Ramblings from 7 Sept. 2015

I haven't done any entries for awhile and I thought it high time I did but wanted to let you the reader know that this will be a venture into the realm of the wondering mind.  I don't know where it will take us or what all it will cover, and I will not guarantee that it will make any sense but like so many things out there you might find a nugget so enjoy.

I put a date in the title today even though I think all of the entries have had a date tied to them.  I find it very helpful to take a web entry and put it into context if there is a date associated with it.  For example, I was browsing around and happened onto a suggested search of "Pope Francis resigns" which I thought was as interesting as suggestion searches go, so I clicked and sure enough he was labeled as the second Pope in recent history to resign, how scandalous.

It turns out that the reference was from a super market tabloid that was created back in April of 2014.  I have a feeling that this is one of those events that did not transpire quite the way the author and editors expected.  Still, it does make for a clickable search item.  I wonder why it is still out there waiting to be looked at?

So just how lousy (or should I say lazy) are the portal web sites getting these days?  Yahoo was the standard but that was decades ago, now they are just a pretend portal site that just processes content from others and can't wait to shuffle you off to the highest bidder.  Come to think of it, they all seem headed that way.  I have pretty much given up on finding a usable news web site.  The fabrication is churned out so quickly without any forethought for intellect, leaving nothing but snippets of superlatives to generate fear and anxiety with which to incite the simpleton to an emotionally driven response that fuels consternation and frustration rather than pacify with perspective and relevance.  But alas, our world is run on this.  I wonder if people quit paying attention to calamity, would they just die out due to lack of attention?

Which leads me to the current state of the union, or at least the continuing saga of a nation bent on self obliteration through the continuing decline of it's choices for public servants and the republic for which they stand.  Sure some of us are laughing now but will we still be able to laugh a year from now?  Why do these elections always come down to either or choice and neither choice is a good one?  Mark my words, this election is headed down the same path as those we have had for the least few decades (if not century) by forcing us to choose between a couple of lousy candidates, none of which is an honest to goodness Leader.

Think for moment how you would define a good honest Leader.  I am not going to insert my definition but ask you to come up with your own.  What traits and characteristics would you choose?  What values would you look for?  What vision charts their course and is it one that you truly would follow?  Is this a Leader that actually leads and that the nations multitude willingly follow?  Are the purposes of this Leader just and true?  Is this Leader truly serving others or merely serving themselves?

Then honestly ask yourself, are any of the candidates today, current or hopeful, able to fit your definition of a Leader in all respects and in all ways?

I am still looking.

But in the mean time I will continue to look on with laughter since it is the only real way to look at the absurd (there is plenty to choose from).  Our time certainly isn't the first and probably won't be the last (a little history can go a long way in adding perspective to the current chaos).  The person who can keep themselves well grounded is the one that will be able to laugh the loudest when the emperor parades past the throngs with no clothes on, but as I recall it was a child that noticed it first and was not afraid to respond appropriately.  Perhaps we should be as little children during this election season.  It seems to me we have been treated as children long enough.  In fact, why do we allow people like this to rule over us?  I think we are more than capable of ruling over ourselves.  That is if we haven't forgotten how.

More to follow I'm sure, but for now...
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farrwest.

Does anybody want to buy my Chevy?

It is lightly used and in fairly good shape, trouble is, with the changes going on I don’t know how much longer I will be able to keep it that way. Does GM now stand for Government Motors? What has happened to this country?

(As I am slow to get this one published and have since noticed that the August issue of Motor Trend as also used the reference to Government Motors. I may be slow but I am not the only one thinking these things.)

I have said that it was a grave mistake for the financial bailout to happen the way it did and that the government should have only stepped in to help smoothly apply the laws already in place for an orderly application of bankruptcy procedures. Those banks and financial institutions that took the money have either regretted it greatly or were most definitely on the verge of collapse and saw this as the only way to continue to draw an overpriced paycheck for a few more months while they polished up their resumes.

So after seeing this happen, why would any other industry be willing to participate in the grand scheme for the government’s takeover of American industry? Two of the Detroit Three has succumbed to the temptress while Ford is trying for a holdout and now the other two no longer resemble anything of their former selves. Ford will go through its own changes and will most likely not resemble its own former self as it tries to reposition for the new automotive world's future but it will at least be trying to maintain a pretense at independence.

(Also, do you notice how they are referred to as the Detroit Three now instead of the American Automakers? This is done to realize the global nature of the auto business and that there are car builders in America that go by the name of Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mercedes, BMW etc. that were not part of the original elite designation. Do you suppose that these American jobs are somehow not valued the same way as those originating out of Detroit to those in Washington?)

Chrysler is an old hand at bailouts having successfully completed one in the 80s. Trouble is this time there is no Iacocca to come to the rescue. With a lack of real leadership at the helm and a government that isn’t interested in leaving them as an American car company, they were handed over to Fiat with far too much ease. This move makes absolutely no sense other than that Fiat makes small cars that the government thinks can be rebadged as Chryslers, sold in large quantities to the American public and thereby meet the politically correct Al Gore global warming agenda.

When I said they gave away the company, I meant it literally as Fiat just promised some of their current technology and they walked away with controlling interest (at least so far as the government will allow). This will not work any better than the merger Chrysler had with Mercedes and for the same reason but on a larger scale, namely culture clash. If hindsight for a Benz and Dodge combo teaches us anything it should at least provide a flashing red light warning for a K-car Fiat.

The new Government Motors on the other hand is just pathetic and sad. After Obama forced out existing management before the bailout was complete (bloodless coup anyone?) GM announced that they are appointing Edward E Whitacre Jr. to become the new chairman after the bankruptcy is complete. Whitacre’s former position was head of AT&T. While this brings praise from the government officials that thought to select him as well as those he will be working with, my view is somewhat different. If AT&T is any example of the kind of company GM is about to become then I do not want anything to do with them. AT&T under Whitacre’s care had become one of the most bloated, conceited, arrogant and uncaring corporate entities to service the public and private sectors. The level of customer care sank to the lowest of depths under his reign and the only reason I can think of for AT&T to continue to exist is that the behemoth was so big it somehow carried on in spite of itself. Actually, it had so much free cash from earlier years that it bought out any potential competitors or spent them into the ground if they tried to enter their markets.

Come to think of it, GM has done much the same thing only somewhere along the line it lost its profitability and ran out of funds to buy out the competition. It then had to stand on its own merits (and GM did have plenty of merits to play from) but it didn’t trust itself to do so. How and what will Whitacre do when the government pulls back the purse strings and makes GM stand on its own? Unlike AT&T, GM will continue to face competition in the automotive world and they won’t be able to rely solely on new government contracts to keep them afloat.

