Mr. Wonderful Explains Current Events

In the December 21st, 2000, Washington Post, The Reliable Source column reports that crotch rocket Sarah Jessica Parker is ". . . very, very concerned about the Bush Presidency." Sarah 'The Body' Jessica stated the she is worried about the kinds of cuts Bush " . . . might make in domestic programs that mean something to a lot of people, including people in my family who depend on certain things from the government." Liberal millionaire Sarah is married to Jewish millionaire Matthew Broderick but between them, after pulling down annually approximately 50 times what the average American family grosses, they can't seem to financially fund the needs her own relations. Yours and my own tax dollars should take care of her family members who ". . . depend on certain things from the government." Hard to comprehend isn't it? Sarah believes it is fine for other married people, scraping along, hoping some day to come up with the down payment for their first home, wheeling around town in ten year Tercel's, working two, three jobs, paying confiscatory tax rates, to see their tax dollars taking care of the close relatives of a pair of millionaire liberals. Understand that the 'compassion' we hear from Democrats, from liberals, from those on the left, will never translate to dollars willingly leaving their Gucci® wallets. But will always translate to ever increasing tax burden legislated on other, not so 'compassionate' Americans.

If anyone desires proof of why disbanding the Electoral College would be a very bad idea, they need look no further than Consumer Reports Magazine. The Electoral College enables states with smaller populations to enjoy an equal voice in Presidential Elections. It can be likened to the U.S. Senate, where each state, regardless of population sends two senators to sit in the one hundred member governing body. These Constitutional mandates prevent states with high populations and hubris from disregarding the views of the citizens in the lesser populated states. That's why I'm not renewing my Consumer Reports subscription. The last twelve issues of the magazine have had articles published on major airports, hotel rates in major cities, gasoline prices in major cities, and grocery prices in major cities. With Phoenix, Arizona being the sixth largest city in population in the United States, possessing the fifth busiest airport in the world and the second largest city in sheer land mass in the United States, one would imagine that Phoenix hotels, airports or at least gasoline or grocery prices would make the pages of Consumer Reports. But no, never! Why? I believe it is the hubris of the East Coast editors of this Ralph Nader founded organization. Only the huge eastern seaboard population centers rate in these people's minds. Everywhere is less than civilized. The reason they even deign to mention California is only to sell magazines.But, even though Arizona is 'less than civilized', consider that our highest populated counties utilize ballots that are optically read by machines. Machines that will not allow moronic voters to leave the polling place until their card is marked correctly. And even though we're a bunch of tobacco chewing retards, our legislature, years ago, decided that the only legal, fair and sensible way to handle a recount of machine counted ballots was to perform another recount using ... only machines.

As I was watching Monday Night Football last night I delighted at how damn good both teams played. As the screen displayed the now mandatory video clips of all the players spouting their intellectual heritage, I noted that well over one-half of the players had their ancestry linked to the African continent. Yet, the U.S. population in general, contains somewhere less than 15% of American-Africans. Why does the NFL display such apparently racist policies that result in the exclusion of so many American-Caucasians? Why? Because member teams of the NFL are 'allowed' to hire the individuals, regardless of race, regardless of sex, regardless of handicap, who can best fill the job. In this case the job is to play American style football on a professional level. And since many American-Africans can play football so well, we see a much higher percentage of these darker skinned athletes on the gridiron than we witness in the overall population. But yet if one establishes a business and this business workforce does not mirror, to the exact percentages, the racial makeup of the neighborhood it's in, you will soon find yourself facing lawsuits and boycotts from every quarter. I'll always remember when officials of The City of Phoenix came to my business and informed us we'd have to hire one 'Pacific Islander', two 'Native Americans', one 'American-African', etc., etc. The City of Phoenix was demanding that we must hire these individuals of these various races to reflect their percentage of the population in the community. "Hire individuals of these races" or else, they wouldn't be able to buy from us in the future. My partner agreed with them and told them to take their business elsewhere. As city employees discovered they could no longer charge their purchases at the company they'd bought from since the late 1950s, they quickly discovered that we would honor City of Phoenix cash and checks. Within the year, City officials had rescinded their 'official' boycott and were once again buying more than ever. I ask, why is the professional sports industry the sole industry allowed to hire only the individuals best equipped to do the job, regardless of race, sex, or handicap?

