Really had to cringe when Hardball 's Chris Matthews acted appalled when Taylor Gipple at an Iowa town meeting told Hillary Clinton she does not appear to be getting the support of young people because people in his age bracket perceive her as being dishonest.
Matthews' hypocrisy about the encounter was a bit amazing. Matthews said that due to Gipple's age, the young man was "nervy" and showed no respect for Clinton's political stature or age with his comment / question.
Right or wrong, the Clintons' integrity became a topic when Bill Clinton became President.
Investigations by the Clintons in the Whitewater Corporation hinted at a cover up by the duo. And more recently, there continue to be questions about her role as Secretary of State in not preventing the fatal attacks on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya and utilizing a private email account to conduct government business.
The news media has reported extensively on those stated events, so Taylor Gipple's comment was fair as Clinton's integrity has been questioned by political opponents as well as the news media.
Matthews comments about Gipple were a bit disingenuous. He is always challenging mostly conservative politicians' moral scruples (as New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's Bridgegate) and enjoys posing gotcha questions or assembling a panel of like minded experts on his show to embarrass politicians or make disparaging comments about them.
Matthews is suggests that people questioning Clinton's trustworthiness are part of a major conspiracy and the only people who can question her ethics are people in the news media.
The question was appropriate and the young man had the guts to challenge Clinton's integrity to her face. Matthews was just sorry he did not have the opportunity to ask the question.
Spanish bull fighter Francisco Rivera Ordodonez caused quite an uproar when he took his young daughter to his job at the slaughter house (rather bull ring).
Despite his own father being gored by a bull when he was 36 years old, the 42 year old matador treated bringing his daughter to the bull ring as just another father /daughter day at the office.
Despite the criticism from his fans in Spain, Orodonez claims that his daughter was never going to be any safer than she was in his arms.
Orodonez is not the only celebrity in recent memory who has engaged in some behavior with a child that was deemed to be reckless by an outraged public.
The late Michael Jackson was legendary for the love of children both in and out of his bedroom. However when he was in Berlin Germany, he dangled his then infant son, Prince Michael, over a balcony to his adoring fans.
The Prince of Pop apologized and by all accounts, Prince Michael has turned out to be an okay young man.
Crocodile Hunter, Steve Irwin, really caught heck when he held his baby daughter Bindi as he fed a snapping crocodile. Well the event apparently did not harm the 17 year old Bindi's psyche as she went on to perform in Dancing With The Stars and continues to remain a favorite of Australian and international audiences.
Another example of Parents Gone Wild was back in 2009, when fame seeking Colorado parents Richard and Maymi Heene alarmed the nation that their young six year old son Falcon was floating across the country side in a home made untethered helium balloon.
Turns out the boy was never in the balloon and his parents were busted so to speak when young Falcon said the stunt was to get on national television.
Falcon's parents served some jail time for child endangering and young Falcon and his siblings have continued the family goal of finding fame and fortune by starting a teenage rock band.
There are some very broad descriptions of a particular American generations and how each generation raises their children.
Bump offers a narrative of what defines each American generation and also supplied a graphic showing the generational breaks. Labels for generations can be coined by someone as Tom Brokaw's Greatest Generation or an organization as the U.S. Census Bureau's Baby Boomers.
Generations born after 2004 are still being defined and are appropriately labeled TBD (To Be Determined).
Technologies, world events, economic earnings, education, etc., all help to define each generation and how its members react to the world.
My generation is Baby Boomers. A Baby Boomer is defined a person who was born between 1946 and l964. This generation, my generation, began when there were over 77 million American babies born after WW2.
The baby boomer generation makes up a substantial portion of the North American population. Representing nearly 20% of the the American public, baby boomers have a significant impact on the economy. As as result, baby boomers are often the focus of marketing campaigns and business plans.
A Baby Boomer is apt to say about those born after him that the younger generation does not have the same work ethic as he did when he was growing up. Many of the Greatest Generation probably made similar observations about the Baby Boomers who protested the Vietnam War and smoked pot!
The Baby Boomers were said to be spoiled by parents who probably were just happy to come home from WW2 in one piece. Today's Baby Boomers seek out Viagra, color their hair, are beginning to wear adult diapers, suffer heart attacks and are taking care of their parents from The Greatest Generation.
Now when Baby Boomers go to their doctor they are apt to say, "the doctor is young enough to be my grandchild!"
