While everyone was focusing on the AIG brouhaha yesterday, a far more serious thing was happening. The US treasury decided to put $1 trillion in to the system by buying up its own bad debt.
This is the same as writing an IOU to yourself. They are taking a trillion dollars from one pocket, and putting it into another pocket. Nothing gets accomplished, and there is still money owed to people.
But no one heard about this, because everyone: congress, the media, the president, were focused on AIG paying :gasp: contractually obligated bonuses to its employees! Bonuses that were perfectly legal because they were promised before the February 1st deadline passed by congress!
Imagine that, a company holding up its end of the deal and fulfilling its contracts! Oh my! Sound the alarm! We need to tax these bonuses at 100% and get this money back! How dare they use the money we gave them to fulfill their contractual obligations!
What else? Oh, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac ALSO used bailout money to pay contractually obligated bonuses to their employees. Why are people not running after them with torches and pitchforks?
Really, it's all the fed can do at this point. Interest rates range between 0 and .25%, so they can't really go any lower. The US Treasury Department currently consists only of the completely incompetent Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary, and President Obama apparently has much more important things to attend to: like appearing on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
This country is falling apart at the seems. At the G20 conference, a meeting of the top 20 industrialized nations, former Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin will propose changing the world bank reserve currency from the US dollar to something else. The dollar has lost all it's clout in the world. Gold rose $50 an ounce yesterday upon news of the Treasury's plan.
The rest of the world wants no part of the US dollar, because they've read a middle school history book and remember the pictures of people bringing wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread in Germany Post-World War I. Obviously Secretary Geithner and President Obama never read that chapter. And we are all going to pay for that in the end.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Entertainer in Chief?
News reached today that President OBama will be appearing on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno this week to sell his economic policies to the american people.
Someone needs to give this guy the message that he already won and doesn't need to campaign. Is anyone else not ok with their sitting president appearing on talk shows to sell his policies? I am no OK with my president being equal to some C-list celeb pimping out their latest piece of crap movie.
Or, when I think about it, Obama's economic policies are about on par quality wise with Paul Blart: Mall Cop, so I guess this is the perfect venue for him.
Someone needs to give this guy the message that he already won and doesn't need to campaign. Is anyone else not ok with their sitting president appearing on talk shows to sell his policies? I am no OK with my president being equal to some C-list celeb pimping out their latest piece of crap movie.
Or, when I think about it, Obama's economic policies are about on par quality wise with Paul Blart: Mall Cop, so I guess this is the perfect venue for him.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
MIA
Sorry, but I am unable to post today, as I am visiting with my grandpa who had surgery today. I'll try to make up for it tomorrow!
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Republican Hypocrisy
Yes, you read that title correctly: I'm taking on my own party. However, this is a pretty common thing, despite perceptions of me and my politics. I'm pro gay rights, pro stem cell research, and pro gun control just to name a few disagreements I have with the Republican Party. However, these disagreements are overwhelmed by my agreements with the party's platform.
That, however, is for another post. Right now my beef is the republicans and this $418-ish billion spending bill with 9000 earmarks. Guess what...60% of those earmarks are from democrats. But, if elementary school math serves me correctly, that leaves 40% of the earmarks going to republicans.
I find it almost reprehensible that republicans are stalling the bill and going on television talking about how much they are against this bill and all of the pork in it. However, as soon as it passes they are going to be completely happy to take all the earmark money they receive and take it back to their constituents.
I agree with Senator John McCain- some of these earmarks are necesary and would do good. However, they are directed to a specific geographic location. If they were nation-wide projects they would be more accepted and do more good, but as they are they are lumps of fat in an omnibus spending bill.
Don't get me wrong, I am totally opposed to this. Yes, the government runs out of money on Wednesday, but they've spend like, five years worth of money in two months. You can only print so much money before people stop using it because it's worth less than the paper its printed on, but the government doesn't seem to realize this. I am considering sending President Obama and Senator Pelosi a chapter from a world history book that talks about Germany's economic policies after World War I, so that they can see what happens when money is printed off willy nilly. I doubt it would do any good, as they can't seem to read reports about our own, current economy.
The bill is going to pass. All republicans can do is get popular support against it and hope that their hypocrisy is not pointed out. If the courts gave President Obama the power of line-item veto, maybe that would solve the problem. That, however, is a blog for another day.
That, however, is for another post. Right now my beef is the republicans and this $418-ish billion spending bill with 9000 earmarks. Guess what...60% of those earmarks are from democrats. But, if elementary school math serves me correctly, that leaves 40% of the earmarks going to republicans.
