The shock waves are still coming out of Illinois, following the FBI arrest of the governor of Illinois on charges of graft, extortion and other corruption charges.
Governor Blagojevich has been accused of trying to sell the U.S. Senate seat of President-elect Obama following Obama's resignation from the seat to prepare his new Administration. And he apparently interfered in the Tribune Company's sale of Wriggley Field to extort the board to replace the editors at their newspaper (the Chicago Tribune) who were calling for his impeachment. Tribune filed for bankruptcy on Monday; the sale of the baseball field could have netted the company $100 million.
The accusations contained in the FBI summary are staggering.
I'm starting to get the feeling that the level of corruption that the governor is involved with runs much deeper than has been revealed so far; and because Obama was a legislator in Illinois for ten years, his involvement with other state legislators and associates who were involved with this corrupt governor will be under close scrutiny.
I'm very uncomfortable with another Administration coming in with the kind of potential baggage that dogged the Clintons for years. It feels all too familiar and is the kind of thing that, as we have already seen, will lead to never-ending investigations, regardless of whether the President-elect did anything wrong or not.
This is one of the reasons that I liked Bush in the beginning: when he first came into the White House; there were no skeletons rattling around in a closet; Clinton came in with lots of them.
Whose example will Obama follow, I wonder?
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Auto Bailout Bill Passes House: Senate Bill Faces Filibuster
The House of Representatives passed their version of a bill which partially bails out the auto industry in exchange for a controlling interest in those corporations. It appears that the bill will face an uncertain future in the Senate as the GOP has threatened a filibuster unless changes are made in the bill.
I have mixed feelings about this bailout.
While I do think that the people of Michigan have suffered enough, I don't think that government will do a better job of making the auto industry better. I do not like the idea of a "car czar," nor his/her power to put the companies into bankruptcy or withdraw potential bailout money without some protections for the corporations, as well as some oversight of the "car czar."
And the government is already into too much private business.
I also do not think that copying Venezuela's economic model is a very smart idea. In fact, it's a really dumb move.
And now that we have an incoming socialist President, I fully expect this nationalization process to accelerate. The debt he's going to inherit and his current "tax and spend" plan is going to put the economy deeper into the hurt locker that it's already in.
The government needs to come to it's senses before it's presented with a bill that it can't pay.
I have mixed feelings about this bailout.
While I do think that the people of Michigan have suffered enough, I don't think that government will do a better job of making the auto industry better. I do not like the idea of a "car czar," nor his/her power to put the companies into bankruptcy or withdraw potential bailout money without some protections for the corporations, as well as some oversight of the "car czar."
And the government is already into too much private business.
I also do not think that copying Venezuela's economic model is a very smart idea. In fact, it's a really dumb move.
And now that we have an incoming socialist President, I fully expect this nationalization process to accelerate. The debt he's going to inherit and his current "tax and spend" plan is going to put the economy deeper into the hurt locker that it's already in.
The government needs to come to it's senses before it's presented with a bill that it can't pay.
Monday, December 08, 2008
Those Who Want Obama To Take Office Immediately Should Cool It: EVERY New Administration Needs Time to Get Set Up Properly
I was listening to Limbaugh today and he played back several sound clips of TV commentators wishing that the Constitution was amended so that Obama could take office on December 1st instead of January 20th. He's correct in telling Obama's TV news friends to settle down, but not for the reasons he listed.
He said that Obama doesn't want to take office due to the fact that the economy will worsen between now and January 20th, and that Obama doesn't want to be seen as being in charge when things really get bad this month; especially if one or more of our auto companies dies at the end of the month.
Putting the politics aside for a moment, the actual reason that there is a lag between the election and the time the new President takes office is that any new incoming administration needs time to fill many thousands of jobs, and not just the cabinet-level positions.
And until the adoption of the 20th Amendment in 1933, the lame-duck period was actually longer; Inauguration Day wasn't until March 4th prior to that. And the four-month period (between the election in 1932 and the inaguration in 1933) really hurt the country as the Great Depression was at it's peak during this time, and critical decisions were being put off.
There's no reason to alter the Constitution. Period. And even if they pulled it off, none of the states would be able to schedule votes before the January 20th Obama inauguration.
And I wouldn't be so anxious to rush a seasoned President out the door in return for someone who's been in federal-level politics for a grand total of four years. Obama will have his chance soon enough.
He said that Obama doesn't want to take office due to the fact that the economy will worsen between now and January 20th, and that Obama doesn't want to be seen as being in charge when things really get bad this month; especially if one or more of our auto companies dies at the end of the month.
Putting the politics aside for a moment, the actual reason that there is a lag between the election and the time the new President takes office is that any new incoming administration needs time to fill many thousands of jobs, and not just the cabinet-level positions.