However, back in the days, when people actually turned pages to read a book, pediatrician Dr. Benjamin Spock authored a book entitled Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care. This book was on my parents' book shelf as well as almost 14 million other American book shelves.
Spock advocated a common sense approach to child care and was against corporal punishment.
Because so many American parents read Dr. Spock's book, and supposedly followed his recommendations against corporal punishment, people attributed that was the reason Baby Boomers disobeyed authority and protested the Vietnam War.
The Greatest Generation probably would have never engaged in the parental antics that are posted on social media as YouTube or on reality television shows.
Besides Dr. Benjamin Spock, Ward and June Cleaver on the television show Leave It To Beaver, showed parents how to tackle certain family situations without getting too excited.
Cleaver Family
Today Generations' X , Y, and Millenial parents can turn to television personalities as the charlatan Dr. Phil McGraw or Dr. Oz for their "expert" advice on how to raise children.
However, no matter how many experts offer an opinion on child rearing, most families will find their own unique way to raise a child and likely be criticized by onlookers.
Just because a person is a billionaire does not mean their purpose is to participate in world domination. But let's face it, if you have a billion dollars in your pocket your view of the world has to be a bit skewed as you sit in your mansion.
Other than health or personal social issues a wealthy person really does not have much too worry about like the rest of the 99% of the world. A billionaire can say what is on his or her mind and really could care less what people think of them.
Billionaires do contribute a lot to philanthropies and if they did not many fine organizations would go under without their assistance.
Search on the Internet for the top philanthropists---and there are different lists but on all those lists there are with some reoccurring names---and one cannot help but be impressed with some of the foundations this elite group of people have contributed to.
Tax billionaires too high and one could almost guarantee philanthropic contributions will drop.
The real danger for America is not there are billionaires, rather it is that our elected politicians are in the pockets of special interest groups and vote accordingly to keep their campaign war chests full. Most of the special interest groups are backed by billionaires of course.
Many of the politicians view their jobs in Washington or their respective state houses as a permanent career move and they will do what is necessary to secure their jobs.
Michael Bloomberg, former NYC mayor, has threatened to run if Trump is the Republican nominee and Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee. If this should happen, Bernie Sanders said it would be him against a wealthy oligarchy.
The Sanders rhetoric is to stir the troops so they would come out in force to vote for him. It would be conceivable that with a divided electorate, Sanders could be President!
Sanders is a good guy rightly worrying about Americans at the lowest economic levels. However, he belongs in the Senate as many of his ideas do make sense and can act as a counter weight to the politicians in the pockets of the lobbyists.
Putting Sanders in charge of the Executive Branch could be polarizing.
A Sanders Presidency would put the country into greater debt and due to entrenched politicians it could be 4 years of stalemate as conservatives and moderates dig in to fight his socialist agenda!
Politics is the art of compromise. Can a Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, or Bernie Sanders compromise? Or will either of these three men be so entrenched in their ideologies that the Executive and Legislative Branches will continue with their current destructive partisanship?
As the primaries are beginning, hopefully moderate candidates are nominated that do not have the the scorch and burn mentality or throwing the baby out with the bath water. Not everything Obama accomplished has been bad for the nation.
In actuality, a third party candidate may be good for this country as the two parties have actually spent any good feelings Americans may have for them. It might very well be that independents and moderates of both parties may actually embrace a Michael Bloomberg candidacy.
Americans should know by now, the current crop of candidates of both parties running for President are narcissistic and many of them and their family members are actually a bit creepy.
There are creepy politicians in both parties as the following:
New York Rep Anthony Weiner (D) texting explicit messages and photos with young women
John Edwards (D) affair with woman as wife was battling cancer
New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) solicited prostitutes
Idaho Sen Larry Craig (R) tapping foot in airport bathroom stall for male sex
Louisiana Sen David Vitter (R) solicited prostitutes
Nevada Sen David Ensign (R) sex with staff member
South Carolina Gov. David Sanford (R) year long affair with an overseas mistress
Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R) paying off blackmail money to cover sexual exploits with young boys when a high school teacher
To make a run for President a man or woman has to have a very big ego and most likely cannot run unless they have the backing of his or her spouse. Running in a national campaign candidates' spouses, children, siblings can all become targets by political opponents, pundits, the news media, and blog writers!
