Athena InStyle

Charity and Christianity

2009-07-11T14:47:00.005-04:00

As President Obama completes his visit to Ghana, I think back to George W. Bush, and his support for Africa.

Despite how much former President Bush's policies have screwed up much of the US and the world, you can't deny what George W. Bush tried to do for Africa. In probably one of his most charitable acts, Bush provided the most aid in Africa to fight poverty and disease, more than any other American President.

In the last year of Bill Clinton's presidency, America's direct bilateral assistance to Africa was only Pounds 700 million. Mr Bush has almost quadrupled this sum. Combating Aids once played virtually no part in America's development policies. Mr Bush has established the biggest fund ever devoted to fighting an epidemic. The President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief, funded to the tune of Pounds 7.5 billion, is paying for hundreds of thousands of Africans to receive the life-saving drugs which hold Aids at bay.

Mr Bush has also made America the biggest single donor to the Global Fund for Aids, tuberculosis and malaria, contributing one third of its Pounds 5 billion. No other leader has given as much money to the World Food Programme as Mr Bush.

I've always thought that the root of all evil was essentially humanity's selfishness. It's our inability to care for others, and only think of our own selfish wants and needs, that bring out all kinds of crimes and horrible acts of violence. If one is a true Christian, you think of the ultimate sacrifice that Jesus made, which is giving up of himself for all of mankind. His most important command to us was to "Love one another, as I have loved you".

That's why being charitable and showing mercy is the only way to really emulate Christ. Anyone who dismisses the suffering of others, and can still call themselves a Christian is simply delusional.

Laws and Stupidity

2009-07-10T23:52:00.004-04:00

It's funny, a lot of the time, people will gripe about Washington, and "those no-good politicians", and how they have no common sense.

Sometimes it's also easy to forget, that politicians are people too, and people in general can be stupid.

Case in point - people who live in Florida and think that buying a Burmese Python for a pet is a great idea. Shockingly enough, the python market is an estimated $10 Million annual business.

While it may seem funny, the explosion of pythons in Florida is becoming a huge ecological nightmare. It seems too many idiots thought it would be "cool" to have a pet python. So instead of researching and studying up on the care of pythons, they just go out and buy one. When it becomes too difficult to handle, and they realize that it's a lot harder to take care of than say a dog, they end up dumping it in the swamps or by lakes.

Officials, for example, fear pythons may be on the brink of wiping out what remains of the endangered Key Largo wood rat and that other South Florida animals like the Key Deer could be next. The Everglades are estimated to contain as many as 150,000 pythons now, preying on rare bird and mammal wildlife. "If we don't get on top of this, they're going to eradicate the indigenous species of the Everglades," Rodney Barreto, Florida's Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission chairman, said during a visit this year by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. Or beyond: the pythons are believed to be moving northward into other parts of Florida and the U.S.

Recently it resulted in a terrible tragedy, when a 2 year old in Florida was strangled to death by a python. These tragic events occur, and we wonder why we need to have laws and regulations.

Pretty much to protect us from ourselves and our inner Homer Simpson.

Taxing Drunk Drivers - What an Idea!

2009-06-08T23:41:00.004-04:00

One of the biggest questions about enacting universal health-care is how to pay for it. Ironically, we could have paid for it a several times over if we hadn't had the war with Iraq! But that's not the hand that we are dealt.

Nate Silver has an interesting idea about one way to gain revenue for health-care. His idea is taxing people who are caught driving under the influence a hefty tax of $8,000 per incident.

In 2006, there were 1.1 million arrests for drunk driving in the United States (source), not counting Florida which didn't report its statistics. Fine each of those people $8,000, and you'd have almost about $9 billion more to pay for health care every year. Why $8,000? Because that's the figure, according to a 2001 paper (.pdf) by Steve Levitt (the Freakonomics guy) and Jack Porter, that would be required to internalize the negative externalities associated with driving drunk.* By the way, if you're concerned that this tax might be regressive, you could scale it according to a person's income, as they do for traffic fines in Finland.

Of course, if you were actually to fine people $8K every time they got a drunk driving conviction, you wouldn't raise quite as much as $9 billion. Faced with a choice between an $8,000 fine or a $20 taxi fare, a lot more people would have Yellow Cab on speed dial, and you'd have fewer revenue-producing arrests.** But this is a feature of the policy rather than a bug -- you'd be stopping drunk driving. Moreover, it's exactly the same feature/bug problem you'd run into by raising alcohol taxes in general, or any time you were trying to use tax policy to disincentivize an undesirable behavior.

In some ways this reflects an approach of "liberal paternalism" as advocated by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein in their book - "Nudge".

I think this idea has merit!

Remembering Buchenwald

2009-06-05T23:33:00.004-04:00

All this week, I've been struck by how provident it seems to have President Obama as our leader in these difficult times. His outreach this week in a historic speech at the University of Cairo, was honest and surprising in it's tone. He spoke as no other President could have spoken. He pushed on the fundamental issue to the Middle East Process, which was that both Israel and Palestine had to compromise and accept the right for the existence and sovreignty of both states. Israel must stop their settlements and pull back to the original treaties. The Palestinian government must get under their control, the violent terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas. Both have to stop playing the victim and the aggressor.

If you listen to both extreme sides, each accuse the other of lying and killing their people. They are both right and wrong.

All too often it's easy too marginalize and disparage a whole culture or race. That happened once before, which led to the death of millions of Jews during the Holocaust.

One thing is clear, regardless of race, human beings are capable of both kindess and love, but also of great evil. Each society naturally has it's extremists. Those who are filled with fear and hate. We have Rightwing fundametalist conservatives here in the US, who only spout venom and hatred for those who are different from them.

They don't see the benefit in open and honest dialogue, nor of accepting of differing viewpoints. They would rather just use their guns to shoot people, as has been demonstrated by the conservative nutcase that opened fire in a Tennessee Church because of his hatred of Liberals. Or most recently, this pathetic speciman of a human being who thought he was justified in assassinating Dr. Tiller, who was known for helping women who no one else would help.

It's led, cowardly conservatives like the aptly named Dick Cheney to spit on the US ideals of democracy and justice, and commit acts of torture on other human beings.

Yes there are criminals and terrorists, but we must follow the law, and be above the violence that the terrorists love. By committing torture, we have ceded the moral high ground, and have aided and abetted the recruiting tactics of Al Qaeda.

But what struck me most today is that when President Obama visted Buchenwald, he admonised those who would deny or forget the horrors that were committed so long ago.

The Germans are very careful and almost obsessed with not denying or forgetting that they killed millions of Jews. Any hint of anti-semitism is dealt with swiftly and harshly.

The current generation knows that they are not to blame, as they were not there, but they do accept that, as a nation, what they did was wrong. They accept that dark period of their history with shame and regret.

What I find ironic, is that politicians like Inhofe of Oklahoma can be such a liar and an idiot as to call President Obama "un-American", and yet deny that we tortured.

As they advise many people with addictions, the first step is acknowledging you have a problem.

It's too bad that dishonorable conservatives like Inhofe can't do what's right and acknowledge what they did, so that we can fix what's wrong with America.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

President Obama's 100 Days

2009-04-30T00:26:00.010-04:00

Getting settled in a new job, a new city, new friends, and juggling a love life, hasn't left me much time to write. However, I watched President Obama's speech and Press Conference marking his 100 Days in office.

Much has been hyped by the constant 24 hour Cable/Mainstream Media on President Obama's first 100 days, particularly with their incessant need to grade his first 100 days, as if he was a student.

Being in a planning role, it always boggles my mind when people continue to spotlight on instantaneous results and what's happening now, without a thought to what does it mean for the future.

It's 100 days into a four year term, and I personally think the challenges we face today requires us to be little more thoughtful and to realistically assess the current situation. We need to make sure that we rigorously contemplate the implications of the various policy proposals, in order to ensure we have some probability of meeting success.

Yet predictably, the idiot masses still want their 10 second soundbite or their minute in the news cycle of their "gotcha moments".

With all the hoopla and the superficial, but utterly predictable punditry out there, it was a relief to come across this really moving and introspective photo diary of President Obama's first 100 days.

It was taken by Callie Shell, who first noticed Barack Obama as an extraordinary politician at the 2003 DNC Convention, where he gave his first soaring national speech. She found him so compelling, that she trailed him during his Presidential Campaign.

The most emotional point in the video occurs 10 minutes into the video story, where she gives insights on the moments she was trying to capture with her camera.

Watching it, I was filled with such pride and emotion at having such a caring, intelligent, and capable leader as our President.

It's definitely worth the time to take a moment to watch this video at Time.com .

What were they thinking???

2009-03-23T00:14:00.004-04:00

I am stunned by the sheer stupidity of Congress. What on earth possessed them to pass a rushed piece of legislation to tax bonuses for Financial Intitutions receiving Federal Bailout money?

First of all their spontaneous reaction to "populist" rage is now open to questions of constitutional legitimacy, and secondly, they look like idiots just reacting without thinking. I get the anger over the sheer greed and thoughtlessness of AIG and Merrill Lynch for giving bonuses to morons who brought about this financial crisis. But to compound this mistake with an another one is ridiculous.

We should not have laws passed on whims of "populism". It was just as dumb when people voted to legislate the California Constitution to define marriage. It would be just as stupid for Government to enact legislation based on the whims of polls, pundits, or the Stock Market. President Obama said very thoughtfully in his interview on "60 Minutes":

The one thing that— I've tried to emphasize, though, throughout this week, and will continue to try to emphasize during the course of the next several months as we dig ourselves out of this— the economic hole that we're in, is we can't govern out of anger. We've got to try to make good decisions based on the facts, in order to put people back to work, to get credit flowing again. And I'm not going to be distracted by— what's happening day to day. I've gotta stay focused on making sure that— we're getting this economy moving again.

Furthermore, in response to Steve Kroft's question on the legitimacy of the bill passed by the House, that would "impose a tax of up TO 90% on the AIG bonuses and on the bonuses of anyone making more than $250,000 a year who works for a financial institution receiving MORE THAN five BILLION IN bailout funds"

President Obama had this to say:

Well, I think that— as a general proposition, you don't want to be passing laws that are just targeting a handful of individuals. You want to pass laws that have some broad applicability. And as a general proposition, I think you certainly don't want to use the tax code—is to punish people.

We have no idea on the implication of what they have done. Furthermore, what kind of precedent does this set for the future? There needs to be a holistic view on what's the right thing to do. The point of leadership is to set policy with a strategic goal, and not to be distracted by the latest policy "trend". Action for the sake of action is not necessarily a good idea, and in the business world, if you don't have the right strategy driving your action plans, it will soon drive you into a ditch and bring a number of inefficiencies within your organization - not to mention have people running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

Watch CBS Videos Online

Class War Delusions

2009-03-14T21:55:00.015-04:00

Someone in my past, once mentioned "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. At the time, I had never read the book, so I had no idea that it was almost a literary bible for conservatives. For those of you who do not know what the premise of this book is, it's basically about this character named John Galt, who decides he's tired of supporting other members of society, and so decides to withdraw from society. Essentially, the most selfish and unchristian character you would ever read about, outside of Charles Dicken's character "Scrooge".

Stephen Colbert has a very humorous take on the synopsis and the key message of this book:

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

The Word - Rand Illusion

Colbert Report Full Episodes
Political Humor

Rap Battle
NASA Name Contest

The question "Who is John Galt?" is also answered towards the closing of the novel — John Galt is a man disgusted that non-productive members of society use laws and guilt to leech from the value created by productive members of society, and furthermore even exalt the qualities of the leeches over the workers and inventors. He made a pledge that he would never live his life for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for him, and founded an enclave (Galt's Gulch), separate from the rest of the country, where he and other productive members of society have fled.

Essentially it has become the battle cry of the ridiculous and delusional right wing idiots still left in the Republican party. Case in point, Chuck Norris, who is ready to declare himself President of Texas. Essentially, Chuck Norris has declared his intent for treason and sedition. So there you have it, crazies like Chuck Norris are pretty much all you have left of the Conservative party.

But what makes it so ridiculously laughable, is this strawman argument that they continue to float, that because you potentially have a higher marginal tax rate, which by the way is only setting it back to the original rates under President Clinton, that this essentially demotivates people to be successful. So there is this movement where they are "Going Galt", and get people to "go on strike" because they feel burdened by their successes. As Austin Powers would say: "Riiiight ...."

Yeah, I would just loooove to see that. If you had the following options:

A. Earning $0 - because you feel demotivated to be taxed on your success.

B. Earning $300,000, and having $50,000 taxed at 36% vs. 33%

Which would you pick? Of course you are going to take Option B.

Secondly, people need to learn the meaning of the word "Marginal Tax Rate". When President Obama stated that those earning more than $250,000 would be facing a higher tax rate, that does not mean that you will be taxed on the full $250,000 at the higher tax rate. It simply means, you will see a slightly higher marginal tax rate for anything you make AFTER $250,000. You have financially illiterate people out there who think that if you make $300,000, that the entire amount would be taxed at 36%.

So by all means, have the crazy right wing nut cases "Going Galt" see how far it takes them. With their "every man for himself" philosophy, I doubt they could continue to exist peacefully as a society on their own.

Talk about Dawinism in action, oh but I forgot, they don't believe in evolution or in science.

Moving Day

2009-03-09T01:01:00.006-04:00

The worst part about moving anywhere is the day you receive your furniture and goods, and you find yourself surrounded by a mountain of boxes, with no idea where anything is.

The movers were quite quick in packing me up in Boston. They were so quick, I felt I had to move out of the way, otherwise risk being packed myself if I stood still too long! They were also equally quick in unloading all the boxes into my new apartment. It was all I could do to check off the box number in the inventory control list. It was like playing an odd sort of BINGO, with numbers being randomly called out. In the end, everything arrived, so kudos to my driver Howard Taylor, of Planes Moving Company!

The good thing for me is that, with each move, I am getting a little smarter! This time I took my wireless box with me, as well as making sure all my bedding, pillows, duvets were packed together. That made assembling my bed and getting my wireless access set up relatively pain free. I say relatively, because it always takes longer than one thinks it should.

Now it's the usual shopping trips to IKEA and Bed, Bath, and Beyond for more things one thinks one needs!

One sad note, you can clearly see in this picture, one the white boxes that followed me from Geneva, but never got unpacked - guess I don't need anything in there!

Financial Market Madness

2009-03-05T05:30:00.007-05:00

I've been working a lot of hours as I am doing two jobs right now. I am still supporting my old role and business unit, while undertaking my new assignment. Having to deal with a move at the same time has left me with little sleep and time.

However, in the past weeks, I've been fuming about the hypocrisy and the madness of the financial markets. And don't even get me started on the ridiculous inferences that Networks like Fox News tries to put forward, that somehow the Stock Market is reacting negatively to President Obama's policies.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

The Dow Knows All

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Joke of the Day

But what continues to get me is the whiny nature of Banks. Recently, Sheila Bair of the FDIC has indicated that there needs to be an emergency fee assessed to all the banks to shore up the FDIC, otherwise, it may go insolvent.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair said the fund it uses to protect customer deposits at U.S. banks could dry up amid a surge in bank failures, as she responded to an industry outcry against new fees approved by the agency.
“Without these assessments, the deposit insurance fund could become insolvent this year,” Bair wrote in a March 2 letter to the industry. U.S. community banks plan to flood the FDIC with about 5,000 letters in protest of the fees, according to a trade group.

This is the insanity that goes through Banks minds these days, the ONLY THING PROTECTING THEM AGAINST RUNS AGAINST THE BANKS IS THE FDIC INSURANCE - yet these morons are planning to send letters to protest this fee increase.

I guess Banks now understand how we feel when they charge us a fee to take money out of ATMs or for maintaining checking accounts!

But the best effort to date on pointing out the sheer stupidity and craziness of "so-called" Financial reporters like Rick Santelli of CNBC, and Wall St. has been tonight's show on "The Daily Show".

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

CNBC Gives Financial Advice

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Joke of the Day

This was a priceless moment of "STFU" by Jon Stewart to the Rick Santelli and Larry Kudlows of the world - well worth losing out on sleep to watch!

Understanding the Financial Crisis

2009-02-21T17:34:00.010-05:00

For many the underlying causes and the correlation between Wall St. and Main St. has been confusing, and very poorly reported or explained.

This video does a fantastic job of explaining the Financial Crisis, and recognizing the blame that is to go to all parties - not just poor, stupid people.

This excellent video is produced by Jonathan Jarvis, a designer based out of Los Angeles.

The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

Alan Greenspan, the lack of regulation, Wall St. greed, irresponsible lenders, homeowners both fiscally irresponsible and responsible, and the unending optimism, that housing values will always rise, did indeed create a Perfect Storm for this financial crisis. We are all in this together, and we must all work to get out of this together.

In order to stem this crisis, it will be critical to stop the hemorraging in the foreclosures and stablise the housing market, but listening to the over-the-top idiot reporters like Rick Santelli, with his mindless, sycophantic rantings, I've come to realize that overwhelming self-indulgent greed continues to rule the minds of these morons. All they can think about is themselves and their perception of how life is unfair.

What's really pathetic is that Rick Santelli, and many like him can only shout about how terrible President Obama's plan to stop the continued foreclosure crisis is, yet have no real solution or alternative. Until they have a better idea, they should just sit in their corner and take a chill pill.

Which makes this video, where Robert Gibbs smacks Rick Santelli, something to savor.

I’ve watched Mr. Santelli on cable the past 24 hours or so. I’m not entirely sure where Mr. Santelli lives or in what house he lives but the American people are struggling every day to meet their mortgages, stay in their jobs, pay their bills, send their kids to school," Gibbs said. "I think we left a few months ago the adage that if it was good for a derivatives trader that it was good for Main Street

"Mr. Santelli has argued, I think quite wrongly, that this plan won’t help everyone," Gibbs said. "This plan helps people who have been playing by the rules....I would encouraged him to read the president’s plan....I’d be more than happy to have him come here to read it. I’d be happy to buy him a cup of coffee—decaf," the press secretary said, in a not-so-subtle jab at Santelli’s frantic style.

Did you know - Shift Happens 3.0

2009-02-19T00:55:00.006-05:00

I saw this last year at a presentation at an internal townhall meeting within my company.

What's clear is that information and the way we use and access information is changing at unbelievable speed, that it begs the question, how are we prepared to meet the challenges of tomorrow? In what way are we prepared to continually innovate?

Quite frankly, if the Republicans had their way, we'd still be operating in the dark ages, with their disdain for science and research. Think of any funding for science, and they will find a way to make fun of it, and call it "pork" or act outraged because there is some innocuous sexual connotation. To them, the Theory of Evolution is hocus pocus.

I was reminded of this when coming across this on TIME

Variations of this video, called Did You Know?, have been floating around for years. It is the product of Karl Fisch, a school teacher from Colorado, and Scott McLeod, a professor at Iowa State University.

Valentine's Day Special

2009-02-15T22:10:00.005-05:00

Not exactly a Charlie Brown type special, but still an amusing clip about finding true love - for conservatives.

There was a diary on DKOS that talked about Hannidate, and it reminded me of this hilarious sketch from The Daily Show:

I was able to spend Valentine's day with someone special, and hope everyone else had someone special to spend the day with!

Bizarro World

2009-02-15T21:08:00.003-05:00

It seems Frank Rich and SNL, and many others are channeling the same thoughts as I am. The Republican Party and the Washington Beltway Pundits are living in - as Jerry Seinfeld would put it - "bizarro world".

In his weekly NY Times editorial, Rich offers this interesting take:

AM I crazy, or wasn’t the Obama presidency pronounced dead just days ago? Obama had “all but lost control of the agenda in Washington,” declared Newsweek on Feb. 4 as it wondered whether he might even get a stimulus package through Congress. “Obama Losing Stimulus Message War” was the headline at Politico a day later.

Less than a month into Obama’s term, we don’t (and can’t) know how he’ll fare as president.

For Axelrod, the moral is “not just that Washington is too insular but that the American people are a lot smarter than people in Washington think.” Here’s a third moral: Overdosing on this culture can be fatal. Because Republicans are isolated in that parallel universe and believe all the noise in its echo chamber, they are now as out of touch with reality as the “inevitable” Clinton campaign was before it got clobbered in Iowa. The G.O.P. doesn’t recognize that it emerged from the stimulus battle even worse off than when it started. That obliviousness gives the president the opening to win more ambitious policy victories than last week’s. Having checked the box on attempted bipartisanship, Obama can now move in for the kill.

