Hiring Slows in the Summer

In case you didn’t already know it, companies don’t do much hiring in the Summer months. That means that we should be seeing a slowdown in hiring statistics through the next three months or so. Most people take off for the Summer. Human resource personal, hiring managers and organizational management all go on vacation at some point and are just not available for interviewing and decision making and so most companies will wait until they become available again before they even start a hiring process. Thats the way of business.   

If you’ve ever had the unfortunate opportunity to be looking for work during the Summer, you know it’s hard to get anywhere because the person you would be interviewing with is “away”. So is their boss.

So it will be interesting to see if the government’s job numbers will “improve” during a traditionally slow period. We know the Obama regime needs growth to appear to be actually doing something so will the liberal media attempt to further skew the numbers and spin them into the sun shining through the clouds? I’m curious to see.  

In the USA at least, the first quarter of every year is the best time to find a job. Many companies will know by this time what they will need for the coming year as far as resources are concerned and will do most of their hiring then. Hiring traditionally tapers off in the second quarter and then drops dead in July and August. Things then pick up a bit come September and into the Fall. Winters are also tough after the Christmas season in the Midwest and the formerly industrial North East.

So what we are looking at in the short term future SHOULD be a drop in job “creation” whatever that means in the age of Obama. I’m frankly surprised that anybody is hiring given the uncertainty in the marketplace due to looming national debt, mandated tax increases and the economy killing specter of ObamaCare.

But we just may see an “improvement” beyond the realm of human belief systems this Summer since we go to the polls this November. The news could very well be that things are getting better but only to the extent of what the nationally owned media will report.  

So as May turns into June most of us will once again be planning our “Stay-cations” since we still can’t afford to go to the places we couldn't afford to go last Summer and at any rate would most likely feel supremely guilty about it if we could given the situation of many people in this country right now.

But this should give us all time to ponder another four years of an Obama regime. Romney may not be the perfect candidate as far as the pure US conservatives go but at least he’s balanced a checkbook and has submitted a budget as a Massachusetts governor and has lived within it’s guidelines. That’s more than can be said of the present administration in which many members have never held a private sector job and who have yet to submit a budget to Congress for scrutiny and approval. This is in violation of the US Constitution I might add but what else is new?

With no budget coming from the president in 3 years, with no plan to stop spending and no idea how to combat the growing demand for power to run all those air conditioners from San Francisco to New York City this Summer season, this nation is fully ensconced in a grip of fear. Fear for the future for ourselves, our children and our nation.  

And all we've gotten from the present administration is threats. Obama theatens the Supreme court not to overturn his pie-in-the-sky healthcare mandate, threats to Congress that he will "go it alone" by using his Presidential edicts to circumvent their authority and threats against his opposition candidates. Yet he has no answers, no plans and no budget.

A future with Obama as President is no future at all.  

Romney/Paul Ticket a Winner

Question: What would make me want to vote for Mitt Romney for President?

Answer: If Ron Paul is on the ticket for Vice President.

It’s enough to give that wack-job radio (lack of) personality Mark Levin an aneurism. 

This would be a smart move by Mitt Romney for several reasons. The first is that he is too much like Barack Obama himself and why vote for a Liberal Republican when you can have the real thing in a Liberal Democrat? So having Ron Paul as his Vice President would set him apart ideologically and Mitt Romney needs that so very badly. He doesn’t have to adopt Ron Paul’s Libertarian ideals but he could let him go at the Federal Reserve and sit back and watch. That would be delightful!

Another good reason to have Ron Paul as part of a Mitt Romney run for the Presidency is that they really seem to get along. Dr. Paul, as elder statesman, has the experience on Capital Hill that Mitt lacks. He knows his way around the halls of Congress like few in the Romney campaign do. This is a valuable asset.

And still yet another good reason is that Ron Paul, as a consistent voice in the dissonant winds of government would keep Mitt Romney grounded and free of glaring missteps that even presidents that were considered good have made. Like Ronald Reagan granting amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens. What was he thinking? Who told him that was a good idea?

Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are kindred spirits in a way. Both are seen as having "problems" because of their beliefs. Mitt for his Mormonism and Ron for his Libertarianism. 

Ron Paul would not be a “yes” man and Romney will need that if he is to set this country back on the right track. Mitt Romney is a smart man but can he go it alone without trustworthy council? Who has been the most consistent voice in Congress no matter what you may think of the man?

