CURR-EVENTS

IT'S OFFICIAL

The New Happiness Poll - By State

The happiest people are from:

1. Louisiana (go figure)

2. Hawaii (how could you not be happy in Hawaii)

3. Florida

4. Tennessee

5. Arizona

6. South Carolina

7. Mississippi

8. Montana

9. Alabama

What in the world do these states have in common?

Oh yeah. They're All run by Conservative politicians

The least happy are from:

36. Washington

37. Washington D.C.

38. Missouri

39. Nevada

40. Maryland

41. Pennsylvania

42. Rhode Island

43. Ohio

44. Massachusetts

45. Illinois

46. California

47. New Jersey

48. Indiana

49. Michigan

50. Connecticut

51. New York

What in the world do these states have in common?

Oh yeah. They're All run by Liberals politicians.

So, let's sum up. If I want to be happy, I should move to a Conservative State?

I Have a better idea. If I (I mean you - I live in Florida) want to be happy, why not vote the Liberals out and elect Conservatives - then I (you) too will be happy, and I (you) won't have to move.

Sounds like a plan.

JOHN W. SAWYER

Conservative for Congress

December 16, 2009: It's Alabama over Texas by THREE Touchdowns. Remember where you heard it first.

CABLE NETWORKS

(August 1 2009)

When TV broadcasting in the whole country switched from Analog to digital ( instantly making many TV sets obsolete ), viewers, especially condo and home-owner association members, made a discovery: the reception from their basic cable system was near-perfect - absolutely outstanding.

Good news, yes? Well that depends. You see, previously if cable subscribers wanted high-definition (HD) reception, they needed to pay extra to receive it. Then you could only receive HD from those broadcasting stations(HDTV) that offered it to the cable companies and major networks like NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX did not offer HD.

When the mandatory switch went into effect, networks had little choice but to offer HD broadcasts, FOX being the last to capitulate. Herein lies the rub. If your house or condo is wired for cable, and your Association pays for basic cable services (and almost all do), you get HD reception free.

Remember where you heard it first: someday the cable companies will charge a premium for this service and block or scramble the reception for those who do not pony up. Why? The service does not cost the cable company one extra penny.

TIME FOR A CHANGE

There isn't a single cable company in the U.S. that doen't make money. The owners of some, like Comcast and Adelphia, are billionaires. Hey, that's the American Way, is it not? I guess that depends on your perspective.

The American way that says take risks, work hard, and, with luck, get rich doesn't apply to monopolies. Cable companies enjoy a monopoly. In the Sixties, these companies came into being to provide reception for rural areas that were not within range of the signals from the existing TV station. It was too costly to put up tall antennae in sparsely-populated areas, so these upstart companies purchased programs and sent to rural homes via phone lines.

Later, cable companies ran their own lines underground. Then, seeing a potential for revenue, governments stepped in, and using the lame excuse that there was limited band space available (simply - too many stations, too little band width [like on your radio]), they proceeded to "regulate" the nascent industry.

But it IS odd that only one company was granted rights to broadcast in each jurisdictions - to keep the reception from overwhelming the reception from other stations, you see.Of course, it was just coincidence that mayors,and city councilman (like Joel Furgeson in Lansing, Michigan) managed to grab a piece of these cable companies.

Cable companies, with their government-provided monopolies, can charge what they want, and provide poor service at their whim.

Now with digital cable we get much greater picture and sound quality. Why? Simply put, digital puts more litle dots on your TV screen - hence better quality. This is made possible because of broadband cable technology. Cables can broadcast far more data than was possible through air transmissions.

So, if he cable companies provide a better service, haven't they earned their profits (monopoly or no monoploy)? Not so fast. Thanks to our politicians in Washington, in exchange for campaign "donations" THE TAXPAYERS paid for those underground cables, at no risk or cost to the cable companies.

Party First, Candidate Second, You and Me - Never.

WHAT LEGISLATOR SAWYER WOULD DO

With the new digital technology, provided by broadband cables (paid for by you and me), there is plenty of bandspace available. No longer do we have to rely on tall TV towers bleeding into the reception of other TV towers. There no longer is a need for a monopoly. President Sawyer would press for Legislation allowing any cable company, anytime, anywhere, to set up a broadcasting service - and let the FREE MARKET decide which companies succeed.