Republicans will also be judged by the voters. If they want to obstruct and filibuster while the economy is in free fall, the president should call their bluff and let them go at it. In the first four years after F.D.R. took over from Hoover, the already decimated ranks of Republicans in Congress fell from 36 to 16 in the Senate and from 117 to 88 in the House. The G.O.P. is so insistent that the New Deal was a mirage it may well have convinced itself that its own sorry record back then didn’t happen either.

Saturday Night Live, also offers this political sketch that satirizes and lays bare how out of touch the GOP thinking and strategy is. Personally I thought Dan Akroyd's portrayal of John Boehner was dead on!

The most adorable Windows Commercial

2009-02-14T23:52:00.005-05:00

Microsoft Windows continues with their $300 Million ad campaign "I'm a PC". Essentially these commercials are designed to break the "stereotype" that Windows PC user are boring and boxed characters.

This new ad is interesting in that it also tries to convey the message that Windows can be easy to use, that even little kids can use Windows.

However you feel about Microsoft Windows or the reality of the little girl being able to be work in a Windows Operating System, no one can deny how totally cute this little girl is!!

The Biggest Loser

2009-02-14T12:49:00.019-05:00

If I had to vote for the biggest loser of the week, it would be a really difficult choice for whether my vote would go to Senator Judd Gregg or the Republican Party.

I mean we already know that the Republican Party is a bunch of "do nothing" obstructionists, who are supposed to be representing the American People in their States, but instead they are filled with nothing but quest for power (re-taking in 2010) and grand-standing. The peer pressure in their own party is worse than High School. They are crowing about the fact that Not a SINGLE REPUBLICAN in the House voted for the Stimulus Bill. In the Senate, there were only 3 who broke to vote in favor of the Stimulus.

But don’t try telling Republicans that. They’re downright giddy with their obstructionist tactics. “Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban,” bragged Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. “And that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person’s entire processes."

Seriously?? This Republican Congressman is giddy with the idea that they are applying something that they learned from the Taliban. If I were a member of the Republican Party, I'd tell this guy to "STFU - because you're embarassing us".

This makes it clear to the American people, that it wasn't about country or the well-being of the American People, it was all about toeing the party line. Statistically it doesn't add up, if every one was voting their conscious, you would expect some sampling of members on either side voting against their party - we see this with 7 Democrats who voted agains the Stimulus. But the fact that you have NO Republicans voting for the Stimulus in the House, indicates a systematic behavior - completely manufactured.

Watch this exchange between Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fl), who totally owns Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA). She basically makes him look like a sputtering idiot, which I guess was not too difficult, as that's what he is.

So since this is a constant display of sophmoric behavior by the Republican Party, I'm going to have to go with Senator Judd Gregg - who I didn't have a great deal of knowledge about in the past - but what a spineless speciman of a human being. The fact is, he could have done something great, he could have put country before politics, and put his so called "business acumen" to good use in the Commerce Department, as Secretary of Commerce.

But then he goes and does two things:

First he says that he will abstain on the stimulus vote as he is Secretary Designate for the Commerce Department, and sites conflict of interest
Then he withdraws his nominee as Secretary of Commerce, because he "couldn't be Judd Gregg".

Excuse my French, but "WTF????" It sounds like something some middle-aged guy or alternately some lame thing a girl might say when he/she wants out of a relationship. The feeble "it's not you, it's me - and I need to find myself" crap that men or women with no integrity or courage say to get out of a relationship.

So either he is STUPID or he has NO COJONES - so which is it?

Of course he is trying to back pedal and save face, saying that he didn't lobby for the position. But let's face it, he wouldn't have reached the notice of the President without Senator Harry Reid to recommend him, and why would Senator Reid do anything on his behalf, unless he was requested to by Senator Gregg?

So anyone applying for a job, should know what they are getting into, and he more or less accepted the position. To accept, and then turn around and say that it would not be a good fit, is an act of a total moron.

If I were President Obama, I wouldn't give this guy the time of day ever again. This happened to me once. I was extremely supportive towards a colleague who reached out to me, and expressed strong interest in a position. We spoke for months, keeping in contact about possible openings, then when an opportunity did come up, I lobbyied on his behalf, and when I extended the position to this candidate, he expressed doubt. After several days of thinking things through, he declined the position, even though we had talked for months about the possibility of him joining the organization. Then not 24 hours later after he declines the position, he calles me back and tell me that he changed his mind. Automatically, I told him, that the position was being offered to someone else, and that it was too late - because it was. Just because he was being "wishy-washy", didn't mean that I was going to be dragged along as well.

So how is it that he couldn't align or agree to what the position would be about in his talks with President Obama in the beginning??? If he didn't agree to certain key deal breakers, he could have walked away, and just said that it was an honor to be considered, but that the fit wasn't right for either party. So what didn't he understand about the job, before accepting it??

If he was ok with the conditions on taking the job, what changed since his acceptance?? I mean let's face it, it's not a secret that President Obama is a Democrat with progressive philosophy. How does he not understand that the President will set the agenda and the vision, that he serves in the CABINET of the President, working on the President's behalf. So if it came down to it being a surprise that he wouldn't get to implement policy to his liking, then all I can say is that he was STUPID for accepting a job he didn't totally understand.

If he understood the conditions and the expectations of the President, the only other thing that makes sense is the dynamics and the peer pressure from his Republican Party. Essentially he caved in to whatever they were saying to him, and he decided he didn't want to be alienated from his little Republican Clique.

Republicans celebrated Gregg’s decision to stay in the Senate — and gloated over the embarrassment the Obama team was facing. “Sen. Gregg made a principled decision to return, and we’re glad to have him,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). “He is among the smartest, most effective legislators to serve in the Senate — Democrat or Republican — and a key adviser to me and to the Republican Conference. It’s great to have him back.”
McConnell discouraged Gregg from accepting the commerce nomination before he took it, and he talked with him about withdrawing before he made his announcement. While McConnell wouldn’t discuss the specifics of his conversations with Gregg, he said: “It’s totally safe to say I was not happy to have a member of my team leave the Senate and go to the administration.”

There was even this garbage that was being circulated that it made the Republicans "emboldened" because Senator Gregg rejected President Obama.

What's silly is that the Republicans think it's a good thing to reflect on their party, when in actuality, it made Senator Gregg look like a weak, indecisive loser, and their party a bunch of petty vindictive men - worse than the shenanigans on "Mean Girls". So this indicates he has no mojo to be his own man.

The fact that the Republican Party are coralling their members and telling them to vote NO despite the benefits, and the fact that some Republican members like the stimulus, but they just don't want to be linked to voting for such a high spending bill, confirms what I have always known about the Republican Party. A bunch of hypocritical losers who care more about how they look, than what they actually do to benefit the country and the American People.

Let's just stop with the lies and the theatrical display, when they moan and don on clothes of sack ashes in decrying the debt we are burdening our children with - where were their fiscal conservative grumblings when we spent billions on contractors and on the Iraq War? Literally they lost $12 Billion dollars, they couldn't find out any accounting for this in the War spending. Did they forget that they and their President took a SURPLUS and turned it into a trillion dollar deficit? Finally, let's not forget that it was the aptly named, DICK Cheney who said "Deficits don't matter".

So at a meeting with the vice president after the mid-term elections in 2002, Suskind writes that O'Neill argued against a second round of tax cuts. “Cheney, at this moment, shows his hand,” says Suskind. “He says, ‘You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.’ … O'Neill is speechless.” ”It was not just about not wanting the tax cut. It was about how to use the nation's resources to improve the condition of our society,” says O’Neill. “And I thought the weight of working on Social Security and fundamental tax reform was a lot more important than a tax reduction.” Did he think it was irresponsible? “Well, it's for sure not what I would have done,” says O’Neill.

By the way, Senator Judd Gregg, voted "NO" on the Stimulus Bill - AFTER withdrawing his nomination as Secretary of Commerce. Gee - what a shocker!

China still likes US Debt

2009-02-12T00:20:00.002-05:00

I wrote back in January "Who will buy US Debt?", well it turns out the Chinese haven't really washed their hands of us yet...

According to FT:

China will continue to buy US Treasury bonds even though it knows the dollar will depreciate because such investments remain its “only option” in a perilous world, a senior Chinese banking regulator said on Wednesday.
China has used the dollars it accumulates selling manufactured goods to US consumers to accumulate the world’s largest holding of Treasuries. However, the increasing US budget deficit and its potential impact on the dollar have raised questions about the future Chinese appetite for US debt.
“Except for US Treasuries, what can you hold?” he asked. “Gold? You don’t hold Japanese government bonds or UK bonds. US Treasuries are the safe haven. For everyone, including China, it is the only option.”

With the $790 Billion Stimulus package, it's becoming clear this strange symbiotic relationship will continue. China and the rest of the World's Economy would crumble if the US Economy were to implode, so in a way they need us, as much as we need them.

Does technology make us stupid?

2009-02-11T23:28:00.007-05:00

I recently bought a car with a GPS Navigation system. I got it, because my siblings insisted it was something I should get. I was at first reluctant to get it, because I always prided myself on being able to be intelligent enough to figure out where I am going, and relying on my sense of direction.

While I know it's totally optional for me to use it, I am finding it pretty useful, as I get to know the Los Angeles area. But it did make me wonder, while it's a useful technology, does it make people less able to cultivate mental capabilities to figure out directions. In other words, does it make us stupid?

I think about spell check and grammar check, both are great features, but I wonder if it's making us lazy about knowing how to spell words or write grammatically correct sentences.

It also makes me wonder how the Internet and applications like Twitter affects the way we read and communicate. Andrew Sullivan notes how many are noticing the lack of patience they have for reading long paragraphs. Yves Smith writes:

I notice how the Internet has affected how I read. I have become impatient with longer stories (unless I am on an airplane). I spend most of my time on the Internet, and the vast majority of what I read fits within the browser window. I find that has conditioned my expectations. When confronted with a longer piece (say Sunday New York Times magazine feature or New Yorker length) I find after the first page wondering if it really had to be this long, and often not finishing the piece. Five years ago, I never would have responded this way.

This reminded me of an article in the NY Times, that debated how the internet has changed the way we read. There are many different viewpoints, as can be expected, ranging from those who feel the internet hinders reading skills, to those who point to other benefits that internet brings to those able to take in many different sources of information.

As teenagers’ scores on standardized reading tests have declined or stagnated, some argue that the hours spent prowling the Internet are the enemy of reading — diminishing literacy, wrecking attention spans and destroying a precious common culture that exists only through the reading of books.
Neurological studies show that learning to read changes the brain’s circuitry. Scientists speculate that reading on the Internet may also affect the brain’s hard wiring in a way that is different from book reading.

The United States is diverging from the policies of some other countries. Next year, for the first time, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which administers reading, math and science tests to a sample of 15-year-old students in more than 50 countries, will add an electronic reading component. The United States, among other countries, will not participate. A spokeswoman for the Institute of Education Sciences, the research arm of the Department of Education, said an additional test would overburden schools.

I would tend to agree that the Internet does teach us other skills, with so many websites, individuals have to be able to filter through and organize the concepts and information flowing through the screen. So I don't think the Internet as a bad thing, just different. But I can't help noticing that I, myself, tend to scan through to just get the key words or points. That I don't exactly read as thoroughly as I used to.

Economic Armageddon

2009-02-10T00:35:00.010-05:00

I just came across a video clip, of what happened that fateful day in September, 2008 when Hank Paulson literally came begging on his knees to Nancy Pelosi to gain support and action from Congress with regards to the first TARP Financial Bailout.

According to TMFSinchurina on his MotleyFool blog:

Now, we have another video (actually available since late January), and one which I encourage every Fool not only to watch but to circulate as they see fit, in which Congressman Paul E. Kanjorski of Pennsylvania reveals some shocking information regarding a bank run which occured right here and indeed brought this country and the entire world economy to within three hours of complete and systemic financial collapse. In this video, Congressman Kanjorski reveals (at about the 2:15 mark) that the move to raise the move to guarantee money market funds up to $250,000 was an emergency measure to stave off a massive run on the banks that removed $550 billion from the system in a matter of just a couple of hours. Treasury then injected $105 billion to no avail, and shut the system down to prevent a panic continuation of this electronic bank run. By "their" [read Treasury's] estimation, had they not shut it down and issued the guarantee, money market withdrawls would have reached $5.5 trillion by two 'o'clock that afternoon!! He then indicates Treasury's assessment that the run not only would have destroyed the U.S. economy immediately, but would have collapsed the world economy within 24 hours.

According to Bloomberg back in Sept. 17, 2008:

Assets in money market funds, considered the safest investments after cash and bank deposits, rose to a record $3.59 trillion this month as stock and commodity markets fell. Investor confidence has been shaken by the subprime-mortgage collapse, the demise of Lehman and Bear Stearns Cos., and the failure of 11 U.S. commercial banks.

Widespread withdrawals from money-market funds would aggravate the global credit crunch because they are major buyers of short-term debt issued by corporations and financial companies. Today, the cost of borrowing in dollars for three months jumped the most since September 1999 as banks hoarded cash. The London interbank offered rate, or Libor, rose 19 basis points to 3.06 percent, the British Bankers' Association said. A basis point is one-hundredth of 1 percent.

President Obama's First Press Conference

2009-02-09T21:15:00.016-05:00

I am stunned, absolutely stunned, after 8 years of complete nonsense, President Obama's first press conference to the American Public is a refreshing change in both tone and content.

"I took a trip to Elkhart, Indiana today. Elkhart is a place that has lost jobs faster than anywhere else in America. In one year, the unemployment rate went from 4.7% to 15.3%. Companies that have sustained this community for years are shedding jobs at an alarming speed, and the people who've lost them have no idea what to do or who to turn to. They can't pay their bills and they've stopped spending money. And because they've stopped spending money, more businesses have been forced to lay off more workers. Local TV stations have started running public service announcements that tell people where to find food banks, even as the food banks don't have enough to meet the demand.

As we speak, similar scenes are playing out in cities and towns across the country. Last Monday, more than 1,000 men and women stood in line for 35 firefighter jobs in Miami. Last month, our economy lost 598,000 jobs, which is nearly the equivalent of losing every single job in the state of Maine. And if there's anyone out there who still doesn't believe this constitutes a full-blown crisis, I suggest speaking to one of the millions of Americans whose lives have been turned upside down because they don't know where their next paycheck is coming from."

"The plan is not perfect," the president said, addressing the nation from the East Room of the White House. "No plan is. I can't tell you for sure that everything in this plan will work exactly as we hope, but I can tell you with complete confidence that a failure to act will only deepen this crisis as well as the pain felt by millions of Americans."

I think political analyst, Rachel Maddow, host of MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show", made a very interesting observation, when she indicated that President Obama was presenting the issue and the situation of what's happening to everyday Americans to Washington, this is different than President Obama trying to explain Washington to the American Public - which is what former President Bush often did.

If anyone doubts the serious and real crisis we are looking at with regards to the economy, this chart says it all:

The Green Line represents 2008/2009 Job Losses, these are ACTUAL job losses. The shocking pace of unemployment rates compared to the unemployment rates in the past should wake up any left in denial.

The only question is HOW long will this recession last if we don't act soon. The longer we wait, the longer and more painful this recession will be.

The Republican GOP Party is demonstrating how pathetically inadequate they are to the whole crisis resolution. They have become a party of whiners ("Nancy Pelosi is being mean to us") and obstructionists. I have no idea what these guys are smoking, how stupid are they, that they don't see that the American Public gets the fact that the GOP are the problem. Yet they are high-fiving each other that none of the House Republicans voted for the Stimulus Bill.

It's absolutely stunning, how the Republican Party honestly does not know how to govern, all they know how to do is complain. They certainly have the ability to feign hurt and outrage down pat. They remind me of soccer players who fall down and look agonized to get a flag or penalty on the other team. The GOP just loves "working the refs". I am completely offended that my tax payers are going toward the salary of these useless morons. Personally I am a fairly generous and forgiving person, but nothing tests my patience than pure stupidity and incompetence.

Have a look at these poll numbers by Gallup:

President Barack Obama continues to have high approval ratings, compared to Congress. But what's interesting is that the Republicans in Congress has the biggest disapproval rate, even greater than the Democrats.

There is a great quote from Thomas Pain, that Lee Iaoccoca repeated in a long ago commercial:

"Lead, Follow, or Get out of the way"

The Republican Party should really consider that advice...

My Favorite Things

2009-02-08T16:56:00.004-05:00

I think in this economic environment, you have to take pleasure in some of the simple things.

Here are a few of my favorite things:

Being able to sleep in on a Sunday morning
That first cup of coffee in the morning
Getting compliments from men in random places
Dancing to a Britney Spears song (in private)
The Whole Foods Salad Bar
Buying that fabulous black dress on impulse, and finding that it's on sale!
Watching "Weekend at Bernies" on TBS
Reading the Best Of Rants and Raves on Craigslist (it definitely helps to put your life in perspective and realize that you have a great life compared to others)
Going to Costco's and trying their dessert samples!
Going for a walk in the sun/on the beach/in the mountains etc.

The Republican Party - Party of the Stupids

2009-02-08T13:21:00.010-05:00

On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, we got a preview of the future leadership of the Republican Party, and it provided a great little gem of an interview with Michael Steele, which showcased just how much the Republican Party is becoming the party of the Stupid People.

Trying to sound outraged and morally superior, the hypocritcal Republican "suddenly we have become the party of fiscal responsibility" Michael Steele has this to say about Pell Grants:

STEELE: How does -- how does -- I mean, I'm all for Pell Grants, but how does a Pell Grant, increasing funding for Pell Grant get me a job when I just lost mine?

Yes Mr. Steele, please go on and tell us why you think having stupid and uneducated people in America is good for our economy. And while we are at it, explain to me why having a proper and real solution to address Health Care and Health issues is such a bad thing? Why is it that they can't get it throught their tiny little skulls, that having a healthy and educated workforce is GOOD for the economy.

Then Steele goes on to argue that jobs created by the Government aren't really jobs.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So a job doesn't count if it's a government job?

(CROSSTALK)

STEELE: Hold on. No, let me -- let me -- let me finish. That is a contract. It ends at a certain point, George. You know that. These road projects that we're talking about have an end point.

As a small-business owner, I'm looking to grow my business, expand my business. I want to reach further. I want to be international. I want to be national. It's a whole different perspective on how you create a job versus how you create work. And I'm -- either way, the bottom line is...

STEPHANOPOULOS: I guess I don't really understand that distinction.

STEELE: Well, the difference -- the distinction is this. If a government -- if you've got a government contract that is a fixed period of time, it goes away. The work may go away. That's -- there's no guarantee that that -- that there's going to be more work when you're done in that job.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, but we've seen millions and millions of jobs going away in the private sector just in the last year.
STEELE: But they come -- yes, they -- and they come back, though, George. That's the point. When they go -- they've gone away before, and they come back.

I love how Steele doesn't get how dumb he sounds saying that. Exactly how are these jobs going to come back or get created when there is no demand? Exactly how do they not get that something needs to get the economy re-started. The only way to compensate in place of private spending, is for Government to step up - UNTIL the economy can get back on its feet.

But then again, these are the morons who still think that having emission standards is a terrible thing, and who fought against efficiency standards since the last Oil crisis, which meant that the US was NOT prepared this past summer to handle the high oil prices.

As I watch the Stimulus debate and posturing by the Republican party, I honestly don't know why I continue to be astounded by their stupidity and their idiotic talking points. Really, can't they ever come up with intelligent and productive ideas? Why are they always such a bunch of small minded hypocrites?

I can't put it any better than Jon Stewart, on just how ridiculous the Republican Party is and will be for foreseeable future!

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Clusterf#@k to the Poor House - Economic Recovery Plan

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Funny Political News
Joke of the Day

Acting vs Being President

2009-02-01T12:02:00.005-05:00

I read an article on Huffington Post the other day that just really got my goat. I'd love to say something a bit stronger, but I don't like to swear.

Think Progress provided this little gem about Andrew Card's response to the working informality of President Obama's administration in the NY Times Article:

CARD: I found that Ronald Reagan and both President Bushes treated the Oval Office with tremendous respect. They treated the Office of the Presidency with tremendous respect. And some of that respect was reflected in how they expected people to behave, how they expected them to dress when they walked into the symbol of freedom for the world, the Oval Office. And yes, I’m disappointed to see the casual, laissez faire, short sleeves, no shirt and tie, no jacket, kind of locker room experience that seems to be taking place in this White House and the Oval Office.