And until the adoption of the 20th Amendment in 1933, the lame-duck period was actually longer; Inauguration Day wasn't until March 4th prior to that. And the four-month period (between the election in 1932 and the inaguration in 1933) really hurt the country as the Great Depression was at it's peak during this time, and critical decisions were being put off.
There's no reason to alter the Constitution. Period. And even if they pulled it off, none of the states would be able to schedule votes before the January 20th Obama inauguration.
And I wouldn't be so anxious to rush a seasoned President out the door in return for someone who's been in federal-level politics for a grand total of four years. Obama will have his chance soon enough.
$10 Million Bonus for Merrill Lynch CEO Under Discussion: They Meant BOGUS, Not Bonus as Company Takes Bail-Out
Merrill Lynch became the latest bailout recipient to raise the ire of Congress and the public when their CEO asked for a $10 million bonus, weeks after the company took a taxpayer-funded bailout from the federal government.
If their executive board authorizes it, the government ought to consider revoking the company's bailout.
This is just one more proof that the entire bailout package was a very bad idea. There's no accountability, the companies aren't following the conditions of the bailout, and some of these companies will drive themselves into the ground pulling crap like this.
$2 trillion for stuff like THIS?
If their executive board authorizes it, the government ought to consider revoking the company's bailout.
This is just one more proof that the entire bailout package was a very bad idea. There's no accountability, the companies aren't following the conditions of the bailout, and some of these companies will drive themselves into the ground pulling crap like this.
$2 trillion for stuff like THIS?
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Nations Begin Signing Cluster Bomb Ban: Can We at Least Design the Weapon So ALL the Bomblets Explode?
One of the most infuriating things about cluster bombs is that when the weapon is deployed, and hundreds of bomblets are deployed, not all of them explode, which turns the impact zones into deadly minefields. Here's what a cluster bombing looks like:
Despite what the announcer says, not all nations that have cluster bombs deploy them correctly. Israel hit southern Lebanon with cluster bombs (supposedly the upgraded units with the self destruct units, but take a look at how effective the self destruct actually is.) The following video was taken by an Australian after the Israeli-Lebanese/Hezbollah war (audio commentary starts about 14 seconds into the video):
Israel and Russia both used cluster bombs in close proximity to civilian populations; the Russians disregarded the rules of war and dropped the munitions directly onto Georgian cities during their war earlier this year, deliberately targeting civilians. They did the same thing in both of their Chechnyan wars (Shali, Chechnya, in 1995, and in Elistanzhi, Chechnya, in 1999).
NATO used them in Yugoslavia, we used them in Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam. And in every use of them, there's a minefield left over. It's believed that ten million
And now there's an international conference going on; 100+ nations are going to ban them, including Afghanistan, Laos, Lebanon, Great Britain and 18 of 26 NATO countries. 88 nations are expected to sign it today, with 22 promising to sign tomorrow; when this is done, it will go to the United Nations where the remaining nations of the 192-member General Assembly can sign it as well.
The United States, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and several others have indicated that they will not sign it.
If we cannot design the damn thing to work as intended, perhaps we SHOULD sign the treaty and develop an effective system that will detect and detonate leftover munitions with minimum risk to the mine clearing teams.
Cluster bomb munitions can kill years after a peace treaty is signed between two warring nations, and that's not right, especially if little kids are the ones picking up the bomblets and having them explode in their hands, or blow their legs off.
I'm in favor of the treaty. These kinds of weapons, while very effective at destroying an enemy target, can be replaced with more reliable weapons that function as performed. The failure rate is simply too great to ignore.
Despite what the announcer says, not all nations that have cluster bombs deploy them correctly. Israel hit southern Lebanon with cluster bombs (supposedly the upgraded units with the self destruct units, but take a look at how effective the self destruct actually is.) The following video was taken by an Australian after the Israeli-Lebanese/Hezbollah war (audio commentary starts about 14 seconds into the video):
Israel and Russia both used cluster bombs in close proximity to civilian populations; the Russians disregarded the rules of war and dropped the munitions directly onto Georgian cities during their war earlier this year, deliberately targeting civilians. They did the same thing in both of their Chechnyan wars (Shali, Chechnya, in 1995, and in Elistanzhi, Chechnya, in 1999).
NATO used them in Yugoslavia, we used them in Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam. And in every use of them, there's a minefield left over. It's believed that ten million
And now there's an international conference going on; 100+ nations are going to ban them, including Afghanistan, Laos, Lebanon, Great Britain and 18 of 26 NATO countries. 88 nations are expected to sign it today, with 22 promising to sign tomorrow; when this is done, it will go to the United Nations where the remaining nations of the 192-member General Assembly can sign it as well.
The United States, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and several others have indicated that they will not sign it.
If we cannot design the damn thing to work as intended, perhaps we SHOULD sign the treaty and develop an effective system that will detect and detonate leftover munitions with minimum risk to the mine clearing teams.