Actually they might. How many other corporate or service entities are there that are strongly subsidized by taxpayer funding for an overzealous government bent on political manifestation? The arts, National Public Radio, the postal service and of course Amtrak quickly come to mind. But wait, don’t these also have competitors present that attempt to service the customer’s needs and the competitors do so at a profit? Yes, yet the government sponsored entities continue to exist with much taxpayer subsidy thereby satisfying its one true customer which is government self interest. Should we expect anything less from their endorsement of Government Motors?

The thought of all this physically sickens me. As a car loving guy, I hate to see what is going on more than most and fear that we will be tossed into the automotive dark ages like that which followed the first gas crisis that generated fuel mileage and emissions mandates and produced some of the lamest excuses for autos for over two decades. These were government mandates and not consumer driven desires and that led to innovative stagnation. All signs are indicating that this is the path we are once again headed.

Also, I am an American and a taxpayer. This country is founded on principles of fair play for everyone yet with every passing day I see less and less of it and not nearly enough voices standing out against the changes taking place. Liberty, and freedom are words that have somehow lost their true meaning as have capitalism and free markets; the consequences both frighten and infuriate. Wake up America. Return to the values our fathers stood for or we will never be able to know them again in our lifetime. We need to return the white elephant now before it eats us out of house and home. For those that do not understand, we have only begun to pay the price for this folly. If we hurry, maybe we can still cancel the check and get our money back.

So if any of you are in the market for a new car, do you really want to pay for it twice, once as the consumer and once as a taxpayer? I know we do that somewhat anyway but really we should be expecting something for our dollars. I have an idea instead of buying new; does anybody want to buy my slightly used Chevy? I just don’t have the desire to support it anymore.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

The automakers dilemma

I have been thinking a little bit about the auto industry lately and the mess they have made for themselves. I can't say that I am surprised by a lot of this. I am very disappointed however.

I am a car nut, an enthusiast even and for the car industry to turn to the very establishment that helped put them in this predicament is truly a situation that will create many a business school doctorate thesis for years to come. What possible good can come from this?

I could be saying I told you so, but I had a hard time finding anyone to tell. No one was listening. The American car makers have had major problems for several decades now, not just the last couple of quarters. They have been given their wake up calls on more than one occasion.

Sure some within the industry heard and heeded the call and some were able to come up with some really good and compelling products. Strides were made in quality improvement but not across the board and not enough to convince consumers that they had caught up with or passed the competition. There were glimmers of hope interspersed with packets of ‘more of the same’.

I feel sorry for anyone that has to turn to the government for a handout or subsidy. Sad to say we all are in that boat now and there doesn’t seem to be any turning back. As those who have had their hands outstretched for a gimme have recently found out, these government handouts come with strings attached. Some are o.k. with that while others prefer their independence. Some are beginning to have regrets.

So what do I make of the current state of affairs for the three? First Chrysler, which lost its way once and found it only to lose it, again, is perhaps in the weakest position of all. It is not currently being run by car guys though it seems to have many car guys within its workings. The shotgun wedding to Fiat seems inevitable if those holding the shotguns have their way, but I think it would be a mistake. Chrysler would do better to maintain its independence and build from its strengths. In order to do that it would need capital, true business management, and leadership with vision. These three components it lacks and therefore I see Chrysler fading away into oblivion even if a merger with Fiat is accomplished.

Second is General Motors, a company that is too big to know which way it is headed and too big to change the direction it is headed even if it wanted to. GM is the prime example of why mergers and acquisitions do not always work in the auto industry. Companies are created for a variety of reason but they all tend to try and differentiate themselves somehow, in other words, not all hamburger joints are McDonalds. Each company in order to do business will come up with its own solution to a consumer need and present it to the buying public. If successful it thrives but if not it goes back to the drawing board or goes away. Some companies will have a few outstanding ideas but will be lacking the rest of the components such as marketing, production, administration and such that make up a well rounded business. These are the companies that become prime targets for a takeover, not to obtain the company but to obtain the patents on the great ideas and incorporate them into your own product line. Many a merger has been done to obtain legal rights rather than finding synergies.

The problem in a merger comes when you try to combine two different cultures, as eventually they will also merge and become one and the same. As this happens, the setting that was the perfect ground to cultivate that great idea slowly fades into the mother company, the same company that was unable to create the idea in the first place and had to buy the other company to acquire. This is very evident in the GM of the 80’s when you the term ‘cookie cutter car’ was coined to describe the fact that all too many cars looked and acted exactly the same. The fact was they were exactly the same with exception of the name badgeing and a few accent trim pieces. You could find the same vehicle at Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, and on occasion Cadillac. Take a look at the pickup offerings from Chevrolet and GMC to see the most obvious example of sameness.

So what does this mean exactly? It means that the accountants and management took control of decision making for future product and decided that it would be less expensive and more profitable to develop one car and put several different labels on it thereby getting two (or three or four) items for the price of one. Sounds good on paper right? It doesn’t work out that way and here is why. Instead of developing and providing to the consumer two (or three or four) solutions to their needs, you have presented one solution and just changed the packaging. This is not an alternative solution to their needs; therefore competition can come in and offer a true difference. Consumers eventually will become savvy enough to know that when they are comparing solutions, they need only look at one of GMs offerings (rather than each one individually) and compare it to what the rest have to offer. And they wonder why their market share has dropped off.

GM has already killed off some of its brands, Oldsmobile is no longer for example. Is it missed, yes and no. If Oldsmobile were still here today wouldn’t it look just like Chevrolet, Pontiac, and Buick? Other than the slight visual clues for demographics they are one and the same. If they close Pontiac or Buick will they really be giving up that much? When Chrysler shut down the Plymouth name was there really much of an impact? They all have histories and we have fond memories of special cars from the past but was there any guarantee of recreating the magic of those one or two items?

So what is GM proposing to do to salvage itself but cut off some of the acquisition lines that gave it some distinction, namely Saturn, Hummer, Saab. Rather than working to make these somewhat independent lines profitable (and not being an insider it is hard to tell if they were or were not profitable) they have decide to cut them loose. This will create a very shallow corporation with dwindling product line with which to compete going forward. And as the product line going forward will now be determined by divine government intervention which will make decision not based on sound business doctrine but by political correctness, it is hard to say if there will even be a GM 5 to 10 years from now. Do you think the fun cars like Corvette and Camaro will even stand a chance of seeing a next generation under these conditions?