Seriously??? Because President Obama will take off his suit jacket to actually do work in the Oval Office, Andrew Card thinks it creates a locker-room experience??

Because if anyone created that locker-room experience it was President Bush, with his ridiculous habit of calling people by their nicknames! Why? Because he couldn't be bothered to respect that individual by remembering or calling them by their true name. What was up with him calling reporters like David Gregory, "Stretch", or Michael Brown that incompetent FEMA director, "Brownie". It always reminded me of some coach saying "You can do it slugger".

If nothing else, this seriously underscored the disillusionment of the Bush Presidency. Here is the difference between the two men:

If Mr. Obama’s clock is looser than Mr. Bush’s, so too are his sartorial standards. Over the weekend, Mr. Obama’s first in office, his aides did not quite know how to dress. Some showed up in the West Wing in jeans (another no-no under Mr. Bush), some in coats and ties.
So the president issued an informal edict for “business casual” on weekends — and set his own example. He showed up Saturday for a briefing with his chief economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, dressed in slacks and a gray sweater over a white buttoned-down shirt. Workers from the Bush White House are shocked.
“I’ll never forget going to work on a Saturday morning, getting called down to the Oval Office because there was something he was mad about,” said Dan Bartlett, who was counselor to Mr. Bush. “I had on khakis and a buttoned-down shirt, and I had to stand by the door and get chewed out for about 15 minutes. He wouldn’t even let me cross the threshold.”

In a nutshell: President Bush just PLAYED at being President, while President Obama is a President.

President Bush just liked the pomp and circumstance, taking pride in his silly Presidential Rug in the Oval Office, the special feeling of flying around in Air Force One, and the "Hail to the Chief" playing in his footsteps. He would never admit to making a mistake, because he felt that would make him look weak.

President Obama, however, is more concerned about actually DOING something to make a difference. Setting the tone, communicating to the American Public what's at stake, and what's being done, setting the goals and priorities to his Administration. Because that's what a PRESIDENT DOES! He doesn't feel the need to own all the ideas, he will admit that he will make mistakes - who doesn't? Most of all, he is willing to hear opposing views and criticism.

Another example showcasing the difference between the two Presidents:

In the West Wing, Mr. Obama is a bit of a wanderer. When Mr. Bush wanted to see a member of his staff, the aide was summoned to the Oval Office. But Mr. Obama tends to roam the halls; one day last week, he turned up in the office of his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, who was in the unfortunate position of having his feet up on the desk when the boss walked in.
“Wow, Gibbs,” the press secretary recalls the president saying. “Just got here and you already have your feet up.” Mr. Gibbs scrambled to stand up, surprising Mr. Obama, who is not yet accustomed to having people rise when he enters a room.

This example of the two types of leadership isn't just limited to the Office of the President, Everyone in any field or job knows what I am talking about. The boss who only pays attention to superficial matters, like what time you get in, as opposed to what you actually accomplish. The manager who expects everyone to fawn over them, despite the fact that they are incompetent. The ones who expect you to do all the work in getting ready for the big presentation, and then take all the credit. Even in the military you have some officers who are complete idiots, and who care about looking like a leader, as opposed to actually being a leader.

But it's not just jobs, it's also in some Churches. You have some churches who disapprove of how people are dressed for service. I always think it's nicer to dress to go to church, but I guarantee that God doesn't care whether you wear jeans or whether you wear a designer suit, he would just rather you show up to spend time with him, to hear his word, and sing about his blessings!

This is a small thing, and I am sure that President Obama could care less what Andrew Card and his ilk have to say about whether or not he wears a suit jacket in the Oval office.

But when I read this comment, it just got me totally steamed about the principle - that the Bush Administration NEVER GOT IT. It's not about the superificial things that matter, it's about the substance - the blatant disrespect of the the US Constitution, the secrecy, the incompetent managing of the economy, the Wars that were bungled, and the lives that were lost.

The fact that they don't speak to that, but just stupid, superifical things about what to wear in the Oval Office is what makes me so angry. I mean how STUPID are these guys? They totally don't get it, and they never will.

Part of what drives success is a clear willingness to honestly assess your strengths and weaknesses. According to these guys, they never did anything wrong. This continued lack of self-awareness will be the reason why the Republican Party will be wandering in the wilderness for generations to come. They only have bloviating idiots like Rush Limbaugh to lead them.

They have no solution, no ideas, no message, and no self-awareness of exactly what's wrong with their party.

The only danger to the Democrats is if they fall victim to the same trap! They too need to be cognizant of what is required, and really understand the mood of the American People. If they lose that, then the leadership is their's to lose.

Trust

2009-01-28T23:48:00.005-05:00

Of all Human emotions, I find "trust" to be a really strange concept. We talk about trust as a concept in our every day life, from the dollar bill that declares "In God We Trust", to the notion that we, as individuals, "trust" in the legal entity and validity of the US Government to ensure our bank accounts. Because if you think about it, our paper money could be like monopoly money. The only thing that gives it value, is because we endow it with meaning, and we "trust" that the government would be able to back the value. Originally this was backed by the value and holdings of Gold Reserves, but since we walked away from tying the the US Dollar to the Gold Standard, our financial system is dependent on the trust we place in the US Government.

When we go grocery shopping, we "trust" that we get what we paid for, that we expect that there is a minimum standard of quality and freshness.

Duracell has spent a lot of effort to brand this idea in their batteries - that it's

A stable society can only flourish with trust in the individual responsibility - that people adhere to the same set of rules. Personal relationships work only when individuals trust in each other. That there is something dependable and reliable between two people. Parents trust that their kids will do the right thing. When that trust is broken, it always makes things harder to keep the same open trust in someone new, that trust issues from a past relationship doesn't color the new one.

I struggled with this concept recently, which is why it's so much on my mind. I struggled with a new person I had recently met, particularly after being disappointed by my last long term relationship, but I also run into this trust issue at work all the time. It's been my experience, that no matter what process or system we implement to help us attain some business result, it's success always depends on trusting that everyone conducts their tasks as required, that they stick to the guidelines or rules that have been set.

What's interesting is the culture in my company is very much centered around individual ownership and accountability. That there is this trust that people will perform and do what they are supposed to do. Funny enough, the reality is, it's actually a lot harder assume this "trust". Because while one person might be trusted. It's a lot harder to control for a larger group. Can anyone really expect the same level of consistency?

Normally I consider my self an optimistic person, always willing to give others the benefit of the doubt. But the reality is, that I have a strong tendency to want to control situations and people, because I don't trust that people will do what is right, what is expected of them. Ironically, I railed at this very issue that made me want to bang my head against the wall today. In a nutshell, the global function essentially does not trust the local countries, so when I told them that they would no longer be signing off on the end product, they balked. My argument to them was that they, at the global level, set the standards. It's up to the local countries to follow and execute to those guidelines. It's this whole notion of "Think Globally, Act Locally". They have to trust that the local organizations will keep to the original intent as much as possible, while at the same time using their judgment to make changes to support their market. So I was demanding that they trust the countries, but oddly enough I would struggle to also place this same trust were I in their position.

Commander-in-Chief Obama

2009-01-23T20:55:00.002-05:00

Just saw an interesting story on President Obama's upcoming meeting with military commanders at the Pentagon.

From the AP:

Iraq is stable enough to allow the roughly 22,000 U.S. Marines there to withdraw, the service's top general said Friday.
"The time is right for Marines in general terms to leave Iraq," said Marine Corps Commandant James Conway.
The Marine Corps can't fight in both Iraq and Afghanistan, he said, because it does not have enough combat support troops and equipment to divide between the missions.

"Anything that you put into Afghanistan must necessarily come as a reduction of Marine forces in Iraq," he told reporters. "When the door slams on the Marines in Iraq, let all the Marines be on the other side of the door."

Conway has been pushing for a large deployment of Marines to Afghanistan for months. No decisions have been made on the size of the force that would be sent.

More interestingly, was this observation:

Conway said that Obama's willingness to meet with his military chiefs at the Pentagon instead of the White House amounts to a gesture of respect to the commanders.

"It is great symbology; he's on our turf," he said. "More importantly, he gets to meet and shake hands with hundreds of people in all the services."

President Obama continually impresses me with his collaborative nature, political maturity, and his respectful demeanor.

Closing Gitmo ~ Restoring America's honor

2009-01-23T19:26:00.005-05:00

Obama signed the Executive Order to close Guantanamo Bay Prison within one year.

Already the Conservatives pundits are going crazy with fear. What I find astonishing is that they think that Gitmo has kept Americans safe; when in reality, this very act was probably Al Qaeda's most powerful recruiting tool! They can advertise how unjust and hypocritical the United States is, and they would laugh and spit on our notion of Democracy.

According to the latest Gallup Poll, 45% of Americans do not believe that Guantanamo Bay should be closed. This was quite surprising and shocking to me. How can more Americans not see how morally wrong it is to torture. Can anyone,who professes to be a Christian, even say with a clear conscious that torture is acceptable?? How can Americans who profess that we feel so strongly about democracy and freedom, that we are willing to die for it, suddenly become so cowardly to say, we need to ignore human rights and that torture is acceptable because it will keep us safe.

As a society that upholds democratic ideals and principles, everyone should know that torture is wrong. You don't need a law to tell you that to commit such barbaric acts is not right. If that was the case, then why not castrate rapists and pedophiles? Yet we don't do this, because that is an act that is not reflective of a humane and just society. This idea that we can even attempt to tell the rest of the world, China included, to respect Human Rights, and push them toward a democractic model, while continually supporting torture and rendition, and ignoring Habeus Corpus is laughable.

The Habeas Corpus act of 1649 and its interpretation was clearly upheld and incorporated into our Constitution by the Founding Fathers. Furthermore, the Founding Fathers, when developing the Constitution, clearly put the focus and emphasis on individual freedoms, and checks and balances against the limitations of Government abuses. This is why during criminal trials, the burden of proof rests with the State, not the individual. This is why illegal search and seizures are not allowed.

George Bush created a nightmare when he created Guantanamo Bay Prison. He was on record for trying to close it, however, he was unable to accomplish it, simply due to the legal complexities, and the fact that because evidence obtained by torture taints the evidence.

I have no doubt that there are some very dangerous terrorists, at the same time, there is also a large probability that a majority are innocent people who have been illegally imprisoned. They have had no avenues for justice, nor have they been able to petition for release due to lack of evidence. However, by imprisoning and torturing them unjustly, we have now just made more enemies.

Let's remember that all the former Secretary of States went on record on the CNN Forum "The Next President: A World of Challenges":

AMANPOUR: General Powell, it's not just about like, is it? It's about being able to get things done. America is the strongest nation in the world. But a new intelligence report is going to tell the next president that America's dominance is not going to be as supreme as it was.

So what do you tell the next president about how to regain respect?

POWELL: I think we have to recognize that there are other nations in the world now whose economic strength is growing, and therefore their political influence is growing.

I don't know that we should be afraid of this or see that as a threat to us. Isn't this what we were working for all of these many decades? We wanted them to rise up and join the international economic community. And that is what is happening.

We're working multilaterally to solve the Iranian problem, the North Korean problem. We have worked with the world to increase funding for HIV-AIDS. We've doubled the amount of money we're putting into development assistance around the world.

So I think a case can be made that we can build on that strength. And the new president, with a different approach to things, and with a different attitude to the rest of the world, can reverse this.

SESNO: But how about some tangible things that the next administration, the next president can do to change policy or send a signal that will address these issues?

POWELL: Close Guantanamo.

ALBRIGHT: Close Guantanamo. I think...

BAKER: Close Guantanamo. We were on a panel together several months ago, and we all agreed, one of the best things that could happen would be to close Guantanamo, which is a very serious blot upon our reputation.

Military experts all agree that torture is not a reliable method for obtaining evidence. Unfortunately, most Americans watch too much TV, and have been fooled by the television "24", and the notion that by torturing someone, it will for sure get that critical piece of intelligence that will help defuse a bomb with 1 minute to spare!

Inauguration of Barack Obama ~ 44th President of the United States

2009-01-20T19:28:00.005-05:00

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.
Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

This is the source of our confidence - the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

The Inauguration of Barack Obama was filled with amazing pomp and circumstance, tradition, electricity, history, joy, relief, and somberness. His Inauguration speech embodied the commitment to our ideals as brought forth by our founding fathers, the renewal, individual responsibility, engagement, and collaboration that will be required to meet the challenges of the future. It was everything that we needed to inspire us on this special day.

President-Elect Barack Obama

2009-01-20T07:51:00.003-05:00

The day is finally here ~ a day that is celebrated within the US, and around the world. What I find constantly amazing is the massive interest from people in the International Community in President-elect Barack Obama (it will be a wonderful thing to drop the "elect").

While some may say the end of American Exceptionalism is at hand, I am not entirely too sure. I think the end of American Exceptionalism as it relates to an "anything goes because we are Americans" or rogue cowboy style of leadership is certainly at an end. However, I still believe that what sets the US apart from any other nation is that we were created from a set of ideals, and not necessarily any one homogenous ethnic group. The fact is, the US culture, Constitution and history is unique and sets us apart from any other country.

President-elect Obama's inauguration represents a possibility that truly has not been a possibility in any other nation. I especially consider a homogenous country like South Korea or even France. As much as the French tout their Liberte and Egalite, they are still driven by nationalistic prejudice of all things French - even their politicians.

So I think back on election night, and the electrifying emotions that I felt on hearing that Barack Obama had become the new President-Elect of the United States, and it instills again an overflowing pride in my country and what we represent apart from any other country.

It's a New Day

2009-01-19T11:59:00.002-05:00

Will.i.am has a great song and video to celebrate the election of Barack Obama as our 44th President - "It's a New Day". It's infectious in it's optimism and hope, that you can't help but dance with joy.

In remembrance ~ Martin Luther King Jr.

2009-01-18T17:43:00.002-05:00

Monday, January 19th will commemorate Martin Luther King Jr.'s 80th Birthday. In 1964, Time Magazine name Martin Luther King Jr. their "Man of the Year".

Three decades after King was gunned down on a motel balcony in Memphis, Tenn., he is still regarded mainly as the black leader of a movement for black equality. That assessment, while accurate, is far too restrictive. For all King did to free blacks from the yoke of segregation, whites may owe him the greatest debt, for liberating them from the burden of America's centuries-old hypocrisy about race. It is only because of King and the movement that he led that the U.S. can claim to be the leader of the "free world" without inviting smirks of disdain and disbelief. Had he and the blacks and whites who marched beside him failed, vast regions of the U.S. would have remained morally indistinguishable from South Africa under apartheid, with terrible consequences for America's standing among nations. How could America have convincingly inveighed against the Iron Curtain while an equally oppressive Cotton Curtain remained draped across the South?

One man come in the name of love
One man come and go
One man come, he to justify
One man to overthrow

In the name of love
One more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love?

One man caught on a barbed wire fence
One man he resist
One man washed on an empty beach
One man betrayed with a kiss

In the name of love
One more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love?

Early morning, April 4
Shot rings out in the Memphis sky
Free at last, they took your life
They could not take your pride

In the name of love
One more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love?
In the name of love
One more in the name of love
In the name of love
What more in the name of love?

Snowy Sunday Morning

2009-01-18T09:39:00.004-05:00

I woke up this morning to a very quiet and snowy Sunday morning. While I won't miss the cold when I move to LA, I will miss the views from my window on early Sunday mornings such as today.

It's definitely one of those days where you can take simple pleasure in lying in a warm, fluffy bed, sipping coffee and reading the NY Times. Speaking of which, the Sunday NY Times Magazine has a fascinating gallery of photos of Obama's People By Nadav Kander, individuals serving in his administration, as well as critical colleagues.

The most interesting story was the background discussion with the photographer on how the shots were taken, and how the unique facets of the individuals would shine through - from the formal and dignified bearings of Robert Gates and Jim Jones, to the easy casualness of David Axelrod.

Train to the Inauguration

2009-01-17T11:27:00.003-05:00

Well Obama has kicked-off his Inauguration with the historic train ride from Philadelphia to Washington DC.

His speech in the 30th Street Train Station was filled with promise, grace, and encouragement. It again reminds me what a once in a lifetime President we have before us. It is not to say that we can expect Barack Obama to fix all the deep and troubling problems we have before us, but his leadership, intelligence, and his ability to connect with the American people demonstrates what a truly remarkable and promising President he will be - not just the US, but in the international community.

And yet while our problems may be new, what is required to overcome them is not. What is required is the same perseverance and idealism that our founders displayed. What is required is a new declaration of independence, not just in our nation, but in our own lives - from ideology and small thinking, prejudice and bigotry - an appeal not to our easy instincts but to our better angels.
That is the reason I launched my campaign for the presidency nearly two years ago. I did so in the belief that the most fundamental American ideal, that a better life is in store for all those willing to work for it, was slipping out of reach. That Washington was serving the interests of the few, not the many. And that our politics had grown too small for the scale of the challenges we faced.

But I also believed something else. I believed that our future is our choice, and that if we could just recognize ourselves in one another and bring everyone together - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, north, south, east and west, black, white, Latino, Asian, and Native American, gay and straight, disabled and not - then not only would we restore hope and opportunity in places that yearned for both, but maybe, just maybe, we might perfect our union in the process.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Bush Legacy

2009-01-16T21:52:00.007-05:00

Tonight on Countdown, Keith Olbermann reported on Bush's last 8 years in 8 minutes, and even though it's widely accepted that Bush has been a terrible President, I was still shocked to realize just how much has been lost, destroyed, and eliminated during his presidency.

It's difficult to see how anyone can say that History will judge Bush kindly, given that the choices and decisions that George W. Bush has undertaken has seriously undermined the stability and security of our country.

So as I write my 100th blog post, I am finally happy to say good-bye to George W. Bush, and I eagerly await the inauguration of a calm, thoughtful, commanding, intelligent, just, rational, and compassionate President.
Here is one last comparison between the different styles of the two Presidents:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

President Goofus and President Gallant - Peer Pressers

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

Why won't "Trickle Down" Economics Die?

2009-01-11T20:32:00.005-05:00

I was watching "Meet the Press" this morning, and the first topic of the show was, of course, about the economy and Obama's stimulus package. David Gregory had a round table discussion with former Congressman David Bonior of Michigan; editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal, Paul Gigot; chief Washington correspondent for CNBC and New York Times political writer John Harwood; Vanity Fair contributing editor Bethany McLean; and chief economist of Moody's economy.com Mark Zandi.

It was clear that Obama is already on the offensive, marketing his plan, and getting the public acclimated to this stimulus plan. The show didn't offer anything new in terms of analysis. The entire discussion can be summed up as follows:

1. We need to do this, otherwise the economy will be in bigger trouble
2. We need to do something, but we should do something else, like tax cuts
3. How will we pay for this ~ followed by requisite ringing of hands

MR. GREGORY: And what about--Paul, what about the idea of tax cuts as being as stimulative as infrastructure spending?
MR. GIGOT: Well, I think they're much more stimulative if they're the right tax cuts.
MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.
MR. GIGOT: I mean, we have a capital strike going on right now. Nobody wants to take any risks, nobody wants to make any investments. Part of it's the uncertainty about the damage that Congress might do, but part of it is also the fact that everybody's frozen. You need the incentives to invest, particularly in the private sector.
MR. GREGORY: Right.
MR. GIGOT: I think a, a tax cut, a big corporate rate tax cut, for example, or an across the board tax cut would be a lot more stimulative than this public spending, which has to come from somewhere.

At what point will Conservatives wake up and smell the coffee - "Trickle Down" Economics is DEAD. The last 20 years of deficit spending and tax cuts under Republican Presidents do nothing but hamper the Government's ability to intervene in Economic downturns, and in fact do more to harm to the economy, causing false bubbles, uncontrollable greed, and recessions.

There continues to be this debate on what spurs the economy. It's a basic fundamental principle that the economy grows as a result of consumption and spending. Capital investments facilitate growth, but capital investments are worthless, if there is no growth or profit to be had.

We need to recognize that the key to growing the economy, is growing DEMAND. Demand for goods and services will continue to exist and grow, as long as people have real income keeping pace. Once Income falls or declines, so does the DEMAND, hence production also slows, continuing a spiral contracting of the economy.

