Is An Old Brain Better

Than A New Brain?

By 

Don White

John McCain will be a better president than Barak Obama, if for no other reason than he is older, wiser, and more experienced.

But scientists now tell us there is another reason why older people like the 72-year-old McCain will be more effective and astute in the Oval Office than the much younger Democratic candidate. Yes, Mac has been around the block more times. He knows a lot more about foreign relations. He knows infinitely more about defending our country. He also is smarter in the U.S. Senate, he’s simply been there much longer.

Scientists now believe that brainpower doesn’t decline with age. What is
sometimes confused as a poor memory because someone can’t remember
names anymore might really be a positive, not a negative. Uhraah! For McCain.

At least this is the conclusion of scientists reported by Sara Reistad-Long in a New York Times article on May 20, 2008.

When older people can no longer remember names at a cocktail party, they tend to think that their brainpower is declining. But a growing number of studies suggest that this assumption is often wrong.

Research suggests the aging brain is simply taking in more data and trying to sift through a clutter of information, often to its long-term benefit.

 

The studies are analyzed in a new edition of a neurology book, Progress in Brain Research.

 

Ms. Reistad-Long said some brains do deteriorate with age—such as Alzheimer’s disease, for example, which strikes 13 percent of Americans 65 and older. But for most aging adults, the author says, much of what occurs is a gradually widening focus of attention that makes it more difficult to latch onto just one fact, like a name or a telephone number. Although that can be frustrating, it is often useful.

 

“It may be that distractibility is not, in fact, a bad thing,” said Shelley H. Carson, a psychology researcher at Harvard whose work was cited in the book. “It may increase the amount of information available to the conscious mind.”

For example, in studies where subjects are asked to read passages that are interrupted with unexpected words or phrases, adults 60 and older work much more slowly than college students. Although the students plow through the texts at a consistent speed regardless of what the out-of-place words mean, older people slow down even more when the words are related to the topic at hand. That indicates that they are not just stumbling over the extra information, but are taking it in and processing it.

 

The Times reported that when both groups were later asked questions for which the out-of-place words might be answers, the older adults responded much better than the students. In a national sense, Obama is the student and McCain the teacher or older adult.

 

“For the young people, it’s as if the distraction never happened,” said an author of the review, Lynn Hasher, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto and a senior scientist at the Rotman Research Institute. “But for older adults, because they’ve retained all this extra data, they’re now suddenly the better problem solvers. They can transfer the information they’ve soaked up from one situation to another.”

 

The article said that such tendencies can yield big advantages in the real world, where it is not always clear what information is important, or will become important. A seemingly irrelevant point or suggestion in a memo can take on new meaning if the original plan changes. Or extra details that stole your attention, like others’ yawning and fidgeting, may help you assess the speaker’s real impact.

 

Obama has demonstrated time after time his lack of being able to grasp important things. Oh, he can remember names, except when he embarrasses himself by calling a reporter “Sweety” instead of using her name. But in a larger sense, he doesn’t seem to grasp the importance of major topics such showing America by what he portrays and does that he is fiercely patriotic or an America-first guy. You know, this is a guy who has to prove that he’s not a Muslim-hating American with a wife who “for the first time in my life” feels patriotic. He has a terrific Muslim name—Barak Hussein Obama, so why all the fuss about who he is? It’s because he is sending signals that he isn’t who he says he is.

 

He refuses to wear an American flag pin on his lapel. He has been photographed not fully participating in the Pledge of Allegiance as witnessed by one photo that caught him looking away with his arms at his side while others were saluting or had their hands on their hearts. What was he doing, memorizing his speech at that very moment?

 

“A broad attention span may enable older adults to ultimately know more about a situation and the indirect message of what’s going on than their younger peers,” Dr. Hasher said. “We believe that this characteristic may play a significant role in why we think of older people as wiser.”

 

In a 2003 study at Harvard, Dr. Carson and other researchers tested students’ ability to tune out irrelevant information when exposed to a barrage of stimuli. The more creative the students were thought to be, judging by a questionnaire on past achievements, the more trouble they had ignoring the unwanted data. A reduced ability to filter and set priorities, the scientists concluded, could contribute to original thinking.