So that leaves us with Ford, the only hold out to the handout. I have to admire that and for that alone give them a standing ovation. I am sure there was a lot of pressure to bow. So Ford becomes the last hope for an American original. It is facing the same problems and constraints that the others are of underfunded pension plans, bureaucratic red tape, poor management, conformist and homogenized product line but it at least seems to be working from a plan and fighting for its continued independence. For this there is hope.

Fords product line is sufficiently diverse in the near term though they have the same problem of cross teaming between their Ford/Lincoln/Mercury lines. They have worldwide ties that should help enormously with product development if used prudently, the future 2011 Ford Fiesta is a prime example. (Ford if you are listening, please don’t over Americanize this car for our country. The European version sounds like the one I would want to own and drive.) The company still has a unique identity and some products still retain character such as the Mustang.

I do not understand the current design direction though. What is it with the 3 big flat chrome piece grill work? It is pathetic and reminiscent of the creased line loot the Art and Technology boys did that made me lose all interest in a Cadillac. I hope it is a short lived fade. They also added it to the full size vans as you can see. This is what being hit with an ugly stick does to you. Why do I always think of the station wagon in National Lampoons Vacation movie when I see these multi-level light treatments? Please run these design changes past someone that has taste before putting them out there?

Will Ford make it? It is hard to say for the same reasons it is hard to say if the other two will or not. The only reason Ford held out is that they had more cash on hand to allow them to stay in the game a little longer. How long it can last is anyone’s guess. I hope they all survive, because I don’t like to see anyone fail for one thing and because I think the open competition is good for the industry and the consumer. We all benefit from the raised bar.

The final note that should be made is that these are not the only American car makers today even if they get all the attention as if they were. Cars made in America include Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, Mercedes, Tesla and others. Are they entitled to equal consideration, or are some ‘animals more equal than others’ in this Obama Nation? Will the rules apply equally to all and apply to all equally? And will those rules be the rules of business with the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail based on the dictates of the marketplace or will the rules change yet again to fuel the fancy of a few? Time will tell as we wait and watch.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Three Stooges redone???

So Hollywood is at it again. Since they are so hard pressed to come up with any original ideas, they are easily sold on doing repackaging of current hits, sequels, or doing remakes of old classics. It is the remaking of old classics that I have had the most problems with. 9 times out of 10 they can't do it. The old classics are true classics that only work with actors, action and story lines that come within the context of the era. Very few actors are capable of recreating the magic of a past era let alone pulling off a credible re-creation of a past master. A poster of the Mona Lisa from the gift shop is not the same thing as the original. (I hesitate to use this example as many suspect that the Mona Lisa that so many enjoy at the Louvre is actually a reproduction. I guess that just shows that there is always a market for those that don't know any better or can't tell the difference.)

So what possible remake could they do that would cause enough of a stir to deserve a comment? It seems the Farrelly brothers, who I am guessing are big fans of the original and want to find more of the magic they once knew, are redoing the Three Stooges. All I can say is that if you are really fans of the original icons, then please do not do this. You will try to modernize it and then have it go through the Hollywood politically correctness department and before you know it you have disaster on your hands.

Case in point is the proposed cast of Jim Carrey, Benicio Del Toro and Sean Penn. Jim Carrey has enough talent that he is the only possibility (given the right team of writers, directors, other cast members, etc.) of pulling something like this off. I would prefer to see him doing something new, fresh and original that would draw on all his strengths but this is Hollywood and we shouldn't expect so much.

The other two are where we cement the disaster. Benicio is a face I recognize but I can't for the life of me associate it with anything remotely labeled as greatness especially in the comedy category. He is a fine actor and can serve up a decent supporting role but this role would be a stretch for anyone. Sean Penn on the other hand hasn't done anything worthwhile of late, and some would argue ever. This is one of the many examples of overrated personalities that somehow manage to continue to find work in show business.

I just pulled is bio on IMDB and he has been involved in a lot of things, it is an impressive resume, at least for volume. I still remember the movie 'The Pledge' as one of the absolute worst pictures at that time only to find out at the end that he was the producer and director. How sad for me (I lost 2 hours and the price of admission). His recent stuff tends to play to the Hollywood insider crowd and that was enough to win him an Oscar promoting the homo sexual agenda. Yet another example of why I do not follow the award ceremony anymore, they've lost their way and are no longer concered about the movies and the entertainment industry.

By the way, I was reading some of the comments that came with the news article, and they were not flattering concerning the casting call nor were they even remotely kind for the selection of Sean Penn. There are a lot of people that feel Sean Penn has been anti-American in many of his comments and actions of late and it shows in the feedback to this announcement of his selection. If this industry still fashions itself to be a business, I would think two and three times before adding him to the cast. The type of audience this movie should be geared towards will actively boycott the Penn selection while the type of audience that Sean Penn would normally attract do not get and well not understand or appreciate the Three Stooges. I would do a quick rethink before too much money has been invested; try to salvage what you can.

That is what makes it all the more strange to pick these three as Hollywood is all about playing it safe when it comes to making big ticket movies and by that I mean they don't take very many chances on unknown quantities. They are pretty good at rehashing (or should I say 'paying tribute too') old story lines and ideas. The vaults are full of examples and the new releases just confirm it. I watched Bolt yesterday and couldn't count how many times I thought of the T.V. show Animaniacs, ('Now that's comedy). Bolt shows that you can take a classic or at least elements of the classic and create a parallel product that can be entertaining without smashing the toes of the original. I still really wish they would have made a Mission Impossible “like” movie with Tom Cruise rather than an actual Mission Impossible movie. It was a fair movie that could have stood on its own but it is in no way related to the T.V. show that made the title famous.

So my suggestion to you Farrelly brothers, throw away the title and the names of the characters, unless you just use them as a working title. Just like there are tribute bands that play in appreciation of the bands they love and the music they enjoy, call this a tribute movie because it will not be the original and there are far too many fans that will know it. Create a movie "like" the Three Stooges would make if they were still around but use your own characters and your own story and give it a new name and title and look. And if you ‘have to’ use Sean Penn, please keep him in the background and at least try to make him funny and not just a laughing stock. My biggest question now is will they use a laugh track. Will they need one?

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Witness the birth of the new Great Depression Part 3.

In fact, that is just what happened. Everyone started leveraging everything and because everyone was doing it, it seemed to make it all right. We piled on debt to pay for everything to be able to live for today and it was all o.k. because once all our cards and accounts reached their max we could just consolidate everything into one big newly refinanced loan by tapping into the freshly created inflation generated equity that the investment in our homes had just produced out of thin air. Pretty neat eh?