So I don't care how much of a tax cut incentive the government gives, unless there is demand and organic market growth potential for the business, there won't be a need for that capital.

Tax cuts have one small benefit, in that they provide instant relief, and add income for consumption. However, most economists recognize that the dollar return on investments for tax cuts are less than the cost of the tax cuts themselves. It's also clear that Obama will need some tax cuts, to gain Republican support for his plan.

MR. GREGORY: Mark Zandi, as an economist, what's your big question about it?
MR. MARK ZANDI: Is it big enough? Is $750 billion, a trillion dollars enough? The economy is in great trouble. We lost 500,000 jobs in December, 2.6 million jobs in 2008. That's the most since 1945.
MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.
MR. ZANDI: Unemployment's 7.2 percent. So is 750 billion, a trillion going to be enough to jump-start the economy, to get the private sector back in the game?

MR. GREGORY: The issue of impact, Mark Zandi, speaks to some of the risk of how long it takes. This is how The New York Times reported it Saturday: "The risk is that Obama and the Congress will weigh down their effort with measures that cost many billions of dollars but may not have much impact on economic activity. Tax breaks, for example, usually produce less than $1" worth "of stimulus for every dollar they cost, economists say. Spending on public construction projects, like highways and bridges, produces the most economic activity--but there's a limit to how many projects are `shovel-ready,' and even those take time to generate jobs and ripple through the economy."

MR. ZANDI: But we, but we have no choice. We really don't. I mean, if we don't do something like this, a stimulus package, a foreclosure mitigation plan, the economy is going to slide away. Unemployment is going to rise into the double digits and we're going to lose tax revenues as a result and the deficit's going to be even larger than otherwise.
MR. GIGOT: But, Mark, don't you think that monetary policy is very powerful here? I mean, Christina Romer, who's the president's economic adviser now, she has written in 1994 that fiscal actions have relatively small effects. The big bang for the buck is monetary policy.
MR. ZANDI: In normal times I would agree with you, Paul, but this--the link between the Fed and the economy runs through the financial system. The financial system is literally broken. There--if--you can provide as much cash as you want; but you don't get credit, you don't get it done.
MR. GIGOT: I mean, if you're borrowing it for aircraft carriers like Reagan did to win the Cold War, you get a big payoff down the road. If you're doing it for tax cuts that really stimulate and drive private investment, and in two or three years' time bring the economy back, great. But if it goes to pork, if it goes to green jobs that may sound good in the short term but may not have a market response or a market for them, then it's a waste.

What still gets me is the ridiculous Republican Talking points that Paul Gigot continues to expound, that Monetary Policy is the answer, and that Tax Cuts (to the wealthy and Corporations) are more effective than any fiscal policy. The real gem was the Paul's glowing and inaccurate description of the benefits of Reagonomics. The fact that the WSJ editorial board seems to only regurgitate Republican ideas and principles, renders the paper virtually worthless, except as a birdcage liner.

Overall, my opinion is that I think Obama has shown his political savviness, in the fact that he already recognizes that most economists believe that the stimulus plan will have to be much bigger, hence it's much easier to start with something smaller and let it grow, as opposed to put something too big on the table that will have Republicans balking. What's ironic, is that after 8 years of deficit spending under a Republican President and a Republican controlled Congress, we suddenly have Republicans growing a conscious about the size of the deficit.

Obama in touch with the Public

2009-01-11T11:09:00.002-05:00

It's well known that Obama is fighting to keep his Blackberry, as he sees it as important for him to keep in touch with average Americans, and he continues to make efforts to openly interact with the public, whether it's getting ideas and questions via the transition website Change.gov or just dropping by a local Washington landmark, Ben's Chili Bowl.

That would be a half-smoke, actually, and an iced tea, and the institution was a longtime U Street establishment, Ben’s Chili Bowl, where a visit from the Obama family has been anticipated.
Well, Mr. Obama didn’t bring the whole family this time, but he was accompanied to the diner, which has been in business 50 years, by Mayor Adrian Fenty of Washington, an ally of his.

In a departure from his healthy diet, Mr. Obama ordered a classic Ben’s half-smoke — a pork and beef sausage on a steamed hot dog bun, topped with mustard, onions and chili sauce — and a sweetened iced tea. Mr. Fenty chose the turkey dog, cheese fries and bottled water. The bill came to $19.15 with taxes, according to prices from Ben’s menu.

Mr. Obama looked over at Mr. Fenty’s lunch and asked the server, Jermaine Jefferson, “Where’s my cheese?”
Immediately after the election, Ben’s co-owner, Nizam Ali, told The Times that he had invited the Obamas to drop in and eat for free, an offer made to help the new First Family feel at home in Washington. The President-elect took up the offer to drop in for a bite, but declined the offer to eat on the house; he paid for his and the mayor’s food with a $20 bill and told the cashier to keep the change.

Do you Facebook ?

2009-01-10T19:44:00.004-05:00

Before last year, I had always considered the internet a fairly utilitarian tool. I never understood people who were constantly online or chatting online. I always got on the internet did my thing, and got off. I was a fan of Google, as I found it useful for getting directions and finding obscure recipes for German Apfel Cakes. The internet was also great for its convenience of online shopping, and no one can argue how revolutionary Amazon.com has been.

However, it's only recently, since last year, that I started this blog, and joined facebook. I at first thought I was too old for Facebook, and of course there was always that concern that once you put something on the internet, it was basically like exposing oneself. However, I came to realize that having a presence online is like driving. If you use good judgement and act responsibly, it can actually be a fun and useful activity.

There are those driven by the number of networks, friends, and social groups they can belong to, or applications or bling that they add to their facebook, but for me, I think the best thing about Facebook has been the ability to reconnect with people from my past - such as old highschool friends, former colleagues, college friends, etc.

The funny thing about Facebook is how much socializing and the ability to connect with people has changed. Even though I have been able to reconnect with friends and colleagues, I've never picked up the phone to call and say "hello" to a majority of my "Facebook friends". And except for small group of very close friends, it's doubtful that I would ever see any of these "Facebook friends" in person.

Which is why I found this video hilarious...

Who will buy US Debt?

2009-01-08T20:40:00.006-05:00

Today, Obama announced his economic Stimulus plan "American Recovery and Reinvestment," the name of his proposed $750 billion stimulus package at George Mason University.

"Throughout America’s history, there have been some years that simply rolled into the next without much notice or fanfare. Then there are the years that come along once in a generation – the kind that mark a clean break from a troubled past, and set a new course for our nation. This is one of those years. We start 2009 in the midst of a crisis unlike any we have seen in our lifetime – a crisis that has only deepened over the last few weeks. Nearly two million jobs have now been lost, and on Friday we are likely to learn that we lost more jobs last year than at any time since World War II. Just in the past year, another 2.8 million Americans who want and need full-time work have had to settle for part-time jobs. Manufacturing has hit a twenty-eight year low. Many businesses cannot borrow or make payroll. Many families cannot pay their bills or their mortgage. Many workers are watching their life savings disappear. And many, many Americans are both anxious and uncertain of what the future will hold.

I don’t believe it’s too late to change course, but it will be if we don’t take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world. In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse...."

What's interesting is that earlier this week, the International Herald Tribune reported that China is losing it's taste for US Debt.

China has bought more than $1 trillion in American debt, but as the global downturn has intensified, Beijing is starting to keep more of its money at home - a shift that could pose some challenges to the U.S. government in the near future but eventually may even produce salutary effects on the world economy.

But now, Beijing is seeking to pay for its own $600 billion economic stimulus - just as tax revenue falls sharply as the Chinese economy slows. Regulators have ordered banks to lend more money to small and midsize enterprises, many of which are struggling with slower exports, and Chinese bankers say they are being instructed to lend more to local governments to allow them to build new roads and other projects as part of the stimulus program.

Given the ambitious stimulus plan that Obama has in mind, it will be interesting to see how the Treasury will raise the capital, with demand decreasing for US Debt. In addition, what will be the effect of rising interest rates on capital investments for the private sector and for consumers?

Race and Achievement

2009-01-08T18:22:00.003-05:00

Obama has demonstrated the ability to make diverse and competent appointments within his administration. The latest nominee making the news is the potential nomination of CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta as Surgeon General.

The Daily Show has an amusing clip satirizing the notion of Race, Immigrants, and Overachievers. As this was something I could relate to, I found the ending especially funny.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Medicine Cabinet

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

Transitions

2009-01-06T22:51:00.006-05:00

Happy New Year to All!

Aside from having to remember to write 2009 and not 2008 on checks, to me, it's just another day in the continuing march of time. While some may think of the New Year as a chance to change habits, lose weight, learn new things, or wiping the slate clean; I personally do not make New Years Resolution. I don't see the point for why we have to have a special day to make commitments? Why put it off tomorrow, why can't people just resolve to change that moment?

However, this January, I find myself a little more reflective on my past and my future. In the past ten years, I have had 6 different assignments, had 7 managers, worked for 2 companies, experienced one merger, and lived in 3 different cities and two continents. With each move, I've come to accumulate more things, and have learned that I abhor packing and unpacking.

Part of my reflection is driven by the fact that I have something in common with the incoming President elect, Barack Obama. Like Obama, I am also moving on to a new assignment and a new location. While Obama is moving into the White House, I will be moving to southern California, a big change from Boston, Massachusetts!

In addition, my new assignment is filled with challenges of learning a new business category and dealing with sensitive organizational changes, just as Obama will face a new role with tough problems, and political environment challenges of Republicans and Democrats. While the challenges and level of complexity that I will face in my new role is not to the scale as what PE Obama will face, I do think about what similar qualities will be required to make transitioning to a new assignment successful.

If there's one thing that I have learned from my own personal experiences, as well as from others, there are certain critical qualities required to help make any transition to a new assignment successful:

Listen and Learn: I've always felt that knowledge is power, and one of the first things I've always found helpful is to listen in on as many meetings to understand the issues and how people are feeling towards sensitive topics. Individually, I also find it helpful to do my own research, analyzing information, and reading up on topics that I am not familiar with.
Collaborate and engage: Reaching out to people and gaining their input is so critical. It helps make your own acceptance into a new environment or organization that much easier. Moreover when recommending proposals or action plans, understanding other people's positions is a critical success factor to its implementation.
Be Flexible: While having a new role or job can already be challenging enough, these are the times that call an individual to be even more adaptable to change. No matter what plans I might have in mind, I find that I need to be patient and flexible when facing unexpected events, and be able to alter my plans accordingly.
Be Realistic: There is always that saying, "Hope for the best, plan for the worst", and it's always good to ensure that you do a proper risk assessment on key decision making. It's also important that you communicate the right level of expectation, not only to yourself, but to others.

For myself, I am certainly glad to shut the door on 2008, as it was a tough year all around both professionally and personally, which makes me very excited and eager to see what 2009 has in store.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

2008-12-21T09:59:00.004-05:00

Having been busy with work, the holiday season, and getting ready to move on to the next chapter of my life, I haven't had a too much time to post.

But during these cold winter nights, I think about those feeling despair, struggling to make it, and alone with no family. To those I offer a prayer for God's peace and blessing, that they may have hope and find support during this holiday season.

I end with the hope that everyone is able to experience the love all around us...

Senate Republicans want a Depression

2008-12-13T11:17:00.011-05:00

I continue to be amazed at the idiocy of Senate Republicans. How eager they are to stand on principle and bloviate in front of reporters and television on why they couldn't in consciousness vote for the Auto Bailout.

First we need to recognize that we are NOT talking about a bailout. What we are talking about is a LOAN of significant amount to the Auto Industry, not just free money. This has already been done in 1980 when the US Government provided a loan to Chrysler, which enabled Lee Ioccoca to turn Chrysler around with the introduction of the K Car and the mini-van. With the revival of Chrysler, and the investments made, they were able to repay the loan back to the US Government with interest.

Secondly, while there are many problems within the Auto Industry brought about by poor decision making, lack of vision and strategy, and poor brand management, we need to recognize that part of the sudden downfall of the Big 3 has been due to the poor economic environment and market forces that created a perfect storm in an industry unable to react quickly.

The idea that the Auto Industry can react to market forces with lightening speed is ridiculous. We are talking about a heavy manufacturing industry that produces durable goods, you can not change production lines and factories with a switch of a lever. Moreover, what's even more idiotic is the idea that the auto industry can operate as a bankrupt company with restructuring as many opponents to the bailout loan are suggesting. Unlike the Airline Industry, the auto industry produces a durable good that most consumers keep for on average 7 to 10 years. An Airline ticket is a cheap service that is quickly consumed on a single use. Studies have been conducted, and it is clear that consumers will NOT take the risk to purchase a vehicle from a company that has been bankrupt.

While it's recognized that many changes need to come about in terms of the strategy, brand management, and operations within the Auto Industry, it's also clear that in order to bring these changes about, the Big 3 need capital to restructure.

What the Senate Republicans did by failing to provide the Big 3 with this loan is light a match that could implode the American Economy, resulting in the next Depression, because of their irrational dislike of Unions.

The idea that it is Unions that are at the heart of the problems of the auto industry and failure for resolution on the bailout loan is completely ludicrous. The only ones to blame are the peopel who voted against it - pure and simple. The UAW had made significant concessions; understanding that their whole future and industry was at stake. Furthermore, this constant lie being reported by the media and Congress on the idea of the $70/hour wage that American Union Autoworkers make is so blatantly false and irresponsible.

The Union Auto Workers do NOT make that much per hour, otherwise we would certainly be seeing a much better economy! Union Auto makers make on average $28/hour. The $70/hour that continues to be falsely bandied about is a COST to the company NOT THE WAGE! What the Auto Industry has done is totaled the entire COST wages + benefits for all current workers, IN ADDITION to ALL retired workers, and divided by ONLY current workers. As a result, not only are we reporting a false number to the American Public, but the American public and the Media are too stupid to understand the difference between wage and cost. Wage being the take home pay, and the cost being a more expansive number to a company. If this is the new standard for reporting income, should we change the federal income tax code to reflect this new definition?

Furthermore, when will we stop demonizing unions? It is because of unions that we have safer work places, child labor laws, and equitable pay. Do unions also have their problems? Sure, but let's not forget the good that they also bring. I would argue just as fiercely that the myth that "unions are the reason for the downfall of business" is just as ridiculous a generalization as the myth that "big business is just out to screw the worker".

Let's be clear, if the auto industry fails, we are talking an impact of potentially up to 3 million jobs and a reduction of $150.7 BILLION dollars in Personal Income within one year. This is a significant impact to the economy. This will have a huge multiplier effect on consumption and demand for goods and services. Think of the impact of the loss in income on other durable goods such as homes, appliances, clothing, and electronics. Outside of direct personal income, the failure of the Auto Industry would also impact their suppliers and vendors, who would in turn see a contracting of their business.

You can expect a knock on effect not only on the retail and service industry, but the US Government! Expect the government deficit to grow even bigger due to more payouts on unemployment and health care costs for the uninsured, along with lower tax revenues. The cost to the US government and the economy will be MUCH bigger than the $34 Billion dollars for the Auto bailout loans that were originally suggested.

We simply can not let an entire industry to disappear overnight without a plan to modernize and transition to a new industry.

There is MORE at stake than just an auto worker and auto industry. Anyone who thinks that we should just let the market forces work and let them fail, are totally shortsighted in understanding the complete impact and devastation it would have on the American Economy as a whole.

If the Auto Industry dies and the US economy spirals out of control, let's be clear, while there will be plenty to go around for blame on the mismanagement of the auto industry, the final implosion can solely be laid at the feet of the moronic and irresponsible Senate Republicans who voted against this measure, simply to assuage their ideology.

Goofus vs. Gallant

2008-12-09T20:35:00.008-05:00

Barack Obama announced on Sunday, that he was going to appoint General Eric Shinseki as the Secretary of Veteran Affairs. This was a selection that was widely praised by all, in particular those in the military.

In the run-up to war in Iraq in early 2003, General Eric Shinseki testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee that it would take "several hundred thousand soldiers" to secure Iraq:

I would say that what's been mobilized to this point, something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers, are probably, you know, a figure that would be required. We're talking about post-hostilities control over a piece of geography that's fairly significant with the kinds of ethnic tensions that could lead to other problems.

Just two days later -- and exactly five years ago today -- then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, swiftly and infamously dismissed Shinseki's assessment.

Obama's transition continues to develop at a steady and competent manner:

Mr. Obama is moving more quickly to fill his administration’s top ranks than any newly elected president in modern times. He has named virtually the entire top echelon of his White House staff and nearly half of his cabinet. Just a month after his election, Mr. Obama has announced his selections for 13 of the 24 most important positions in a new administration.

By comparison, Bill Clinton had filled only one of those jobs by this point in his transition, and Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan only two. Even the elder George Bush, who had the advantage of succeeding a fellow Republican, had picked just eight a month after his election. George W. Bush, stalled by the Florida recount, had named a chief of staff at this point in 2000 but was waiting to find out if he would even become president.

Furthermore, the latest Gallup Poll has 78% of Americans approving of Obama's handling of his transition and his Cabinet picks.

John Stewart provides a humorous comparison between Bush and Obama, with a nod to the Goofus vs. Gallant comparison. For those who are old enough, this was a staple of the Highlight Magazines which taught kids between good vs poor behavior by example in a cartoon. I remembered reading these magazines at the dentists office when I was little!

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Clusterf#@k to the Poor House - President Goofus and President Gallant

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

---------------

A Remarkable Athlete

2008-12-07T13:54:00.004-05:00

As my friends and family can attest, I know nothing about sports, and in particular football.

However, I read with great interest a profile that Time Magazine did on Myron Rolle, an imposing 6'2 college football player for Florida State. What make Myron so special is that not only does he have athletic talent, but he's also a gifted student.

On Nov. 22, the Seminoles' safety jetted off to Birmingham, Ala., where he sat for a final interview for the Rhodes Scholarship, generally viewed as the country's most prestigious. After learning he was one of the 32 student-athletes in the country to earn the honor — and with it, two years of study at England's vaunted Oxford University — Rolle flew to College Park, Md., joined his teammates late in the second quarter and helped Florida State to a pivotal win over the Maryland.

The part that caught my attention was his response when asked about breaking the stereotype of an academic athlete.

The focus on academics and athletics started in grade school. My parents always put a high premium on academics, and I was always good at athletics. For high school, I went to the Hun School in Princeton, N.J., which is a very challenging boarding school, where I got more practice at balancing the two.

I found it interesting that while access to good schools was important, it always starts with individual responsibility and support from parents.

He'll have an exciting decision to make whether to take this opportunity to study abroad, or play in the NFL. Fortunately for Myron, he has a role model who he can look to for advice in Bill Bradley, who an addition to being a Rhodes Scholar himself, had a career in the NBA and in politics.

Sign of the times

2008-12-06T17:01:00.005-05:00

Friday's jobless numbers reporting an additional loss of 533,000 jobs for the month of November continues to pummel the stock market, and brings great concern on the state of the economy. While the current unemployment rate is at 6.7%, the real unemployment rate is most likely much higher, as it does not take into consideration those who have simply given up looking for work.

The unemployment rate has been made less meaningful by the long-term rise in dropouts from the labor force. The simple percentage of people without jobs — including retirees, stay-at-home parents and discouraged would-be job seekers — can also be misleading, though. It has dropped in recent decades mainly because of the influx of women into the work force, not because the job market is fundamentally healthier than it used to be.

The Labor Department does publish an alternate measure of unemployment, which counts part-time workers who want full-time work, as well as anyone who has looked for work in the last year. (The official rate includes only people who told a government surveyor that they had looked in the last four weeks.)

This alternate measure rose to 12.5 percent in November. That is the highest level since the government began calculating the measure in 1994.

Perhaps the best historical measure of the job market, however, is the one set by the market itself: pay.

During the economic expansion that lasted from 2001 until December 2007, when the recession began, incomes for most households barely outpaced inflation. It was the weakest income growth in any expansion since World War II.

One person who has not, is Paul Nawrocki, who's taken to standing in the streets looking for work.

Paul Nawrocki says he's beyond the point where he cares about humiliation. That's why he weekly takes a 90-minute train ride to New York, where he walks the streets wearing a sandwich board that advertises his plight: The former toy-industry executive needs a job.

"Almost homeless," reads the sign. "Looking for employment. Very experienced operations and administration manager."