 

This phenomenon, Dr. Carson said, is often linked to a decreased activity in the prefrontal cortex.

 

Could that be Barak’s problem?

 

Studies have found that people who suffered an injury or disease that lowered activity in that region became more interested in creative pursuits.

 

There is a word for what results when the mind is able to assimilate data and put it in its proper place and it’s called “wisdom.”

 

 

>

Congress Poised To Pass Housing Bailout Bill

 

 

What is patently unfair and stupid is a proposed Democratic Congress bailout of homeowners who aren't keeping their promises with the Banks and mortgage companies--homes they bought during the speculative home buying binge of 2005-2006.

These people never had any intention of making mortgage payments over a long period of time and weren't qualified for the loans they got. Many of them took out adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) and now the payments have skyrocketed to two or three times their original monthly payment.

Several hundred thousand homeowners--most of them speculators owning two houses or more--are about to lose homes because they can't make the mortgage payments. Making payments was never their idea. They bought believing they could  "flip" it and make a lot of money.  Well, the  nose-dive in the housing market put an end to that fantasy.

Here's what Congress would do. They would ask Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to refinance these homes, insured by the FHA, at rates and monthly payments people "could afford." The government would pump in about $85 billion into these homes--basically owning the homes-- and when the homes sold again, hopefully the $85 Billion would be paid back so that taxpayers wouldn't lose a dime.

Wishful thinking! What these "astute" lawmakers haven't factored into the equation is how long and how deep the housing recession will take us. For example, let's assume someone bought a house for $500,000 with a payment of, say, $1800 per month. That means they didn't put much down. The value of that house may now be $200,000 and the payment double the original amount if they took out an ARM. But let's say in two years the value has dropped to $40,000. The money that should have gone back to the Treasury isn't there. The owner only put down $30,000 and he walks away free and clear, leaving John and Mary Q. Taxpayer holding the bag.

Mark my words, today it's $85 Billion and tomorrow it may be another $85 Billion. This is "Deep Dark Hole" speculative legislation, something our government should never engage in.

Another reason that a free society government shouldn't engage in this is far more basic and simple: America is the land of opportunity, and we operate a free market based on individual initiative with rewards based on a person's  hard work and acumen. Some people profit greatly, some fail. It isn't an economy run by the government, which, by the way, is incapable of running anything correctly. 

America isn't a great country because government has all the answers and is the backup for every free enterprising endeavor.

Companies come and go. That's the idea--free marketplace.  Some go bankrupt. People play the market, some lose big. It isn't a function of government to bail out private enterprise in America.

If we continue doing this—as we did recently with Bear Sterns and with Chrysler in the 1970s, for example—we won't be a private enterprise country any more. What will we be? The Soviet Union, a socialistic top-down demagogue-run society or dictatorship with most things owned by the government. The Democratic-led Congress of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid is quickly taking us there.

Orlando--There is a movement afoot to have all American companies tell all--that is post salaries on bulletin boards. How would you like it if you were a civil engineer in a company of twenty engineers and your salary was at the bottom of the list?

What if you were making considerably more than the average engineer? Is that everyone's business? It seems to me this kind of openness could lead to bad feelings and a nasty phrase some call "collective bargaining."

Well, America, wake up! You may be entering the era of full disclosure. It all started when Lilly Ledbetter went to work for Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company in 1979. She knew nothing of her peers' paychecks. She was hired as a supervisor at Goodyear's Birmingham, Alabama tire plant, doing all the things her male counterparts did. Her job was to take tires off machinery for inspection. She rotated through several divisions and pulled many hours of overtime. She said she earned bonuses and plaudits for good work.

In 1998 someone put up a notice on her bulletin board listing her base salary, about $44,000. That didn't bother her as much as seeing men's salaries, some of  lesser  title and tenure, making more than her--pulling $53,000 to $62,000. "I was floored," she said.

Ledbetter filed a discrimination suit and a federal jury awarded her $3.8 million, later reduced to $300,000 by the judge. Goodyear appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. The Civil Rights Act forbade any employment discrimination based on race, gender, and religion. But here's the kicker: The act said an employee must lodge a complaint within 180 days of the original discriminatory paycheck. She would have had to sue the company within 6 months of when she was hired, but it took her 20 years to discover her pay was considerably less than men in her pay category. Because of that technicality, the court ruled against her and she was left with a $3,182 bill from Goodyear for court costs.