Often times, a President's parents, siblings, or adult children can prove to be an embarrassment. Jimmy Carter had brother Billy Carter. Bill Clinton had half brother Roger and his colorful mother Virginia Kelly. George W, Bush had party-loving adult daughters and his adoring mother Barbara and the long shadow of his father's presidency.
Next to the Clintons, another dysfunctional family in the White House was the Kennedys.
The myth of Camelot has gradually been dispelled as the public has learned that the "beloved" John Kennedy was a known womanizer and more than likely he and his brother Bobby passed actress Marilyn Monroe between them.
Franklin Roosevelt's mother was legendary with interfering in his marriage to his wife Eleanor. After being caught in a couple of affairs, Roosevelt swore not to do it again or at least get caught. Of course the four term President died in the arms of his mistress.
So now we are entering the long political year and we can see our future leaders acting like children and one should dread that one of these dufuses will occupy the White House.
When Barbara Bush was asked about her son running for President a couple years ago, she replied:
I think it’s a great country, there are a lot of great families, and it’s not just four families or whatever. There are other people out there that are very qualified, and we’ve had enough Bushes.
There were many people hoping that the nation would not be put through another nightmare of another Bush Presidency and that Jeb would have listened to his mother.
But Jeb did not honor his mother and plunged into a Presidential campaign which is now plummeting.
So to let Americans know that despite his failing campaign, he has the support of his mama Barbara, Jeb pulled out all the stops and put her in a campaign ad endorsing him as President.
.
In many conservative circles, the outspoken Barbara Bush remains popular and many were upset when Donald Trump, acting just like the little boy bully that he is, ran to his computer and twittered:
Just watched Jeb's ad where he desperately needed mommy to help him. Jeb --- mom can't help you with ISIS, the Chinese or with Putin.
And in defense of his mother, the loyal son Jeb also ran to his computer and tweeted back:
I'd be careful Donald
In another campaign ad, the ever not so lovable Ted Cruz marched his family out for the cameras to produce a campaign ad. His daughters asked "cute" questions to their father as he read Dr. Seuss type books to his precocious daughters on how their daddy will save Americans from the big bad liberals.
The Washington Post cartoonist, Ann Telnaes drew a now famous cartoon depicting a Grinch dressed Cruz manipulating his children as trained monkeys to muster support for him.
The Senator was offended. The Washington Post withdrew the cartoon due to a supposed public outcry. Cruz capitalized on the staged brouhaha and asked for a cool million dollars in donations to fight the liberals and the press who attacked his family and of course the American family.
The three times married Donald Trump as well as his other Republican rivals really know what God and Jesus wants for America. Besides throwing out illegal immigrants and Muslim immigrants, many of the candidates definitely do not want government sanctioned same sex marriage.
Always reminding us that he is the son of a Cuban immigrant bartender, Marco Rubio apparently saved his son Dominic from a possible pool drowning. Rubio saw the light and now values his family even more.
Of course, the supposedly born again Catholic Rubio, knows that same sex marriage is destroying American Christian values and is of course against Catholic teachings. So by golly when he is in the White House besides flexing American muscles overseas, a President Rubio will work hard to end government sanctioning of the sinful practice of same sex relationships.
Former Alaskan Republican Governor Sarah Palin is always invoking the notion that conservative values are best for the American family. Despite the fact her daughter Bristol had a baby out of wedlock and more recently her son beat the crap out of his girl friend she feels she knows how a good Christian family should act.
Palin, a gun toting Alaskan hillbilly claims she is a Mama Grizzly when it comes to protecting her crazed family and their shootouts at the Palin family homestead. In true Palin fashion, she blames her troubled son's issues on President Obama not funding enough for veteran care.
Now that Hillary wants to be President, Americans should shudder knowing her sexually deviant husband will be lurking through the White House.
Bubba Clinton pulled his penis out of his pants for his intern, poked a cigar in areas of Monica's body and splattered his DNA (semen) on her dress. And all along, the perverted President vehemently denied having sexual relations with that woman. Of course Bubba recanted after trying to convince everyone that oral sex was not sex and Clinton took the nation to the brink of an impeachment trial over his lying to the special prosecutor.
Other than encouraging people to eat better or black men stepping up to act responsibly and raise their families, Barack and Michelle Obama have not lectured Americans about family values and both have embraced diversity.