Wearing a suit and tie under the sign, Nawrocki -- who was in the toy industry 36 years before being laid off in February -- stands on Manhattan corners for hours, hoping to pass resumes to interested passers-by.

"When you're out of work and you face having nothing -- I mean, having no income -- pride doesn't mean anything," Nawrocki said. "You need to find work. I have to take care of my family."

This is just another example of the results of eight years of failed economic policies by the Bush Presidency and the Republican controlled Congress.

Republicans may excel at telling lies and using Rove Style politics to get elected, but it's pretty clear that they fail at governing. It's been demonstrated that both the Stock market and the economy performs much better under a Democratic President, as opposed to a Republican President.

President Bush's multitrillion-dollar tax cuts, which were strongly tilted toward the rich, could not prevent (and may even have contributed to) significant job losses. On the other hand, when Bill Clinton raised taxes on affluent people to balance the federal budget (while significantly expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit for working poor people), unemployment declined substantially. Under Clinton's watch, 22 million jobs were created.

Prefer a broader historical comparison? In the past three decades, since the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries oil price shocks of the mid-1970s and the Republican turn toward "supply side" economics, the average unemployment rate under Republican presidents has been 6.7 percent – substantially higher than the 5.5 percent average under Democratic presidents. (The official unemployment rate takes no account of people who have given up looking for work or taken substantial pay cuts to stay in the labor force.) Over an even broader time period, since the late 1940s, unemployment has averaged 4.8 percent under Democratic presidents but 6.3 percent – almost one-third higher – under Republican presidents.

Lower unemployment under Democratic presidents has contributed substantially to the real incomes of middle-class and working poor families. Job losses hurt everyone – not just those without work. In fact, every percentage point of unemployment has the effect of reducing middle-class income growth by about $300 per family per year. And the effects are long term, unlike the temporary boost in income from a stimulus check. Compounded over an eight-year period, a persistent one-point difference in unemployment is worth about $10,000 to a middle-class family. The dollar values are smaller for working poor families, but in relative terms their incomes are even more sensitive to unemployment. In contrast, income growth for affluent people is much more sensitive to inflation, which has been a perennial target of Republican economic policies.

Obama's inauguration can't come fast enough.

Thanksgiving and Thomas Jefferson

2008-11-27T14:17:00.006-05:00

I traveled to Washington DC to spend with my family for Thanksgiving this year. Today we were fortunate enough to enjoy a crisp, sunny day, so instead of watching football or the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, I ended up going for a walk along the Tidal Basin with my family. When we came across the Jefferson Memorial, we walked up, and I was struck by how timeless Jefferson's words regarding freedom and governance were, and how they still applied today, particularly given the recent tragic events, where terrorists attacked several hotels in Mumbai, India.

The violence, while intolerable, begs a question "Why"?

It's too easy and simplistic to just attribute these evil and violent attacks to soulless individuals who have no regard to humanity. Certainly, they demonstrate a lack of respect for human life, but we also need to look at the root cause for their anger.

For too long, mankind in every society has been prone to marginalizing the humanity and equality of others. The idea that Jefferson proposes, in the Declaration of Independence, is truly inspirational and timeless:

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed..."

Despite differences in ethnicity, culture, or history, every race is looking for security, stability, and well-being. When society allows both social and economic inequalities, is it any wonder that we see such bursts of rage? If we are honest, when we turn our backs on the rights of others, on the humanity, and needs of others, we also have some share of culpability.

What brought economic revival in Europe was the Marshall Plan, the same approach needs to be applied for developing nations. When rich nations develop foreign aid packages to help invest in health care, education, and food production, the economic support will provide a greater and more meaningful solution toward fighting hatred and terrorism, than any missile defense system.

Moreover, even within the US, the effects of poverty, hopelessness, and inequality in our inner cities is evident on a daily basis in the news. We can do more to improve crime and violence in our cities, if we could focus more on improving the income inequality and education of inner city kids.

While it's always a good thing to take stock of what we are grateful for on this annual day of giving thanks, thinking of those who are less fortunate than ourselves is something we should do more often.

Americans, Brits, and Canadians on Holiday

2008-11-17T20:50:00.010-05:00

Last week, I had a much needed mini-break with "Les Filles", my best friends from Geneva, and we had a great time in San Francisco and in Las Vegas.

San Francisco was gorgeous, and was only marred by one day of bad weather, but the day we chose to drive down the coast to Carmel, ended up being beautiful. It was just an amazing drive, and gave one the sense of how immense and varied the American landscape really is.

Then it was on to Las Vegas, where we had a day out on a helicopter tour of the Grand Canyon. The views were amazing! Of course there was the requisite gambling, but as I am fairly risk averse, I didn't participate too much, but it was still fun to watch the others.

We were there to celebrate two birthdays, and had a great time at Fleur de Lis in Mandalay Bay , with aperitifs at Mix, where we were able to enjoy our cocktails with a great view of Las Vegas at night.

I had a great time with my friends, but as usual, all good things must come to an end...

p.s. still working on the photobucket slideshow to add to this post...

In Defense of Lawrence Summers

2008-11-16T19:19:00.009-05:00

Recently, NOW has made some noises about not wanting Larry Summers as a candidate for Secretary of Treasury. I feel that he is being unfairly maligned for being a misogynist for some comments he made, while as President of Harvard University. Just as the rightwing idiots who took a comment that Gore made, out of context and ran with it, saying "Gore invented the internet" is false; so is the story about Larry Summers being against women or saying women are not as intelligent in Math and Science.

In 2005, Larry Summers was asked to speak and address the question about how they can diversify the workforce in Science and Engineering, and more specifically about increasing the number of women. You can read his entire speech here, and judge for yourself. However, this is what really was said, and how what Summers said was taken out of context.

There are many aspects of the problems you're discussing and it seems to me they're all very important from a national point of view. I'm going to confine myself to addressing one portion of the problem, or of the challenge we're discussing, which is the issue of women's representation in tenured positions in science and engineering at top universities and research institutions, not because that's necessarily the most important problem or the most interesting problem, but because it's the only one of these problems that I've made an effort to think in a very serious way about.

Essentially he was saying that there are three main proposals for why we don't have many women in the upper echelons:

...The first is what I call the high-powered job hypothesis. The second is what I would call different availability of aptitude at the high end, and the third is what I would call different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search.

Summer's first reason, the high powered job hypothesis, speaks to a very real problem that we face in our society today. We all know it, not just women, but men. How do we push forward with having a successful career and having a family? It takes A LOT of work and focus to move up, whether in industry or in academia. Quite frankly, I know many people where their career couldn't have succeeded without the support of their spouse. Moreover, for women the burden becomes especially harder, because we need to make choices. If we have a family, then the father has to take just as a great a role in the share of raising the family, or in some cases, be the stay at home dad.

As a single 38 year old female, I'm single for a reason - my career. I put in long hours, and I made that choice a long time ago. In my profession, women in senior leadership positions either do not have children or if they do, their husbands are the ones who have flexible careers and follow their wives from location to location. While the cultural views of stay at home dads, and gender roles in marriages are changing, historically, we have been a society that expected the men to be the providers.

Summers recognized this social environment. He wasn't supporting it, nor was he saying that it was right, but that it was the current reality.

I think it is hard-and again, I am speaking completely descriptively and non-normatively-to say that there are many professions and many activities, and the most prestigious activities in our society expect of people who are going to rise to leadership positions in their forties near total commitments to their work. They expect a large number of hours in the office, they expect a flexibility of schedules to respond to contingency, they expect a continuity of effort through the life cycle, and they expect-and this is harder to measure-but they expect that the mind is always working on the problems that are in the job, even when the job is not taking place. And it is a fact about our society that that is a level of commitment that a much higher fraction of married men have been historically prepared to make than of married women. That's not a judgment about how it should be, not a judgment about what they should expect. But it seems to me that it is very hard to look at the data and escape the conclusion that that expectation is meeting with the choices that people make and is contributing substantially to the outcomes that we observe.

His second remark regarding the difference in aptitude on the high end, was what put him in hot water, and quite frankly was misunderstood. His remarks were looking at the variability (standard deviation) between Men and Women. He was NOT making an inference between the average intelligence of men and women. He was stating that the intelligence of men was probably MORE variable than women.

Here is what he said:

If one supposes, as I think is reasonable, that if one is talking about physicists at a top twenty-five research university, one is not talking about people who are two standard deviations above the mean. And perhaps it's not even talking about somebody who is three standard deviations above the mean. But it's talking about people who are three and a half, four standard deviations above the mean in the one in 5,000, one in 10,000 class. Even small differences in the standard deviation will translate into very large differences in the available pool substantially out. I did a very crude calculation, which I'm sure was wrong and certainly was unsubtle, twenty different ways. I looked at the Xie and Shauman paper-looked at the book, rather-looked at the evidence on the sex ratios in the top 5% of twelfth graders. If you look at those-they're all over the map, depends on which test, whether it's math, or science, and so forth-but 50% women, one woman for every two men, would be a high-end estimate from their estimates. From that, you can back out a difference in the implied standard deviations that works out to be about 20%.

Essentially from his methodology, he is ASSUMING that there is no IMPLIED difference in average intelligence between men and women. Summers made a deduction on the standard deviation of the upper tail to figure out what the variation would be to account for this difference between the number of men and women.

His ONLY POINT that he was trying to make is that men have a 20% greater variability than women. Actually if you think about it, what Summers is saying is that women could be more consistently smart, because their standard deviation is less. While with men, they can either be really smart, or really stupid.

Finally with regards to his third reason, on discrimination:

The most controversial in a way, question, and the most difficult question to judge, is what is the role of discrimination? To what extent is there overt discrimination? Surely there is some. Much more tellingly, to what extent are there pervasive patterns of passive discrimination and stereotyping in which people like to choose people like themselves, and the people in the previous group are disproportionately white male, and so they choose people who are like themselves, who are disproportionately white male. No one who's been in a university department or who has been involved in personnel processes can deny that this kind of taste does go on, and it is something that happens, and it is something that absolutely, vigorously needs to be combated.

He wraps up with this:

So my best guess, to provoke you, of what's behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people's legitimate family desires and employers' current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong, because I would like nothing better than for these problems to be addressable simply by everybody understanding what they are, and working very hard to address them.

So that's how Larry Summers finally got pushed out of Harvard, because his comment about the "variability of aptitude" was misinterpreted and misunderstood by a math illiterates. Granted, his abrasive personality, and other management controversies as a University President also contributed to his resignation, but surprisingly when polled, a majority of Harvard Students did not see the need for his resignation.

Larry Summers is quite frankly the most brilliant mind that we have in our country today, and sometimes with geniuses, their social IQ isn't what it should be. He is known to be abrasive, and yes he can make occasional gaffes. How many of us haven't made a dumb comment in the past?

Quite frankly, we are in the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression, and we need to have the best mind on the job. Moreover, it is women who are hit the hardest during economic downturns, so I find it slightly ironic that feminists feel the need to go against the best interests of women, simply because of a remark that was taken out of context.

Now for those who have a beef with Larry, because he was for de-regulation. That's a different issue, and something that is more substantive and worthy to beat him over the head with.

However, one least defense on his part, he has seen the error of his ways, and in fact he is a big proponent of what's fundamentally wrong with this economy - which is Income Inequality.

According to former Clinton Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, the shift of income inequality over the last quarter century simply dwarfs the amount of money being discussed in partisan debates over wealth redistribution -- and represents a serious crisis of legitimacy for society.

In the last 29 years, Summers said, "you'll find that the share of income going from 80 to 99th percentiles has stayed the same. And those in top one percent have gained about $600 billion. Those in bottom 80 percent have lost about $600 billion."

Summers then calculated that this overall transfer of wealth averaged out to an additional $500,000 per year in earnings for those in the top one percent, and an $8,000 loss every year for those in the bottom 80 percent.

"If the bottom 80 percent had kept pace and earned that $8,000 ... their income growth would have been twice as high over the last generation as what we in fact observed. Think about this number: $600 billion a year. It is immense compared to any discussion of changing the tax system here or there," Summers added.

Some final thoughts, Slate.com gave their two cents on Obama surrounding himself by nerds:

Here's a radical suggestion: Barack Obama should pick the smartest people he can find for his Cabinet...But it makes sense for Obama to give greater weight to intellectual acumen and subject-specific knowledge than his recent predecessors have, both because of the depth of the problems he faces and because of his own style as a thinker and a decision-maker. Bush, whose ego was threatened by any outburst of excellence in his vicinity, politicized all policymaking and centralized it in the White House. Obama, happily, has the opposite tendencies. He is intellectually confident, enjoys engaging with ideas, and inclines to pragmatism rather than partisanship.

Another interesting article from SLATE.COM about Larry Summers:

Summers rose despite himself. He had energy and brains (and humor) but also a nasty arrogance. He was impatient with those less intelligent than himself (that is, everyone), lecturing members of Congress who asked stupid questions, berating foreign finance ministers for their foolishness, sneering at colleagues, undermining rivals, and generally abusing his staff. Summers had a poisonous reputation on Capitol Hill and an unsteady status in the White House—protected by his brilliance and by Rubin, but distrusted.

Summers—too smart and ambitious not to recognize his problem—approached it with the same exacting logic he brings to everything. He realized that he was in danger of being permanently tattooed as a jerk and perhaps blackballed from higher office. So, as Clinton's second term began, he set about domesticating himself. Says one longtime Summers staffer: "He had a huge incentive, because he could see that he couldn't get far in Washington rubbing people the wrong way. He realized this was a chunk of stuff he needed to learn. So he did it. It was like learning French for him."

Summers tried to imitate some of Rubin's gentility. He began repeating self-deprecating Rubinisms: "It's just one man's opinion, but …," and "I may be wrong but …" He taught himself to endure congressional idiocy and journalistic doltism with a smile. He remained as intense and hard-working as ever but eased up on berating his staff...He is zealous about global inequality. As a political economist, he lobbied incessantly for small steps that could have outsize benefits: educating girls, developing vaccines against diseases of poor countries, and forgiving Third World debt.

The Obamas on 60 Minutes

2008-11-15T19:35:00.003-05:00

This 60 Minutes interview, set to air tomorrow night, will their first interview since the election.

Watching this clip, I can't help but think "how cute is this couple!"

Here's the transcript:

"When did it sink in?" Kroft asked Michelle Obama.

"I'm not sure if it has really has sunk in, but -- I, I remember, we were watching the returns and on one of the stations Barack's picture came up and it said, 'President-elect Barack Obama,' Michelle Obama responded. "And I looked at him and I said, "You are the 44th president of the United States of America. Wow. What a country we live in.' "

"How about that?" the president-elect chimed in.

"Yeah," the future first lady agreed.

"Yeah," said the future 44th president. "Then she said, 'So are you going to take the girls to school in the morning?' "

"I did not!" protested Michelle Obama, laughing. "I didn't say that."

"It wasn't at that moment," quipped her husband.

Are you smarter than a 3rd Grader?

2008-11-15T15:30:00.004-05:00

Watch these kids have a debate on the Iraq War....

The kid on the left spoke much more intelligently and seems to be much more informed than most adults. There's a high probability that this kid is even smarter than Sarah Palin.

Books for Oprah's Book Club ?

2008-11-14T19:50:00.010-05:00

Today was a day for book deals, as news came out that Nate Silver, the baseball Statistician and pollster extraordinaire, has received a deal for two books:

... one about the art of prediction and the other a Freakonomics-style guide to the mechanics of electoral politics. Mr. Silver's agent, Sydelle Kramer of the Susan Rabiner Agency, told publishers she wanted indications of interest by Tuesday, but evidently the indications came faster than expected (so much for the art of prediction) and Ms. Kramer decided to just hold an auction today. According to several sources, that auction has ended, and Penguin Group USA has prevailed. Which of Penguin's imprint will publish Mr. Silver has not yet been determined, however, as there are at least three within the company that are jockeying for the privilege. The pricetag, we hear, is above $600,000 but below $1 million—a healthy sum even though it's paying for two books rather than just one. Update, 5:00 p.m.: New intelligence says Mr. Silver's advance is in the neighborhood of $700,000, give or take a few grand.

On the other end of the spectrum, we have Joe The Plumber, who is apparently going to have his own book (co-written by a real writer):

But charity isn't Wurzelbacher's sole goal. Sharing the wealth also means helping himself. To that end, he's working with writer Tom Tabback on a book about American values.

"Everyone came at me to write a book. They had dollar signs in their eyes. '101 Things Joe the Plumber Knows' or some stupid s--- like that. Excuse me, I am sorry," he said. "You know I will get behind something solid, but I won't get behind fluff. I won't cash in, and when people do read the book they will figure out that I didn't cash in. At least I hope they figure that out."

The book, called "Joe the Plumber -- Fighting for the American Dream," is to be released by a group called PearlGate Publishing and other small publishing houses.

"I am not going to a conglomerate that way we actually can get the economy jump started. Like there is five publishing companies in Michigan. There's a couple down in Texas. They are small ones that can handle like 10 or 15,000 copies. I can go to a big one that could handle a million or two. But they don't need the help. They are already rich. So that's spreading the wealth to me," he said.

Having just come from a mini holiday in Las Vegas, I'm wondering what the odds are that Joe the Plumber's book ever actually get's published? I'm also curious what the market is for Joe's pearls of wisdom.

Myself, I am looking forward to reading Nate Silver's books, as his website fivethirtyeight.com gave a very interesting statistical analysis on the probabilities of the election, based on the state polls.

Another book got a lot of buzz today, this one has been out for sometime, and that's Doris Kearns Goodwin's "Team of Rivals". Kearns had written about Lincoln's Cabinet:

Lincoln's political genius in this highly original work, as the one-term congressman and prairie lawyer rises from obscurity to prevail over three gifted rivals of national reputation to become president.

Goodwin described the effectiveness of Lincoln's approach:

Sorely underestimated as both an effective orator and leader, Abraham Lincoln surprised both his colleagues and critics as he rose to political prominence. But what's even more surprising was his ability to surround himself with a coalition of supporters made up almost entirely of men who had been both his political enemies and enemies of each other. Lincoln carefully navigated this "team of rivals" to achieve not only political success, but also victory in the Civil War. Could Obama be taking a page out of Lincoln's playbook??

This all came on the rumors of potential candidates for Secretary of State. Both Governor Bill Richardson and Senator Hillary Clinton have traveled to Chicago to meet with President-Elect Obama, officials on both sides have leaked word that they are strong contenders to be appointed SoS.

WASHINGTON (AP) - President-elect Barack Obama is considering primary election rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Richardson to be his secretary of state, according to Democratic officials who revealed his secret meetings with both as he weighed the decision on folding former foes into his new administration.

News also came out that John McCain is set to meet with President Elect Obama on Monday - oh to be a fly on the wall of that meeting!

Obama's Presidency

2008-11-06T19:32:00.018-05:00

Now that the election is over, the media's attention and frenzy for news turns to Obama's Presidency, his agenda, and most importantly Cabinet picks! Already rumors that Rahm Emanuel would be Obama's Chief of Staff were confirmed when he formally announced his acceptance for this tremendous position of responsibility.

What's interesting is that already we see a hint of how Obama would govern as President of the United States from his quick actions post Election Day.

He has campaigned on transparency and public involvement in the government process. In this regard, Obama is providing a way to get the American public to get engaged in their own government with the Change Government Website.

Moreover, it appears that the tradition of giving plum Ambassadorships to large donors is a thing of the past.

There is major agita among some key elements of President-elect Barack Obama's juggernaut. For example, the big-money types and "bundlers," the fundraisers who helped put together Obama's stunning financial advantage, are expecting their reward -- say a nice, cushy ambassadorship in Rome or Paris or London. (By tradition, about one-third of the nation's 190 ambassadors are political appointees. They're the ones who get the fine European postings.)

But the chatter is that they'd better not count on it. The traditional sale of most ambassadorships, so aptly carried on during the Bush administration, may not continue. Early speculation is that Obama may be more inclined to follow the Clinton model and select people, often political types, with some foreign policy credentials or knowledge of a country's language or culture.

Rahm Emanuel's selection as Obama's Chief of Staff again shows the judgment that Obama exercises by selecting a capable, savvy, experienced, and loyal partner to be a part of his team. Rahm (aka "Rahm-bo") has a reputation for toughness and for getting things done. This sends a clear signal that Obama is focused on delivering results. Clearly this has the GOP scared, and fearful of the demonstrable results that Obama will be able to deliver with a Chief of Staff like Rahm Emanuel.