Since then, Ledbetter has been on a campaign to change the law. In 2007 the U.S. House passed a bill that would make employers accountable for the most recent discriminatory paycheck, not just the first one. But the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act failed to come to a vote in the Senate due to a Republican filibuster supported by John McCain. Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama supported the Act.

The National Women's Law Center which supports Ledbetter says the bill would help close the gender wage gap.  The gap is slowly narrowing. Today, women earn 77 cents to every dollar a man makes.  However,  employers contend that there are good reasons for  the pay differences. 

While Ledbetter's gripe may have been meritorious, to pass a blanket law for the sake of evening out pay for all people will prove disastrous because you know it will say nothing of ability, education, and tenure. Women make less on average for a reason. Part of it is because many women work sporadically. They go in and out of the work force, working for an employer for a few years, having a couple of children, then returning to work for a while. Then they decide to go back home to take care of the kids until they're in high school. In other words, all this time away from the job the male counterpart has been a steady, loyal employee, going to seminars, taking classes or making himself more valuable to the employer. Secondly, the employer can count on the male to be there when he's needed, something many non-career women can't vow to do. In other words, it usually costs more to have a woman in a position than it costs to have a man doing the same job, thus the pay discrepancy.

If the Democrat-controlled Congress finally passes the Ledbetter Bill, companies like Goodyear would have wished the Supreme Court hadn't ruled against her. A blanket salary leveling bill like this cannot do anything good for the country or for the company. It will become more costly to produce tires in this nation and we will be less able to compete with foreign countries, potentially creating a situation where we could lose another vital industry and have fewer American jobs.

That's Goodyear's worry. But this bill will have far more negative consequences than that. It will apply to all American industries, to all jobs where women or other minorities are employed at different wage levels.

Why is it that Democrats don't get it? It's because all they can see is getting re-elected and none of them are strategic long term thinkers. Nor do they care for the long-term welfare of the country. We should thank conservative and moderate Republicans, including John McCain, for fighting this terrible bill and urge them to filibuster this kind of legislation again and again. In the employment practices area, John McCain again looks more and more like the conservative we need in the White House.

Don White is an attorney-writer and co-author of an exciting new book " SELLING FAST: We Sold Our House In One Day And You Can Too." He also writes columns in several blogs including http://PoliticalDisconnect.blogspot.com

May 11, 2008 12:00am

AUSTRALIA—On the other side of the world taxpayers are experiencing what America will discover if liberal Democrat Barak Obama is elected.

Having a unique peek at what really happens when liberals take over in a country is important. Today the Australian government announced a HEFTY tax increase on luxury cars, just the latest move in a tough Government Budget strategy aimed at targeting the rich and curbing inflation.

America’s inflation has been at a modest five percent under President Bush, but you can bet the Democrats will invent higher inflation so they can clamp down on the rich in this country—the very people who need to remain viable in order to create more jobs. Job creation is our problem, not inflation. When will the Fed and the liberals learn?

You can bet Obama will mimic labor leaders down under. Their treasurer Wayne Swan yesterday said the Labor Party’s new budget would herald a "new era of fiscal discipline" and he warned there would be "substantial expenditure restraint".  With our liberal Democrats, believe it only when you see it.

Budget restraint talk is not a bad thing, but only if lawmakers go along. Past history shows that when Democrats get control of the White House and Congress, which they soon may, they immediately wreck the economy with higher taxes and less job creation incentives. Then they blame it on the previous president.

Australia's plan is wrongheaded. They say their tough anti-inflation measures will curb consumer spending and make higher income earners "pay their share". This is just the opposite from what we need in America. We need to invite more consumer spending to keep our economy purring along. I hope the Obama gang doesn’t get wind of the following occurring in the Land Down Under:

“Targeting the top end of the car market is seen as one way to make higher income earners shoulder a greater tax burden and Mr Swan yesterday confirmed to The Sunday Mail that luxury vehicles would incur higher sales tax.” But know what? Revenues from this tax ploy won’t amount to even enough to pay for printing the new tax order because there aren’t a lot of people driving Bentleys and Rolls Royce cars down there. There are only 20 million people.

