This is the bare faced reality of  life with the dreams long gone and no serious reason to believe that life is going to get any better. I find myself just going through the motions of living because there is no sane alternative. I am alone, I am going to be alone, my affairs seem to be just modicum enough to get by with no real chance of improvement. I am not a hermit or a quitter, I do do the things expected of me, I ask for no special favors, I am self reliant and independent, but that something is missing becomes more and more obvious everyday.

I will continue, I will be 56 in December so it's not like I don't know myself, this is just me trying to put my feelings into words. So here I sit writing, I suppose I write because I can and I want to, so it's not like I am paralyzed in any sense of the word, and I am not bored either. It's not like I can't find anything to do or that I'm not willing to do anything, obviously I am doing this right now. I can't sit here and choose my words as carefully as I do, review what I have written and edit when I need to and assume I have lost the capacity to care deeply or love being involved in work. I am in the moment.

I'm not talking about regrets, I have none, I'm not here trying to blame anyone or any situation, I own all this, my reality, my feelings, the words of my essay and the thoughts expressed. I sit her in charge of my life and yet, I can't say my life isn't working, it does, so what am I trying to say? I have essentially described the keeping on keeping on thing so far, but what I am trying to get at is my loss of faith. Not the futility of faith, faith is supposed to get you through the struggles of self doubt and failure when nothing else will. But here I find myself keeping on with no extra motivation other than the keeping on in and of its self. It is peculiar.

I suppose faith implies that I work and plan believing that better days are ahead. I see no better days ahead, just more days. Days I will live until my last day, which ever day that comes to be. I am grateful for that opportunity, I will indeed be engaged in my activities on any given day, I will indeed see my responsibilities through to the best end I am able, I will keep on keeping on frankly, just to keep on keeping on. I will.

This is not sad essay, this is actually me just coming to terms and defining what I see in my world. Is this about ambition or my lack of it? Maybe, but that's just it, I fully intend to keep working on my dreams and folly even though I am long past any realistic hope of achieving and kind of worldly success or meaningful recognition in any of my endeavors. Again, I will keep on keeping long after the faith is gone. It is a blessing perhaps that I know no other way. It is definitely a blessing that I am happy without conspicuous worldly success or the faith that it will come.

I must be blessed, and being blessed, I find I need no faith to continue. I will continue to be there for my friends and obligations, and I will continue for myself. I will continue until the day comes that the keeping on keeping on in this world ends on its own terms. And, I will do it with no expectation of reward in this world, a next world, or any other world. I will do.

Thanks.

Getting past all the meaningless political talk it gets hard to really make sense of what just occurred in the Georgia-Russian war. We all know the superficial details as they have been presented, Georgia first invaded Ossetia to re establish it's dominion over what was originally a part of its sovereignty. Ossetia is on record stating its preference to Russian rule. So Georgia invades and things are going as planned when Russia counter invades with an over whelming force. A force apparently waiting for a Georgian invasion of Ossetia. The USA has been reported to have actually encouraged the Georgian incursion. The USA, Israel and a few other nations have been training and supplying arms to the Georgian military. Russia after repelling Georgian troops in Ossetia then continues on into Georgia itself.

It was feared that Russia wanted to do damage to a competing oil pipeline that runs through Georgia. Strange how the crude markets never reflected this fear. Russia did no harm to this pipeline, though obviously they could have. It was feared that Russia wanted to conquer Georgia and return the whole area to Russian rule and control. That didn't happen either though Russia did roam freely and did attack certain areas and interests. The USA simply lied when it stated it had no practical military option to use against the Russian forces in Georgia. The US Air Force could have mobilized immediately and been in the conflict in mere hours from their many bases in Europe and the Persian Gulf. It should be noted that our Air Force could have easily neutralized the Russian air advantage and carried out attacks on the Russian Tanks and troops.

So what's really going on? Why did the USA encourage Georgia to attack Ossetia, drawing the certain Russian response and then just leave Georgia, ostensibly our ally, hung out to dry. Russia was indeed prepared and ready, we must have known that, we could have responded but didn't, thereby giving Russia our tacit consent to do whatever it is they did while in Georgia. Again, Russia didn't attack the Oil Pipeline and they did not occupy the Capital or arrest the President of Georgia. All of which they could have done. There's not much left to speculate about the Russian mission. If Ossetia was all they wanted they would have stopped after they secured Ossetia.

The only possibility left, underneath all the propaganda, is the illegal drug trade, and other criminal activities, like Internet porn and prostitution. It was revealed in more detailed examinations of the Russian computer hacking of Georgian Internet sites that indeed these kind of sites were hacked. Questions also arose about the true source of the Hackers. At first it was assumed it was the Russian Intelligence doing the hacking but further research seems to cloud that certainty. Looking at Georgia on a map makes reasonable that Georgia could indeed be a route for illegal drugs from such poppy havens as the recently "liberated" Afghanistan. So was this all a clandestine mob territory and money grab under the cover of International disputes and Politics?