Already, some of the GOP were trying to pain Emanuel as partisan and a "bad choice" on the part of Obama. Rep. Boehner (R-OH) demonstrated how petty and childish the GOP plans to be going forward by releasing the statement.

“This is an ironic choice for a president-elect who has promised to change Washington, make politics more civil and govern from the center.”

The RNC was quick to put out a statement that was made no bones to hide their unhappiness upon hearing the news:

“Barack Obama’s first decision as President-elect undermines his promise to ‘heal the divides,'" said RNC spokesman Alex Conant. "Rahm Emanuel is a partisan insider who played a lead role in breaking Washington. The White House needs a chief of staff – not a chief campaigner like Emanuel. Our nation will be ill-served if Obama runs the White House the way ‘Rahmbo’ ran the Democratic Congress.”

Interestingly, the Washington Post, also observed the same thing, and gave it's advice, although I am doubtful that Boehner and company have any rational sensibilities left.

The less-than-gracious GOP statements, and the turmoil in the House leadership ranks, underscore the choice ahead for the Republican minority: whether to try to cooperate with the new president or, with moderates an endangered species in the party, to form an unyielding opposition. We are not in the business of giving either party advice on how to tend to its electoral interests, but the public does not seem positively inclined toward political jockeying and reflexive obstructionism. Republicans should, of course, stand up for their principles, although the party, in the aftermath of its loss, will inevitably spend some time debating exactly what those are. But the country -- and, we suspect, the party as well -- would benefit from a sincere effort to find common ground with the new administration on some of the daunting issues facing the country in the months ahead.

The response from Lindsey Graham gives an inkling of the growing divide in the Republican party between cultural warriors such as Boehner, and more traditional or moderate conservatives within the Senate.

"This is a wise choice by President-elect Obama. Rahm knows Capitol Hill and has great political skills. He can be a tough partisan but also understands the need to work together. He is well-suited for the position of White House Chief of Staff.

I worked closely with him during the presidential debate negotiations which were completed in record time. When we hit a rough spot, he always looked for a path forward. I consider Rahm to be a friend and colleague. He's tough but fair. Honest, direct, and candid. These qualities will serve President-elect Obama well."

Some Democrats have concerns whether Emanuel is an appropriate choice given that he served as part of Clinton's White House Staff. This is where I think Democrats need to be careful in not making the same mistake as Bush and Cheney did when they entered the White House. Bush and Cheney were practically religious zealots about removing people from government positions if they were in any way associated with Democrats or the Clintons. It wasn't about experience or knowledge, it was about ideology. Hence, the illegal firings in the justice department, and the litmus tests they imposed on party loyalty.

This kind of slash and burn style brings problems because you risk losing qualified individuals with talent. For example in the business world, a successful merger of two organizations takes into consideration the top talent and best practices between the two companies, in order to create something greater than the sum of the two parts. Any company that ignores or denies the value that the other company can bring to the table, does so at their own peril.

Let's be clear, what makes Obama so refreshing, and what he means by Change is "Pragmatism". Forget any of the other terms, liberal, socialist, centrist, etc. Obama is first and foremost pragmatic.

He's about what works and what doesn't. Don't expect Obama to be prejudiced against anyone because of who they worked for or which party they belong to. It's clear that for Obama, it's about who is going to be effective, add value, display judgment, knowledge, and experience. This is the BIG change. It's about what you know, and how you will contribute to making a difference.

Change means saying no to governance based on ideology
Change means valuing experience, valuing collaborative approaches, and knowledge
Change means taking the best practice approach

This means that Obama will be looking back at history and taking the best approach for what works.

Ideology has no place in governance, and Obama provided us a glimpse of his pragmatic nature when asked of his philosophy for selecting Justices for the Supreme Court. In an interview with Brian Williams, Obama made it clear that "Roe v. Wade" was not a litmus test for him, that it was more about past experiences, judgment, and their philosophy with regards to the US Constitution.

WILLIAMS: Senator, a question about the Supreme Court. Everyone running for President always says, especially on the narrow issue of abortion rights -- no litmus test. It's said on both sides of the issue. And if that's true, if you're not going to call a future Justice into the Oval Office, if you're successful in this endeavor and bring up the subject, how then do you also avoid surprises? I don't think George H.W. Bush, 41, ever dreamed that in Justice Souter he was appointed a dependable liberal vote.

OBAMA: Right.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: And as -- Eisenhower for years called Justice Brennan, his biggest mistake in office. Two surprises that just come to mind.

OBAMA: Right. Well, look, I think that you -- what you can ask a judge is about their judicial philosophy. And as somebody who taught constitutional law for ten years, who actually knows a lot of the potential candidates for Supreme Court on the right as well as on the left 'cause I've taught with them or interacted with them in some way -- I can tell you that how a Justice approaches their job, how they describe the path of interpreting the Constitution, I think can tell you a lot.

And so my criteria, for example, would be -- if a Justice tells me that they only believe the strict letter of the Constitution -- that means that they possibly don't mean -- believe in -- a right to privacy that may not be perfectly enumerated in the Constitution but, you know, that I think is there.

I mean, the right to marry who you please isn't in the Constitution. But I think all of us assume that if a state decided to pass a law saying, 'Brian, you can't marry the woman you love,' that you'd think that was unconstitutional. Well, where does that come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy. That may not be listed in the Constitution but is implied by the structure of the Constitution.

BARACK OBAMA WINS THE ELECTION!

2008-11-04T23:35:00.009-05:00

It's official - Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States

------
Titans Spirit (Score) - Trevor Rabin

I Voted Today !

2008-11-04T22:36:00.003-05:00

I voted today, and participated in our democratic process, unique to our country. This is a right that every American has that protected by the constitution, and for which many have fought for.

I voted for Change and for a brighter future for America

I voted for Restoring Honor and rejecting Torture

I voted for Fairness and finally saying no more to failed Trickle Down Economics

I voted for Veterans and our Servicemen around the world

I voted for Respect and to say no more to Divisive Politics

I voted for Equality for ALL AMERICANS and not just a select few

I voted for ending American Hegemony and rejoining the International Community

......I voted for Barack Obama.

We need to make sure our democracy stays vibrant, stays law abiding and respectful.To a certain extent we are a beacon of democracy for the world. As much as the Constitution has done for us, the American democratic example can do for the world.

Election Eve Sadness and Hope

2008-11-03T20:10:00.007-05:00

There was news today that Barack Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, has passed away.
It almost seems too bittersweet that she would pass away before Election Day.

Madelyn Dunham:October 26, 1922 - November 3, 2008

She and her late husband Stanley raised the young Barack in Hawaii for many years while his mother, who had remarried, lived abroad.

Known within the family as "Toot", a shortened form of the Hawaiian word "tutu" meaning grandmother, she gave him a stable home and the traditional American values brought from her own Midwestern childhood. She was also a trailblazer in her own right, having risen from a lowly position to be one of the first women vice-presidents of the Bank of Hawaii.

In a major speech on race he gave in March, Mr Obama described her as "a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world".

When my own father passed away, it was a shock and yet not completely a surprise, as he had been diagnosed with cancer. After a hard battle, the cancer became too much, and spread too far and too quickly. We knew we didn't have a lot of time left, but I knew that still his thoughts were for us. That is always the way with parents and grandparents, they think more about the happiness and well being of their children. I can only imagine how much pride Obama's grandmother must have had for his accomplishments.

If Barack Obama becomes the 44th President of the United States, it will mean so much to so many Americans, including myself, but in particular to many older Americans who experienced the Civil Rights movement.

This picture of this older gentleman in Times Square watching Obama's acceptance speech in Denver during the Democratic National Convention says it all.
The tears and naked emotion on this man's face would move anyone with a heart. So many African Americans never thought that they would see this day in their lifetime.

Tomorrow I will cast my vote for Barack Obama, and hope that America finds the strength and the common sense to vote for Obama, our best hope for the next President who could lead the US into a new chapter in history.

Where is Moses when you need him?

2008-10-30T22:15:00.006-04:00

When I saw this on the Wonkette, I was completely and utterly flabbergasted. These so called "Christians" are praying to a golden bull to fix the economy. Some 700 Club nutcase, Cindy Jacobs, as reported by the CBN, called for a "Day of Prayer for the World’s Economies".

Um apparently they forgot the first two of the Ten Commandments :

1. I am the Lord your God, You shall have no other gods before me
2. You shall not make for yourself an idol

In January of this year, Cindy Jacobs was in a worship service when the Lord spoke to her, “Cindy, the strongman over America doesn’t live in Washington, DC – the strongman lives in New York City! Call My people to pray for the economy.”

This word so shook Cindy; she knew she had to call the people of God to converge on New York City the week of October 29 for an emergency prayer rally to cry out against economic collapse in the midst of shaking.

Obama Speaks to the Nation

2008-10-29T20:55:00.002-04:00

Barack Obama is truly a once in a generation leader.

I couldn't help but wish it was longer - the 30 minutes went too quickly for me. But I can definitely say it was worth every penny of my donation :-)

Yellow College Republicans

2008-10-27T20:38:00.014-04:00

I came across this video of College Republicans attending some sort of conference in DC, where they were fortunate enough to hear Tom Delay (aka "Hot Tub Tom") former Congressional Member and Campaign Finance & Ethics Violator. I realized that within 10 seconds, that this was really a showcase of the most pathetic excuse for college students. For some reason, they are able to successfully come across as a joke, with just enough earnestness to give one a creepy feeling. I found these students to be the typical "chickenhawk" Republicans who are able to spout the usual Republican Talking Points, without really knowing what they are talking about.

In any case, an intrepid individual took it on his own to interview these College Republicans to get an idea of what their views were on the key political issues of our day, in particular the War in Iraq. What ensued was almost as funny as something you might see on "The Daily Show". Unsurprisingly, many stated that the war in Iraq as a good thing, a necessary evil. Why? Because we are "taking the fight" over to them.

That's it - that's their reason. Put aside the fact that they are completely, and utterly dead wrong, what makes them total losers, is the fact that they are such war hawks, but when asked about future plans to join the military, not a single one has any plans to serve in the military. No National Guard service, no ROTC, nada, zip.

Funny enough, they all have excuses for why they can't serve. Some gave the excuse that they couldn't join the military because they were in college. Many gave the ever popular reason - debilitating health issues like trick knee or flat foot; otherwise you know it, they would be there on the front lines fighting. What's wrong with these Republican offsprings?? Why are they all so defective? One sad individual even alluded to mental problems not allowing him to join the military. The most pathetic was a fat kid who admitted he couldn't handle the physical requirements.

Above all else, this is something I don't understand, if there is a justification for war, why do we not have more people serving in the military? The percentage of the able population serving is at a ridiculously low level. Why isn't there more outrage and disgust about the lack of sacrifice on the part of the American public to do their part and pay for this war. Why is it that the American public has lost interest in hearing about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? I'm pretty certain that Paris Hilton is getting more coverage than the events in Iraq.

This is what I find concerning - these morons are the future who may potentially be in a position to influence the direction of the country by their votes, or even more frightening be in a position to determine policy like Dick Cheney or Paul Wolfowitz. They have no clue what War means. To them it's just a video game like Halo3 or potentially a war movie like "Top Gun", where the hero always gets the girl and defeats the bad guys, all while some over the top, testosterone pumped, cheesy rock music plays in the background.

No one has any sense of reality or acknowledgment of the ugly side of war, and most disappointing is how the topic of Iraq is handled like a football rally - usually with words and cheering about "winning" and "Victory". Exactly what did we win? What defines victory? Who did we defeat??

I do not profess to know what the soldiers, who have returned or are still serving, are feeling. Quite honestly if you haven't walked a mile in someone's shoe, you will never know their experience. But what's tragic is that these "College Republicans" don't even consider for a second, the ugly side of war; the potential mental challenges, confusion, death, anger, fear, and guilt that many of the returning soldiers coming back from Iraq or Afghanistan may be grappling with.

Ironically, Chickenhawk Republicans may say they support the troops, but just try to bring up the topic about raising taxes to fund the war effort; funds that would improve the Veterans Hospital, the GI Bill, and to ensure that the troops have the right supplies to do the job they need. Any mention of taxes, and immediately arguments come up about how taxes kill the economy and that big government is not the solution. They will point to the fact that tax hikes are not needed, that all that is needed is to cut the wasteful spending such as earmarks on Bear DNA studies or cut spending on welfare or unemployment. Or better yet, kick out all the illegal immigrants, and for sure we will be able to find the savings to fund the war. What they refuse to acknowledge is that the Iraq War has cost us over $3 trillion dollars, earmarks account for $12 to $18 billion dollars of the annual budget - you do the math.

If they had any smidgen of intelligence in their pea sized brains, they might eventually consider the horrors and sacrifices war brings. If they were truly living out the "christian" values that they believed in, they wouldn't deny the tragedy in the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have died in Iraq. Yet their attitude, along with many of the right wing republican base seem to marginalize the growing number Iraqi civilians who have died during this war as a nuisance. From their point of view, they are thinking "Why should we care about some dead Iraqis? They are all towel wearing muslims aren't they? All Muslims are terrorists aren't they?".

At least this is what's being said at McCain/Palin Rallies.

If they truly did have any capability for rational thought or open minds, then they would certainly be much more circumspect about the idiotic nonsense they are taught to spout. The unfortunate fact is they have been brainwashed by Republican talking points and Fox News, to the extent that they are now incapable of questioning or reasoning with any modicum of intelligence. Personally, it seems an education is being wasted on these characters.

Section 60

2008-10-26T13:42:00.003-04:00

There is a new documentary out by HBO, which I think is a must see for anyone who thinks that the Iraq War was a good thing, or as Joe the Plumber puts it "taking the fight to them".

"Section 60: Arlington National Cemetery" called "the saddest acre in America," Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery is a burial ground for U.S. military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, a place that epitomizes the honor of service and the cost of war. The third in a trilogy of Iraq-related HBO documentaries (following the Emmy®-winning "Baghdad ER" and the Emmy® nominated "Alive Day Memories: Home from Iraq") from Jon Alpert and Matthew O'Neill, the moving verité special SECTION 60: ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY commemorates the lives of the deceased and the mourning of their survivors.

"Section 60: Arlington National Cemetery" provides rare, intimate glimpses of the loss, love and pride felt by Section 60 visitors, underscoring the human toll exacted by the military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, while honoring those who sacrificed their lives for their country. Jon Alpert and Matthew O'Neill capture the sights and sounds of this quiet pocket of Arlington National Cemetery, where families and friends grieve, honor, remember and find comfort and community with others who share profound loss. A reverent snapshot of the ever-expanding Section 60, the film comprises vignettes shot from early morning to sundown. Mourners ranging from young widows and family members to fiances and fellow soldiers visit Section 60 to try and connect in spiritual and physical ways with the loved ones they've lost. The parents of a Muslim serviceman tell how they moved to the U.S. 25 years earlier to pursue the freedoms for which their son died. A group of mourners mark the anniversary of a soldier's death by playing a patriotic country ballad on a boom box. A father camps out on his son's grave with a quilt, a bottle of bourbon, and one of two "Iraqi freedom cigars" his son had sent from Iraq, with the promise to smoke it on his return. The sister of a fallen soldier calls Section 60 "one of the most honorable places in America."

Anyone watching this should ensure they have a box of tissues on hand. It is a very heartbreaking documentary.

Wassup Boys 8 Years Later

2008-10-25T19:26:00.004-04:00

Charles Stone was a film director who found success through Music Videos and short films, but is probably best known for his commercial that he directed and starred in for Budweiser, for the SuperBowl game, along with his friends - the infamous "wassup" .

Now he revisits his boys 8 years later in a video for change.

The Original 8 Years ago

The GOP becoming the Party of the Ignorant

2008-10-25T12:23:00.009-04:00

Sarah Palin gave her first "policy" speech yesterday on one of her future platforms to focus on special needs children. I use the word "policy" very loosely. It was yet another emotional speech about how Palin understands and knows what she would do, just because she has a child with Down's Syndrome and because her sister has a child with autism. Parents have children, but that doesn't make them Pediatricians.

So I hardly see how this will make her an expert on Special Needs Children, particularly given her own relatively short experience as a mother of a special needs child, and the fact that it doesn't appear she seems to have done any research on the educational support that special needs children may require to help improve their motor skills and neurological development.

She didn't lay out any specific policy on research, education, or funding. It was all about prayer and how "In a McCain-Palin administration, we will put the educational choices for special needs children in the right hands their parents." - in other words you're on your own to deal with your own problems.

Then comes the most outrageous line, where Palin brings up spending or earmarks on a study about Fruit Flies.

Where does a lot of that earmark money end up anyway? […] You've heard about some of these pet projects they really don't make a whole lot of sense and sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not.

By this very statement, she displays her ignorance once again. If she cared so much about special needs children, and the challenges that parents face, she may want to know about the types of research that are being carried out to understand the protein deficiencies that lead to neurological conditions such as autism.

[S]cientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine have shown that a protein called neurexin is required for..nerve cell connections to form and function correctly.

The discovery, made in Drosophila fruit flies may lead to advances in understanding autism spectrum disorders, as recently, human neurexins have been identified as a genetic risk factor for autism.

Professor Meyers, a Biologist with the University of Minnesota had this to say:

Yes, scientists work on fruit flies. Some of the most powerful tools in genetics and molecular biology are available in fruit flies, and these are animals that are particularly amenable to experimentation. Molecular genetics has revealed that humans share key molecules, the basic developmental toolkit, with all other animals, thanks to our shared evolutionary heritage (something else the wackaloon from Wasilla denies), and that we can use these other organisms to probe the fundamental mechanisms that underlie core processes in the formation of the nervous system — precisely the phenomena Palin claims are so important.

This is truly becoming the party of the "know-nothing". I have said it before, and I'm going to say it again - what does McCain and Palin have against science? Why do they paint any spending on science as wasteful?

They take great delight in valuing "gut thinking" more than intellectual discourse. What's worse is that they don't care that they are ignorant. Facts don't matter - only emotion. Any attempt to appear thoughtful or intellectual is just ridiculed with disparaging comments about "elitists".

The GOP Party needs to take a good long look at it's platform and rethink the future of their party as noted by several conservatives such as Peggy Noonan, Kathleen Parker, Christopher Hitchens, Christopher Buckley, Ken Adelman, Susan Eisenhower, Charles Fried, Colin Powell, and many others. McCain and Palin, along with their supporters, are in denial in their ability to attract a majority of Americans to their party if they continue this path of creating a more narrow party.

It seems increasingly apparent that the only people left who support McCain and Palin are either rabid Christian fundamentalists, ignorant or uninformed voters, or straight out racists. Having seen and heard the comments coming out of the mouths of the McCain/Palin supporters, it's just too much for anyone with a modicum of reasonable intelligence to tolerate.

Check out the Las Vegas Sun, where they have a video of a McCain/Palin Rally, in which the paper describes the "anger, fear, and racism" that is occurring more frequently at Palin's Rallies.

Soundbites I never want to hear again after Nov. 4th

2008-10-23T20:05:00.010-04:00

This election year has been fraught with soundbites, and here are a few that I hope I never have to hear again after Obama gets elected on November 4th!

"Drill Baby Drill"
"One heartbeat away from the presidency"
Pitbulls (with or without lipstick)
"Hockey mom"/"Soccer Mom"/"Wal*Mart Mom"
"Joe Six-pack"
"Joe the Plumber"/"Sally the hairdresser"/"Bob the Builder"/etc
"Nobama"
"Maverick"
"I know how to [fill in action]"
"Pro America"/"real America"
"Anti-America"/"fake America"
"Bridge to Nowhere"
"reach across the aisle"
"country first"
"My Friends"
Any phrase with a suffix "-gate" (lipstick-gate, trooper-gate, Neiman-Marcusgate)
"POW"
Any phrase with "moose" or "caribou" in it (Mooseburger, Caribou Barbie)
"Straight Talk"
"Surge"
"Hail Mary Pass"
"gotcha journalism"
"Eastern Media Elite"
"Main St"
"Washington Outsider"
"game changer"
"in the tank for"
"executive experience," especially in context with small town mayors
Any phrase using "Elite" incorrectly
Any phrase using "Socialism" incorrectly

Comedians for Obama

2008-10-23T18:44:00.004-04:00

Of all the endorsements that Obama has received, some laughs can be had by some comedians and entertainers who endorse Obama.

