Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for November 7th, 2012

About Dog and Pony Shows, and another Beast….(post-election perspective)

leave a comment »

(this actually, it says, is from a Renaissance festival in Louisiana).

Some people may now not know the term “Dog and Pony Show” referenced in my Election Day posts.  I think the above communicate the message — taken from image search on “dog and pony show” where the original links for these may be found.

While these are easily identified in re: the word “SHOW,” or “Entertainment” or “novelty” etc., perhaps this type of material may NOT be:

(incomplete Election Map — Florida not in (again.  Fancy that!  Remember 2000?))

NY TIMES ELECTION RESUTS MAP (SHOWING RED & BLUE STATES) 2012

QUITE DIFFERENT WHEN ONE LOOKS AT THE COUNTIES (MORE RED THAN NOT)

Please look at the “States” map and then opt on the “Counties” map.  See what a mosaic of counties is across the country?

Be aware that every single one of them (the counties) is a governmental entity which has an associated “CAFR” and it’s my intent to locate and post them all (unless I can get some help with that!).  And that’s just the start.

Anyhow, thanks to modern technology, the Christian Science Monitor already has the racial breakdown of the election, informing us what should be obvious by now — when it comes to popular vote, the era of “white male supremacy” is probably over.  Which probably (in great part) is what the marriage/fatherhood promotion is all about anyhow — because it immediately (welfare reform, I mean) targeted the base prejudices of the human nature — welfare queens, etc., low-income people (what is a “low-income” person???  Is that a genetic descriptor???    Or did the offspring of eugenics have something to do with who had more income than others, based on racism?

This is entirely a different matter than who, REALLY, is the United States of America?  Because I’ve been spending the last few days looking at more utter chaos, fraud, dishonesty and stupidity in the handling of money around certain federal programs that I’m beginning to believe we’ve had stupidity programmed into the entire country.  It’s definitely in the school systems, and in the public-consumption version of who is government, and for all I know, it may be in the water, too!

Election results 2012: Who won it for Obama? (+video)

Exit polls find that a key to Obama’s victory was winning 93 percent of African-Americans, 71 percent of Hispanics, and 73 percent of Asians. Mitt Romney took most of the white vote, which is 72 percent of the electorate. But it wasn’t enough.

By , Staff Writer / November 7, 2012


President Obama was reelected Tuesday night in large part because of strong support from women and minorities. The lesson of his victory for both parties, but particularly Republicans, may be this: The primacy of white male voters has passed. In the modern era, it takes a diverse coalition to win the White House.

Look at the basic breakdown of Mr. Obama’s victory, according to exit polls (which may yet be revised). He won 93 percent of African-Americans, 71 percent of Hispanics, and 73 percent of Asians. He took 55 percent of the overall female vote, down only one percentage point from his comparable 2008 showing.

Mitt Romney, meanwhile, won about 59 percent of the white vote. That’s the best a GOP nominee has done among whites since 1988, and not too long ago such a performance might have guaranteed a winning margin of 270 electoral votes. After all, whites still make up 72 percent ofUS voters. …

Mr. Romney would have needed the support of even more whites to win – and Obama did well (or well enough) among white women, particularly single and young white women.

Romney won white men by 25 points. It wasn’t enough.”

Women, in this election, didn’t have a real good choice.  I do know some who voted for Romney, but I wouldn’t characterize this as too smart.  Notice it’s single and young ones.

Others, like me (I’m single and not young, and also a mother, obviously from this blog) know more by now about Social Security, Welfare Form (and diversions into marriage/fatherhood) and Clearinghouses paid for with tax monies.  Of course, I learned the hard way that parents are only temporary custodians of children, until the state sees it differently.  This may be why politicians keep speaking about “OUR” children.  It turns out to be, literally (and legally) true as a corollary of citizenship.

While we may not be guilty or cognizant — up front — of the “sins of our fathers” (I should say, mothers and fathers) in giving us birth certificates and, for the most part, sending us off to compulsory education in state schools, while going off to work in a corporation and get paid in what’s not really, bona fide money, such that the KIDS primary relationship is with a procession of teachers (some who teach them, some who molest them, some who at least make competent babysitters) and the PARENTS relationship is so frazzled — but, I’d have to say, with their corporate masters (or institutional, if incarcerated) — and trying to get the day-time babysitters (called schools) to do a decent job — all of this is a interlocking directorate of HOW WE SPEND OUR DAYS.

What I’m blathering on about here is the birth certificates, marriage certificates, drivers’ licenses, and all that stuff that did not USE to be routine.  I am old enough to remember when kids were not issued social security numbers (not claiming to have been alive then, but — read between the lines).
I tried (again) to explain the “Baltimore” situation, recently, but ran across the faith-based thing, and how Ohio’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (the first round) was simply steering HHS grants to cronies, after which the person stepped down in 2007 (as apparently did the person involved in the Baltimore Mayor’s Office of Children Youth and Families (a.k.a. “Baltimore Rising, Inc.” which called itself a nonprofit, apparently filed a tax return twice, but which — I simply don’t see, at least in Maryland.  This also parallels behaviors of other groups in New York State, and in California — they get the grants, and they don’t comply with the state laws of charities or corporations, AND THEY KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT!

And quite honestly, it’s rather discouraging.  If someone has regurgitated the Kool-Aid as not sustaining life (and tastes bad) it’s very hard to drink it again.  I have done this, and am having one HECK of a time justifying why to hang around and feed any part of the system anything.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 7, 2012 at 10:03 pm

%d bloggers like this: