Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Remember kids...

"stroganoff does not taste as good coming up as it does going down! Please post a warning before you do that again."

Picture of the Day

Monday, October 22, 2012


"Tyler is NOT a good actor or writer, PERIOD. He puts support of black actors on his shoulders, sorry, not going for that. We as a community need to show that we are a diverse intelligent discriminating audience and we have more than a few talent actors with a great range. They keep throwing us this drag queen as our voice in the media and I am tired of it."  Not saying where I found it (don't want to admit visiting the site), but it's nice to see some non-lemming thinking:

Reblogging because it's the truth...NOT MINE!

"I just want to add this, many men have a wrong view of what it means to ‘lead’ a family. They think that’s being authoritarian and bossing folks around. But leading as a man in family means, you lead in sacrifice, you lead in loving, you lead in serving, you lead in giving. That’s what it means to lead a family and I’m sorry many some folks don’t deserve that title nor do they deserve to be respected or followed by the women they supposed to be leading. If a man did all those things that a leader should do in a family, he wouldn’t have one ounce of issues with his wife. She’d be happy, so she would be onboard.

I’m a strong woman and very independent and have always been so. But when I met Matt and we decided to go into a serious relationship that has now lead to marriage and it happened without an argument or even an side-eye from me. You don’t have to force her, she will naturally go. Women want to be taken care of by their men and real men want to take of their women, but most women don’t trust the man to do it especially when he shows no willingness to do it. People are always acting like bw are forcing their will down bm’s throats. Leading your household is not anything you have to make a woman get behind, if you do it and do it well, it just happens naturally. As strong, capable, and independent as I am Matt is a leader and it didn’t take any convincing on his part for me to let him lead. It was a relief to tell the truth, in ex-marriage I had to lead b/c he was incapable of doing so. I was so happy to have a man, be the man, he didn’t have to convince me. He takes care of business, why the hell would any woman fight that and if she does she’s certifiably stupid. And if a man is deserving of a leadership role, it will make itself known in him. He won’t have to convince or cajole, he will just do. I’m tired of this talk and no action, if you doing the actions of a leader, how do ppl argue with that but my thought is that since many bm aren’t raised by fathers that showed leadership they have no idea what it means to lead a family. You have to be taught that."

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Friday, October 5, 2012

The ‘Self-Made’ Myth: Our Hallucinating Rich

Let’s cut Mitt Romney some slack. Not every off-the-cuff comment the GOP White House hopeful made at that now infamous, secretly taped $50,000-a-plate fundraiser last May in Boca Raton reveals an utterly shocking personal failing. Take, for instance, Mitt’s remark that he has “inherited nothing.”

A variety of commentators have jumped on Romney for that line. They’ve pointed out that Mitt, the son of a wealthy corporate CEO, has enjoyed plenty of privilege, everything from an elite private school education to a rolodex full of rich family friends he could tap to start up his business career.

On top of all that, the young Mitt also enjoyed $1 million worth of stock his father threw his way to tide him over until big paydays started arriving.
Not quite “nothing.” But no reason to pick on Mitt either. Most really deep pockets, not just Mitt, consider themselves entirely “self-made.” The best evidence of this predilection to claim “self-made” status? The annual September release of the Forbes magazine list of America’s 400 richest.

Each and every year Forbes celebrates the billionaires who populate this list as paragons of entrepreneurial get-up-and-go. The latest top 400, Forbes pronounced last week, “instills confidence that the American dream is still very much alive.”

Of America’s current 400 richest, gushes Forbes, 70 percent “made their fortunes entirely from scratch.”
Most of our super rich were born on third base and think they hit a triple.

Forbes made the same observation last year, too, and most news outlets took that claim at face value. Researchers at United for a Fair Economy, a Boston-based group, did not. UFE analysts stepped back and took the time to investigate the actual backgrounds of last year’s Forbes 400. They released their findings last week, on the same day Forbes released its new 2012 top 400 list.

The basic conclusion from these findings: Forbes is spinning “a misleading tale of what it takes to become wealthy in America.” Most of the Forbes 400 have benefited from a level of privilege unknown to the vast majority of Americans.

In effect, as commentator Jim Hightower has aptly been noting for years, most of our super rich were born on third base and think they hit a triple.

In its just-released new report, United for a Fair Economy extends this baseball analogy to last year’s Forbes 400. UFE defines as “born in the batter’s box” those Forbes 400 rich who hail from poor to middle-class circumstances. Some had nothing growing up. Others had parents who ran small businesses.

About 95 percent of Americans, overall, currently live in these “batter’s box” situations. Just over a third, 35 percent, of the Forbes 400 come from these backgrounds. Just over 3 percent of the Forbes 400, the United for a Fair Economy researchers found, have left no good paper trail on their actual economic backgrounds. Of the over 60 percent remaining, all grew up in substantial privilege.

Those “born on first base” — in upper-class families, with inheritances up to $1 million — make up 22 percent of the 400. On “second base,” households wealthy enough to run a business big enough to generate inheritances over $1 million, the new UFE study found another 11.5 percent.

The narrative of wealth and achievement that Forbes is pushing ignores the other side of the coin.

On “third base,” with inherited wealth over $50 million, sit 7 percent of America’s 400 richest. Last but not least, the “born on home plate” crowd. These high-rollers, 21.25 percent of the total Forbes list, all inherited enough to “earn” their way into top 400 status.
Last year, a rich American had to be worth at least $1.05 billion to make the Forbes 400. This year’s entry threshold: $1.1 billion, the highest ever.

Forbes, the United for a Fair Economy researchers sum up, has glamorized the myth of the “self-made man” and minimized “the many other factors that enable wealth,” most notably the tax breaks and other government policies that help the really rich get ever richer.

The narrative of wealth and achievement that Forbes is pushing, the new UFE study adds, “ignores the other side of the coin — namely, that the opportunity to build wealth is not equally or broadly shared in contemporary society.”

And many of those who do have that opportunity — like the mega millionaires in Boca Raton who applauded so warmly when Mitt Romney asserted he had “inherited nothing” — see absolutely no reason to turn that coin over.

Veteran labor journalist Sam Pizzigati, an Institute for Policy Studies associate fellow, writes widely about inequality. His latest book, The Rich Don’t Always Win: The Forgotten Triumph over Plutocracy that Created the American Middle Class, will appear this fall.
*I like that picture of Oprah she is a perfect example of self-made, she was born into poverty in rural Mississippi, and now this amazing woman has built an media empire and is one of the world's greatest philanthropists.

FROM: http://inequality.org/selfmade-myth-hallucinating-rich/

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

In a strange way, I kind of hope so....

2012, end of the world, doomsday

Monday, October 1, 2012