No one can prove it, just like no one can prove that our invasion of Afghanistan was a similar operation as the Taliban at that time were eradicating the Poppy fields and Heroin trade from Afghanistan. You can only look at the results and then guess. What other gain has come from the Afghan invasion?  So this is my guess. Enjoy

The usual drone of the news cycle was interrupted this week with exciting reports of fighting in and around Georgia, Georgia's so called break away state, Ossetia and Russia. Latest reports have Russian military basically attacking at will various targets in Georgia. So how did all this come about? The formal history has Georgia gaining autonomy from the break up up of the former Soviet Union with Ossetia then breaking away from Georgia and proclaiming a loyalty to Russia. There's all the questions about NATO, Georgia wishing, but so far being denied, to join. But then the USA got involved, probably as part of this so called Neo con agenda of Russian containment.

It seems that the USA has sent troops into Georgia to help train Georgians in all the fine arts of modern warfare, some reported being there just a month ago. USA arms manufacturing has of course been paid by DOD to supply arms to this fledgling modern warfare unit. It should be noted that Georgia has some 2000 troops in Iraq, ranking 3rd in size behind the USA and the UK. No modern war story is complete without the OIL connection and Georgia does indeed have a pipeline that runs oil from the Caspian sea to Western Europe. And naturally, BP oil of the UK owns some 30% controlling interest in that pipeline.  I have also read a report saying the USA gave it's support for the idea of the Georgian invasion of the break away state of Ossetia.

Now why would the USA encourage Georgia to invade Ossetia? Well, it is clear that Russia fully expected hostilities to commence because they obviously had amassed considerable troops and air power right near the region. This was clearly done in advance. Though my diary title says, Russia Invade Georgia, the fact is Georgia started the latest round of, for them quite disastrousus, battles. So what is the point? Russia has so far not attacked the oil pipeline even though that pipe line represents direct competition with its own Gazprom energy, which essentially hold most of the EU hostage as the main supplier of energy products. Why would the USA hang Georgia out to dry like this? Well, we've done this before.

Other than the usual calls to cease fire and the obligatory condemnations, for the most part neither the USA nor NATO has done anything overt to help this, must be feeling quite betrayed and stupid right now, nation State of Georgia. Only a fool would not suspect that some kind of deal has not been made between the USA and Russia over this tiny and now battered region. For starters, NATO has just announced that Georgian membership is out of the question. That must please Russia. Ossetia will probably gain its own autonomy or assimilation into Russia as that does seem to be what Ossetians want. So where will that leave Georgia? I mean besides battered and humiliated on the world stage and during the Olympics no less?

It would appear that if Georgia survives, she will be totally beholden to the USA-UK and big oil interests. That should take care of Georgia wanting a bigger slice of the revenues from that pipeline. The EU is powerless against Russia as Russia, with its Gazprom literally has the power to shut off the lights and park the cars in Europe. So hey Georgia, welcome to the world of super power politics. My hope is you pick yourself back up off the ground, go polish that pipeline and learn to be a happy vassal state in the New World Oilder. oops, I mean Order.

After I stopped laughing at the portrait of President Barack Obama, Muslim and First Lady Michelle, feminazi black activist from hell, it began to occur to me just what the real message was from the New Yorker editorial board. it's subtle but it's definitely deeper than just a caricature of alleged right wing talking points and Internet smears against the candidate and his wife. The whole adds up to a Hail Mary up yours from the deserted Left to the candidate that had courted them and had them believing that Barack Obama was indeed hope and change that the Left could count on. So let's take the symbols one by one, shall we?

Barack Obama standing there in full Muslim regalia seems on the surface to be just a poke at right wing fear mongering. But added up with the candidate's of late moralizing to the black community about responsibility, accountability and fatherhood, along with Faith Based initiatives, I see something else in the Muslim attire. I see a mocking of Barack Obama's conservative values that do resemble the real Muslim faith more so than a secular left agenda for advancing the Black's cause. Muslims are indeed a very moral conservative people and not so much the wild eyed media portrayal we get here in the USA. To say the least the Left finds Obama's outing of his true agenda for Blacks and I assume the rest of us, offensive.

The burning flag has a few meanings. I believe that the first real intended Obama slam from the New Yorker by this image was on his FISA stuff and his general war mongering. I see a deeper meaning however, I see the burning flag and the picture of Osama Bin Laden as something already in the White House when Barack ostensibly arrived. These images stand for the things that a President Obama would simply continue. Things like the continuing erosion of American Civil Liberties in the name of National security. And, the continuing of this War culture by maintaining the belief that Osama Bin Laden represents everything that is Anti American and must be defeated.