So unless there is a scandal Americans don't know about, the Obama family (as the Bidens) has been quiet and have probably demonstrated how a non-dysfunctional family should act in public office.
In history there has always been great orators. The Greeks had Demosthenes who legend has it stuffed pebbles in his mouth to work on his oratory. World War 2 England had Winston Churchill. And also during WW2, the Germans had Hitler and the Italians had Mussolini. And of course Americans had Franklin Roosevelt who inspired a nation during the Great Depression and then an army to defeat Nazi Germany and Japan.
People know that being able to advance both socially and professionally, the ability to speak before groups of people is often times a necessity. The famous Dale Carnegie courses for self-improvement include speech as one necessary skill for success. The non profit Toast Masters International has meetings throughout the world dedicated to the art of public speaking.
Dale Carnegie
Americans pay high prices for tickets, team merchandise or products endorsed by an athlete. Musicians and actors are handsomely compensated for their talents.
Attendees to a ball game, concert, or movie expect to be entertained. As long as celebs entertain, the money will keep flowing to them.
But apparently, there is great entertainment value for corporations and universities to pay big bucks for public speakers and some ex politicians as Bill Clinton have made a very lucrative income to just talk and people to listen.
Recently, Bill Clinton's better half---Hillary---has been challenged by her rivals for being paid substantial amounts of money for addressing Goldman Sachs clients or employees. One has to wonder what the hell Hillary actually said which made it worth paying her about $600, 000 in annual speaking fees to that Wall Street corporation.
Perhaps Hillary has a comedic talent that most Americans cannot appreciate? Were the speeches lengthy enough to warrant such a high hourly fees? Were her speeches below the going rate to court Wall Street supporters for her Presidential campaign? What Goldman Sachs official actually authorized such large amounts of money to hear a speech?
Hillary wants to be President but at the time of this writing is a Presidential wannabe. But should the day she becomes an ex-President, she could be handsomely well paid for her talent to just talk.
So if you are a parent with a talkative kid in your life, help nurture that talent. He may become a well-respected orator on his way to making a very lucrative living inspiring people.
“I find politicians’ speeches moving. Sometimes I don’t even pack up before forever leaving their vicinity.” ― Jarod Kintz,
A democracy takes a great deal of work and right now Americans have a crop of politicians of both parties with questionable motives thinking they have what it takes to make this country great.
The following are some quotes about democracy that should give pause as we watch the antics going on in the local, state, and federal levels of government.
Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, PC, DL, FRS, RA was a British statesman who was the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1940 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1955
Louis Dearborn L'Amour was an American author. His books consisted primarily of Western novels; however, he also wrote historical fiction, science fiction, nonfiction, as well as poetry and short-story collections.
Henry Rollins is an American musician, writer,journalist, publisher, actor, motivational speaker, television and radio host, spoken word artist, comedian
William E. Vaughan was an American columnist and author. Born in Saint Louis, Missouri, he wrote a syndicated column for the Kansas City Star from 1946 until his death in 1977.
As stated in a previous blog, freedom of the press and speech are guaranteed in the First Amendment and are being withered away by the United States government in the name of national security. This gradual but creeping infringement on the First Amendment is often overlooked by many Americans who believe that any gun regulation is far worse than a restricted press.
Let's categorically state, Americans will continue to own guns and this writer does not want to see it any other way. However, there needs to be some gun regulations---and yes only criminals will break the laws when purchasing guns---and those criminals need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the laws.
Magazine Guns and Ammo published a list of the "10 best countries for gun owners". Of course the United States remains number one. But the other nine countries on the list had some form of any regulation which the editors of course viewed as bad.
Besides the United States, Guns and Ammo listed the following countries with the best place for gun ownership, The best place for gun ownership is listed first in the order from best to worst:
United States
Czech Republic
Switzerland
Panama
Norway
Canada
Sweden
Serbia
Finland
Honduras
The countries on the list which are stable democracies similar and perhaps even better than the United States as a place to live have gun regulations worth looking at.
The gun regulations of countries with similar standard of living as the United States are directly quoted from Guns and Ammo as:
Finland:An acquisition license is required to buy firearms, and a separate license is required for each individual gun. Gun owners must declare a reason for ownership such as hunting, target shooting or collecting, but self-defense is not considered valid. All guns must be locked in the home. If the collection includes more than five guns, they must be stored in a safe that has been inspected and approved by local police.