Ron Howard has a hilarious clip bringing back the "Fonz"

See more Ron Howard videos at Funny or Die

Then we have Larry David airing his nervousness about election night. Here I am with Larry David - I am so nervous and I can't wait for Election Night to be over, and to know that Obama has won by a landslide!

I can't take much more of this. Two weeks to go, and I'm at the end of my rope. I can't work. I can eat, but mostly standing up.....Five times a day I'll still say to someone, "I don't know what I'm going to do if McCain wins." Of course, the reality is I'm probably not going to do anything. What can I do? I'm not going to kill myself. If I didn't kill myself when I became impotent for two months in 1979, I'm certainly not going to do it if McCain and Palin are elected, even if it's by nefarious means. If Obama loses, it would be easier to live with it if it's due to racism rather than if it's stolen. If it's racism, I can say, "Okay, we lost, but at least it's a democracy. Sure, it's a democracy inhabited by a majority of disgusting, reprehensible turds, but at least it's a democracy." If he loses because it's stolen, that will be much worse. Call me crazy, but I'd rather live in a democratic racist country than a non-democratic non-racist one.

Even Al Bundy gets on the Obama bandwagon as he shows how Al the "Shoe Salesman" could save more in taxes under Obama than McCain.

And of course we can never get enough of how cool Obama is, as he shows he can be a better dancer than John McCain.

Palin's Fashion Faux Pas!

2008-10-22T17:43:00.010-04:00

Yesterday, the story broke out on Politico, that the RNC has spent more than $150,000 to dress Sarah Palin and her family.

According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.

The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.

The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.

While clothing shouldn't be an issue, the fact is Palin has been campaigning to the "Wal-Mart" moms and hockey moms. I don't know about you, but I don't know any Wal-Mart mom wearing Valentino or Manolo Blahniks!

Apparently there are some really pissed off Republicans!

In contrast we have the Obamas discussing Barack's frugal shopping habits:

In addition, Barack Obama has been teased about his lack of interest in fashion, and how old his clothes are. Check out his shoes, which have been re-soled repeatedly due to the amount of time he's spent pounding on the Campaign Trail.

Michelle Obama appears on the "View" in a chic, but inexpensive dress from "White House/Black Market". Within days, there was a huge demand for this dress that caught everyone's attention.

Below we see Michelle Obama in a dress from H&M ($34.95)

Fate

2008-10-20T23:58:00.013-04:00

I saw this commercial, and I thought it was an interesting take on fate.

It makes you wonder what paths people choose to take and how our lives can intertwine for a brief (adversarial) moment...
.....Or it could just be another commercial to emphasize the Nike Brand.

It's accompanied by a beautiful remix of Ennio Morricone's L'estasi dell'Oro, which adds a nice touch.

Vote for Change

2008-10-20T18:50:00.002-04:00

Nice upbeat video by MC Yogi taking the words right out of Obama's mouth why he is the right choice:

McCain: "Please sir - can I have some more?"

2008-10-20T17:06:00.003-04:00

This weekend was quite the blow for McCain. First, Colin Powell announces his endorsement for Barack Obama. Then he learns that the Obama Campaign had raised $150 MM in donations. Then we find out that McCain has apparently send a Fundraising Letter to Vitaly Churkin, the Russian UN Ambassador, asking for a contribution to the McCain Victory Fund

This is really quite sad, McCain is reduced to begging campaign funds from the Russians! Naturally, the response back was a big "nyet"!

"Russia officials, the permanent mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations or the Russian government do not finance political activity in foreign countries,'' Russia's mission to the UN said in a statement about the letter, which was addressed to Vitaly Churkin, the Russian ambassador.

So whatever happened to the "We are all Georgians now" ?? Did John McCain throw them under the bus in his quest for the Presidency?

Of course Presidential Campaigns are barred from accepting foreign contributions. If this was a mistake,it's one stupid mistake. How on earth could the Russian Ambassador's address have made it into a contributor database?

Colin Powell Endorses Obama

2008-10-19T14:18:00.010-04:00

Colin Powell came on MtP, and finally ended months of speculation as to who he would endorse for President.

His words were very powerful, and very direct with regards to his reasons:

On the Obama side, I watched Mr. Obama and I watched him during this seven-week period. And he displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems like this and picking a vice president that, I think, is ready to be president on day one. And also, in not just jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor. I think that he has a, a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well. I also believe that on the Republican side over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower. Mr. Obama, at the same time, has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He's crossing lines--ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He's thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values.

I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, "He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists." This is not the way we should be doing it in America. I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards--Purple Heart, Bronze Star--showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way.

Elsheba Khan at the grave of her son, Specialist Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan.

He and three other soldiers, including a corporal from Washington Heights, were killed in Baquba after a bomb detonated while they were checking abandoned houses for explosives. They served in the Stryker Brigade combat team of the Army’s 2nd Infantry Division, based in Ft. Lewis, Washington.

Mr. Khan graduated from Southern Regional High School in Manahawkin in 2005, and enlisted in the Army a few months later, spurred by his memories of the 9/11 terror attacks. "His Muslim faith did not make him not want to go. It never stopped him," his father, Feroze Khan, told the Gannett News Service in a story printed shortly after his death. "He looked at it that he’s American and he has a job to do."

Corporal Khan's Legacy Page

This is what I find most troubling about some of the extreme right wing Republicans. They casually link Terrorist to all Muslims, and the uneducated and uninformed voters are making the connection, just as the irresponsible GOP party members are hoping for. In their minds Muslim=Terrorist.

Mr. Khan served his country bravely, and he died for our country, and these despicable individuals are belittling Muslim and Arab Americans in this country, by promoting these racist attitudes. They are shamelessly stepping on the principles upon which our country has been founded, and what many soldiers have given their lives and limbs for.

Ever since, the Clarion Fund started distributing DVDs of movie called "Obsession" about extreme fundamentalist muslim suicide bombers, there have been a rash of violence and vandalism that have been popping up. I find it disgusting, that in this country, there are those out there who would automatically judge and terrorize other Americans, simply because of their religion or ethnic background. They do this out of cowardice, fear, and most of all because they are simply ignorant.

The GOP are indeed playing with fire if they continue these divisive tactics. It is true they are becoming more and more narrow in those who they consider part of America and their party. This is why they are losing. People are rejecting the direction and the hijacking of the Republican Party to the far right. If they are not careful, they will soon truly resemble an extreme Christian Fundamentalist version of the Taliban.

Obama the Poker King Champion

2008-10-19T08:33:00.008-04:00

The Obama Campaign has just announced that they have raised
$150,000,000 +
in the month of September !!!

Over 632,000 new donors.
3.1 million total donors.
More than $150 MILLION.
Average contribution for the month was under $100.
Average contribution for the entire campaign is around $86.

Obama's campaign has been set up for success since the beginning. They learned from past campaigns what NOT to do. If they had opted for Campaign Finance, they would have lost against the rich Republican Party, and their unethical Swift Boating 527s groups. This is a lesson that Obama learned from the Kerry Campaign.

They've been playing their game their way. His entire Campaign has been run and executed like a tight ship. For 20 months, Obama has been running a multi-million dollar operation. If his leadership during this campaign has been this freaking awesome - can you imagine what he could do with the Presidency???

By the way, according to this photo, we now have evidence of Obama's ability to use his Jedi mind tricks and levitate oranges. (just kidding)

From what the delusional redstate bloggers are saying - clearly Obama is buying the presidency and that all of the money comes from commies - seriously when will they get psychiatric help???

Also in other campaign news, since Michelle Bachmann spoke out on Hardball on Friday, Oct 17th on her "anti-American" McCarthy speech, her opponent Elwyn Tinklenburg (yes that's his name!) has reported raising nearly $500,000 in 24 hours! Moreover, it looks like Bachmann has a late challenger from her own party. Some Republican candidate just registered as a write-in on the MN-06 Ballot for her district, because he was embarrassed that this woman was representing the Republican Ticket!

The Democratic National Convention has reported raising $50 Million for the month of September.

This reminds me of the night that Sarah Palin made her snide and sarcastic speech at the Republican National Convention, Obama ended up raising $10 million just in one night, due to the many pissed off Democrats, like myself, who watched her hateful speech.

At least we know that Republicans are good for one thing, pissing off Democrats to the extent of contributing money to their opponent's campaign! I have never gotten over the swift-boating and smearing that they have done to John Kerry. Republicans have shown they will lie and fight dirty to win. They will divide this country into Patriots vs Commies (read Liberals), Red State vs Blue State, Christians vs heathens/baby killers (again read liberals). They can try to spread lies and fears about muslims and minorities, but it won't work.

Now McCain's Camp is having massive robo-calls spreading lies about Obama and ACORN, as well as spreading fear about Ayers/Terrorist connections.

This is having an effect on some lunatics out there, who are easily swayed by fear.

Police in Caledonia are investigating the assault of a campaign volunteer as she was canvassing for Senator Barack Obama Saturday afternoon. In an exclusive interview with 12 News, 58 year-old Nancy Takehara of Chicago says she was going door-to-door when she came across a disgruntled homeowner.

“The next thing I know he’s telling us we’re not his people, we’re probably with ACORN, and he started screaming and raving,” Takehara said. “He grabbed me by the back of the neck. I thought he was going to rip my hair out of my head. He was pounding on my head and screaming. The man terrified me.”

This election, Democrats refuse to let Republican tactics go unanswered, we want our country back. We want this to be for all of Americans - not just the top 1%. We want to change the reputation of America, and turn our backs on torture. We want our democracy to MEAN something, and not just empty gestures or flag pins.

Obama and his Campaign team has done this by campaigning on policy, never on smearing character like the Republicans like to do. They don't whine about the media and try to work the refs when the Media says or prints things that are not true - Rush Limbaugh, Ron Fournier of AP, everyone at Fox News in particular.

NOT ONCE has Obama ever questioned McCain's patriotism or his service to his country. McCain never wears a flag pin, yet no one would dare say - why isn't he wearing a flag pin? Obama gets accused of his lack of patriotism for not wearing a flag pin, EVEN WHEN he is wearing a flag pin. I was literally floored in the last debate, when some Republican surrogate was complaining about this, when Obama was clearly wearing one.

I am tired of elections being about small things, instead of the real issues at hand. I've never donated before in any election, but this time it's different. I can only leave this post with this great video of why Barack Obama's message resonates with so many people.

Palin Snubbed by the Bush Administration

2008-10-18T16:30:00.006-04:00

This was just too funny not to post on.

Given the intense negotiations on the Iraqi agreements that are currently underway, Secretary Gates and Secretary Rice thought it appropriate to update the Presidential Candidates John McCain and Barack Obama, they also informed Joe Biden. Noticeably missing was the other VP candidate - Sarah Palin.

At a press conference at the State Department, Sean McCormack was asked by reporters regarding Palin.

Q: You called Senator Biden, you called McCain. Did you also call Governor Palin?

McCORMACK: No. If you hadn’t noticed, she’s a governor. Not a senator or a congressman.

Q: She’s a vice presidential candidate.

McCORMACK: Right.

Q: She also has extensive foreign affairs experience. (LAUGHTER)

McCORMACK: Right. I explained to you the reasoning behind the phone call.

Q: Maybe if this has to do with Russia, you would have called her.

So let's get this straight, they haven't bothered to update the VP Candidate on the Campaign Strategy about pulling out of Michigan, and they don't bother to bring her up to speed on the Iraqi War Negotiations.

A small part of me feels a little bad for Palin, and how her career is most likely ruined, as she has now been characterized as a cartoonish, pathetic politician - worse than Dan Quayle. McCain brought her up to the big leagues way too soon. But then the feeling goes away pretty quick when she opens her mouth.

Obama Kicking A$$ in St. Louis - Saturday Open Post

2008-10-18T14:23:00.016-04:00

Saturday, 2:15 pm

I have to say I am exhausted. I can't wait until the election is OVER and Barack Obama becomes the 44th POTUS. I am swamped at work, and this election news and blogging is not helping me.

Today, Barack Obama is in St. Louis with a crowd of approximately 100,000!!!

Of course McCain's Campaign would just say that this is clear evidence of Obama being in "Anti-American" locations vs "Pro-American" places.

Witness Nancy Pfotenhauer's big mouth (is anyone else creeped out by her constant smiling? I swear she's like one of those Austin Powers "Fembots", all of McCain's female surrogates are like that - they have these creepy smiles) saying how Northern Virginia is not part of "real Virginia".

Right... It's not enough for them to separate America into Red States vs Blue States. No they have to separate even States between Pro-America and Anti-America (or as John McCain's brother puts it Commie Country)

So would this apply to Roanoake and Virginia Beach? Home to major Virginia Military bases that is projected to go for Obama? Are they a bunch of commies too?

Saturday, 3:15 pm

Now I've got to get back to work that I am behind on darn it! I've got to earn my paycheck so I can continue to donate to the DNC.

It is my patriotic mission in life to ensure that these politicians, in particular, never attain office again:

Sarah Palin (AK) - For trying to create an American "Taliban" nation
Saxby Chambliss (GA) - For beating out disabled Vietnam Veteran Max Cleland, a 3 time amputee through vicious smears.
Peter Roskham (IL) - For beating out Iraqi Veteran Tammy Duckworth, who is a decorated Officer who lost her limbs in service through vicious smears.
Michelle Bachmann (MN) - McCarthyistic skirt wearing politician who wants to turn America into another "Taliban". She's also a Bush 43 stalking fan. Witness her intense desire to kiss him at the SOTU. Literally she wouldn't let go, until she got to kiss him. Creepy!
Eric Cantor (VA) - For just being an idiot and who risked America sliding into financial meltdown by whining about Nancy Pelosi being mean.
Roy Blunt (OH) - Racist Idiot who would suppress votes.
George Voinovich (OH) - Racist Idiot who would suppress votes. Maybe they should just move to Zimbawe. They do a lot of that kind of thing there I hear.
Lynn Westmoreland (GA) - Racist Idiot who doesn't know the 10 Commandments

This business with ACORN and the risk to stuffing ballots is PURE BS. Yes there are some minor problems with false voter registration cards being collected, BUT ACORN pulls out those false registration before submitting to the State Elections board. Further more 20 Tony Romos would not be processed because of lack of proper data. Voter caging, voting intimidation, and suppression however is un-democratic, immoral, and illegal. All of these tactics to scare the public about voter fraud is like crying fire in a crowded theater.

The Ohio GOP would have you believe that because some overworked data entry person who accidently mistyped your name as Joe Wurtzelbacher vs Joseph S. Wurtzelbacher, that it should be grounds for removing you as a voter. If you do exact comparison matches Joe vs Joseph is not the same thing.

Every vote should count, regardless of who that vote is for. If John McCain garners the most vote, fair and square, I will accept that. But I would hate to think that the GOP thinks that they can only win by cheating and scaring away voters.

Here's the thing, leaving Iraq doesn't dishonor the men and women who fought to bring democracy to Iraq. Making a mockery of our democratic process dishonors the more than 4,500 troops who have lost their lives.

Rachel Maddow (my favorite lesbian, Rhodes Scholar Political Pundit) quoted:

We need to make sure our democracy stays vibrant, law abiding and respectful. In some respects we are a beacon for the world. As much as the Constitution has done for us, the American democratic example can do for the world.

Focusing on the Middle Class and yes "Joe the Plumber"

2008-10-18T13:02:00.004-04:00

I've posted before on the tax policy comparison of John McCain and Barack Obama, but this chart really does provide a stark contrast between the two candidates. This information comes from the Brookings Institute Tax Policy Center:

During the debate on Wednesday, the Joe the Plumber became an overnight sensation. What's ironic is that in all this hoopla about Joe the Plumber, he would actually benefit MORE from Barack Obama than John McCain. This is what I call "cutting off one's nose to spite the face".

Unfortunately, Joe found out the hard way that 15 minutes of fame can come with it's own problems. Initially everyone was tickled by this Joe the Plumber character, until they found out that a) He was not really a licensed Plumber b) He made only $40,000 a year c) He wasn't truly an undecided voter.

The Daily Show as always has a very satiric view of the Media frenzy and the comedy surrounding Joe the Plumber.

Comedic Candidates

2008-10-18T12:30:00.004-04:00

At the Alfred E. Smith Dinner, a time honored tradition of 63 years, they had a comedy/charity dinner where both John McCain and Barack Obama attended. They both gave hilarious comedic speeches with self-deprecating humor, not only on themselves, but on each other.

It was really nice to see the John McCain of 2000 again. Towards the end of his speech, he gave a very gracious recognition of Senator Obama's historical candidacy, at the same time wrapping up with humor.

Here are just a few excerpts from John McCain's speech:

I don't want it getting out of this room, but my opponent is an impressive fellow in many ways. Political opponents can have a little trouble seeing the best in each other. But I've had a few glimpses of this man at his best and I admire his great skill, energy and determination. It's not for nothing that he's inspired so many folks in his own party and beyond.

Senator Obama talks about making history. And he's made quite a bit of it already. There was a time when the mere invitation of an African-American citizen to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage and an insult in many quarters. Today, it's a world away from the crude and prideful bigotry of that time. And good riddance. I can't wish my opponent luck, but I do wish him well.

Whatever the outcome next month, Senator Obama has achieved a great thing for himself and for his country and I congratulate him.

Now, a copy of the senator's comedy routine was left on the table this evening. And I have to confess, Your Eminence, I looked at it. Now, of course, it would be unfair -- and even a little unkind -- to put my opponent on the spot before he gets up here or to throw him off his game with unreasonably high expectations. But I do need to warn you, ladies and gentlemen, you all are about to witness the funniest performance in history.

In the 63-year history of this event...let's not add to the mounting pressure he must be feeling. Just prepare yourself for nonstop hilarity...the funniest 15 minutes of your life or any other. I think he knows that anything short of that would mar the evening, insult our hosts...and perhaps even cost him several swing states.

Then it was Barack Obama's turn:

I was thrilled to get this invitation and I feel right at home here because it's often been said that I share the politics of Alfred E. Smith and the ears of Alfred E. Neumann.

But I have to say tonight's venue isn't really what I'm used to. I was originally told we'd be able to move this outdoors to Yankee Stadium, and -- can somebody tell me what happened to the Greek Columns that I requested?

Americans have a big choice to make, and if anybody feels like they don't know me by now, let me try to give you some answers. Who is Barack Obama?

Contrary to the rumors you have heard, I was not born in a manger. I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father Jorel to save the Planet Earth. Many of you -- many of you know that I got my name, Barack, from my father. What you may not know is Barack is actually Swahili for "That One."

And I got my middle name from somebody who obviously didn't think I'd ever run for president.... But in the spirit of full disclosure, there are a few October surprises you'll be finding out about in the coming weeks. First of all, my middle name is not what you think. It's actually Steve. That's right. Barack Steve Obama.

Then at one of these campaign rallies, someone in the crowd started yelling, No-Bama, announcing to everyone in the room that I shouldn't be the Democratic nominee because there were far more qualified candidates.

I really wish Joe Biden hadn't done that.

But in all seriousness, I'm so glad that I could make it tonight, and I'm honored to be among such wonderful public servants. I want to especially say a word of thanks to Senator McCain. We are in the midst of a tough battle right now, and American politics at the presidential level is always tough. But I've said before, and I think it bears repeating, that there are very few of us who have served this country with the same dedication and honor and distinction as Senator McCain. And I'm glad to be sharing this space with him tonight, as I am during the course of this nomination.

Obama's Speech:

Obama's Closing remarks:

McCain's Speech:

McCain's closing remarks:

Pandora's Box

2008-10-17T19:26:00.021-04:00

So McCain has said that he is proud of his supporters. Really??? Check out these classy supporters at a McCain/Palin Rally from Oct 11, 2008 in Johnstown, PA.

When Karl Rove and George Bush unleashed their strategy of using divide and conquer tactics, they opened Pandora's Box. Now in the 8 years since Bush took office, Karl Rove and his minions have turned the Republican Party into a monster that they can not control. They have used the "us vs them" mentality, and they are unable to rein in the hatred even within their own party.

This thinking of either you are for America or you are against, leaves no room for any differing view points. They have brought religion into politics, resulting in a culture war, with God choosing party politics. Instead of promoting freedom, they are slowly poisoning the American Democratic process, and turning it into a American Version of the Taliban.