Cluster bomb munitions can kill years after a peace treaty is signed between two warring nations, and that's not right, especially if little kids are the ones picking up the bomblets and having them explode in their hands, or blow their legs off.
I'm in favor of the treaty. These kinds of weapons, while very effective at destroying an enemy target, can be replaced with more reliable weapons that function as performed. The failure rate is simply too great to ignore.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Media Matters Goes After Bill Cunningham: Some of His Comments Earn Him Title of "Purveyor of Hate Speech" From Liberal Group
Media Matters has set it's sights on conservative commentator/radio host Bill Cunningham for some of his controversial comments about poor people, blacks, the unemployed and other groups.
He came into the national consciousness during the recently concluded Presidential elections when he introduced John McCain at an event in Cincinnati. He used President-elect Obama's full name (HOW DARE HE USE THAT NAME!) and said that he was a "hack" and a "Daley-style Chicago politician" among other things.
McCain didn't like it, and immediately repudiated what Cunningham said, which prompted Cunningham to say that he had been thrown under McCain's "Straight Talk Express" bus and trampled. He pulled his support of McCain and returned to his local talk-radio show. McCain knew who was introducing him, yet made no effort to find someone else to do the honors.
In the months since, he made some very nasty comments about Obama that Media Matters has zeroed in on. And truth be told, Cunningham is in the same vein as Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly; he sometimes says the right things the wrong way. The specifics that Media Matters quoted in their report are as follows (credit: Media Matters web site) :
I definitely don't agree with everything that Savage, O'Reilly and Cunningham say. They're their own worst enemies at times, but I also disagree with Media Matters on how they cut and paste comments together to make their victims look as bad as possible.
If fascism does start in this country, it'll start in the media with the same kind of tactics that Media Matters employs when going after people they don't like.
He came into the national consciousness during the recently concluded Presidential elections when he introduced John McCain at an event in Cincinnati. He used President-elect Obama's full name (HOW DARE HE USE THAT NAME!) and said that he was a "hack" and a "Daley-style Chicago politician" among other things.
McCain didn't like it, and immediately repudiated what Cunningham said, which prompted Cunningham to say that he had been thrown under McCain's "Straight Talk Express" bus and trampled. He pulled his support of McCain and returned to his local talk-radio show. McCain knew who was introducing him, yet made no effort to find someone else to do the honors.
In the months since, he made some very nasty comments about Obama that Media Matters has zeroed in on. And truth be told, Cunningham is in the same vein as Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly; he sometimes says the right things the wrong way. The specifics that Media Matters quoted in their report are as follows (credit: Media Matters web site) :
- Alleging that "Obama wants to gas the Jews"
- Invoking "[s]ix-six-six" and "the beast" in discussing "Barack Hussein Obama"
- On Obama Sr.: "That's what black fathers do. They simply leave"
- On the poor: "[P]eople are poor in America ... because they lack values, morals, and ethics"
- Declaring that America's "so-called noble poor" don't use birth control so that "the mom can get more checks in the mail from the government"
- "We are the only country in the world where poor people are fat."
I definitely don't agree with everything that Savage, O'Reilly and Cunningham say. They're their own worst enemies at times, but I also disagree with Media Matters on how they cut and paste comments together to make their victims look as bad as possible.
If fascism does start in this country, it'll start in the media with the same kind of tactics that Media Matters employs when going after people they don't like.
Monday, December 01, 2008
The Post of U.S. Secretary of State is Part of the Foreign Policy Team, Not the National Security Team
I keep hearing that the Secretary of State is the head of the President's national security team. With all due respect, no it isn't. The Secretary of State is the head of the President's foreign policy team.
The head(s) of the actual national security team are the Homeland Security Director, the National Intelligence Director, and the Secretary of Defense.
The Secretary of State is the President's chief foreign diplomat.
The National Security Council, of which the Secretary of State is a member, also includes the President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and the National Security Adviser as well as other departments as needed. The President is the chair of this council.
The President uses the National Security Council to get the experts in their various departments to come up with a comprehensive national security and foreign policy. Once the President decides, the Secretary of State executes the diplomacy, while the other departments execute their own part of the plan.
So it's quite confusing when the media portrays the post of Secretary of State as something other than it is.
The head(s) of the actual national security team are the Homeland Security Director, the National Intelligence Director, and the Secretary of Defense.
The Secretary of State is the President's chief foreign diplomat.
The National Security Council, of which the Secretary of State is a member, also includes the President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and the National Security Adviser as well as other departments as needed. The President is the chair of this council.
The President uses the National Security Council to get the experts in their various departments to come up with a comprehensive national security and foreign policy. Once the President decides, the Secretary of State executes the diplomacy, while the other departments execute their own part of the plan.
So it's quite confusing when the media portrays the post of Secretary of State as something other than it is.