I can recall that Congressman Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, who was at the time before he was a Vice Presidential candidate, a staunch advocate of the School Voucher Program. That’s the program where you, as a taxpayer, receive a voucher for the money you have paid toward the school system via taxes, would then be able to use that voucher to enroll your children in THE SCHOOL OF YOUR CHOICE.

But when Al Gore picked him to run with him as Vice President, Joe Lieberman never uttered the word VOUCHER ever, ever again. A true man of principle, Joe Lieberman.

Ron Paul is not another Joe Lieberman. No Sir.  

This would also be a shining achievement for Libertarianism. To have Ron Paul as a Vice Presidential nominee would be the next big step in acceptance in the ideals of freedom not embraced since the founding fathers did in 1776. How sweet that would be not for us but for this great nation. After all, we’re not in it for the money like the Liberals.

Forgotten will be the alternate disparagements and ignoring of Dr. Paul. It is no secret that the younger voters, having witnessed the failures and false promises of the past, are hearing the Libertarian message. It’s been long overdue for freedom and the freedom loving to go mainstream.

Would that it were, would that it were. 

Liberals Blame the Other Guy...

It happens every time. When the Left's Liberal policies crash and burn, it's everybody else"s fault. It can't be that the President does not know how to actually fix the financial mess created by his own runaway spending plans, can it? No, it's GWB's fault, it's the Republican's fault or it's the Tea Party's fault. Blame the other guy. "It would have worked if it wasn't for X, Y or Z.

This is why the Left never changes their view of things. They're in denial. They believe that their beliefs of wealth distribution, welfare and a "depend on gov't" state would work if only it was allowed to be implemented correctly. If only it wasn't held back by the "Non-believers".

Well it has been applied correctly this time and many times before this and it not only doesn't it work, it really can't work. You can't suck money out of the productive sectors of our economy and give it to the unproductive. You can't lift a people up by tearing the prosperous down. We can't spend ourselves into prosperity. No, it has never worked and talk of people paying "their fair share" hasn't proven to be very fair at all in its distribution and use by the government. If fact it's been wasted.

Like Obama said, it's not class warfare, it's math. And the Left, apparently, can't do math.

Ron Paul’s First Mistake…

This year has proven a boon to Libertarians everywhere. Long in the political shadows, Libertarians have looked to Ron Paul’s resurgence in a war weary nation ten years on in wars that see no end in sight.

Mr. Paul has never been more articulate, succinct and, for the most part, brief in explaining his Libertarian ideals and values as he has been this year. This is far beyond his 2008 efforts what found him at times struggling to put into words the principles that unite our belief system. It is these core values that make Libertarianism a consistent thought process and Ron Paul has been our leading spokesman for decades.

But last night he made a critical error.

He tried to answer a difficult question that he did not have enough time for.

It is obvious that Ron Paul is not against America. It is also obvious that he is not blaming the American people for 9/11 and he should have just said so when challenged by Rick Santorum. But the long answer does not work on television debates and so he got nailed.

To say that our dealings with the Arab world had no bearing on the attacks of 9/11 would lack credibility. The U.S. is Saudi Arabia’s biggest trading partner and the Muslim radicals are no friends of the house of Saud but to use this to justify the murder of over 3000 people is only the lip service of tyrants.

Al Qaeda has attacked every foreign country that has entered their country for whatever reason. To say the U.S. has dealt with Arabia unfairly, building a nation of sand and oil deposits into a country of riches albeit poorly distributed, and that the UAE is an exploited region is an unimaginable stretch. Osama bin Laden is a great example since he was raised in a very well-to-do family as an aristocrat really.

Outside of the ruthless U.S. backed rule of the Shah of Iran, it is folly to compare the conflagration of 9/11 to our dealings with Arabia itself, the home of the Taliban/Wasabi cult. They had no legitimate justification for their attacks.

And Ron Paul never got the time to explain it and he knows it. Now he may never get another chance.

Right up until his gaff, he had nailed the question and was cheered. There is indeed a difference between Military spending and Defense spending. We do have too many military bases all over the world and it’s costing us Billions of dollars and adding not one farthing to the Treasury. This has to end. It will end one way or another because we can’t go on in this fashion. 

He is right again when stating that if we as a nation continue in this way we will have nothing but turmoil overseas. This has proven to be so very true since we have had nothing but war since I was born. 

I know Ron Paul as a man of principle and as an American first. I never for a moment believe that he thinks America is to blame for 9/11.

I just wish he said it.