The knock on Michelle Obama on the surface is a caricature of her Right Wing perceived out spokeness and perceived Black militancy. It's the fist bump that gives away the true intention of the New Yorker. They are making fun of Michelle's make over with print dresses and her warm and fuzzy appearances on shows like the View and Access Hollywood. The real message is that Michelle, like Barack Obama has now sold out to this mythical middle America with white picket fences and so much "green". Oh the green!, what Idealist can resist piles of the green? In my view, the Left at the New Yorker feel that they know of one idealist and his wife who couldn't resist the "green".

There may be some frustration at the New Yorker over Obama defeating Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. But then she's from New York and would have been good for New York as the President. Apparently Barack Obama paying black mail, I mean helping Hillary with her campaign debt wasn't enough to appease and "unite" all behind the effort after all.

I heard of a poll today on NBC that seemed to be saying the election was drawing into pretty much a dead heat here in the middle of summer. A poll is just numbers, saying what they might mean is opinion and that's where I come in. It's no surprise that the electorate, at least those who were "polled", are generally evenly divided. This has been the case for several elections now. But specifically this year, it may be the result of a let down after the protracted Democratic primary and voters reassessing the candidates. This poll seems to suggest that many voters who had been supporting Democrat Hillary Clinton are not just automatically backing the presumed Democratic nominee Barack Obama.

This new evenness between Obama and Republican John McCain is not due to any particular, at least high profile, effort on John McCain's part. John McCain keeps up a full campaign schedule and though I'm sure he's out there somewhere I really can't tell you where he is. Perhaps his Central America jaunt, which did receive some publicity, I mean I at least heard he was down there, but I can't tell you much if anything about what he said, aided his poll numbers somehow. still, it seems that it was Barack Obama's numbers that took the hit more so than John McCain's numbers "surging" all of a sudden. I think that is what makes John McCain such a formidable candidate. I am reminded of the old tale of the "Rabbit And The Tortoise", or maybe Captain kirk of the Star ship Enterprise with his, "Steady as she goes".

Barack Obama meanwhile has been under attack from, where else but, the Democrats. It seems he's been getting a lot of, "Did he really say that?" from many Democrats and not just the Left leaning who are upset with his FISA stuff and his perceived vagaries on Iraq policy. Many Democrats are upset that Obama seems to be courting the religious vote by talking positive about Faith Based Initiatives. Obama's latest speeches about Blacks have even drawn fire from many high profile Black leaders, Jesse Jackson most notable, so far. Perhaps some of Obama's problem is he is now having to adjust from being a speechifying, electrifying new voice of change to being just another Democratic Platform running Democratic Presidential Candidate. In my Opinion the same thing happened to John Kerry in 2004.

My memory of John Kerry has him suddenly coming out of no where in 04 and with some well placed appearances and talking against Bush and the Iraq War, wrestling the nomination away from all the early front runners that year. But it was after he locked up the nomination that John Kerry turned into this passionless speech reader. He became almost detached to the point of uninterested in being the Democratic Candidate. I still believe that John Kerry coulda shoulda won the White House in 04 but for some reason he just quit. Some like to give credit to Republican political operatives for a genius campaign, but that wasn't it so much, it was a disengaged John Kerry who allowed the election to simply be swiped from him by GW Bush.

John McCain is not going to change his tactics much between now and November. He's going to stay with the tactics that got him the Republican nomination and now suddenly a dead heat with Barack Obama. John McCain seems to do best when the chips are down and he's being counted out. My memory of the last time John McCain was a front runner has him being destroyed by GW Bush in the North Carolina primary back in 2000. Recent memory has him being just barely breathing in the Republican field last year only to somehow come back and defeat front runner Mitt Romney even though Mitt Romney totally out spent McCain all the way to his concession speech.

So how does Barack Obama recapture that magic? How does Barack Obama again make Americans believe that he is hope they can believe in and a real change? I'm not sure he can if he is can only be just another Democratic Nominee for President running on the Democratic platform. That's what I'm saying, the things Barack Obama talked about that propelled him into the imagination of the American People, are not the same things he will have to try and sell as the Democratic Party's Presidential nominee. That's just not how the game is played. And that is unfortunate.

The Fanni Mae and Freddy Mac imminent possible collapse is an interesting story and draws clear the battle lines in the War on the middle class. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac are guarantors of loans for mortgages. Their presence makes it possible for more mortgages to be underwritten at affordable rates for qualified home buyers. With them gone or seriously impaired, mortgages would be more expensive and housing values would decline. In short, increased Bank power over the ways and means of working class Americans.