The proposed rise is an increase from 25 per cent to 33 per cent on the GST exclusive value of cars exceeding $57,123.

GULP!  Did I see 33 percent sales tax? Ours here in Florida is 6.5 percent, just to compare. Or did the story say a nine percent tax increase? Top income taxes in Australia are 47 percent, which has caused a “brain drain.” Almost a million Aussies live abroad to escape high taxes in a country whose highest tax rate kicks in at $95,000 a year.

In the U.S., the top federal tax rate of 35 percent applies to people earning more than $326,450. State income taxes range from zero in nine states to as high as 10.3 percent in California on incomes more than $1 million.

Ask Obama: When you raise income taxes, aren’t you afraid of a U.S. brain drain?

Australia’s new tax would affect a market that not only includes imported luxury vehicles but also the locally made Holden Statesman and Caprice, top models in the Ford range and many bigger sports utility vehicles. The increased tax would affect a market estimated at only 105,000 vehicles a year.

Mr Swan made it clear wealthy Australians would be targeted as part of Labor's efforts to make across-the-board savings while trying to protect working families squeezed by rising prices and interest rate increases.

Watch out America! With Democrats, what goes up never comes down.

read more about the economy, selling houses fast and politics at http://politicaldisconnect.blogspot.com<br>http://DonWhitePortfolio.blogspot.com<br>http://Donwhitesunshinecabal.com<br>

 

 

The Real Winners and Losers

By

Donald White

 

One hundred sixty-four years ago, Joseph Smith became a candidate for president and in four months he was dead. An armed mob killed Joseph and his brother Hyrum and drove the Mormons from their homes and farms in Illinois and Iowa to what is now Utah.

 

Today there are more than thirteen million Mormons, a world-wide religion in 178 countries, fourth largest in America. Mike Huckabee’s Evangelicals were so wary of this church that they fought the Mormons every step of the way, calling it a non-Christian cult. They voted for Huckabe, knowing that he couldn’t win, keeping Mitt Romney from winning. On the other hand, the Mormon Church was completely neutral about politics—they never ask members to vote for specific candidates. They did not endorse Mitt Romney. Wouldn’t Harry Reid have had a fit if they had?

 

Importantly, Mormons have forgiven past Illinois mob offenses. With the loss of Florida and only a fair showing in Super Tuesday, Romney did the right thing. He dropped out of the race in the interest of the Republican Party and threw his support to the ultimate winner, John McCain. 

 

Romney Did The Right Thing

 

With each primary it became clear that the GOP favored a maverick Republican who claimed to be conservative. McCain claims that only he has commander in chief instincts, and he is definitely right! But what has he ever commanded or run except a small squadron? Even in his best military days he was assigned tactical duties, not strategic command.

 

At the same time, Republicans have rejected a true leader, a true conservative—a man who has created jobs and improved the economy for thousands of people.

 

Shame on you, America

 

This is amazing because this year’s biggest issue is the economy, Mitt Romney’s acknowledged area of expertise.

 

America is in recession. The U.S. is in trouble with a deep housing depression and unemployment—good jobs vanishing to foreign lands—and steadily increasing, unbearable national debt. International confidence in the dollar is at an all-time low, meaning Americans, logically, should be looking to vote into office someone like a Romney with proven job-building skills who can correct this errant economy that both parties have allowed to go astray.

 

Meanwhile, the surge has calmed the Iraq war, something in which the very captious John McCain not only claims credibility but some responsibility.

 

America’s economic downturn and the sub-prime housing market crisis are real. How can Republican voters ignore that fact of life—unless they believe that McCain is also an economic guru. Even he admits he isn’t.

 

Romney Has Learned A Lot

 

Governor Romney now can look back at an intense year and a half that has cost him a good part of his fortune with what pundits will say has very little to show for it. That is unless this year was a dress rehearsal for the 2012 election.