Pentagon Preparing 20,000 Troops for Domestic Use: Conspiracy Theorists Run Wild Over This
This has been underway for some time, but the Pentagon is preparing a 20,000 strong military force for domestic deployment in the event of a city-killing terrorist attack, such as a chemical, biological, or nuclear strike.
Some talk-radio personalities are saying that this will be the tool used to overthrow the Constitution and establish fascism in this country. I disagree with Glenn Beck's assessment. When a nuclear attack happens (WHEN, not IF), we will be thanking God that these troops are available to help. If we are the targets of a Mumbai-style terror assault, people like Glenn Beck will be the first ones publicly calling on the government to use these troops immediately.
I do not believe that this force will be used to overthrow the Constitution, but to strengthen it, and to help our domestic institutions protect the American people from the kind of people (with their fourth-grade educations) who murdered so many in Mumbai, including six of our fellow citizens.
I'm not going to sweat it. The Fairness Doctrine is more of a threat than these troops are.
Some talk-radio personalities are saying that this will be the tool used to overthrow the Constitution and establish fascism in this country. I disagree with Glenn Beck's assessment. When a nuclear attack happens (WHEN, not IF), we will be thanking God that these troops are available to help. If we are the targets of a Mumbai-style terror assault, people like Glenn Beck will be the first ones publicly calling on the government to use these troops immediately.
I do not believe that this force will be used to overthrow the Constitution, but to strengthen it, and to help our domestic institutions protect the American people from the kind of people (with their fourth-grade educations) who murdered so many in Mumbai, including six of our fellow citizens.
I'm not going to sweat it. The Fairness Doctrine is more of a threat than these troops are.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Are Our Big Cities Prepared for a Mumbai-Style Terror Hit?
One of the questions being asked in Britain and in the U.S. is whether there are enough anti-terrorism forces to go after terrorists in multiple locations in the same city, as it happened in Mumbai, India. Rather than army commandos, it would likely be SWAT teams that would be initially deployed in places like New York, L.A., Chicago, Detroit and Atlanta. Britain's got their own version of SWAT.
Focusing in on America, if a terrorist force hit multiple locations in one city and managed to dig in as they did in Mumbai, would there be enough SWAT units and other similar units to quickly deploy and begin immediate operations to secure whatever locations had been seized and rescue the hostages? And would reinforcements be quickly available from the federal government?
India was not prepared for an attack of this magnitude; it took 60 hours for them to clear the buildings that were captured by the terrorists. During that time, the terrorists were shooting hostages.
Are we ready for something like this?
Focusing in on America, if a terrorist force hit multiple locations in one city and managed to dig in as they did in Mumbai, would there be enough SWAT units and other similar units to quickly deploy and begin immediate operations to secure whatever locations had been seized and rescue the hostages? And would reinforcements be quickly available from the federal government?
India was not prepared for an attack of this magnitude; it took 60 hours for them to clear the buildings that were captured by the terrorists. During that time, the terrorists were shooting hostages.
Are we ready for something like this?
Governments of India and Pakistan Need to Keep Talking: The Region Doesn't Need a War Between Two Nuclear Powers
Indians are asking exactly the same questions of their government that many Americans were asking after the 9/11 disaster in this country. "Why did the government fail to protect us?"
The Indian news media is reporting that the government knew a major attack was coming, but took no steps to warn their people that a disaster of this magnitude might happen in the near future. They kept their silence in the same way that the Bush Administration ignored the previous administration here about how dangerous al-Qaeda was and that an airborne terrorist attack might be mounted.
And India seems to be pointing the finger of blame at Pakistan, even as Pakistan attempted to ratchet down the rhetoric and keep everything low-key. They dispatched their intelligence chief to New Delhi to speak with his Indian counterpart, an act that many Pakistanis were unhappy with, but did so regardless of how it looked in Islamabad.
And Pakistan's president has promised to take action if it is proven that elements in his country were involved. Asif Ali Zardari is the husband of former Pakistani Prime Minister Bhutto, who was also killed by terrorists last year.
India and Pakistan need to be talking, not arguing and then fighting. They're both nuclear powers, and blowing one another off the map won't help matters. Pakistan really needs to come down on it's extremists, and India must do the same.
The Indian news media is reporting that the government knew a major attack was coming, but took no steps to warn their people that a disaster of this magnitude might happen in the near future. They kept their silence in the same way that the Bush Administration ignored the previous administration here about how dangerous al-Qaeda was and that an airborne terrorist attack might be mounted.
And India seems to be pointing the finger of blame at Pakistan, even as Pakistan attempted to ratchet down the rhetoric and keep everything low-key. They dispatched their intelligence chief to New Delhi to speak with his Indian counterpart, an act that many Pakistanis were unhappy with, but did so regardless of how it looked in Islamabad.
And Pakistan's president has promised to take action if it is proven that elements in his country were involved. Asif Ali Zardari is the husband of former Pakistani Prime Minister Bhutto, who was also killed by terrorists last year.