Recently, Conservative writers such as Christopher Buckley, whose father founded National Review a Conservative Magazine, Kathleen Parker, and Peggy Noonan, have experienced this disturbing trend, that their party no longer tolerates differences.

The intellectual conservatives have honestly written their view points regarding Sarah Palin and her deficiencies, and their candid views supporting Obama have been inundated with extreme reactions.

Kathleen Parker wrote about her concerns about Sarah Palin's qualification in the Washington Post.

She was then inundated with hate mail, which she wrote about:

Allow me to introduce myself. I am a traitor and an idiot. Also, my mother should have aborted me and left me in a dumpster, but since she didn't, I should "off" myself. Those are just a few nuggets randomly selected from thousands of e-mails written in response to my column suggesting that Sarah Palin is out of her league and should step down. Who says public discourse hasn't deteriorated? The fierce reaction to my column has been both bracing and enlightening. After 20 years of column writing, I'm familiar with angry mail. But the past few days have produced responses of a different order. Not just angry, but vicious and threatening.

Then we saw Christopher Buckley come out with his endorsement of Barack Obama,

His endorsement of Obama apparently angered and offended so many, that the the negative reaction resulted in his resignation.

"Within hours of my endorsement appearing in The Daily Beast it became clear that National Review had a serious problem on its hands,"

Kathleen Parker writes in defense of Buckley:

Christopher Buckley's endorsement of Barack Obama -- followed by his abrupt departure from the back page of the magazine his father founded, National Review -- has caused a ripple of contempt from the conservative right.

What does it mean that the right cannot politely entertain dissenting opinions within its ranks? What, if anything, does it portend that Buckley The Younger has bolted from the right, even resigning (with enthusiastic editorial approval) from the family flagship?

Peggy Noonan writes in her Op-Ed Piece in the WSJ:

But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? For seven weeks I've listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite—a spender, to speak briefly, whose political decisions seem untethered to a political philosophy, and whose foreign policy is shaped by a certain emotionalism, or a conservative whose principles are rooted in philosophy, and whose foreign policy leans more toward what might be called romantic realism, and that is speak truth, know America, be America, move diplomatically, respect public opinion, and move within an awareness and appreciation of reality.

But it's unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn't think aloud. She just . . . says things.

Here are just a few sample comments that readers have left, which are quite tame compared to what Parker received, but still show how they leave little room for dissension :

----------------------------
Reply 7 - Posted by: kennowen, 10/17/2008 1:24:20 AM
Good LORD, Peg, if you cannot figure out the values and issues that Governor Palin cares about by now, maybe you aren't quite as bright as you claim!
----------------------------
Reply 8 - Posted by: losgatos, 10/17/2008 1:26:16 AM
Peg is just such a snob.
----------------------------
Reply 9 - Posted by: The Phantom, 10/17/2008 1:29:40 AM
No longer read her ramblings, she has gone to the dark side, never to be allowed to return.
----------------------------
Reply 10 - Posted by: DoktorFranken, 10/17/2008 1:29:56 AM
Noonan's Loonyin'
----------------------------
Here is a fact of life that is also a fact of politics: You have to hold open the possibility of magic.

Abracadabra! Poof! You're a toad, Peggy!

Then we have politicians like Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota, who seemingly resurrects the dark and ugly ghost of McCarthy:

"What I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or Anti-America? I think the American people would love to see an expose like that."

Seriously???? Bachmann wants to have a litmus test on Congressional leaders as to how patriotic they are?

Even more alarming, Palin continues to pound out the "You are either for or against America" meme:

Palin also made a point of mentioning that she loved to visit the "pro-America" areas of the country, of which North Carolina is one. No word on which states she views as unpatriotic.

We are fighting two wars, have a financial crisis on our hands, with more and more Americans facing economic challenges, and all the Republican Party can offer is racism, hate, and violence.

Case in point, we have Mike Lunsford of Fairfield, Ohio. Note this moron couldn't even spell "Hussein" right!

There it is, right above the "McCain-Palin" sign: a make-shift ghost, hanging from a noose. A Barack Obama sign attached upside down. Obama's middle name: "Husain" spray painted and misspelled above.

Mike Lunsford hung the ghost in his yard. He spoke to us off-camera, saying his views could hurt his employers business ... but he says make no mistake: He doesn't want an African American running the country.

Lunsford says he believes Barack Obama is not a "full blooded American." And he says the United States is a white, Christian nation - and only with white Christians should be in power.

In a time of crisis, it's so important for all Americans to come together, yet instead of taking positive action, all they want to do is spread fear about "who is Obama": that he's a terrorist, unpatriotic, a "baby killer", un-American, a lover of gays (or other such euphemism), and that he's a communist.

Has it really come to this? Truly, I wonder if Karl Rove and George W. Bush realize in their zeal to win the Presidency, if they understand the destruction and division that they have brought upon the US has been worse than anything Osama Bin Laden could have crafted.

Babies for Obama

2008-10-16T20:44:00.010-04:00

After last night's debate, it does seem that there is fairly high probability for an Obama landslide. In addition, apparently the Scholastic News for Kids have projected an Obama Win!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27172326/

In a poll of a quarter of a million students who are too young to vote, Democratic nominee Barack Obama sailed to victory with 57 percent of the vote while Republican nominee John McCain received 39 percent... Since 1940, student voters have accurately chosen all but two presidents...Scholastic officials say they’re likely mirroring what they hear their parents talking about at home — to a point, at least

So we know Obama has the Youth vote locked in, but what about babies? Well have a look at this video. Just a warning, this is almost too cute for words, maybe a little too much sugar! Obviously, we have some very smart babies here!

These babies clearly love being around a genuinely warm and caring person.

http://www.slate.com/id/2181495/

Here is Darren Garnick and his daughter, Dahlia. I read his submission to Slate.com back during the Primaries, where he tried to get as many pictures of the Presidential Candidates with his daughter. It was a very funny post!

Obama Wins Last Presidential Debate

2008-10-15T20:33:00.016-04:00

Well the Insta-polls have come in and again it looks like an overwhelming win for Obama!

Things that the viewers who were watching didn't like - McCain's response on Education, Abortion (McCain lost female voters here), and the constant dragging conversation on Ayers.

Obama gave a very eloquent response on the topic of Abortion. I was really irritated by John McCain's patronizing "finger quotes" around the concern of the mother's health as it relates to late term abortions.

It quite frankly angers me that this hypocritical party that shouts for independence, free rights for guns, and reducing government intrusion would dare tell me what to do with my own body, and make decisions on my health. McCain cavalierly dismisses women's preferences and their health by saying to women "You have no choice, you must have this baby even if your life is in danger".

This is a right already guaranteed by the Constitution, this is NOT something that liberal politicians want to implement. It's already existing!

Viewers definitely preferred Obama's responses regarding Health Care. McCain's "deer-in-headlights" was very amusing when Obama shot back that Joe-the-plumber would pay $0 in fine. McCain was clearly caught off guard.

Biggest problem for McCain is that it is now Oct 15th, and there is less than 20 days until the Election. Early voting has already begun, with Obama picking up a majority of the early votes.

McCain has failed to make the case that Obama is a risky candidate, as he lurched from attacks on Ayer and ACORN to the economy.

McCain was definitely coming off as angry and I was really hoping for that "A Few Good Men" moment - you know what I mean "You can't handle the truth!"

He was definitely in danger of losing it. His constant interrupting and smirks were definitely starting to grate on my nerves. And from the looks of things, it was also grating to those necessary Independent Voters, who McCain just lost!

When did "Arab" become a dirty word?

2008-10-15T16:17:00.005-04:00

Recall that recently at a McCain Rally:

Woman at rally: I don't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's an Arab.

Sen. John McCain: No ma'am, no ma'am. He's a decent family man, citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues. That's what this campaign is all about. He's not, thank you.

Campbell Brown cuts through the "bull" on CNN, and she rightly asks the question - "So what if Barack Obama were an Arab?"

So what if Obama was Arab or Muslim? So what if John McCain was Arab or Muslim? Would it matter?

When did that become a disqualifier for higher office in our country? When did Arab and Muslim become dirty words? The equivalent of dishonorable or radical?

I feel like I am stating the obvious here, but apparently it needs to be said: There is a difference between radical Muslims who support jihad against America and Muslims who want to practice their religion freely and have normal lives like anyone else. There are more than 1.2 million Arab-Americans and about 7 million Muslim-Americans, former Cabinet secretaries, members of Congress, successful business people, normal average Americans from all walks of life.

McCain's response doesn't do enough to correct the impression that Arab or muslims are decent people. Just because are some muslim terrorists, doesn't mean that ALL MUSLIMS are terrorists. That's like saying that because some white people are racists, then ALL white people are racists.

But in case it's still difficult to understand this concept, John Stewart and Aasif Mandvi helps us to see how ridiculous the "fear" and pride in ignorance that some of the right win McCain Supporters espouse over Obama being a "muslim".

Arab Americans have served our country in many areas. Here are just a few examples of Arab Americans who have served in the Military, Politics, and Journalism

You talk about courage … How about America’s and the world’s first jet ace? He was the Korean War hero, U.S. Air Force Col. James Jabara. In World War II, Army officers like Maj. Gen. Fred Safay fought alongside Gen. Patton, and Brig. Gen. Elias Stevens served on Gen. Eisenhower’s staff.

And in 1944, one of our Navy’s ships, the destroyer escort USS Naifeh, was named in honor of an Arab American hero, Navy Lt. Alfred Naifeh of Oklahoma. Retired Brigadier General James J. David served as Company Commander of the famous 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam in 1969 and 1970. More recently, West Point graduate and retired four-star Gen. George Joulwan was the NATO Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, where he commanded both European and U.S. troops. Brig. Gen. William J. Jabour is the Director of the Air Force Program Executive Office for Fighter and Bomber programs in charge of the F-22 System Program Office (SPO). General John Abizaid is head of U.S. Central Command in Iraq.

The first Arab American ever appointed to a Cabinet secretary post was Donna Shalala, the nation’s longest serving Secretary of Health and Human Services, and now president of the University of Miami. Former Governor of New Hampshire John H. Sununu became the White House Chief of Staff under Pres. George Bush, Sr., and later a political commentator on CNN. America’s longest-serving White House Chief of Protocol, serving seven-and-a-half years under President Reagan, was Ambassador Selwa Roosevelt. Thomas Nassif and Edward Gabriel both served as U.S. Ambassador to Morocco. Our Ambassador to Syria was Theodore Kattouf, and Marcelle Wahba was Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates. The late ambassador Philip C. Habib served as Special Presidential Envoy to the Middle East and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Feisty Helen Thomas, who served for 57 years as a correspondent for United Press International and was dean of the White House press corps, is a Hearst newspaper syndicated columnist.

http://www.aaiusa.org/arab-americans/23/famous-arab-americans

Winners & Losers

2008-10-14T04:54:00.007-04:00

A lot happened on Monday, October 13th. We have a veritable plethora of Winners and Losers!

Winners

1. Paul Krugman
Congratulations to Mr. Krugman for winning the Nobel Prize! He was awarded this prize based on his work in International trade modeling.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/business/economy/14econ.html?scp=4&sq=Krugman&st=cse

2. The American Tax Payer (sort of)
Why? Because instead of the "better than doing nothing" plan of the $700 Billion bailout plan that was originally proposed by Paulson and Bernanke, they finally have seen the light and have proposed a much better plan to inject capital into the banks and allow the Government to gain equity into the banks. To some die-hard Reagan conservatives out there it's almost like Halloween came early - yes we are semi-nationalizing private firms, life as we know it has ended, cats and dogs are marrying, etc.

However, this is along the same lines as what the Swedish Government did when they faced a similar situation. Both Brad Delong and Paul Krugman give their approval!

Krugman:

The United States should have been in a much stronger position. And when Mr. Paulson announced his plan for a huge bailout, there was a temporary surge of optimism. But it soon became clear that the plan suffered from a fatal lack of intellectual clarity. Mr. Paulson proposed buying $700 billion worth of “troubled assets” — toxic mortgage-related securities — from banks, but he was never able to explain why this would resolve the crisis.
What he should have proposed instead, many economists agree, was direct injection of capital into financial firms: The U.S. government would provide financial institutions with the capital they need to do business, thereby halting the downward spiral, in return for partial ownership. When Congress modified the Paulson plan, it introduced provisions that made such a capital injection possible, but not mandatory. And until two days ago, Mr. Paulson remained resolutely opposed to doing the right thing.

Brad Delong was an ardent proponent of this solution since the Lehman Crisis first started this Financial Meltdown.

Now it's time to go back to three principles. There are three options:

Do nothing.
Bailout (a la Paulson)
Nationalization (a la Sweden 1992)

Do nothing was last tried in 1929-1932. The result was called the Great Depression. Let's not do that again. Let's decide between bailout and nationalization.

Nationalization has the best chance of avoiding large losses and possibly even making money for the taxpayer. And it is the best way to deal with the moral hazard problem.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/09/time-not-for-a.html

However, I was in doubts whether politically this would happen, as I would have thought Republicans would have gone bonkers over this proposal. We saw already what happened when the first vote came up with regards to the bailout. I guess Paulson realized that in a serious situation, ideology needs to go out the window in favor of pragmatism?

Losers

1. William Kristol
This man is the epitome of a bloviator. There are some intellectual conservative columnists that I can respect - like David Brooks. But if there was a Nobel Prize for writing journalistic nonsense, it would be William Kristol.

Regard his latest example, in yesterday's Op-Ed Column, he had this to say:

It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed.
What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over. Shut down the rapid responses, end the frantic e-mails, bench the spinning surrogates, stop putting up new TV and Internet ads every minute. In fact, pull all the ads — they’re doing no good anyway. Use that money for televised town halls and half-hour addresses in prime time.

With friends like this, McCain & Palin do not need any enemies. I sometimes wonder in just what reality does Kristol live in? Does he not get that if McCain were to fire his campaign staff less than 20 days before an Election, that he would look even MORE erratic? Moreover, he advises them to stop advterising, when he was the one advising them last week to go full on negative with the whole Ayers and Reverand Wright bit.

I will give Kristol his due, McCain's Campaign Managers, who might be successful lobbyists, are certainly terrible as campaign managers. They should be fired, but let's face it, it starts with leadership at the top.

In his first paragraph, Kristol points out exactly why Obama will win this year's election. It is due to the fact that Obama has been able to successfully lead his campaign and provide a clear message with his team, that he was able to win against Hillary Clinton. McCain is in just as much trouble, his campaign has been poorly managed, with no clear cut strategy, and does not have a winning message that has been able to successfully connect with the American Voters.

Hillary couldn't lead her own campaign team, how could we have expected her to lead a country? The same goes for John McCain. He can't even manage his VP Candidate to help as opposed to hurt his ticket.

Normally I don't like to call people names, because it's just not nice. But with Kristol, there is just no other word to describe him, other than "douchebag". I think we can safely say that no one will be hiring Mr. Kristol as a campaign manager any time soon.

2. Sarah Palin

The sheer boldness of Sarah Palin never ceases to amaze me. The report on "Troopergate" came out on Friday, and the Independent Investigator reports:

For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 2952.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 2952.110(a) provides

“The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust.”

She then has the "chutzpah" to say she has been cleared of any wrong doing!

While Sarah Palin was boarding her campaign bus this morning, a reporter seeking comment on the new Troopergate report shouted out to her, “Governor, did you abuse your power?” She responded:

If you read the report, you’ll see that there’s nothing unlawful or unethical about replacing a cabinet member. You’ve got to read the report, sir.

In what reality is she living in?

3. John McCain

I am starting to feel bad for him. He has incompetent campaign managers, a VP from hell, and a republican base that he actually doesn't like. It's been no secret that he has always been at odds against the Religious Fundamental base such as Dobbs and the American Family Foundation. But because of Palin, that's pretty much all he has been able to excite. His negative attack ads and his selection of Palin, as a completely unqualified VP, has totally turned off Intellectual Republicans and Independents. When you've lost Peggy Noonan, it's not a good sign, if you are a Republican:

"Obama seems older in a way," said the former Ronald Reagan speechwriter. "McCain has seemed herky-jerky. Obama has seemed like the older, steadier fellow since the economic crisis began."

"Her performance from day one mattered. What the American people saw over the period of five or six weeks, it has been very up and down. From an unveiling that gave rise to questions to a very strong convention speech, to interviews that were disastrous, to a debate in which she came back very strong, to now, ten days on the campaign trail, where I think it is fair to say: that didn't work."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/13/noonan-york-toobin-and-ot_n_134263.html

Scientists for Obama

2008-10-12T23:04:00.005-04:00

I don't know why, but for some reason McCain and Palin are against science. They seem to delight in not knowing anything or mocking knowledge.

Case in point, in the first Presidential Debate

McCain: Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control in Washington. It's completely out of control. It's gone -- we have now presided over the largest increase in the size of government since the Great Society.

You know, we spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don't know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue, but the fact is that it was $3 million of our taxpayers' money. And it has got to be brought under control.

As president of the United States, I want to assure you, I've got a pen. This one's kind of old. I've got a pen, and I'm going to veto every single spending bill that comes across my desk. I will make them famous. You will know their names.

What I find amusing is that, even though he rails against this bill, he ended up voting for it!

Secondly, he is making fun of a funding for a scientific study, that was looking at the potential for grizzly bears to be extinct. I would say that's pretty important study, and not a frivolous expenditure as McCain would like to paint it.

In the second presidential debate, McCain went at it again:

McCain: Do you know that Sen. Obama has voted for -- is proposing $860 billion of new spending now? New spending. Do you know that he voted for every increase in spending that I saw come across the floor of the United States Senate while we were working to eliminate these pork barrel earmarks?
He voted for nearly a billion dollars in pork barrel earmark projects, including, by the way, $3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?

Again, McCain falsely conveys the idea that Obama voted for an expensive Infocus (TM) Machine or some kind of AV equipment.

McCain's idiotic attack and ignorance was highlighted by Andrey Kravtsov, a professor of Astronomy at the University of Chicago.

The way Sen. McCain has phrased it suggests that Sen. Obama approved spending $3 million on an old-fashioned piece of office equipment (overhead projector).
The 3 million is actually for an upgrade of the SkyTheater - a full dome projection system, which is probably the main attraction of the Adler Planetarium and is quite sophisticated and impressive piece of equipment.

I find it appalling that Sen. McCain would call a science education tool for public (largely children) for a historic planetarium with millions of visitors a year a wasteful earmark. The planetarium's focus, as stated on their website (http://adlerplanetarium.org) is "on inspiring young people, particularly women and minorities, to pursue careers in science." Is an investment in such public facility at the time when US competitiveness in math and sciences is a constant source of alarm a waste?

Is it no wonder that Obama received an endorsement from 61 Nobel Laureates Scientists.

An Open Letter to the American People

This year’s presidential election is among the most significant in our nation’s history. The country urgently needs a visionary leader who can ensure the future of our traditional strengths in science and technology and who can harness those strengths to address many of our greatest problems: energy, disease, climate change, security, and economic competitiveness.

We are convinced that Senator Barack Obama is such a leader, and we urge you to join us in supporting him.

During the administration of George W. Bush, vital parts of our country’s scientific enterprise have been damaged by stagnant or declining federal support. The government’s scientific advisory process has been distorted by political considerations. As a result, our once dominant position in the scientific world has been shaken and our prosperity has been placed at risk. We have lost time critical for the development of new ways to provide energy, treat disease, reverse climate change, strengthen our security, and improve our economy.

We have watched Senator Obama’s approach to these issues with admiration. We especially applaud his emphasis during the campaign on the power of science and technology to enhance our nation’s competitiveness. In particular, we support the measures he plans to take – through new initiatives in education and training, expanded research funding, an unbiased process for obtaining scientific advice, and an appropriate balance of basic and applied research – to meet the nation’s and the world’s most urgent needs.

Senator Obama understands that Presidential leadership and federal investments in science and technology are crucial elements in successful governance of the world’s leading country. We hope you will join us as we work together to ensure his election in November.

Monty Python - Witches

2008-10-10T22:48:00.005-04:00

The video of this low information voter who was convinced that Obama was an Arab, and how she was scared of him, reminded me of the scene about witches in the film "Monty Python and the Holy Grail".

Is it too much to ask that if people want to vote, that they at least be informed voters? Or am I being too elitist again?