 

Romney has learned a lot from his campaign. We hope he is forty million dollars wiser. If he makes another run in four years he may want to make some more friends, break the ice with other politicians a little earlier, campaign for candidates to other offices as did McCain, and line up well-known national endorsements that become seen as photo ops and official approval, while erasing the impression that he is plastic and bobblehead-stiff.

 

Romney’s Run Was Good For The Church

 

Mitt Romney’s running for the Republican presidential nomination gave rise to much debate inside and outside the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Was it good or bad for Mormons that their faith has been the object of close scrutiny of friends, enemies, and strangers? Their religious practices have been free game for ridicule and praise by Americans. There has never been so many religious bloggers.

 

Many have asked, “What would it be like to have a devout Mormon in the White House?” Would the Mormons be blamed if his Grand Old Party ticket lost to the Democrats in November? We’ll never know.

 

It is safe to say that in the annuals of American political history some years hence we will find that Governor Romney’s religion had little impact on the presidential race. At the same time, it is equally fair to suggest that Mike Huckabee’s candidacy and religious backing had much to do with Romney’s demise.

 

While Romney did not win the nomination, his run was overwhelmingly good for the Mormons.

 

The Religious Issue—Helped or Hurt?

 

Certainly there was an initial flurry of interest—passive curiosity—in Mr. Romney’s religious beliefs. Many may argue that Governor Romney was wrong when he failed to meet those questions head on, to informally discuss his religious background, perhaps Reaganesque in his living room wearing a sweater before a warm fire; he could have allowed all the country to understand just what kind of person he is. It was almost like he was too private.

More people will argue—given the critical sound-bite mentality of elections—that he took the right course in referring all religious questions to his church and only speaking about the Second Amendment and separation of church and state in his College Station, Texas speech at the George H. W. Bush Presidential Library. It was an outstanding address and it did him much good, helping him appear presidential and attractive to those who had never heard him speak, which was most of us in and out of the church.

 

History will judge if he handled the religion issue correctly, but something good happened. His initial failure to come right out with information turned some people off—mostly critics who would be turned off at anything he did—and created a vacuum that caused much discussion and controversy on the blogs, though not all of it was correct and complementary to the Mormons and Mitt Romney.

 

Conservatives Are Still Troubled

 

Actually, even the blog controversy probably cleared the air for non-Mormons who must have learned a great deal, if not from Romney, from Mormon bloggers. When it came right down to it, Romney’s wealth and ability to flood the airwaves with advertising may have turned off his opposition, but it also made him new friends and made “Mitt” a household name.

 

McCain wasn’t conservative on important issues like President Bush’s tax cuts which he and only one other Republican senator voted against. Consider the liberal amnesty bill McCain co-sponsored  with Ted Kennedy, and McCain-Feingold which would have severely restricted voters’ First Amendment rights. The bill had been heavily promoted by the liberal news media.

 

McCain-Feingold would enhance the power of the liberal news and entertainment media, since they would continue to enjoy unrestricted power to promote favored politicians while tearing down others.

 

It would have severely restricted the right of citizen groups to collect and spend money to inform the public about what members of Congress are doing in Washington, including alerting citizens about upcoming votes on key issues in Congress.

 

McCain calls himself conservative? He is anything but, except in matters of choosing Supreme Court Members, the Iraq war, and defense.

Because of Romney’s character and commitment to focus only on the issues, he did not attack McCain as a person or his occasional lack of scruples.

 

Loss Not a Blow Against Mormonism

 

Despite Romney’s loss in the primaries, it is difficult to see it as a blow against Mormonism or a setback for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There are too many great people in that church for one election, one man, or even a series of negative comments to damage it. And given the way the people accepted Romney, political defeat or not, it is not a setback for Romney the man, just Romney the presidential candidate.

 

It is not repudiation against the church that claims to be the force described by the prophet Daniel when he saw a stone cut out of the mountain that would roll forth in the latter days consuming all kingdoms before it. When something as vital as this gets momentum, nothing can stop it. Certainly not one election or one little man named John McCain.

 

It is doubtful that in the future that politicians, pollsters, or analysts will find any basis upon which to attribute Romney’s loss to the fact that he is a devout member of this church.