India and Pakistan need to be talking, not arguing and then fighting. They're both nuclear powers, and blowing one another off the map won't help matters. Pakistan really needs to come down on it's extremists, and India must do the same.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Government Should Forget About the Bailouts, and Reduce the DEBT: That's Going to Kill Us
When we take a hard look at what our nation is facing in this financial crisis, it becomes clear that a number of things need to be considered when formulating a strategy to dig ourselves out of this mess. And I think our government is failing to look at what lies over the horizon. They're really blowing it.
They've reacted by adding $5 trillion to our national debt.
Here's my impression of this fiasco:
As for the rest, it was a mistake to begin with. I think that those companies that would have a negative effect on the value of the dollar overseas (should they fail) need to be bailed out, while the others should get on a payment plan and pay off their debts, just like Joe and Jane Six Pack does.
The government should take the money from this $5 trillion scheme and put it toward paying down our national debt. That'll kill us in the long run and will hurt many more people than the current downturn has/will.
They've reacted by adding $5 trillion to our national debt.
Here's my impression of this fiasco:
- A stimulus package that requires us to borrow money from China to fund it? DONE!
- Fanny Mae is failing? So is Freddie Mac? QUICK!! TAKE THEM OVER! (Pass the buck.)
- Lehman Bros. is failing? Too bad. They didn't support my candidacy. Let them FAIL!
- AIG is failing? Bail 'em out. Then bail 'em out again!
- Stock market's lost 2,000 points in the last ten days? Drat.
- Bear Stevens is failing? Seize them, sell them and put the taxpayer on the hook for the bill!
- Citi is failing? Bail 'em out. More? Bail faster! Here, have some more taxpayer money!
- A $700 billion bailout? Add another $150 billion to bribe the opposition in Congress. Mo' money, mo' money!
- We're bailing out all the toxic debt??! Bail harder! Bail faster! Here, have some more money!
- What? What? Wall Street doesn't think it's the right fix now that they have it?
- Washington Mutual is failing? Seize 'em and bail 'em out!
- Dow's dropped 2,000 more points?
- Hmm...Dow added 936 points in one day, but it's still down for the week.
- Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Bank of New York Mellon and State Street all signed on to our $2.5 trillion deal, to take our money, whether they needed it or not! YAY!! MORE DEBT!! Oh those taxpayers are really soaking it up now! Hummana, hummana, hummana!
- WHAT DID ALAN GREENSPAN SAY?? Oh, man, there goes another 600 points off the Dow!
- "Bailouts Being Used to Finance Retirement Packages." Surprise, surprise, surprise.
- Now the TARP measure isn't being used to buy all toxic debt? What's going on now?
- Hmm...General Motors sales fell 45% from a year ago, Ford fell 30%, Chrysler fell 35%, Toyota fell 23%, Honda fell 25%, and Nissan fell 33%.
- Now the Big 3 want a bailout? Yes! No! Yes! No!
- The CEOs flew their private jets to Washington while claiming that their companies are BROKE??! GM is producing a 2009 Hummer??!
- Group says we entered a recession in December 2007. Well, DUH!
As for the rest, it was a mistake to begin with. I think that those companies that would have a negative effect on the value of the dollar overseas (should they fail) need to be bailed out, while the others should get on a payment plan and pay off their debts, just like Joe and Jane Six Pack does.
The government should take the money from this $5 trillion scheme and put it toward paying down our national debt. That'll kill us in the long run and will hurt many more people than the current downturn has/will.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Trouble in India Will Mean Disaster Between Pakistan and India: Last Major Attack Almost Brought Two Countries Close to War in 2002
The huge terrorist attacks taking place in India will cause serious problems between Pakistan and India. The Indians have been looking for an excuse to put Pakistan in it's place for a while, and the headline-grabbing terrorism taking place in Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay) may well provide it.
Kashmir remains a problem between the two countries, and at least one terrorist has cited the troubled region as being the reason for his taking hostages. Terrorists launched an attack on India's government in New Delhi in 2001, and that attack caused over a million Indian and Pakistani troops to take up positions on either side of their shared border and square off for months.
If Kashmir is the cause of this, and it's directed at the government of India, they might turn their attention from Mumbai to Kashmir, and trouble will follow.
I'm getting the impression that there's more than one terror group involved here; one group took a Jewish facility, several others attacked hotels, and others attacked elsewhere. Some have targeted Americans and British citizens; others targeted Jews, still others targeted Indians. Some have released their Western hostages. It's really confusing. If it is one large group, they're hiding their goals quite effectively by going after so many different targets.
It's going to take a while to sort all of this out.
Kashmir remains a problem between the two countries, and at least one terrorist has cited the troubled region as being the reason for his taking hostages. Terrorists launched an attack on India's government in New Delhi in 2001, and that attack caused over a million Indian and Pakistani troops to take up positions on either side of their shared border and square off for months.