Sweden:Swedish self-defense laws essentially render any shooting an unjustifiable one. The gun-control laws are numerous and draconian. Those over 18 may obtain a license from the police to own a gun and must declare their reason for applying: sport shooting, hunting or collecting. Sport shooters must belong to a club for six months before obtaining a license; prospective hunters must pass an examination. Guns registered for sport may not be used for hunting. Swedes are only permitted 6 hunting rifles or 10 pistols, or an eight-gun combination of rifles and pistols (all of which must be stored in an approved safe), and they cannot purchase ammunition for a firearm they do not own.
Canada:Canada has outright bans on pistols with barrel lengths under 4.1 inches, semi-auto rifle magazines holding more than 5 rounds and semiautomatic pistol magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Pistols with barrel lengths exceeding 4.1 inches, long guns with an overall length under 26 inches and semi-auto rifles with barrels under 18 ½ inches (i.e. AR-15 variants) can only be shot at firearms ranges and require a special firearms ranges and require a special license. All gun ownership requires a “possession and acquisition license.” Canada’s storage requirements include provisions that the guns be unloaded and rendered inoperable or locked. Forget using them for self-defense.
Other than 911 and Pearl Harbor, the United States has not been threatened by an invading army and in all likelihood the mainland probably never will be. For other countries on the list as Switzerland and the Czech Republic, gun traditional ownership is viewed as a necessity in the event of an invasion. And that indeed makes some sense after Putin's Russia has recently invaded the Ukraine as well as the Czech history of dealing with both German and Soviet occupations.
Some form of gun regulation has been needed in the United States for a very long time. Unfortunately for Americans, the NRA is a strong lobbyist in Congress and politicians of both parties are in the NRA pocket.
President Obama has tried to get some Congressional action in terms of some form of gun regulation and finally he had to resort to Presidential Executive Orders, a clear circumvention of Congress, to have some needed gun control.
As Commander- in- Chief it would be very remiss if he did not take some actions to bring some control to a situation out of control. The very dysfunctional Congress could have acted and it did not.
Let the Supreme Court make the decision on these executive orders.
What is interesting that many ardent second amendment supporters do not have such zeal when there are indeed attempts by politicians to restrict freedom of the press or speech!
Perhaps all Americans need to be wary when the government attempts to curb any restrictions on not only the press but our freedom of speech and right to redress grievances with our elected officials.
There are many good references reminding all Americans of the significance of a free press in preserving an American democracy. Basically freedom of the press and speech (written or electronic) help to assure the government is accountable to the people which it is to serve.
However, according to Reporters Without Borders, shockingly the United States ranks 32 in assuring press freedoms! Finland is number one and Canada is ranked 20.
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists the top 10 nations of the world for press and electronic communication restrictions are:
Eritrea
North Korea (family run)
Saudi Arabia (family run )
Ethiopia
Azerbaijan
Vietnam (communist)
Iran (theocracy)
China (communist)
Myanmar
Cuba (communist)
It is very easy to see why these nations restrict the press, Their governments are dictatorships many fueled by religion or restrictive political beliefs which empower only a select few. A free press or free exchanging of ideas threatens all the regimes of these countries.
As for the United States, under the Obama and Bush Presidencies, the press has been restricted to free information under the guise of protecting national security.
Was catching up on the news and Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir was addressing as to why the Saudis were breaking relations with Iran.
All this turmoil between these two began after Saudi Arabia executed of a Shi'ite Muslim cleric and other alleged terrorists. Well, the Saudi regime is composed of one of the most brutal group of thugs in the world and the executions were just to keep the regime in power.
If this blog writer was to be living in either Saudi Arabia or Iran, my head would be chopped off offering a commentary about either of these dictatorships that definitely do not allow any criticism of their regimes.
And depending how the political wind is blowing, both are sometimes referred to as friends of the United States.
As repugnant as dictatorships and theocracies are to this very spoiled American, it gives one pause as to think that maybe the region of the Middle East may be better served by despots in power---all who deserve a quick bullet to their heads for their brutality.
As evidenced with the Saudis and Egypt, that despite our long history of supporting world democracies, United States policy makers still like despots in power as long as they are pro-American.
When the Arab spring began in large part due to the influence of social media upon the youth of the regions, one could not help but be awed that perhaps brutal leaders were going to be justifiably dispatched with and replaced with a democracy.