 

There will be other Mormon candidates for national office—there are currently 15 in the U.S. Congress including speaker of the house Harry Reid—and if the Romney v. McCain v. Huckabee series of clambakes proved anything it is the following proposition: so long as the Mormon faith in the United States continues to produce politicians with the integrity, stature, and moral character of Willard Mitt Romney, the electorate of the United States will welcome them to their highest offices—even if some Evangelicals won’t.

 

Latter-day Saints can be proud of the distinguished manner in which

Governor Romney conducted himself in this race, the poise and dignity that he exhibited and the widespread respect that he earned from the American electorate at large.

 

Mormons should also be proud, rather than embarrassed or critical, of the unabashed manner in which Governor Romney spoke of his faith, “the faith of my fathers,” and the values that he constantly draws from it.

 

Mitt Was A Great Ambassador of Truth

 

It is encouraging to this writer that Governor Romney has single-handedly taken on the world in behalf of the Latter-day Saints. After all, until the late President Gordon B. Hinckley, who recently passed away at age 97, this church was not good at media hermeneutics or communicating its fundamental beliefs on radio and television. Singularly, following Hinckley’s lead, Romney stood up and praised the day he became a Mormon—which was at age 8 at the hand of his father the late George Romney who baptized him.

 

The Mormons had been erroneously defined in the public eye as non-Christian cultists, something that is anathema to Mormons. But now, thanks to Romney and the late President Gordon B. Hinckley, the world knows this church is ultra-Christian. Though, importantly for Mormons, its teachings of the nature of the Godhead don’t coincide with Catholic or many Protestant views because it is far more comprehensive and understandable.

 

Always seeking to banish any semblance of religious display from the public square, Governor Romney, like Joseph Smith, demonstrated forcefully, clearly and unabashedly to the American people that Mormons are in fact not only religious people with solid moral values, but Christians with a world-wide following—people not afraid to stand and testify of Christ; that they are a people who invite others to join them in worshiping the true God, his Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost as three separate personages even as did Joseph Smith, the first latter-day prophet.

 

American Voters Get What They Deserve

 

Americans deserve what they get in a politician. It always comes back to haunt them. If Obama is elected it may come back to haunt all of us in some way.

 

Unfortunately, most of America’s press is liberal and still holds a rather limited view of the Latter-day Saints, but even that is improving.

 

When Mitt Romney refuses to use profanity, but only an occasional Ozzie and Harriet style “gosh” or “Gee” or “good heavens”, he is portraying who he is, conforming to the Latter-day Saint prohibition against being profane and using profanity and vulgarity. He is Mormon through and through and when another Mormon runs for president, maybe the electorate will understand this church a little better. Oh, there will be more, for this church is ever expanding while the rest of Christianity dwindles.

 

Devout Mormons are not monolithic or disengaged from American life; but the good ones like Romney do not treat money as a pathway to personal popularity for popularity’s sake, and they are not consumed in becoming millionaires for the money or for the glitz and conveniences money can buy, but for what that money can do to aid in a common cause or to help others less able.

 

 

 

Latter-Day-Saints Live Their Religion

 

Consecration is their byword and they live their religion. By definition as an honest tithe payer, Romney has already given many millions of dollars to his church, money he would say wasn’t his, but the Lord’s.

 

The Latter-day Saint faith is comprised of millions of honest, intelligent, educated, articulate, hard working, and broad-minded men, women, and children. They are fully and passionately engaged in the day-to-day affairs of contemporary society in a thoughtful, concerned and productive fashion.

 

They might not be United States Senate and House members—though fifteen are—or presidential candidates, but they may be faithful government workers or honest and hard-working doctors, accountants, office workers, engineers, laborers, lawyers, farmers, teachers, or business owners. They may appear like Governor Romney, with clean-cut looking faces because they don’t use alcohol or tobacco, or even caffeine-laden soft drinks, drugs, coffee, tea, or porn. They don’t practice polygamy—no, the FLDS Church that got busted for child abuse and polygamy is not Mormon—frequent bars and burlesque houses, gamble, or carouse.

 

Perhaps because they are a more serious minded people, they—like Mitt—have been given undeserved descriptions like rigid, plastic, or stiff. That’s actually in their favor, knowing what we know about the morals of the average American today.