If Kashmir is the cause of this, and it's directed at the government of India, they might turn their attention from Mumbai to Kashmir, and trouble will follow.
I'm getting the impression that there's more than one terror group involved here; one group took a Jewish facility, several others attacked hotels, and others attacked elsewhere. Some have targeted Americans and British citizens; others targeted Jews, still others targeted Indians. Some have released their Western hostages. It's really confusing. If it is one large group, they're hiding their goals quite effectively by going after so many different targets.
It's going to take a while to sort all of this out.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
ANOTHER $800 Billion Mistake? It Happened a Lot Faster Than I Thought It Would
Back when I was railing against the first $850 billion mistake to bail out Wall Street's Folly, I predicted that they'd be back in six months asking for another huge infusion of cash.
I was not expecting them to put up another $800 billion within 1 1/2 months to help Wall Street.
We can't afford this, nor should we be bailing out the auto industry. The fact that they're begging for money shows that they're already bankrupt, but haven't chose to admit it yet.
The government is setting us up for more falls in the future with all this intervention. This is a short-term strategy that will have serious long-term ramifications. A lot of these companies that we're busy rescuing were going to fail, and will probably fail regardless. And we'll still be stuck with the bill.
I don't like it.
I was not expecting them to put up another $800 billion within 1 1/2 months to help Wall Street.
We can't afford this, nor should we be bailing out the auto industry. The fact that they're begging for money shows that they're already bankrupt, but haven't chose to admit it yet.
The government is setting us up for more falls in the future with all this intervention. This is a short-term strategy that will have serious long-term ramifications. A lot of these companies that we're busy rescuing were going to fail, and will probably fail regardless. And we'll still be stuck with the bill.
I don't like it.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Many Institutions Climb on Gravy Train: Corporations, States, Cities and Who Knows What Else
Let's see who else is requesting federal bailout money, now that the floodgates are blown open:
American Express
Transportation Corridor Agencies of California
Ford
Chrysler
General Motors
General Electric
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
State of California
State of New Jersey
State of New York
Independent Connecticut Petroleum Association
City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
City of Phoenix, Arizona
City of Atlanta, Georgia
City of Detroit, Michigan
There are now DOZENS of institutions trying to get onto the gravy train! They need to all be told to cut their expenses and live within their means. People do it; why can't they?
American Express
Transportation Corridor Agencies of California
Ford
Chrysler
General Motors
General Electric
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
State of California
State of New Jersey
State of New York
Independent Connecticut Petroleum Association
City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
City of Phoenix, Arizona
City of Atlanta, Georgia
City of Detroit, Michigan
There are now DOZENS of institutions trying to get onto the gravy train! They need to all be told to cut their expenses and live within their means. People do it; why can't they?
Friday, November 14, 2008
TERRIBLE Nebraska Law Allowing Parents to Drop Teens Off at Hospitals Being Reviewed: "Please Don't Bring Your Teenager to Nebraska" Comes TOO LATE
Nebraska's awful child-abandonment law is FINALLY being reviewed, as kids from other states continue to be dropped off by their idiot and incompetent parents.
The total number of kids abandoned so far is 34. On Thursday, a 17 year-old girl was dropped off at an Omaha hospital with her 14 year-old brother, and promptly ran away, leaving her brother behind.
This law has been a FARCE from day one and should never have been adopted by the legislature of Nebraska.
And the emotional damage being done to these children by their parents is immeasurable.
They say the way to hell is paved with good intentions. And this law was originally designed to help infants, but with the lack of an age limit in the law, parents began dropping their teenagers off. Of the 34 kids dropped off so far, not a SINGLE one has been an infant. Six of the children were under age 10, and the rest were teenagers.
All of these teens need to be returned to their relatives, and the ex-parents PROSECUTED! And in particular, those parents who crossed state lines to get rid of their kids need to be in federal court for what they have done.
I'm not interested in hearing why they've done what they've done. They had the means to travel to Nebraska from other states to drop their kids off; why couldn't they have contacted social services in their OWN states? EVERY state in this country has some kind of system to help parents in need, and family courts to order the kids into state custody to get the help that they need.
Nebraska needs to GET IT IN GEAR and FIX this terrible law!
The total number of kids abandoned so far is 34. On Thursday, a 17 year-old girl was dropped off at an Omaha hospital with her 14 year-old brother, and promptly ran away, leaving her brother behind.
This law has been a FARCE from day one and should never have been adopted by the legislature of Nebraska.
And the emotional damage being done to these children by their parents is immeasurable.
They say the way to hell is paved with good intentions. And this law was originally designed to help infants, but with the lack of an age limit in the law, parents began dropping their teenagers off. Of the 34 kids dropped off so far, not a SINGLE one has been an infant. Six of the children were under age 10, and the rest were teenagers.
