The Bail Out

Apparently our "leaders" have come to an agreement about how to handle a bail out of the misdeeds and idiocy of the Solons of Wall Street and the banking industry.
This writer does not claim to have any expertise about economic matters. His financial plan is based on the thoughts of John Wesley: Make as much as you can, save as much as you can and give as much as you can. But this writer thinks that the bail out plan is a bad idea simply because there is no Constitutional mandate for the federal government to bail out any one, let alone Wall Street and the bankers.
The speed with which this deal has been pushed through the halls of Congress reminds your faithful correspondent of the sale of a questionable used car. In other words, the salesman tells you that the car is great and if you don't buy it now someone else will be it and you'll be getting to work on the bus. Then, after you buy it, you find out that you have to spend as much as the car is worth or more to get the thing safely on the road.
Also, this writer is of the opinion that the businesses who partied at our expense have no business expecting us to suffer the hangover they caused.
Would the failure of the government to bail out the banks and investment houses result in a recession or depression? Perhaps. But that may be the very thing that we need to instill financial discipline on business and the populace.

Calling All Screen Writers

Here's a story that hasn't gotten any attention from the television, radio or newspaper reporters: Mystery surrounds hijacked Iranian ship - The Long War Journal
One can almost look forward to the pulp novel based on this incident. Never mind the Robert Ludlam or Tom Clancy nonsense. This story deserves the Sax Rohmer ( writer of the Fu Manchu novels)or Maxwell Grant (writer of the Shadow novels). One can almost see a Republic Studios serial starring Clayton Moore in the story.

The Financial Crisis

Your faithful correspondent does not claim to know a whole lot about economics.
But he does know this:
If this writer conducted his financial affairs in the same way that the CEOs, CFOs and executives of the major banking, investment and insurance houses have he'd be living in a tent by the BNSF railroad tracks instead of softly descending with a golden parachute.
And this writer knows that no one would bail this writer out of his trouble except, maybe, his family. The federal government would give yours the big California "Howdy."
Socialism. Brought to you by Wall Street.

The Trouble With Tattoos

Those who know your faithful correspondent well are aware that he is a tattooed man. At one time he would have been considered a heavily tattooed man. At that time four tattoos or more on one person were considered to be the datum of a heavily tattooed person. Never mind how many tattoos this writer has because it is not to the point.
Let us just say that most people who know yours are not aware that he is tattooed at all. This is not due to any embarrassment on the part of this writer, but due more to discretion and the personal nature of said tattoos i.e., names, dates and symbols. The tattoos were not, not are not, for public consumption. They were and are personal images only of import to this writer and his loved ones.
But, in recent years, this writer has noticed that many young people seem to be using tattoos as fashion statements. They have become some sort of trend that the bearers may one day later grow to regret. Some, in fact, seem to be aspiring to get jobs with the circus sideshow as "Tattooed Men" while working as salesmen at Circuit City or preachers.
"Back in the day" tattoos were the purview of servicemen (usually sailors), roughnecks, bikers and anyone who, having drunk too much, wandered by a tattoo parlour thinking of "Mom." Tattooed people were a sub-culture who. Their tattoos were personal statements, not fashion statements.
And their tattoos made sense. They expressed sentiments or philosophies or experiences. They were not "tribal" or fashion. A hula girl or globe and anchor denoted memories of Hawaii or the Corps.
Nowadays it seems that every damn clerk at the local Wal-Mart or CVS is sporting some sort of "tribal" tattoos going from their shoulder to their wrist when the only tribe they ever belonged to was the generic white guy or gal. The tattoos mean no more to them than make up or tennis (or is it athletic?) shoes. What these young sprite do not seem to realize that one day they will be fifty years old with tattoos that reflect nothing more than a fashion. Does any young woman who has a "tramp stamp" tattooed on her lower back realize that one day she will be a granny hiding that thing from her dear little angel grandkids? Or does a future IBM executive realize that he will be wearing long sleeves at work until his retirement because he has a screaming skull in flames etched on his arm?
What has happened is that the youth of the middle and upper classes have taken over an art that has heretofore been the purview of the military, the working class and the lower class. They've, in effect, taken on something that is not theirs to present themselves as us. And they will one day regret their decision much to the delight of plastic surgeons. And they have made tattoos common and have made them less special to those who have had them for years.
Idiots.