WHOOOOOOOOAAA - UPDATE, UPDATE

(February 19, 2010 online)

I just hate to say "I TOLD YOU SO" but (ever so reluctantly) here goes:

Dear Property Owner,

We are writing to share some exciting news about your residents’ cable service. We’re enhancing our network, giving your residents access to more – more choices and more internet speed.

Through your agreement with Comcast, your residents now receive Full Basic service. As part of the network enhancement, to continue receiving channels 25-99, your residents will need to order a digital device for each TV in their home that isn’t connected to a digital set-top box. If they have a TV or other device that uses a CableCARD, no additional equipment is necessary for that TV.

The channels 25-99, will be offered exclusively in digital format as of August 30, 2011. Once the network enhancement is complete:

· Residents will enjoy crisp digital picture and sound.

· All channels will be broadcast exclusively in digital format.

· Additional channels will become available.

After the digital conversion on August 30, 2011, any TV without digital equipment will no longer receive channels 25-99.

Your residents can receive up to three digital adapters at no additional monthly service charge. Residents who already have digital equipment can receive up to two digital adapters at no additional monthly service charge. Additional adapters are $1.99 per month

How will your residents get the equipment they need?

We will contact your residents directly and offer them several options:

· Residents with an existing account at Comcast can use comcast.com/digitalnow to order their digital adapters and have them shipped at no charge. Residents will need to know their Comcast account number to use this option.

· Residents with an existing account at Comcast can call the automated Digital Upgrade line at 877-634-4434 to order their digital adapters and have them shipped at no charge. Residents will need to know the phone number that they have provided on their Comcast account to use this option.

· Residents without an existing account at Comcast can call our regular order line at 239-432-9277 or 1-800-COMCAST to order their digital adapters and have them shipped at no charge or they can schedule a professional installation for $29.95 for the first box $9.95 for each additional.

· Residents are also welcome to stop by our service center to pick up the necessary equipment. The nearest service center location is:

12641 Corporate Lakes Dr

Fort Myers, FL 33913

UPDATE June 21, 2011

Yessir: I received this notice through my Association Website, no less:

Dear Property Owner,

We are writing to share some exciting news about your residents’ cable service. We’re enhancing our network, giving your residents access to more – more choices and more internet speed.

The channels 25-99, will be offered exclusively in digital format as of August 30, 2011. Once the network enhancement is complete:

· Residents will enjoy crisp digital picture and sound.

· All channels will be broadcast exclusively in digital format.

· Additional channels will become available.

After the digital conversion on August 30, 2011, any TV without digital equipment will no longer receive channels 25-99.

Dutifully, and before my 4 tv screens went blank, I called to get my two free and one ($1.99 per month) boxes, While trying to get an explanation from the person on the other end as to why I had to have three boxes cluttering up my (already small) apartment for a service I now get for free without the boxes, she continued to talk over me - "we're adding new cable channels with High Definition, so you need the boxes." besides it's free, she concluded.

"But I get HDTV NOW without boxes, exclaimed I." And it isn't free - the third box costs $1.99 per month.

Let's see: Comcast has what, 20 million customers? At $1.99 mo that's ? Now you see why this Monopoly created through the bribes to your Congressman, can purchase NBC.

You get the picture. I concluded - it's a matter of time before those "free boxes" are no longer free.

ONLY A MONOPOLY - CREATED BY BRIBES (OOPS, CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS )TO YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES - CAN GET AWAY WITH THIS. YOU WERE WARNED.

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS AND SANTA CLAUS?

SANTA STOPS AT THREE HO'S

CNN, MSNBC, ET AL

When I am contracted to help new business owners start up their companies, I advise this: before you can travel with the classes, buy a Ferrari, save the whales, or be named Forbes' Man of the Year, your company first must do this: Make a profit. Second, to earn a profit you have to have a product someone wants to buy.

It amazes me how few business people heed that advice. Which brings me to cable news stations and network news. Most lose money. Why?

First, it's not important to the people on air whether or not their network makes a profit; they are above it all (as long as they are paid their exorbitant salaries). In fact most frown on profits.

Second, they don't provide their customers (viewers) with a product the viewers want to buy. They offer their (usually left) points of view and process it as "News."

Then their ratings go lower; their networks lose money; but their bosses continue to put up with it.