Unfortunately, it did not happen and the region was plunged into utter chaos with more people being killed and displaced than ever before. ISIS was one of many groups of sadists who filled the vacuum.
So this American sadly wonders is the Middle East ever able to handle democratic traditions or do the people actually prefer thugs running their lives versus the alternative of anarchy.
The modern Middle East is not the only region of the world in that has embraced dictatorships. Freedom House has a great interactive map showing with freedom scores of the world's nations.
The question if some regions can handle a democracy is not only relevant to the Middle East but also of course to other nations of the world. But unlike some of the other regions, a Middle East in turmoil seems to spill over the entire world and impacts most nations.
But in reality, can democracies really ever thrive in the Middle East?
Iraq was President Bush's experiment of overthrowing the brutal Saddam Hussein which was to be replaced with a regime which would be democratically elected and of course be a friend of the United States.
Well, Iraq was a disaster and has splintered into many factions and is a friend of the much hated Iran. (Americans are to hate Iran because Israel does and Israel is America's 51st state!)
Egyptians on their own over threw President Hosni Mubarek. And when their newly elected President Mohamed Morsi was viewed as a threat to the status quo military, he was ousted, imprisoned, and replaced in a new "election" with Abdel Fattah el-Sisi from the former Mubarek regime.
No matter what a person's nationality or religious belief---Egyptian, Israeli, American, Canadian, Muslim, Atheist, Russian, Syrian, Chinese, Catholic, etc., when tortured it hurts. All nationalities grieve when family members are imprisoned or executed. All peoples need water, shelter, food, and a way to make a living.
But are there some regions of the world that the people are incapable of managing a democracy? Or have the large economic super powers made it virtually unlikely democracies can succeed due to their influence?
Regardless one of these narcissistic persons will be our President and Americans actually will come down to picking the lesser of two evils to be President.
After all the televised debates, people should by now be figuring out why some of these candidates should not be elected President.
A billionaire businessman sitting in White House is a bit disconcerting. But a pompous billionaire as Donald Trump sitting in the White House is beyond disturbing but is frightening.
Unlike as a CEO of his own company, Trump will quickly learn that not everything he wants will be implemented as President. At this time he has no grasp of foreign policy and despite claims he knows economics, his economic plan may benefit the upper 1% of Americans but not middle class or poor Americans.
Trump comments appeal to the frightened middle class white man.
Unfortunately for the nation, Trump will likely get bored and will pass the day to day operations to some lack eye or allow his adult children take on some behind the scenes roles.
Based on her history as Secretary of State, United States Senator, and First Lady, Hillary is probably the most qualified of all the candidates at this time. However, Hillary has a perception of not being totally honest which is probably one of two reasons people would have trouble voting for her.
However the second problem for Hillary is that her husband Bill will residing with her in the White House. The image of Bill wandering the White House is as disturbing as billionaire Trump being in the White House.
Bill Clinton has proven to be a sexual predator and womanizer and Hillary should be distancing herself from her husband with say a divorce of political expediency!
Hard to think of Hillary consulting with Bill while they are sacking out in the bedroom. Frankly one should pity her potential staff or Cabinet members having to work for her. However, the nation has had father and sons as Presidents and so a husband and wife team might be doable.
Rather than doing the jobs they were elected to, Americans have two governors and four senators blatantly ignoring their day jobs in their quests for the Presidency.
Of all the Republican senators running for President, Rand Paul has been continually over looked and brushed off by mainstream Republicans and news media. Paul does deserve a second look. Paul has demonstrated a common sense approach to not over governing as well as assuring that Americans' civil liberties are protected. A President Paul is not as apt to engage the United States in all of the international conflicts the other candidates are promising to do.
With his conservative views and being an obstructionist as a senator, Ted Cruz is down right the scariest of all the candidates. Now with the question of whether he is a naturalized citizen creating quite a firestorm, he will be un-electable.
Marco Rubio, blatantly had no intention of completing his senatorial term and had set his term on a Presidential run. With no military experience, Rubio would likely engage the country in military conflicts at the cost of human lives and at the expense of improving American infrastructure.
At this time, Rubio has demonstrated no intentions of taking on curbing of global warming and wants to dismantle Obamacare and as of yet has not proposed an alternative insurance program.