This worked so well that we got used to it and came to expect that it would work every time. Jobs were consist enough that we could count on the income to always be there and so we went ahead and obligated ourselves to make consistent payments that matched those consistent paychecks. Most Americans had it worked out so well that everything that came in was exactly the same as everything that went out. It was a smooth running machine, until one day when the price of gas went up. Now instead of it costing $20 to fill the tank it cost $40 and you don’t have the other $20 in your pocket. Something has to go but everything you have is already spoken for. Witness the pin that popped the bubble.

So stupid people make stupid decisions, this is nothing new. It has happened before and it will happen again. The key point to take from all this is that we don’t make the innocent pay the price for the ignorance of others. That is where the second comparison has come into play. The knee-jerk reactions that followed the bad choices of others as happened following the first great depression should not be replayed this time around. Obama and Congress are launching on the biggest mistake in this nation’s history and it is not without forewarning. The “stimulus package” will seal the fate of this nation as a full blown socialist state with little hope of return. There are far too many critics that have been far too quiet concerning this matter. It is not because they have not spoken in the past or in the present, but the current mass media markets have decided not to listen. Make no mistake about it, voices are being suppressed. The America of our forefathers is in jeopardy of being no more, and for the sake of being politically correct we will squelch the voices of wisdom. We will label them crackpots or worse.

There are of course differences between now and then. FDR waited several years and I imagine went through quite a bit of debate before implementing the new deal. Obama and his congress have rushed the current new deal through in a matter of days. This surprises me especially when you compare it to the regular congressional budget that usually is past after the new fiscal year has begun, and sometimes months after. Why this rush? Banks closings are up but not anywhere near the level of the Great Depression. Unemployment is up, but also not anywhere near what it was in the Great Depression. 7.5% vs. 25+% do the math.

The economy was a hot button item during the election timeframe and usually is during campaigning. The Democrats and their media talked up how bad things were when in reality things were not really bad at all. This is not to say that there were not some bad areas and some people experiencing bad times. That has always been the case in our nation’s history. There are boom and bust cycles going on all over all the time, nothing new. But like so many political campaigns, you can’t convince others to vote for you unless you can convince them that the other guys are doing worse than you would. Standard fare, I mean I many times have you heard that the last few years under the Bush administration were the worst years ever in recorded history. Kind of sounds like the same thing Bush said about Clinton and Clinton said about the Bush before that. My question is why do we continue to believe it when the truth says otherwise, or at least is somewhere in between?

So the Democrats have convinced us all that the economy was falling apart and only they could make it work again. They said it so long that we and they started to believe it. Is this the case of a self fulfilling prophecy? Pretty soon people started making decisions based on this doomsday prophecy, confidence in the system was shaken and those decisions triggered other decisions which started us down the path of an economic slowdown.

If we can raise this slowdown to the level of a crisis, then we can implement all kinds of legislation without any questions or obstacles. What better way can you think of to get your policies in place before anyone has time to think twice? It has to be done now because it will be too late tomorrow, and beside we have to do something…don’t we? The knee-jerk caught a lame duck president with a first financial bailout and followed on to the new president with the stimulus package.

This isn’t the first real estate driven crisis, remember the 1980’s and the savings and loan problem. Remember how it wasn’t solved with a massive spending bill but a revamp of the banking industry that combined savings and loan institutions with bank bringing them under the FDIC insurance for depositor safety and then orderly liquidated bad real estate deals through the use of open market pricing? Why are we subsidizing the bad institutions this time and trying to keep them in business when we should be helping them liquidate in an orderly fashion? The FDIC could play the role of insurer as it is chartered to do and protect depositors money up to the agreed upon amounts, sell off the assets of the defunct business at market prices to willing participants and we could all get on with the business at hand.

Instead we are putting the patient on life-support, one that only prolongs the misery and the pain. Japan went through a period of denial with its real estate boom of the 80’s and they are still paying the price. Instead of clearing the books they finagled them through adjustable accounting. We are doing the same. Where oh where has wisdom gone in our elected officials?

And where has our wisdom gone? This article has taken a lot of thought and effort to write. As I have watched the proceedings take place in the news and the actions taken by our elected elite, I am both in awe and wonder. I am totally dumbfounded by what is taking place. It just doesn’t seem possible that this is actually happening in real life, and maybe when I get up tomorrow I can find that I just read it wrong. That was several days ago and I am still seeing the same thing, it is really happening. I can’t stop it, I am not an insider so I can’t profit from it, and I shudder to think what it will take to reverse it now that it is in place.

When reason fails with man, and the world begins to tumble, I guess the only thing left is the thing we have had all along. Turn to God. Pray and know that God lives. As the world tosses and turns and changes with the winds and tides; know that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Therein lays our strength, our guide, and our salvation. Ours need not be a fleeting moment in time if we are willing to look to our Father in Heaven with eternal eyes. My prayer for us all, leaders and citizen alike is that we have the wisdom and the courage to make the right choices and to stand for what is right.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Click here if you want to see the new Great Depression Part 1 or to go to Part 2.

Witness the birth of the new Great Depression Part 2.

So what did you want the government to do, nothing? Yes, as a matter of fact, that would have been the best course of action for it to take. If we really believe in free markets (a freedom principle) and the economics of supply and demand, then the role of government is too help protect consumers from fraud (a criminal act with criminal intent) and monopolies (manipulation of markets to gain control and prevent freedom within the market), and such acts for fairness sake, but not to dictate which businesses we can have and how we should run them or who we can and can’t deal with. It is when governments try to intervene on the belief that they can best determine how to ‘create’ fairness that we all lose.

This is called social engineering and it has never worked well if it has ever worked at all. In any instance I can think of, it comes down to taking away from one to give to another. It is providing subsidies for a favored group at the expense of a less favored group, and it is always the party in power that is making the decision of which group to favor. This is not equality this is theft, and it is the worst injustice of all. Two wrongs do not make a right. Just because your group or cause may be winning the ‘equality equation’ one minute is no guarantee that it will the next. Welcome to the roots of Socialism and Communism. Ayn Rand, F.A. Hayek, George Orwell, and many others have tried to warn and persuade against these evils.

So if the government would have done nothing, the market would have worked itself out and life would have gotten back to normal a lot sooner than it did. Remember the words about supply and demand. Basic economics says that when a seller and a buyer have the same price in mind, a transaction takes place. If there is a difference in the desired price each is willing to accept then no transaction takes place…that is until they come to an agreed price. Of course, if a seller’s price is less than what a buyer is willing to pay or if a buyer’s price is higher than the seller is expecting a transaction will also occur with a happier than expected outcome for one of the participants.