A cynic might see the whole sub prime debacle as an attack on the Fannie Mae-Freddy Mac paradigm started under FDR as an aid to get more Americans into their own homes under reasonable terms. A fair question has to be, what benefit is it to the Banks and lenders to see Fanni Mae-Freddy Mac broke and street after street of empty houses across the American landscape? Who are these people, these "bankers" and what possible pleasure can they be getting from all this hardship they have helped spread in the country?

I know the banks keep any equity paid into a defaulted mortgage, plus the closing costs, fees and whatever other money a banished attempted home owner has paid into his futile effort. The bank also gets to keep the house, though of course they like to "say" they aren't in the Real Estate business. So what gives? Why would banks do this or allow this to happen? You're tempted to say they do it just to be mean, but meanness or revenge is never a savvy business motive unless considerable profit is being made at the same time. Is there the usual pile of obscene profits being made by bank insiders in all this seeming travail?

Of course there are profits. I think it's safe to say that even when banks lose money the "banker" is finding a way to thrive. It's not esoteric, just look at the Bear Stearns CEO severance package for example. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac executives themselves have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar, just in 2004 was the latest public scandal. Fanni Mae and Freddy Mac are now privatized and what with the falling share prices you can see more money just "disappearing" into thin air. The permutations of the money game evolve of course but the basic game is always the same, buy low-sell high. So who sold high on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac and is now or soon will be buying low? Especially if the Federal Government and the Federal Reserve step in as is generally expected and bail everybody out?

I can tell you who won't win, but do I really have to? Bond brokers are licking at the chops waiting and ready to fire up those printing presses and get the old bail out ball going. You did know that there is a class of people who get rich from Federal Government deficit spending? Many many people enjoy the business of "brokering" Federal deficit spending. But anyway, how will all this help homeowners caught in this sub prime mortgage trap? Well, I don't see the Government or the banks giving anybody their house back. In fact what I see is terms for loans stiffening across the board for lower income brackets. It will go back to the old days of practically the only people that banks will loan money to with reasonable terms will only be people who don't actually need the money.

History is replete with images of befuddled scared people lining up out side of closed banks waiting and hoping to get some of their money back. History would be a little more accurate if it showed what was going out of the back door of all these "closed" banks. Shall I paint you a picture? He wasn't a banker per se though I'm sure bankers admired him and he no doubt had considerable banking know how, think Ken Lay of Enron. He actually flaunted his accruing riches while Enron stock holders clamored outside the locked doors unable to even sell their suddenly worthless shares. Oh well, on to the next thing.

I finally saw the video of what appeared to be Jesse Jackson expressing his displeasure at the approach Barack Obama is using to "uplift" and encourage black people. Here's the link to the video 

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07092008/news/nationalnews/jesse_jackson_sharply_criticizes_obama_119161.htm

The whole thing looks set up and phony. Makes me wonder just what is going on. I really have no clue except that somehow Jesse Jackson ostensibly feels that Barack Obama is not being the Black Candidate Blacks expected. Jackson says Obama's talking down to black people and I paraphrase, "I'm going to call him on it." What Jackson really says is clear on the video. Jackson has of course apologized and praised Obama as history and all that.

Obama doesn't want to just be the black people's President. Barack Obama has succeeded where Jesse Jackson failed in 84 and 88. Perhaps that is what's going on. Jesse Jackson is trying to manipulate white voters by saying that Barack Obama is not appeasing Black voters enough. At least such an explanation would have Jackson looking intelligent. I'm really trying not to be discouraged at the latest turns this election is taking.

You know what the problem is? We all know what the symptoms of the national problems are but, no one knows what to do about them.  America knows there's a Health care affordability problem, but we just don't know what to do about it. No one knows, especially our Presidential candidates. Medical care is just too expensive. Any Government fix that doesn't change that status quo will also be too expensive. Inflation is out of control, we're in wars that don't make sense, are too expensive, and futile on top of that. Energy prices have simply gotten out of control. Markets are nuts and speculators are having a field day picking Americans pockets. And again, no one seems to know what to do about it, any of it.

So this is what we get. All this silly talk in our election instead of vision and attempts at workable solutions. It's like the Jerry Springer TV formula has been adopted by the Media and Pundits. And we're all buying into it, we love the spectacle and circus atmosphere that's as genuine as Professional wrestling. Except in Professional wrestling, the fans of a particular wrestler are happy with their "warrior" when he wins. Sadly, there will be few who are happy with their Presidential candidate after he wins and begins to do what passes for governing these days. 

But I could always be wrong, Maybe one of these guys is all that and will prove it over the next several years