All of these teens need to be returned to their relatives, and the ex-parents PROSECUTED! And in particular, those parents who crossed state lines to get rid of their kids need to be in federal court for what they have done.
I'm not interested in hearing why they've done what they've done. They had the means to travel to Nebraska from other states to drop their kids off; why couldn't they have contacted social services in their OWN states? EVERY state in this country has some kind of system to help parents in need, and family courts to order the kids into state custody to get the help that they need.
Nebraska needs to GET IT IN GEAR and FIX this terrible law!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Gay Activists Disrupt a Lansing-Area Church: How Low Can They Go?
Gay activists took a Lansing-area church by surprise and staged a protest during services, both inside and outside the building on Sunday.
Inside the Mount Hope Church, demonstrators yelled gay slogans, hanged a banner from the church balcony, threw fliers at members of the church and then pulled a fire alarm. Outside, activists had an upside down pink cross and picket signs.
Revolting behavior!
And no one was arrested for doing this? Pulling a fire alarm is not protected speech. I wonder how many of these protesters were locals, and how many were outside agitators?
Inside the Mount Hope Church, demonstrators yelled gay slogans, hanged a banner from the church balcony, threw fliers at members of the church and then pulled a fire alarm. Outside, activists had an upside down pink cross and picket signs.
Revolting behavior!
And no one was arrested for doing this? Pulling a fire alarm is not protected speech. I wonder how many of these protesters were locals, and how many were outside agitators?
Time to Repeal the $850 Billion Bailout Mistake: It Isn't Working
I wrote the following in the last couple of months:
September 24th: I think that $700 billion is just the start and they'll come back and ask for another $500-$750 billion in six months. We can't afford that!
September 28th: No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable.
October 3rd: And we've only seen the beginning of this bailout. Now everyone will want one too.
October 5th: Two states--California and Massachusetts--want money as well. The floodgates are now open; where will this end? And how many states will try to climb on this gravy train?
October 6th: Welcome to the dark side of globalization....This has been the strangest bill in quite a while; the size of it is HUGE; Wall Street didn't want it, the politicians say they didn't want it but attached $150 billion in pork to buy off their colleagues to vote for it, Wall Street put it's reaction on public display by losing hundreds of points on the days that the House and Senate voted on this bill; then they said it probably wasn't the fix that was needed. Then Wall Street lost hundreds of points more over worry that the money won't come fast enough. And the taxpayer's on the hook for the entire $850 billion package with little to no hope for a return.
Then I took a hiatus to see if this $850 billion mistake was the miracle cure that would save us. What happened?
Since the signing of the bailout of Wall Street's Folly, the DJIA has lost another 1,950+ points. The federal government increased it's bailout of AIG from $85 billion to $150 billion. Now they're talking about bailing out the auto industry. And many companies that have been thrown a lifeline are sustaining HUGE quarterly losses.
And the U.S. government is up to about $5 trillion in additional debt, trying to solve this mess.
The bailout isn't working; the money's being eaten like candy, and the problems are continuing to cause mayhem in the American and global economies. I get the impression that this bailout money is being thrown away.
They need to repeal the entire mess. The bailout of Wall Street's Folly was ill-conceived, and we simply cannot afford to bail out industry after industry, as the politicians now seem to be hell-bent on doing.
September 24th: I think that $700 billion is just the start and they'll come back and ask for another $500-$750 billion in six months. We can't afford that!
September 28th: No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable.
October 3rd: And we've only seen the beginning of this bailout. Now everyone will want one too.
October 5th: Two states--California and Massachusetts--want money as well. The floodgates are now open; where will this end? And how many states will try to climb on this gravy train?
October 6th: Welcome to the dark side of globalization....This has been the strangest bill in quite a while; the size of it is HUGE; Wall Street didn't want it, the politicians say they didn't want it but attached $150 billion in pork to buy off their colleagues to vote for it, Wall Street put it's reaction on public display by losing hundreds of points on the days that the House and Senate voted on this bill; then they said it probably wasn't the fix that was needed. Then Wall Street lost hundreds of points more over worry that the money won't come fast enough. And the taxpayer's on the hook for the entire $850 billion package with little to no hope for a return.
Then I took a hiatus to see if this $850 billion mistake was the miracle cure that would save us. What happened?
Since the signing of the bailout of Wall Street's Folly, the DJIA has lost another 1,950+ points. The federal government increased it's bailout of AIG from $85 billion to $150 billion. Now they're talking about bailing out the auto industry. And many companies that have been thrown a lifeline are sustaining HUGE quarterly losses.
And the U.S. government is up to about $5 trillion in additional debt, trying to solve this mess.
The bailout isn't working; the money's being eaten like candy, and the problems are continuing to cause mayhem in the American and global economies. I get the impression that this bailout money is being thrown away.
They need to repeal the entire mess. The bailout of Wall Street's Folly was ill-conceived, and we simply cannot afford to bail out industry after industry, as the politicians now seem to be hell-bent on doing.