FOX NEWS

On the other hand Fox News has no bias against either making money or providing a product their customers want to buy. So while CNN and MSNBC gurge a steady diet of Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann, and a bevy of trolls, Fox hires Glenn Beck, Dick Morris, Dennis Miller, Karl Rove, Bernie Goldberg, John Stoessel, and now Sara Palin, and a dozen or so from Hooters (former federal prosecutors).

Update: Jan. 11, 2010: Fox just signed Sarah Palin. Geez, MSNBC, CNN, this is just TOO EASY.

NEW YORK TIMES, The

www.nytimes.com

My conservative friends and conservative talkshow hosts rail constantly against the left leaning articles published daily in the Times.

These are many of the same people who lament when liberals, who never even watch Fox News. poormouth Fox News,

So before I decided to jump on that wagon, I thought I might read the paper and see for myself. I now subscribe and pay for my brother's subscription.

I read in the Times, at length, for example, about the Owosso (Where I and Thomas Dewey were born) anti-abortion protester who was shot and killed in front of the local high school by someone who was offended by the graphic depictions on the protester's signs.

The article started on page 1 above the fold and continued on all of page three, with human interest stories about several local anti-abortionists, with nary a snide comment about any of them.

When I read articles or editorials interjected with the writer's opinions, with which I disagree, I just chuckle and go on.

If this newspaper is losing money it's because the heirs who manage it don't know how to run a business - not because of the content.

I'm a Conservative who reads the Times every day, and am the better for it.

This guy . . . . . .. . For you abortion supporters who blamed every one who disagrees with you for the murder of Dr. Tiller, is YOUR poster boy?

Dateline Owosso, Michigan (hometown of me and Thomas Dewey) Pro Life advocate James Pouillon, 63 Shot to death by . . . . . . .

NICE DECISION - U.S. SUPREME COURT

January 21, 2010: Charles Schumer and I agree on this and this alone: the decision today to (effectively) reverse McCain-Feingold, and turn back the clock one century on corporation and union spending is a disaster. Where in the Constitution does it say corporations and unions have First Amendment RIghts? It doesn't. In fact corporations and labor unions did not exist when this country was formed and the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution.

Corporations were an artificial entity created by THE SUPREME COURT in 1819, granting a private charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members. The Corporation as a whole was labeled an "artificial person," mainly to protect shareholders from personal liabilities incurred collectively by the company as a whole, and to define the rights of investors in a business.

SO, does McCain/Feingold violate the rights of the shareholders of the corporation or union? I say no. The Supreme Court (5/4) says yes. Let's examine: McCain/Feingold in no way restricts corporate officers or shareholders, nor union officials or rank-and-file members from making personal donations to candidates or parties, or from participating in campaigns for any candidate.

What's next? Rights for dogs and cats?

Sorry Krauthammer, upon this matter we disagree.

CORPORATIONS, UNIONS

HAITI

When it rains, it pours. As if the Haitian People hadn't enough misery in their lives, along comes the earthquake.

1. If aid from the U.S. had come so slowly under George Bush, Congress would be calling for his impeachment - this with a runway NOT under water. In the real world it just takes time to react to an unexpected disaster, the chronic dependency of the victims involved in Haiti, Katrina, and Homestead notwithstanding.

2. Under the leadership of Bill Clinton and Madeline Albright where businesses paid bribes to the thugocracy of "Papa Doc" Duvalier, and later his son "Baby Doc," the U.S. military sent the Duvalier regime into exile. They were replaced by the former priest, Jean Bertrand Aristide, hand-picked by Ms. Albright, who referred to Aristide as "Pere" Aristide (with the French accent, of course - "Pfaggghhh Aristide - you get the picture). After he had driven all of the "corrupt" businesses out of Haiti (along with all of the jobs), "Pere" Aristide fled the country with $300 million of Haitian assets. Mad Madeline Notbright never did apologize to the Haitian people. After all, to liberals, "I tried" is good enough.

3. With precious emergency supplies and volunteer Doctors poised to land to lendtheir support to saving lives, by all means let's hold everything up for hours - even days - to clear a secured landing for American Politicians to get their photo opportunities.

Feb. 18, 2010: So, Bill O'Reilly. It's EXTREME (your word) for someone to refuse to obey a Law that is unconstitutional. In this case the leader of Oathkeepers, Stewart Rhodes cites the illegality (his word) of the Sheriff of New Orleans confiscating ALL guns because of Anarchy after Hurricane Katrina. It was unsafe for anyone to go out on the streets so the Sheriff took everyone's guns.

So, to your way of thinking if the perceived danger is serious enough, it's ok for even some (a sheriff no less) local official to suspend the U.S. Constitution (2nd Amendment).

So, if the Government wants to supersede the U. S. Constitution, all it needs to do is declare their cause as 'serious'. I see. I might remind that the Nazis created exactly the same emergency to confiscate private weapons, and 6 million unarmed and defenseless Jews were hauled off and murdered.

HOME COUNTRY (APRIL FOOL’S DAY)

Michelle Obama makes two comments in a speech in Kenya (paraphrased from memory):

1. How many people who are getting AIDS are sick because of Homophobia (from, ya know, those right winger, hate mongers) and,

2. How Kenya is Barack’s ‘home country’ (her words).

Then in context she tells the locals how much Barack is doing to identify with their cause -e.g. he had an HIV test taken right here in River City, by golly. Right on. I’m sure Kenyans got a warm feeling all over from this revelation.

I might remind you that Obama’s reception in many African nations has been rather tepid compared with the reverence shown ex-President George Bush in response to the massive aid that he (quietly, without fanfare, noisy fund-raising concerts, or photo-ops) provided for Africans - Not to mention the millions of African lives President Bush has spared from the ravages of malaria (see BELOVED). But then Bush never had himself tested for malaria in Africa, so I guess they’re even.

Finally, I thought Obama was born in America? Kenya - his ‘Native Country’? Oops.

FHA Lending Changes that Could Impact Real Estate Consumers

Did you know that in 2009, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) insured nearly 30% of the single-family mortgage market and that more than 50% of all first-time home buyers used FHA programs?

In today’s challenging credit climate, many home buyers and homeowners are turning to FHA for insurance, to purchase loans, and for refinancing options to get out of risky ARMs or subprime loans. As a Member of the Top 5 in Real Estate Network®, I have access to information from the National Association of Realtors® (NAR) regarding recent and upcoming changes to FHA’s single-family program that could impact the use of these important programs for consumers in the future. According to Jerome Nagy, senior regulatory policy representative at NAR, in order to replenish its dwindling reserves, FHA has implemented or proposed the following changes:

1. Mortgage Insurance Premium (MIP)

FHA has increased the upfront MIP from 1.75% to 2.25% for borrowers while it awaits legislative authority to increase the annual premium. FHA stated it will decrease the upfront premium when they can increase the annual premium.

2. Credit Score Changes

FHA has proposed that borrowers with a credit score below 580 be required to make at least a 10% down payment. The minimum down payment will remain at 3.5% for all other borrowers.

3. Seller Concessions

FHA intends to propose a rule to decrease allowable seller concessions from 6% to 3%. NAR plans to argue against this decrease since closing costs differ greatly among states, and with fees on services (such as appraisals) increasing, seller concessions can be a vital part of closing the transaction.

4. FHA Loan Limits

Current FHA loan limits are as high as $729,750 in high-cost areas, and are set to expire at the end of the year and revert to lower amounts, potentially putting a damper on a housing market rebound. A decrease of current limits would adversely affect 612 counties in 40 states and the District of Columbia, reports NAR, which is urging passage of legislation to make the loan limits permanent.

5. Condominium Rules

FHA is delaying implementation of “Mortgagee Letter 2009-19” and making temporary enhancements to the policy instead, such as eliminating the owner-occupancy requirement for FHA condo mortgages and reducing the number of units sold prior to FHA’s endorsement of a unit from 50% to 30%.

Thanks to Sheila Ferguson, Prudential R.E.

"/lycos/mail/MailComposeFrame.lycos?TO=SoldOnMiami@gmail.com?subject=Top 5 RE Social Networking System Inquiry"

This page was last updated: January 14, 2012

NO - SENATOR DORGAN.

NO - GLENN BECK

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION IS NOT PAID FOR OUT OF THE WORKER'S PAYCHECK. IT'S PAID 100% BY THE EMPLOYER. Get it right.

Of course, I tried to e-mail you - but yeah, right, good luck.