I find it almost reprehensible that republicans are stalling the bill and going on television talking about how much they are against this bill and all of the pork in it. However, as soon as it passes they are going to be completely happy to take all the earmark money they receive and take it back to their constituents.
I agree with Senator John McCain- some of these earmarks are necesary and would do good. However, they are directed to a specific geographic location. If they were nation-wide projects they would be more accepted and do more good, but as they are they are lumps of fat in an omnibus spending bill.
Don't get me wrong, I am totally opposed to this. Yes, the government runs out of money on Wednesday, but they've spend like, five years worth of money in two months. You can only print so much money before people stop using it because it's worth less than the paper its printed on, but the government doesn't seem to realize this. I am considering sending President Obama and Senator Pelosi a chapter from a world history book that talks about Germany's economic policies after World War I, so that they can see what happens when money is printed off willy nilly. I doubt it would do any good, as they can't seem to read reports about our own, current economy.
The bill is going to pass. All republicans can do is get popular support against it and hope that their hypocrisy is not pointed out. If the courts gave President Obama the power of line-item veto, maybe that would solve the problem. That, however, is a blog for another day.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Response Time!
No one seems to comment on this blog anymore...this is sad. Look at my sad face- :(
Anywho, I guess I'll just have to response to Noah's novel-length posts. Seriously, anyone else think he writes too much? And what's with his not being obsessed with Britney or Blago? Lame, I know.
Starting with his first post: I must admit that I do not know enough history about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict to properly analyze, let alone judge the situation. I do know that Palestine is currently rules by a terrorist organization, Hamas, and spends most of its time planning how to white Jews off of the Earth. I believe that nations have the right to defend themselves when faced with a threat from an outside entity, like the US and a al Queda, and Israel with Palestine/Hamas/Iran. Proportional responses never get anything done. Israel wants to eliminate this threat to its people and land, and the only way to do that is to eliminate the problem: Hamas. To the best of my knowledge, Israel has no beef with the Palestinian people, only its "government." With the limited knowledge I have on the subject, I see no problem with Israel's military decisions.
I have always thought it interesting that in high school government classes, when you are taught the vague types of people in each party, you learn that Democrats are usually Catholics, yet their party believes in contraception and abortion. I myself have never been a very religious person, hence my barely being welcomed in the Republican party. I am all for sex education, birth control, condoms, and I believe that states should have the ability to decide on abortion. I wouldn't personally have one unless it was a very serious circumstance, but it is not my place, nor the governments, to tell people what they can and cannot do. I don't believe it's a baby until it is distinct cellularly from an ameba or other random grouping of cells. When that is, I'm not sure (I never really paid attention in health class). But I do agree that religion has a very large role in America. I understand churches not allowing gay marriages, but I can't understand the federal government not allowing it. They don't have the ability to enforce this on churches, but they have the ability and, in my opinion, obligation to make this legal.
I also must admit I have basically zero knowledge of the Bible, its creation, or its teachings, so I can't really comment. I respect people who have deep religious convictions and applaud them for their devotion. i myself am only really devoted to Harry Potter. I don't feel anyone has the right to judge a person or demean them for their religious beliefs. It's a personal choice and to each his own.
Finally, Noah's post from yesterday. i find it amazing that he finds such odd things to blog about. I had absolutely no idea who this person was, or that anyone was needed to fill Rahm Emmanuel's seat in Illinois. This woman doesn't really seem, based on Noah's blog, fit to run a cashier at Target, let alone be a state representative. Also, if the seat was vacated by a democrat, I believe it should be filled by one. I hate when people exploit situations to help their own cause (a la Blago). If the people chose a democrat to the seat, the governor or whomever is in charge of filling it should fill it with a democrat in order to uphold the will of the people. As much as I love politics, I hate the games and maneuvering that goes along with it. This would by why I abandoned any political hopes for myself long ago. I refuse to play the game, so I wouldn't ever get far.
Well, that's all! I think Noah had a very good first week, don't you all? Hopefully he cuts down the length of his posts a teeeeeny bit :)
EDIT! I have been informed by Noah that governors do not appoint house seats, but that they are filled by special elections almost everywhere. Oh well, I think I got a nice rant out of it anyway :)
Anywho, I guess I'll just have to response to Noah's novel-length posts. Seriously, anyone else think he writes too much? And what's with his not being obsessed with Britney or Blago? Lame, I know.