Rubio touts himself as being the new generation of American leaders. Well, the self-centered Rubio demonstrates what is all wrong with the younger crop of career politicians desiring to lead the country.
As an Ohioan, John Kasich is appealing, however like all the senators, he is an elected governor and should be home worrying about the day to day operations of the state. This same criticism of not running the state he was elected to govern also applies to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.
Unlike Christie, at this time, Kasich does not have political scandals following him nor the abrasive temperament Christy is noted for.
President-wanna-be Jeb Bush has the dubious honor of his father's and big brother's legacies to follow and justify. Americans were tired of Bush /Cheney and this dangerous duo of plunging the nation into Iraq and destabilizing the middle east.
Though he does not have a strong flamboyant personality, Jeb Bush is a moderate and maybe could be a decent President if he surrounds himself with moderate advisers.
Another senator who has avoided his day job to run for President is Bernie Sanders.
Sanders is a socialist---not necessarily bad---but if Americans thought Obama had a difficult Presidency dealing with conservatives, we ain't seen nothing yet if Sanders occupies the White House.
So the choices for the Presidency are very bleak and it is tragic for the country these are the best the two parties can offer us!
It is amazing how many people buy products based on celebrity endorsements. According to the The Richest Blog the top celebrity endorsers and the products they promoted have been:
Brittany Spears Pepsi
David Beckham H&M Clothing (European)
Catherine Zeta Jones T-mobile
Nicole Kidman Chanel
Tiger Woods Rolex
Ellen Degeneris Cover Girl
Fabio Lanzoni I Can't Believe Its Not Butter
Jessica Simpson Proactive
Bill Cosby Jell-o
Michael Jordan Nike and Hanes
And of course other blogs or magazines may have their own list---but regardless-- celebrity endorsements pay off to the manufacturer in sales.
Consumers really do not know if the celebs endorsing the products really use them.
Between drugging women, did Bill Cosby really eat Jello-O with children. Unless the consumer could get into the locker room, did Michael Jordan really wear Hanes underwear. And did Wheaties bring upon the gender confusion of Bruce Jenner? Did Ellen really use Cover Girl make up did or Jessica really slop on Proactive to reduce her acne?
Who knows if celebs are being honest with their fans when they endorse a product.
Regardless celebs are paid sometimes incredible amounts of money to tell a gullible consumer the products are good because they actually use them.
Celebs endorsing weight loss or muscle building programs appear to be a bit more legit. Most celebrity watchers can see celebs packing the pounds on and when shedding the pounds people take notice and want to know the celeb's secret.
One of America's best known celeb is of course Oprah.
It is unAmerican to not love Oprah!
This self-made billionaire is loved and trusted by millions and Oprah knows how to capitalize on the public goodwill towards her.
So when Oprah decided to endorse Weight Watchers, this overweight man and millions of others took notice.
As Americans learned on the Ellen Show, Oprah was approached on being a spokesperson for Weight Watchers.
In a nutshell, Oprah tried the program and lost 15 pounds following the Weight Watchers regimen.
And with some prodding by Ellen, Oprah tactlessly admits to Ellen she made $45 million dollar profit in Weight Watchers stock in one day after her public announcement to join the company with her initial $40 million dollar investment in 10% of the company.
Oprah has been very public about struggling with her weight and has a very philosophical way of how to live a good and meaningful life. And therefore Weight Watchers which is a combination of counting food points, changing life style eating habits and group support would mesh well with her personality.
But Oprah's marketing strategy is one that all college marketing majors should note.
Oprah has over 30.5 million followers on Twitter and has enlisted her followers on Twitter to join her on her journey of weight loss with the inspirational "Are You Ready" and "Let's Do This Together" ad for the company she owns stock in.
The news media has gone all out and promoted this Weight Watcher campaign as Oprah's return to television. Americans will follow her journey and gobble up the Weight Watchers cuisines and helping her and her fellow investors make more money.
Americans will be subjected to following Oprah's journey. Not necessarily a bad journey as she has invited all of us fat people to join her. Who could not resist after all it is Oprah! Besides slimmer physiques, perhaps there is an actual pot of actual gold like Oprah found for following the program!
But cutting through all the media hype and bologna, Oprah will shed some pounds and stands to make a lot of money from the journey her fans take with her.
Regardless, it is a helluva good marketing campaign!