By the way, why do you sign autographs only at the big corporate bookstores, like Borders and Barnes & Noble, instead at the small-business independent bookstores?

ACORN

It appears, from recent news stories, that having lost its federal funding ACORN is dead. So here is the former “C.E.O.“ of ACORN giving a speech before a group of like-minded people, telling her audience, that “I AM a Socialist. Yay, whoo, woo, clap clap from the enthusiastic audience.

This week President Obama made another of his ubiquitous appearances wherein he chirps (paraphrased) “I call on young people, African Americans, Hispanics, etc. (people naive enough to vote for me) to back my Immigration Bill.”

So, without ado, the establishment media ignored the speech and conservative talk-show goes right to air condemning Ms. ________‘s admission, and adding “I told you so.“ The response to Mr. Obama’s entreaties varied, but were along the lines of “ he’s stirring up passion among the people who voted for him, to create a backlash against the tough Arizona Illegal Immigration laws.” (Watch out for the racism card)..

In the old Soviet bloc countries, work, at least on paper and in theory, was the primary fuel of the economic engine that drove the “workers’ paradise.” While in theory, everyone contributed according to his abilities, and reaped according to his needs, in reality when it was apparent to so many that no matter how hard they worked, due to the vagaries inherent in Socialism itself, they weren’t going to get anywhere, many of the workers in paradise became slackers. But if you chose to openly eschew work in favor of, oh, a job that didn’t pay more than chump change, then you didn’t eat - or worse.

When Socialism originally became a favored topic at fashionable progressive parties in Georgetown, and Beverly Hills, the disaster that was Socialism was relatively unknown outside the Soviet Union, except by a chosen few (Armand Hammer, Lillian Hellman, Paul Robeson, and Walter Duranty at the New York Times come to mind) who kept the dirty secret to themselves while extolling in print the virtues of ‘Uncle’Joes’ workers’ paradise.

Since the ‘glastnost’ of the 1980’s and the collapse of Communism in the early 1990’s, the world has become aware of the atrocities and utter failure of the corrupt system called Socialism. But those revelations have barely slowed the Socialist thinking in Ivy League classrooms, and student unions. Unable to defend the failed system elsewhere, today’s professorial and government elite have come out of hibernation harumphing that had Socialism simply been done their way, it would have worked just fine. The geranium on the windowsill died, but teacher (professor) you went right on.

Thus having achieved control of our governmental institutions, the progressive thinkers are dumping their ideas on us all, like it or not - beginning with cap ‘n trade, Obamacare, and Amnesty (just wait and see). Which brings me to the ACORN Lady and Mr. Obama’s entreaties the his core supporters. Unlike in the workers paradise, those who support progressive politicians aren’t looking for ‘fairness’, a good job, healthcare, a level playing field. They want it all. They want it free. They want you and me to pay for it. Food

The cheering folks listening to Ms. ________’s declarations aren’t cheering for a Socialist Government. They are cheering for the expansion of the welfare state. They want a handout ! !. Many, if not most of those in that audience are second, third, fourth, generation welfare, Medicaid, and food-stamp recipients. They shout for free housing, free food, free healthcare, and the progressives are providing it - with our money.

Thus, when Glenn Beck and other conservatives rail against the Socialist agenda of ACORN and the Obama ‘regime.‘ they miss the point - badly. In a recent Fox news poll, 34% of Americans surveyed saw Socialism as a viable economic system for this country. The point of Mr. Obama’s preaching to the choir was this: The Arizona Immigration Law is ill-conceived, and racist (you wait). The Federal Government has let the people of Arizona down on illegal (undocumented to progressives) immigration, and we need to do something about it. We’ll build a fence. BUUUUTT FIIIIIIIIIRRST. AMNESTY !! (of course, Mr. Obama never will use the A word).

What happens then? 12,000,000 new, legal, and grateful Americans and millions more of their relatives to vote for the progressive agenda. The progressives will have their 51%, and our experiment in Freedom will be over. We will be Mexico.

STIFLING FREE SPEECH

The use of these phrases is not to further open discussion or debate on a subject; these phrases and a plethora of others are utilized (usually, but not always by the left) for one purpose - to prevent the listener from exercising his or her right to a dissenting opinion: that is TO STIFLE FREE SPEECH.