Starting with his first post: I must admit that I do not know enough history about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict to properly analyze, let alone judge the situation. I do know that Palestine is currently rules by a terrorist organization, Hamas, and spends most of its time planning how to white Jews off of the Earth. I believe that nations have the right to defend themselves when faced with a threat from an outside entity, like the US and a al Queda, and Israel with Palestine/Hamas/Iran. Proportional responses never get anything done. Israel wants to eliminate this threat to its people and land, and the only way to do that is to eliminate the problem: Hamas. To the best of my knowledge, Israel has no beef with the Palestinian people, only its "government." With the limited knowledge I have on the subject, I see no problem with Israel's military decisions.
I have always thought it interesting that in high school government classes, when you are taught the vague types of people in each party, you learn that Democrats are usually Catholics, yet their party believes in contraception and abortion. I myself have never been a very religious person, hence my barely being welcomed in the Republican party. I am all for sex education, birth control, condoms, and I believe that states should have the ability to decide on abortion. I wouldn't personally have one unless it was a very serious circumstance, but it is not my place, nor the governments, to tell people what they can and cannot do. I don't believe it's a baby until it is distinct cellularly from an ameba or other random grouping of cells. When that is, I'm not sure (I never really paid attention in health class). But I do agree that religion has a very large role in America. I understand churches not allowing gay marriages, but I can't understand the federal government not allowing it. They don't have the ability to enforce this on churches, but they have the ability and, in my opinion, obligation to make this legal.
I also must admit I have basically zero knowledge of the Bible, its creation, or its teachings, so I can't really comment. I respect people who have deep religious convictions and applaud them for their devotion. i myself am only really devoted to Harry Potter. I don't feel anyone has the right to judge a person or demean them for their religious beliefs. It's a personal choice and to each his own.
Finally, Noah's post from yesterday. i find it amazing that he finds such odd things to blog about. I had absolutely no idea who this person was, or that anyone was needed to fill Rahm Emmanuel's seat in Illinois. This woman doesn't really seem, based on Noah's blog, fit to run a cashier at Target, let alone be a state representative. Also, if the seat was vacated by a democrat, I believe it should be filled by one. I hate when people exploit situations to help their own cause (a la Blago). If the people chose a democrat to the seat, the governor or whomever is in charge of filling it should fill it with a democrat in order to uphold the will of the people. As much as I love politics, I hate the games and maneuvering that goes along with it. This would by why I abandoned any political hopes for myself long ago. I refuse to play the game, so I wouldn't ever get far.
Well, that's all! I think Noah had a very good first week, don't you all? Hopefully he cuts down the length of his posts a teeeeeny bit :)
EDIT! I have been informed by Noah that governors do not appoint house seats, but that they are filled by special elections almost everywhere. Oh well, I think I got a nice rant out of it anyway :)
Friday, March 6, 2009
Friday Grab-Bag
Let's start off with some light news: Michael Jackson is playing like, 5 shows in London this summer. Seriously, who DOESN'T want to see this train wreck? If I had the money, I would so be there.I would also be at Britney's comeback tour if I had the money. This thing looks so bad that it is amazing! Yes, I still love Britney, get over it.
Onto more serious topics. It came out today that the Obama's are having lavish parties at the White House every Wednesday. Who does he think he is, Marie Antoinette? The economy is in the sewer and he is wasting money throwing parties every week? Maybe if he stopped with the pinatas for a day, he might be able to fix America.
Rush Limbaugh announced this week on his radio show that he wants to debate President Obama on his show. Is there anyone who wouldn't pay to see this, let alone get it for free? Yes, it is kind of below any president to give in to the demands of a radio host, let alone debate them, but how awesome would a Limbaugh/Obama showdown be?
Anyone else think it's kind of cool that the government ran out of money today? How very "The West Wing," eh? Granted, the House passed an emergency spending act to get us through Wednesday, but was anyone else waiting for Obama to walk to the Capitol building all Jeb Bartlett style? That would have been kind of neat.
That's all I have for this Friday. I'm pretty exhausted from my exams this week. But never fear, tomorrow I will tackle Noah's posts, mostly because they are too long! I will embed an amazing video from this week's The Daily Show:
Onto more serious topics. It came out today that the Obama's are having lavish parties at the White House every Wednesday. Who does he think he is, Marie Antoinette? The economy is in the sewer and he is wasting money throwing parties every week? Maybe if he stopped with the pinatas for a day, he might be able to fix America.