If prices rise too far, buyers quit buying or buy less than they normally would until either their situation changes or prices fall back to a level they are willing to accept. This is where the true power of the market and more importantly the people’s power lie…as consumers. If a consumer decides that the price is too high she can just turn away, and with the markets that America has developed, they can look elsewhere. We as consumers have the power of alternatives and options, another great benefit from having free markets…choice.

So what happens in a bankruptcy? The prices fall to clear inventory. How far the prices fall is determined by the market and the need to move that inventory to meet the demands of the defunct business. Again the market place determines a fair price by matching the seller with the buyer at a price both can live with. In the case of stocks, the price will fall to some level where a buyer will believe that he can find value in the purchase. Look at the recent Circuit City bankruptcy as an example. They have invited in the liquidators who will sale all remaining inventory (and then some) at liquidation prices. First they will move all prices back up to full retail and then start marking off a certain percentage to make the sale. A few weeks pass and they will raise the percentage off to sell a little more. A few more weeks and a few more percentages, until most all the inventory has been sold off by having a willing buyer and a willing seller at an agreed upon price. The good stuff will go first at the highest prices and the lesser stuff will go as their fair price is eventually reached. It is natural, and it is how real markets work.

So what can we compare this to today? There are two common elements that exist today that were common back then. First is an overinflated market full of speculators and hype that has easy access to excessive credit for an overleveraged play. If anybody could not see the comparison to Real Estate investing then you shouldn’t be allowed to vote because you just aren’t paying enough attention to the world around you.

Real estate has been a huge hit sense someone went to the trouble of trying to convince everyone that they should have some. A chicken in every pot, a car in every garage, and home ownership, the American dream, who could ask for anything more?

Real estate promised equity and wealth, and a place of status. It was incentivized and subsidized by tax breaks and government programs. Best of all you could finance 80%, then 90%, then 100% with no money down. They even had loans that would give you 120% of the homes “value”. At the pinnacle of it all you could even find loans where you never had to pay back the principle, just pay the interest and everything would be fine. After all the prices were going up and up and up and they aren’t building any more land you know.

Everywhere you turned there was a class or a course on how to buy real estate with no money down, or how to flip a home, or buy a foreclosure, or become a landlord. Real estate gurus came and went as fast as you could change the channel on the late night infomercials. All you had to do was take a look around and you could see someone that had made a mint in real estate, why even the Governor of California made his millions in real estate so why shouldn’t we.

And even if it wasn’t to make us rich by becoming the next Donald Trump we could at least be better off. We have always been told that owning your own home was a good and smart investment. Look at the equity your building. You have ownership of something and they can’t take that away from you. Why pay someone else when you can be paying yourself? (That is good advice when applied in a practical matter).

So the equity you built is caused by inflation and not by an increase in value, and owning your own home allows you to put holes in the walls where you want to and repaint any color you so choose without checking with a landlord first, and owning your own home means you can do with it whatever you want to as long as what you want to do is consistent with existing zoning laws and property covenants and building permits, and owning your home means no one can take that away from you unless you have a mortgage and miss a payment or run up against hard times and can’t pay your property taxes, but hey it is your home.

In the past, you could only borrow an amount that would have your monthly payment no greater than 25% of one wage earners income and that was probably take home pay at that. Recently it seems that you could qualify to finance an amount that would take 80% of your take home pay. (The remaining amount could pay for cable and you could feed yourself with food stamps).

Click here to see the new Great Depression Part 3 or here to go to Part 1.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Witness the birth of the new Great Depression Part 1.

There are certain stages in our nation’s history that we thought would never be repeated. In fact they should never be repeated. Those that have not learned the lessons from the past are doomed to repeat them. We have learned these lessons, or at the very least should have. For those that have not learned them, there are others that have if we will but listen. Sometimes it becomes a matter of knowing who to listen to. In this world of spin and revisionist historians, it is easy to become confused. Here then is my contribution to the economic world of wonder we are facing.

The current financial crisis we are facing has often been compared to the Great Depression. There may be some similarities and that is disturbing as this need never have happened, but with the passage of the “stimulus bill” it most certainly will turn into another great depression.

First a quick word about the economy and economic cycles. Booms and Busts. They have been with us since the beginning of commerce and will continue to be a major part of any world that consists of trade. The market psychology that comes with it is also nothing new. People get overly exuberant and overly pessimistic at the worst times and that drives the demand side of the supply vs. demand equation to unrealistic levels. Once it gets too far one way or the other, it usually returns to a more normal state but at a pace that catches most people unprepared. When this is done on a large scale it is called a bubble. It is called a bubble because prices grow rapidly and, much like a bubble, from the insertion of air…much of it hot. When a bubble can take no more air yet more is introduced, the bubble pops and everything comes tumbling back to normal waiting for someone to stick their ring in a can of solution, blow real hard and start to create the next new bubble.

We have all experienced bubbles before and sometimes not even realized it. The recent increase and then decrease in the price of oil and gasoline is a great example. The tech stock market that took dot.coms to the stratosphere and then tanked in 2000 is another. The bubble that is getting us today is housing. In order to put this into perspective and compare it to the Great Depression, let us go back to that time and see what was happening.

Most will say that the stock market crash of 1929 triggered the Great Depression while others are looking at other factors such as the governments reactions (actions taken after the fact) as the major cause of the Great Depression. From what I have seen and read, I tend to fall in the later camp.

The stock market crash of 1929 had several factors that came into play but one of the key elements was that fact that you could buy stocks on margin. In other words, you could use debt, or borrow 90% of the price of a stock to purchase it. This is known as using leverage in the investing world. It works great as long as prices are going up. It can kill you when prices go down. Here is how it works.

You buy $100 dollars in stock but you only have to come up with $10 and your broker came up with the other $90. The price of your stock goes to $110 and you sell it. You pay back the broker his $90 plus some interest for borrowing his money, say $1. That leaves you with the remaining $9 as profit and since you only put up $10 of your own money you just made a 90% return on your investment. Pretty sweet deal and way better than the piddley amount you would earn in interest from the bank.

The boom market in stocks that started in the mid 1920’s was making many people very rich, and just like the gold rush it attracted many newcomers, some that knew what they were doing and many that didn’t. It seemed that anybody could invest and make big money, and many did. And when you saw your neighbor making easy money it was natural for you to want to do the same. Pretty soon everyone was trying to jump on the band wagon and make their fortune. Eventually, prices rose to a point that was ridiculous and unsustainable and they started to decline.

