, at the top of their collective journalistic lungs, over the impending Government shut-down (as if that was a bad thing?).  And what do they threaten to shut down first?  National parks are among them as I understand.  The answer is not to shut down government, especially things like parks.  The answer is to stop paying those most inefficient and incompetent sections of our government until they start doing their job correctly.  This would of course include the financial black hole known as the white house, congress and senate.  They are the ones responsible for the mess; they should be the first to feel the consequences of their ineptitude.  

Harry Reid called this “an unnecessary blow to America” but it is Mr. Reid, and his cronies that are the “unnecessary blow to America”.  If they really care about America, they should forfeit their pay until this is properly, resolved.  I have little hope that this will happen however.  In mid-October looms yet another deadline; a deadline that, unfortunately, we have faced recently:  To raise the debt limit or face US Government default.  That they would even consider raising the debt limit shows that our “leaders” are in intellectual and professional default. 

Shut down the government?  NO.  Stop paying the incompetent nincompoops who are creating this predicament along with their unscrupulous and reprobate underlings until they do what we are paying them to do?  BY ALL MEANS, YES!!!

Hugo

Published in: Uncategorized on October 1, 2013 at 11:59 am  Leave a Comment  

Replace the monkeys!!

Got this from a friend of mine.  No idea where it originated but I just love it!  Enjoy.

 

Psychology 101 – Monkey Business

If you start with a large cage containing five monkeys and inside the cage, hang a banana on a string from the top and then place a set of stairs under the banana, before long a monkey will go to the stairs and climb toward the banana.  As soon as he touches the stairs, you spray all the other monkeys with cold water.  After a while another monkey makes an attempt with same result…all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water.  Pretty soon when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it.  Now, put the cold water away.  Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one.  The new monkey sees the banana and attempts to climb the stairs.
To his shock, all of the other monkeys beat the daylights out of him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs he will be assaulted.  Next, remove another of the original five monkeys, replacing it with a new one.  The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm, because he is now part of the “team”.
Then, replace a third original monkey with a new one, followed by the fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked.  Now, the monkeys that are beating him up have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs. Neither do they know why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.  Finally, having replaced all of the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys will have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, not one of the monkeys will try to climb the stairway for the banana.  Why, you may ask?   Because in their minds…that is the way it has always been!!!!

This, my friends, is how Congress operates…and this is why, from time to time: ALL OF THE MONKEYS NEED TO BE REPLACED AT THE SAME TIME.

Published in: Uncategorized on June 19, 2013 at 11:14 pm  Leave a Comment