Rush Limbaugh announced this week on his radio show that he wants to debate President Obama on his show. Is there anyone who wouldn't pay to see this, let alone get it for free? Yes, it is kind of below any president to give in to the demands of a radio host, let alone debate them, but how awesome would a Limbaugh/Obama showdown be?
Anyone else think it's kind of cool that the government ran out of money today? How very "The West Wing," eh? Granted, the House passed an emergency spending act to get us through Wednesday, but was anyone else waiting for Obama to walk to the Capitol building all Jeb Bartlett style? That would have been kind of neat.
That's all I have for this Friday. I'm pretty exhausted from my exams this week. But never fear, tomorrow I will tackle Noah's posts, mostly because they are too long! I will embed an amazing video from this week's The Daily Show:
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Our De-facto Leader?
I guess I should put my two-cents into the ring on this Rush Limbaugh fiasco, as everyone else in the known universe seems to be talking about it.
I never was much of a fan of Limbaugh. I usually listened to the Radio Factor during his time slot. The only talk radio other than O'Reilly I listened to was Sean Hannity. I just never had the patience to listen to people talking on the radio. Every now and then I would tune into Limbaugh if I was in the car and couldn't find a station that carried the Radio Factor, and I liked what I heard for the most part. I just always had this idea that he was too far to the right for me, so I didn't want to listen to him.
However, I started listening to him more after the election during the hour after the Radio Factor and before Hannity, and the more I listened, the more I liked. I soon became a fan of El Rushbo and of what he was saying.
Then President Obama said his now infamous "you can't listen to Limbaugh and expect to get anything done," comment, which I already addressed in a previous blog. Doing that gave Limbaugh attention and notoriety, which was probably not the intention of the comment.
Things died down a little...until Limbaugh spoke at CPAC. I LOVED his speech. It was exactly what the republican party needed to hear. He was forceful, funny, and truthful.
That is when the media anointed him the "de-facto leader" of the republican party. The party's official leader is Michael Steel, who is head of the RNC (I am a fan of his too, by the way). He was on talk shows doing damage control, attempting to reassert himself as the leader of the party. The damage, however, was done.
Limbaugh hasn't become the apparent leader of the party because he is the best or only choice. He happens to be the loudest. With a listenership of 22 million, his microphone wields immense power, and has the ability ot spread his and the party's message all over the country. He can rally republicans around his microphone, which is what the party needs. He reminds republicans that they don't need to change their message, they merely need to reconnect with their message and adapt it, not overhaul it. He is the loudest critic of the Obama administration, and has the ability to hold them accountable far more than any other opposition voice.
Limbaugh didn't choose this position of leadership, it chose him. And he has embraced it admirably.
I never was much of a fan of Limbaugh. I usually listened to the Radio Factor during his time slot. The only talk radio other than O'Reilly I listened to was Sean Hannity. I just never had the patience to listen to people talking on the radio. Every now and then I would tune into Limbaugh if I was in the car and couldn't find a station that carried the Radio Factor, and I liked what I heard for the most part. I just always had this idea that he was too far to the right for me, so I didn't want to listen to him.
However, I started listening to him more after the election during the hour after the Radio Factor and before Hannity, and the more I listened, the more I liked. I soon became a fan of El Rushbo and of what he was saying.
Then President Obama said his now infamous "you can't listen to Limbaugh and expect to get anything done," comment, which I already addressed in a previous blog. Doing that gave Limbaugh attention and notoriety, which was probably not the intention of the comment.
Things died down a little...until Limbaugh spoke at CPAC. I LOVED his speech. It was exactly what the republican party needed to hear. He was forceful, funny, and truthful.
That is when the media anointed him the "de-facto leader" of the republican party. The party's official leader is Michael Steel, who is head of the RNC (I am a fan of his too, by the way). He was on talk shows doing damage control, attempting to reassert himself as the leader of the party. The damage, however, was done.
Limbaugh hasn't become the apparent leader of the party because he is the best or only choice. He happens to be the loudest. With a listenership of 22 million, his microphone wields immense power, and has the ability ot spread his and the party's message all over the country. He can rally republicans around his microphone, which is what the party needs. He reminds republicans that they don't need to change their message, they merely need to reconnect with their message and adapt it, not overhaul it. He is the loudest critic of the Obama administration, and has the ability to hold them accountable far more than any other opposition voice.
Limbaugh didn't choose this position of leadership, it chose him. And he has embraced it admirably.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)