When prices decline, those that have leveraged are the ones that are hurt. When the $100 stock goes to $90, and you bought it on margin, you still owe your broker $90. If you sell the stock now and pay off the broker, (and don’t forget you owe him $91 to cover the cost of borrowing) you are left with nothing. Well you don’t want that to happen so you hold on thinking this is a temporary down turn and prices will be heading up again very soon. After all you made this investment to become rich like your neighbor, and everybody is doing it. Pretty soon however the price is $80 and your broker gives you a call and says he needs some money to cover the shortfall. You don’t have any money because you spent your last $10 buying this stock that was going to make you rich. The broker sells your stock and you owe him the difference.

As the broker sells your stock it puts more pressure on the prices and they continue to go down creating a spiral effect. Individuals have to pull money from the bank to pay off their debts. If the stock they bought is used as collateral for other purchases and the value of that collateral declines the other loans are in danger of going into default. As the defaults start in one area they can quickly expand, moving from one area to another by hitting one account and then another. As people scrambled to cover their newly acquired debt and save their personal finances from collapsing, it began to impact other people and business portfolios. They in turn had to struggle to save their finances from collapsing. One person’s pain began to be felt by all.

Now remember that this was nothing new and in reality it was quite common for markets to experience booms and bust. In fact, some areas of some markets have had greater price movements both up and down. Investors have made their millions and lost everything on many occasions and in many different markets even before there was a stock market. You can find books that will describe other markets such as the great tulip market of the 1600’s that went through these outlandish pricing periods. In fact there have been many markets in our lifetime that have experienced extreme boom and bust conditions. Our awareness of them is only brought about by our personal participation or the participation of someone we know. The really big ones are only well known because they impacted a large percentage of the population. Where was the media when you lost all that money on your cabbage patch doll and beanie baby collection?

As a result of the magnitude of the stock market price decline, the impacts spilled out into all aspects of the economy from banks to business to government. The madness of men and markets drove a typical price correction into a recession of large magnitude and that should have been the end of it but then it turned into a depression as a result of the actions taken by the government to correct the problem.

Now before you get me wrong, note that they did do some things right. The margin rates were cut so that investors were no longer able to buy stocks with 10% down. The current rate is 50% which some might think is still high but 2 for 1 is a lot less than 10 for 1. They also strengthened the banking system and regulations for oversight and increased the use of insurance for depositors to restore faith in the banking system.

Unfortunately, the Great Depression also allowed the government to introduce the New Deal. This was one of those giant knee-jerk reactions from government to fix the wrongs of man. What it did was introduce many of the Socialist policies and programs that we face today. It also launched a large “stimulus” package that tried to spend our way back to prosperity. Many would say that it extended the length of the depression many years past its natural length. I would have to agree. Much of the spending went into make work projects where efficiencies and effectiveness were not considered let alone any outcomes beyond the creation of jobs as the objective. We also created the world’s largest legal Ponzi scheme ever known to man…Social Security.

This government driven economy is the very idea we used to find so abhorrent in communist nations and would speak openly against. We used to think that nationalizing any industry was something that only happened in backward third world countries and if anyone even suggested such a thing people would start looking for a hanging rope. Laissez faire has oft been the slogan of a free nation.

Click here to continue to the new Great Depression Pt. 2. or Part 3.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Is the Obama threat real?

I have written a few articles lately that have condemned the political candidates in this year’s elections. I have generally meant exactly what I have said about this being one very scary election with the threat of a bloodless take over by socialist and socialism that would shock anyone that has participated in the writing of the story that is America. From the founding fathers to the warriors and soldiers that stood up to dictators and communism, I think that there is a great disappointment over the fact that Obama was even allowed to make it this far and that the only answer put forth against is a McCain.

Have we forgotten the lesson of our past? Do we not recall what our forefathers worked so hard to establish? Did we even really know? Do we no appreciate what we have? I fear that we have no clue what we have done to ourselves.

In any case, I have heard rumor that the Obama campaign has enlisted the help of volunteers to search out blogs that speak poorly of their candidate and flood the comments with countering viewpoints. I have not seen any indications that that is the case. So in order to test this out I have added the above title in an effort to draw them in. No worries as this is still one of the least read blogs in blogosphere land but what the heck.

I do wish to understand what it is, or should I say how it is Obama supporters think. I know that there is the blind allegiance to party that can claim a large percentage of supporters. I know that there is the projection of a person’s personnel values onto the candidate’s platform whether true or not in an effort to believe that the candidate actually represents their views. Many turn a blind eye to anything that might cast the light of truth if it reveals their candidate for who they really are. It is easier to “hope” that things are different than to realize that reality falls far short of their ideals.

So why on earth would anyone be for Obama? I know he has used the traditional political illusions of being able to make everything better without actually offering an actual plan. Are you buying into them? Did you buy into the Clinton approach that everything wrong was someone else’s fault while taking credit for anything that went right even if was in spite of their actions? Is cause and effect that easy to manipulate? For some it must be.

So will anybody reading this respond? Is there really a program in the Obama camp that reads and responds to these blogs? If there are genuine Obama supporters out there that want to respond I will add any and all comments sent my way. That goes for McCain supporters also. Just keep the language clean. That is really the only thing I will edit on.

Maybe with a better understanding of what we are seeing out there and what we are wanting to see, we will be able to come up with better solutions to the common problems we all face and not have to rely so much on the windbags that continually sell us short.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Politicians promise scary Halloween

I have been hearing a lot of very scary things this Halloween. I understand there is an election going on where the very fabric of our Society is at stake. It appears that there is an attack on the core values that made America great, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness (Property).

I also understand that we are down to two finalist, (were there really ever going to be any more than two?) and both our out to destroy your way of life. Our job is comparing too what degree of destruction we are willing to accept.

This nation struggled throughout its lifetime to obtain and maintain the values that have stood the test of time as being preferable to anything else the world had to offer. But, at this point in its history, all of those past efforts are threatened to become null and void by the results of one election.

The reason it is different this time, is that those that oppose American values have stacked the cards in their favor. Whichever candidate gets the nod this time is a move in their direction. They win, we lose. And whichever candidate wins, they will take it as a mandate for them to continue to pursue and implement their Socialist policies and agendas.