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of U.S. Navy Use of Sonar Without Restrictions
Environmental wackos lost their case against the U.S. Navy today, when the Supreme Court ruled that the Navy could use sonar whenever and wherever it needed to.
Lower court judges had issued injunctions against the Navy to prevent it from using sonar to detect enemy submarines when in proximity to marine life, whether in practice or in an actual combat situations. The high court found that the possibility of having an untrained anti-submarine force being deployed against an enemy (with no such restrictions) presented a danger to the safety of the fleet, and outweighed the potential danger to the little fishies.
The Supreme Court decision is the correct one. It would be a HUGE gamble to have an inexperienced Navy crew going after a Russian or Chinese-built sub with a nuclear payload targeted at American cities.
If the wackos don't like it, why don't they take their money and find an alternative detection system that the Navy can equip their ships and subs with, so that the Navy can get rid of their EVIL sonars and save the little fishes?
Lower court judges had issued injunctions against the Navy to prevent it from using sonar to detect enemy submarines when in proximity to marine life, whether in practice or in an actual combat situations. The high court found that the possibility of having an untrained anti-submarine force being deployed against an enemy (with no such restrictions) presented a danger to the safety of the fleet, and outweighed the potential danger to the little fishies.
The Supreme Court decision is the correct one. It would be a HUGE gamble to have an inexperienced Navy crew going after a Russian or Chinese-built sub with a nuclear payload targeted at American cities.
If the wackos don't like it, why don't they take their money and find an alternative detection system that the Navy can equip their ships and subs with, so that the Navy can get rid of their EVIL sonars and save the little fishes?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Veterans Deserve More: Government Has Dropped the Ball
On this day that we honor America's veterans for their service to our country, I find it APPALLING that 1/4 to 1/3 of America's homeless are also VETERANS.
This is shameful.
They put their lives on the line for our country, and come back from America's wars with both obvious and hidden injuries. It's a sad state of affairs when our various elected federal governments have to be prodded AGAIN and AGAIN to take the necessary steps to care for America's wounded warriors, both from the current wars and from past wars as well.
And yet, some 300,000 to 400,000 veterans are out in the cold, and the VA takes care of 100,000 of them annually. If the 400,000 number is accurate, then that means that 300,000 (or 75%) are left to fend for themselves.
I'm glad that the budget for Veterans Affairs has doubled to $93 billion in the last seven years, but they had no choice, with so many wounded veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan. I hope that the VA is expanding it's reach to help other, less fortunate veterans.
Thank you veterans, for putting on a uniform and putting it ALL on the line.
This is shameful.
They put their lives on the line for our country, and come back from America's wars with both obvious and hidden injuries. It's a sad state of affairs when our various elected federal governments have to be prodded AGAIN and AGAIN to take the necessary steps to care for America's wounded warriors, both from the current wars and from past wars as well.
And yet, some 300,000 to 400,000 veterans are out in the cold, and the VA takes care of 100,000 of them annually. If the 400,000 number is accurate, then that means that 300,000 (or 75%) are left to fend for themselves.
I'm glad that the budget for Veterans Affairs has doubled to $93 billion in the last seven years, but they had no choice, with so many wounded veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan. I hope that the VA is expanding it's reach to help other, less fortunate veterans.
Thank you veterans, for putting on a uniform and putting it ALL on the line.
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Obama Chooses a KLINGON for His Chief of Staff: So Much for Cooperation
President-elect Obama is not off to a smooth start to his new Administration. He chose the Democratic version of Karl Rove, Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, as his White House Chief of Staff. Emanuel is not equipped with an "off" switch, unlike Rove, who knew when to keep his mouth shut. The GOP labeled him a "hyper-partisan" immediately upon the announcement of his nomination to be White House Chief of Staff.
Here is an example of how a Klingon deals with an annoyance, which matches how Emanuel will deal with people in the White House:
This will be a VERY interesting appointment. Obama's found someone meaner than Michael Savage, which I didn't think was possible. Here's Emanuel's Wikipedia entry, including a recounting of the famous steak knife incident, which helped to earn him his nickname of RAHM-bo, owing to his "take no prisoners" strategy of dealing with people he doesn't like.
I though President-elect Obama would pick a Klingon-like person to fill the role of Chief of Staff, not an ACTUAL Klingon!
Here is an example of how a Klingon deals with an annoyance, which matches how Emanuel will deal with people in the White House:
This will be a VERY interesting appointment. Obama's found someone meaner than Michael Savage, which I didn't think was possible. Here's Emanuel's Wikipedia entry, including a recounting of the famous steak knife incident, which helped to earn him his nickname of RAHM-bo, owing to his "take no prisoners" strategy of dealing with people he doesn't like.
I though President-elect Obama would pick a Klingon-like person to fill the role of Chief of Staff, not an ACTUAL Klingon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)