 

Mormons don’t divorce as often as others, don’t have mistresses and clandestine lovers, don’t engage in premarital or extramarital sex or watch R-rated movies. Besides their strong health and moral code, another reason they live longer is that they do not have as much stress in their lives because they live with strong, supportive families.

 

They are admonished to read the scriptures daily, hold family gatherings called Family Home Evening on Monday nights, do family history work and attend the temple. If they break the commandments they cannot enter the temple.

 

Mormons believe in God and Jesus Christ, go to church for three hours on Sunday, accept mission calls—two years today, but 30 months when Romney went to France; and, believe me, these missions are tough and are not like a walk in the park to a Sunday School class. Mormons, both men and women, are expected to accept positions in the church since it has a lay ministry, though only men hold the priesthood. As Mike Wallace of CBS said, “being a Mormon is not easy.”

 

Mormons are an honest, law-abiding people of all races and ethnicities, and all of this tends to make them look younger and live longer than other Americans.

 

Church—True Winner

 

Regardless, Governor Romney has demonstrated to the world that the face of the true Latter-day Saint is in fact one face of the 21st century, one every American wishes they could cultivate.

 

With his integrity, passion and sensitivity, Governor Romney truly should have earned the respect of not only his peers, but of all Americans. He was the most qualified to lead this country out of recession, during war and into a better time, but unfortunately the average American rejected him.

 

Did they reject him because of his faith? Some may have, but not generally because his faith is the one Romney attribute that rises above all others. His dedicated groundbreaking work in 2008 has effectively made it easier for him or someone like him to win over a reluctant American voter in times ahead.

 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its people emerged winners of this year’s primary election. The losers were the American people. 

 

 

Statistics are like potter's clay. They readily yield to the clever hand of the sculptor. So what if America lost 35,000 jobs the last three years?

Americans should not look with gloom and fear at jobs leaving our shores and going to smaller countries that can make things for less. We should pattern our system after the ancient maker of brooms. He asked each of a hundred families in his tribe to create one broom of exacting quality and proportions. He paid these private entrepreneurs per broom and sold his brooms on the market. He did not invest in expensive plant and equipment, but did business in a scaled down way.

I've been an author under the name of Donald White for many years. Yet my fiction pen name, Donald Bruce, may be more notorious and findable on the net than my real name. This afternoon I received a call from the Philippians. The woman said she knew I was an author and that her firm wanted to help me market my new book. She meant my new real estate book, SELLING FAST: We Sold Our House In One Day And You Can Too. Co-authors were my real estate guru wife Carolyn White and son, Marcus.

She's speaking broken English then it comes to me. I only used the Donald De Bruce name on fiction, so things got screwed up, but in a nice way. Her name was "Jennylyn Fernandez" and she didn't know Tiger's Woods' mother was from the Philippians.  <jfernandez@yenchensupport.com> but she called my home number that I thought I never gave out. She must have  had a great researcher. Her email arrived this afternoon.

Dear Mr. Bruce,

Greetings!

I understand that you are an established author. So we can help you promote your book and generate sales as well and be known worldwide over the internet through our Marketing Services here at Yen Chen Support. Our Marketing Services are Web Design, Online Listing Campaign and Email Marketing Campaign. Through these services, there will be a big chance to have great sales in your work. To know more about our company and the marketing services that we are currently offering you can visit us online at marketing.yenchensupport.com.

She's offering a 30% discount, so maybe someone can use her.

So what if America lost jobs the past two years! We're smart enough--we can create 10,000 new jobs a month--at least a Mitt Romney can. But to those who lost their jobs, it may not be that simple. That's where government and unions--even to me, a conservative--can play a role. It's in training the unemployed for new kinds of jobs, jobs that may pay even more than what they were making. I recommend you read a great book, A Country That Works by Andy Stern, president of Service Employees International Union (SEIU), largest and fastest growing U.S. union.
business@simonandschuster.com  or 1-800-456-6798
 
Unions have failed. They should be big time into retraining. This is why unions in America only represent 12 million blue collar workers. Union bosses have not been responsive to the changing world. They should be in a position to anticipate what's happening before it happens in the job market. More on unions and creating new jobs later.
Don White
dusanotes@yahoo.com