And of the two remaining candidates that are essentially running unopposed, by far the worst offender to grace the stage has to be Barrack Hussein Obama. Where McCain is an old hand Democrat and has worked hard to one up the traditional Democratic party by pandering to its traditional campaign plans, Obama has raised the gamut completely past that stage to full on socialism.

(Lest ye think otherwise, I have been warning of and calling the traditional Democratic party socialist for far longer than the recent use by host and pundits on the airwaves.) The warning extends now to this fact. The next step beyond Socialism comes when it is no longer able to be enforced by persuasions political correctness but needs to be enforced by force and that is usually representative of Communism, and Dictatorships.

So do I really think we are on the verge of destruction? Actually I am not sure. I do find it hard to believe that this nation has spent so much time and energy to defend and promote these two candidates and in particular Obama as he appears to be the furthest removed from traditional American values. Obama seems poised to ruin the fabric of democracy from the first day in office whereas McCain might take an extra week to get there. It really scares me that a seeming majority of America's citizens would actually embrace what these two are proposing. Once we have gone over the half way point is there hope of bringing things back?

Actually there is hope. I have talked to quite a few Americans that still believe in America, what it stood for and what it stands for. They still have America's core values at their core. They do not want to give up and will not give up. They are just struggling to know what action to take to try and help ensure that those American values are not threatened. They want to put their voice with others and be heard. They want to have something to vote for, but once again they have a contest of choosing what to vote against. If you have to vote against then by all means vote against, but be sure that you make your vote against the absolute worst possible scenario, then work like mad to make sure that next time really will be different, and work like mad to preserve real American values.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

Energy solutions?

I have seen a couple of commercials lately that have caught my interest but then created disappointment and just a touch of anger. The two I am talking about are the ones espousing T Boone Pickens Plan and the other being the We Can Solve It group.

It seems like every other ad these days has an internet address attached to it for further information and in some cases the only way to find out any information about the company that is doing the advertising. In most cases, probably 98 times in 100 I don’t give the ad a second thought and very seldom if ever actually go to the web site. In fact I am almost anti web page advertising and actively ignore some of the more gimmicky ads like the one that starts you off on some adventure and then wants you to go to their web page to see what happens next. Sorry I haven’t done it yet and don’t intend to. I just don’t manipulate that way.

Curiosity did get the best of me on these two though because they are covering topics that I have had an interest in, or at least I thought I did.

As when American with a pulse knows the price of gasoline has gone up a little bit lately and it has caused some concern. T Boone Pickens, an oil man who has made a fortune from the oil industry is also concerned and has decided to put his money into letting us know of this concern and at the same time offer up a proposal on how to solve this dilemma we now face.

His proposals for the most part are sound with the stated goal of getting America to do some basic things that would significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil. He suggest converting some of our transportation vehicles such as trucks and buses to run on natural gas which burns more cleanly and is a product that this nation has a rich abundance of.

This approach has a lot of merit but will take a little time and some commitment on people and companies willing to break some new ground. The infrastructure for refueling vehicles with natural gas is not nearly as abundant as it is for gasoline and diesel. As demand goes up so will the facilities. I have a friend right now that is converting to natural gas powered cars and he is loving it. He has to plan his fuel stops but when he fills up it only costs 8 or 9 dollars as compared to the 45 to 50 it has been costing me. He deserves those bragging rights.

The downside is planning a long cross country or even a short trip to grandmothers house will take extra effort to make sure there is fuel available along the way. There are some cars that are dual fuel machines and can run either or but most are single fuel choice. Another setback is the added weight for carrying the heavy high pressure tanks that hold the fuel. This will reduce the performance of the vehicle and I am including handling as part of that.

Another key ingredient to the plan is to really start harvesting one of the energy sources that America has an abundance of, namely the wind. We have all seen the pictures of big wind turbines and some of us have actually seen them in action. They can be quite impressive. Some of the wind farms are immense and make quite an impact by its presence. I have seen wind farms in the hills of California to the high Wyoming valleys. I have seen giant windmills on the hilltops of Greece from 35,000 feet wondering what they would look like at ground level if they where that easily seen from that height. I have seen large single windmills set within city limits and on military installations supplying energy to their communities. I have also seen small single units and testing units churning away producing energy. Each time a see a modern era windmill silently working away I am impressed.

I have often driven through the back country of America, for lack of a better term, and have past often old and forgotten windmills that used to serve the ultimate off the grid user, the ranchers and farmers of the west. These old windmills had one important function, bring the water from the well to the surface to water crops, livestock, and family.

There is so much potential for wind and I hope that it begins to be realized. If interest grows then technology advancements will also grow and increased efficiencies will be injected into the equation making the cost benefit analysis of wind a great alternative energy source. The one thing missing in most all of these arguments is a true comparison of costs.

I think that the cost issue may account for the lack of mentioning of photovoltaic or solar cell technology. Again though, as interest grows technology advances and possibilities increase.

More information about the Pickens Plan can be found at:

http://www.pickensplan.com/index.php

The other advertisement that has had a lot of airplay lately is a group of people taking about the current problems we are having with the high cost of oil but ends with the collective resolve that we can solve it by demanding action.

Before I go any further let me tell you up front what it took a very little digging to find out. This web site is a front for Al Gore and his politics. It is totally centered on his vision of the environment and his environmental manifesto. Just know that going in. I for one was greatly disappointed by this fact.

The commercial has great power in that it alludes to the people of this land banding together as individuals and making changes within their own lives and actions they can take that will lead to a ground swell change. The kind of changes made for individuals by individuals. Changes that come from ideas that are freely shared, and expanded upon by individuals, with the common goal of freeing ourselves from the oil crisis.

What you get is a call to become a political activist and demand Al Gore’s environmentalist programs be turned into Congressional mandates. He has already conned more than 1.5 million into signing up. This means he can weld some influence in Washington which is easily pushed over by such silliness. Do all of those that signed up on the web site really understand that they are giving their voice to the personal fancy of one man?

There are the solutions already mentioned but without any detail nor again any cost benefit analysis which is to be expected of a long term politician. It is easy to say we should enhance energy efficiency and adopt the use of renewable energy; it is a whole other ball game when you actually infuse it with a real plan of action. And that is where Al Gore fails. He wants to set the goal that sets the agenda and he wants others to figure out how to met his goal and then he can take credit for it while he calls it innovative leadership.

Al Gore’s web site can be found at:

http://www.wecansolveit.org

My biggest gripe for both of these movements and especially Al Gore’s is that they both call for government action. Both want government intervention to force and fund full implementation of their plans. That funding would come from taxpayer dollars and changes would be mandated is where these plans break down. If they are viable worthwhile goals, both economically and environmentally, (which I think they are), they should be able to be implemented directly without the need for government mandates, infusions, or interventions.