If one compares your thoughts, deeds, or actions with similar behavior by those bad Nazi’s in the 30’s,whatever contrasting opinion you may have had on the subject at hand (say Az Immigration Laws) gets lost by compelling you to instinctively defend that you are not a Nazi.

The comparison of the new and tougher Arizona Immigration Laws (most of which simply allows for more direct State enforcement of existing Federal laws), to Nazi ID requirements for Jewish Germans in the 30’s is comparing apples (with) to oranges - and those who use this tactic know it. Nor, I think, do those lamenting the perceived loss of ones civil rights when cops question their right to be in the U.S., really care about the Constitutionality of such laws and actions, but rather they are more concerned about certain illegal immigrants (who by definition are committing a crime) staying in this country illegally.

Dead farmers, high crime rates, drug smuggling, record kidnappings - never mind that the Federals won’t help you Arizonians, just think of the progressive votes gained by amnesty tfor these grateful millions.

Party first, getting elected second. . . . . . dead farmers? Who cares?

ARIZONA LAW (con’t)

(click here)

The Roman Empire lasted from 32 A.D. to 1453 A.D. Its most powerful and influential period was between 32 A.D. under Cesar Augustus until around 600 A.D. Any Roman citizen, which included slaves, could walk anywhere on the Earth without fear of endangerment. While many of the Roman Emperors ruled despotically, all understood that in exchange for the complete loyalty and respect of its citizenry, it was their governing responsibility to protect the lives and well-being of ALL Roman citizens.

Our Federal government expects the loyalty of its citizens, but offers excuses, cliches, and patronizing B.S.

GULF OIL SPILL

George Bush took three days to send help to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The airport facilities were destroyed; much of the city was under water; the people who took that idiot Rag Nagen’s advice and stayed at the Dome; roads were washed out. But within three days, help was arriving.

The media crucified Bush and his FEMA leader, Joe Brown.

Now we have a disastrous oil rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico spewing millions of gallons of oil into the waters; President Obama attends Press Corp Dinners, fundraisers, ribbon cuttings, and the media says nothing?

And why did the President ignore the issue until it threatened to grow out of control? Could it be that in deference to the Environmentalists to whom he owes his soul, the President has let the problem grow into a crisis so that oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico will cease forever? After all, Rahm Emanuel considers it a waste not to exploit a good crisis.

Would I have waited? (click on "The Buck Stops Here")

C'MON GLENN BECK

It's impressive, I guess, when you bring in the electronic lift and that red tape to show how much the World's GNP has increased since the American Revolution - especiall y impressive when you imply it is BECAUSE of the American Revolution.

In fact, for several years after our Independence, we continued to purchase almost all of our manufactured goods from European Nations.

CAN YOU SAY INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION?

The Industrial Revolution was a period from the 18th to the 19th century where major changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, and transport had a profound effect on the socioeconomic and cultural conditions starting in the United Kingdom, then subsequently spreading throughout Europe, North America, and eventually the world. The onset of the Industrial Revolution marked a major turning point in human history; almost every aspect of daily life was eventually influenced in some way.

Starting in the later part of the 18th century there began a transition in parts of Great Britain's previously manual labor and draft-animal–based economy towards machine-based manufacturing. It started with the mechanization of the textile industries, the development of iron-making techniques and the increased use of refined coal. Trade expansion was enabled by the introduction of canals, improved roads and railways. The introduction of steam power fuelled primarily by coal, wider utilization of water wheels and powered machinery (mainly in textile manufacturing) underpinned the dramatic increases in production capacity. The development of all-metal machine tools in the first two decades of the 19th century facilitated the manufacture of more production machines for manufacturing in other industries. The effects spread throughout Western Europe and North America during the 19th century.

The Industrial revolution was well underway BEFORE OUR American Revolution - simple fact.

Ho, ho, ho . . . . .

R. I. P.

Charles Eliot Silberman (January 31, 1925 – February 5, 2011)

b. Des Moines, Iowa

"That is the true genius of America, a faith in the simple dreams of its people, the insistence on small miracles.”

BARACK OBAMA, speech at 2004 Democratic Convention

Like the popular line in some Hollywood movies "I demand respect,' usually "demanded" at the end of a gun (held sideways), you dont' demand respect - you earn it. You don't insist on small miracles, you earn them.