A busy December for Mr.Wonderful has found him, so far, visiting three Christmas get togethers, with many more to come as I follow the seasonal Star. The other evening, as I reclined alone and apart from the hubbub, examining a $2,500 coffee table, a pair of $350 lamps, a duo of $1,400 Ethan Allen end tables, a $7,000 leather shod couch and contemplated the $70,000 of rolling stock on the shining emergency-room-clean garage, I sympathized about the children. This lavish home, this lifestyle, these accoutrements were the result of both parents being hired guns for employers who have shot them across week days through weekends from one end of this country to the other. For years. In the meantime, their children were raised by housekeepers paid by the hour, and educated with facts, attitudes, and morals dished out by the union members of their nearest public school. The progeny of these intelligent, attractive, and accomplished parents have rarely encountered the warmth of an early morning ride with mom or dad to school inside a frost encrusted vehicle. Or the ensuing AM fight for the FM control of the Bose seven speaker stereo system. Or have they experienced the predictable afternoon caress of a mother while being pelted by the call of soft macadamia nut cookies cooling in the 300 square foot island kitchen. Or having available, in those crucial minutes after last period dismisses, the ears and the heart of a parent who so dearly cares. Mr. Wonderful has felt some of the regrets these parents will be burdened with for their entire lives. Because while I made my modest fortune and never missed a recital, a baseball game, a play, a band concert, a secret auction or a horse show, my oldest boy, raised by the stay-at-home Mrs.Wonderful, raced through childhood as quickly as the model changes of the Mercedes brand auto I so favored. With his mother always beside him, Stephen streaked from seven to seventeen . . . without a father. What sad surprises these intelligent, attractive, accomplished and now wealthy stay-away-from-home parents have waiting for them.

Reading in the September 25th, 2000 eWeek  magazine, I learn about Linkzilla, the advertiser's latest weapon. What this software program does is ingenious, too bad it's also obnoxious. And in some cases, dangerous. Linkzilla allows Web sites to add 'Bookmarks' and 'Favorites' files to Netscape and Microsoft browsers without the user's knowledge. I can just hear Mrs. Wonderful now, shortly after the sound a Cephalon  frying pan makes slamming into a skullcap, "Honey why do you have a link to 'Hot Goat & Monkey Love' in your 'Favorites' file?"

Have you heard of the FBI's software package that tracks suspected criminals using the Internet? This new 21st Century weapon was named 'Carnivore' (an in-house title that wasn't supposed to be revealed to us dumb-assed taxpayers.) With a court order (beware Floridians) they can force an ISP, like Earthlink to connect the Carnivore software to an Internet communication node that the suspected criminal is signed on to. Once Carnivore is attached, like a huge electronic leach it sucks in and digests all the electronic traffic on that node, which could include hundreds of unsuspecting citizens. But the FBI claims to examine only the email, file transfers and web-surfing traffic of the suspect. Right, of course! ZDNet reports that under the Freedom of Information Act, the Electronic Privacy Information Center has discovered documentation that reveals Carnivore is sophisticated enough to also read and log all the data sent to any user's hard drive! The FBI protests that they wouldn't do this because, "It would be illegal." Note that it is also a felony for the Clinton/Gore White House to remain in possession of raw FBI data on over 900 Republicans, but that has resulted in neither jail time or even the return of the files! Too bad they didn't have the FBI file on Katherine Harris, eh, Gore fans?

It runs taxpayer's $40,000 to feed, clothe and house felons in Arizona prisons. We hear the question all the time, "How can we afford this?" Or, "$40,000, that's more than I make!" The recent arrest of two career criminals exposes the other side of the equation, the side ignored and unspoken by the 'anti-prison' crowd. The other day two gentlemen were arrested and soon confessed to police, that in the last two months alone, they had committed over one hundred thefts of property from the garages of home owners. One hundred thefts, every two months at $500 a pop, would mean these losers were stealing at least $300,000 per year of property. That is, if they didn't steal any automobiles or motorcycles. So, putting these two criminals behind bars isn't costing us $80,000 annually but saving us $220,000 each year.