Of the two plans at least Pickens is putting some of his plan into real action by starting wind farms to harness and produce a real change. I can assure you that he will only do this as long as it is economically viable and that is the other reason for him to seek government subsidization, but a better way would be to continue to seek ways that would make it profitable on its own.

The last energy crunch of the 70’s created a surge in wind generators and solar cells that were heavily subsidized with tax breaks. Because the cost break even points were artificial, true cost benefits were not needed. The quality of the products that were rushed to market to fill the new tax subsidized industry were subpar and new technologies were not needed because existing or old tech would meet the rules for tax write off purposes. When the wind generators broke they sat there broke because it was not worth putting any money in to fix them.

I don’t want to see us head down that path again. We can’t afford to waste time and energy on more knee jerk reactions that continually shift the problem. We need real solutions from real people for real people, not government solutions for the masses. If the government would kindly leave some money in my pocket rather than continually confiscate it for ill conceived plans, then maybe I as a consumer could create an influence through my actions and choices that would make a real difference. Maybe I could afford to support by investing in a wind farm of my own, or at least buying a solar system for my house. One that put money back into my pockets because of savings and sell back would make it all the more sweet. That is where you start and that is how you make it work.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.

The world of hypocrisy continues

Not 24 hours after the comments from Jesse Jackson were made somewhat public, the media was a spinning. Not only did we not get to hear the whole and complete version of what was said ‘supposedly off the air’, but the story had little time to develop before Graham’s words of silliness were splattered across the airwaves. The morning news today continued with the distractions by going into history and pulling out old footage of President Bush’s off the mic comments.

A couple of things occur to me as I ponder on the absurdity from this example of the flaky times we live in. First, political correctness has gotten completely out of hand. Remember ‘when sticks and stones can break your bones but words can never hurt me’ was valued advise given to children as they were growing up providing a way for them to deal with others that had a cruel way of using their new vocabularies. So why are we as adults so quick to talk offense from passing phrases of no importance? Why do we let ourselves be affected so easily by the words of another when our own values, judgments, and integrity teach us to ignore them? I have noticed that all too often those that do take offense are those that do so for a purpose. They have their own agendas they are trying to promote and by bringing attention to another’s words it is really only to bring attention to themselves. Recognize that fact and then you have two things to try to ignore rather than one.

The second thing that disturbs me is the fact that people have been frightened into a corner and are not willing to have an opinion anymore for fear of being attack for that opinion. I say that there is no opinion but what I really mean is that people are having more opinions than ever; they are just keeping them to themselves (or sharing them with a select few). Now this is nothing new as one of the basic family rules for getting along has always been never to discuss politics, religion, or money around the family, (though I think these can be the most interesting conversations to have).

In fact, most all interesting dialogues revolve around opinions. What is the best car, engine, tire, transmission? What did you think of that movie? Did you hear the new album by …? Did you see the TV show last night? Do you ski, hike, bike, sew, bake, cook, row, etc., then you have had at least one conversation that involved an opinion. So what is wrong with having an opinion? Absolutely nothing. We should have opinions as well as ideas and we should be able to share them freely. It is that free exchange that makes us a better people. Does that mean we accept all opinions and ideas, mercifully no. That does not mean we readily reject all opinions and ideas either. If we are to grow we need to expose ourselves to new things and thoughts, and incorporate the best elements into our lives. A healthy debate also helps define and validate our own sense of right and wrong and who we are.

That is what this web site is trying to be. Expressions of opinions and ideas that should be unencumbered by worry that I might attract petty criticisms. In fact I welcome them as long as they are done in a civil manner. Anyone that has spent much time on the web soon is able to recognize the difference between an intelligent post and an emotionally driven ignorant response.

We should not fear opinions and ideas but we should recognize that many of them have strong emotional ties to them. In fact it is that very fact that gives the two political parties the power they seek. If they can define a topic in an emotionally charged way they can drive people to take action, whether it be to form a rally, tell a neighbor, write letters, make phone calls, or finally vote for their candidate, they know that it is emotion that will get a nation off its couch.

It is also that emotion that can create hurt feelings in someone and that may be the only time we need worry about sharing our opinions (How do I look dear?).

The third thing I have noticed from all this silliness is that once an opinion has been expressed there is a plethora of people waiting to share their opinion of what the first one said. The fact that the news cast spend more time and effort getting reactions from as many people as possible that have absolutely nothing to do directly with the matter, and spend ten times as much actual air time on the surrounding issue than what was used to report the original matter is frankly a painful experience for this viewer. I am one that wants to view the original act, in its entirety, unedited, and then decide for myself the relevance of the act. I don’t need so many others telling me how I am supposed to think and feel about these issues. If the new issue needs clarification or some background information to increase my understanding of its relevance to current events that is one thing, but to tell me how I should respond to those events is irrelevant and unnecessary. As one station claims (and I wish they would take their own advice) “We report, you decide”.

In order to do that though, we need more complete reporting; something with enough details to present a complete picture not just the typical sound bite laden snippets that pass for formal news these days. When the teaser before the break gives you the same amount of information as the formal presentation of the story you tend to realize that you might be missing something.

The final item is an item that I have noticed on more than one occasion in the past but was brought to the forefront strong and clear again with these stories and that is whenever we get a story second hand we get an interpretation of the real story, and when it comes to our political candidates this is not always o.k. Of course the candidates cannot be in all places at all times and therefore must rely on the assistance of others if they are to get things done and get their message out. Too often the message then takes on the image of the one delivering it. Bias enters in. The messenger projects their personal views of what they feel the candidate is about and tend to project their desires into the selling of the party platform.

Occasionally things go wrong. What typically happens is that we don’t really get what we are signing up for. There has been more than one messenger who has been deceived by their desires for qualities in a candidate only to find that reality is very different. Many a candidate has also found that their quickly formed political relationships truly do make for strange bedfellows.

So where is the hypocrisy in all this? There are many examples to choose from. What would the reaction have been if someone other than Jesse Jackson had made those remarks? Wouldn’t Jesse be one of the first to cast a stone? What if the remarks were made about someone other than Obama, would the press have suppressed the story with the same amount of zeal? Of course the other thing of note is that Jesse Jackson quickly withdrew his opinion with a boiler plate apology while Graham stood by his opinions with some minor comments to try and clarify to those that weren’t just trying to spin a sound bite. Maybe there is a lesson in this after all.

This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.