Posts Tagged 'politics'

Deadman’s A-Z Guide to Living: Gray

Gray is usually such an unattractive color.

The safe, uninspiring choice in fashion and design. The gloomy, unwanted harbinger of storms and aging.

It is the definition of blah-ness. An easy metaphor for deep sadness.

But at least in matters of politics and policy, gray happens to be a most beautiful color.

Indeed, gray is the color of the lens through which I view almost everything in this complicated, crazy world of ours. To me, it signifies empathy and thoughtfulness. And when followed, it often leads to necessary compromise, or – at a minimum – mutual understanding.

It is a mystery why people so often see this world in black and white, why they hew to rigid ideologies as if the very idea of keeping an open mind, of seeing multiple sides to key issues is an anathema, a sign of terrible weakness to be avoided at all costs.

Don’t get me wrong: Seeing things in shades of gray doesn’t mean you just straddle the fence and refuse to pick sides. That is hardly helpful and rarely appropriate. No, you still take stances, and you fight for them. And there may be, on rare occasions, controversial issues which you view in black and white – gay rights being one that comes quickly to mind – where compromise isn’t possible. But in general, when you see things in gray, you allow yourself to appreciate the logic that usually exists in the opposing view and you strive for middle ground where most of the workable solutions will be found.

Give me almost any controversial subject on the political landscape today – Abortion? Taxes and deficit reduction? Universal health care? Oil drilling? - and I can likely offer up a very reasonable argument for either side.

Take abortion, for instance. You will find perhaps no issue that polarizes people more than this one, and the intensity on both sides can be rather frightening. But all of the ethical, logistical, moral, medical and political debates concerning abortion are astoundingly complex, and for the life of me, I cannot fathom how pro-life and pro-choice activists refuse to respect and appreciate the other side’s point of view.**

Now I didn’t always disdain ideology; I used to be a pretty hard-core liberal, president of the Young Democrats club in high school, and even within the last five years a co-founder of one of the most liberal blogs on the Web. I still lean left politically, I suppose, especially when it comes to social issues, but in general now believe effective answers don’t often fit into easy slots and that rigid ideology leads people to overly simplistic group-think.

It may seem a bit hypocritical, but if I had the time, skills, and/or motivation, I would love to start a new political organization in this country: The Gray Party. The Grays would stress open-mindedness and freedom of thought. We would consider each issue separately and place great value on scientific data and research in determining policy. We would encourage healthy and respectful debate. We would embrace compromise and seek the middle ground as much as possible. If we even had a platform, it would be fluid and flexible, and party members would be free to take or leave whatever portions of it they wanted, without fear of reprisal. We would nominate the wisest, most qualified people in this country and demand of them only that they use their intelligence and vote their conscience while in office.

Yeah, I know: Totally unrealistic. Apparently, I dream in gray as well.

————————————————————————————————————————

**Abortion is in fact an issue utterly surrounded by ‘gray’ areas, including a well-known, oft-discussed one surrounding the viability of the fetus, a key factor in the crucial Supreme Court Roe v Wade decision.  The Supreme Court argued that a woman’s right to privacy – and thus her right to do what she wished with her pregnancy – was paramount up until the fetus reached a point of viability outside the womb. Alas, a ‘gray area’ in viability exists between the 21st week of pregnancy (before which no fetus is viable) and the 27th week (after which almost all fetuses are viable). The initial decision pointed to the end of the second trimester (week 28) as the cutoff date, but that has since been repealed as medical advances have moved up viability. But viability will likely always remain an imprecise ‘gray area’, one more reason why the abortion debate is such a complex one that it bewilders my mind when I listen to rabid activists on both sides.

When does life begin? What about personhood? Surely at some point, abortion becomes a form of murder. And should fetal dependency/viability really be the decisive factor regarding abortion’s legality when even after a full-term birth, a baby would quickly die without proper nourishment and care; yet in our society we view infanticide as one of the most horrific crimes imaginable.

On the other hand, the fact is, very few abortions happen after the point of viability, and are then often only done to protect the life of the mother. Even if you insist that life and/or personhood begins at conception, you’d have to admit that an early-stage fetus bears little resemblance to a healthy baby. For the first several weeks, there’s no heartbeat and no separate blood supply. Vital organs are non-existent or barely formed. A great number of fetuses will miscarry during early pregnancy without any intervention. So how is it not preferable that a woman who cannot or doesn’t want to spend all the necessary time, effort, love, money and care into gestating, delivering and raising a happy, healthy baby make the decision to terminate the pregnancy at an early stage.

Personally, I think many (but not all) abortions are selfish, awful events, and greatly admire women who choose to go through an unwanted pregnancy and pursue adoption instead. But I’ve done my share of selfish, awful things in my life, so who I am to judge. And while I believe it’s a million times better to see a pregnancy terminated early than an unwanted baby raised in a hostile, unloving environment, it’s frankly none of my business, or society’s business for that matter, what a woman does with her body. I agree the situation becomes much more complex after fetal viability, and generally have little problem with states’ restrictions on such later-term abortions, as long as the health of the mother isn’t threatened.

In short, it’s complicated. Shades of gray everywhere! And it seems as a nation we’ve stumbled upon a very workable, if fragile, solution, where abortions up to a certain point are legal and must be allowed, while states in more conservative parts of the country have a certain amount of flexibility, through various mechanisms, in restricting the number or type of abortions performed. The situation may not please everyone, and certainly doesn’t please the extremists on both sides, but that’s kind of the point.

Obama Disappoints Again … Health Care Reform Likely to Lose its Public Option

Boy, what a disappointment. According to published reports, the Obama administration is willing to give up a plan to create a government-run health insurance company – the so-called ‘public option’ – in order to get some sort of reform passed. Instead, they are now touting the creation of some kind of cooperative health insurance groups, which would be non-profit and owned by its members.

Now I don’t want to overstate the letdown I feel. If this is the only way some health care reform can get done, then fine. Something needs to be done, and the political realities on the ground are obviously quite tricky when you have a slim majority in Congress and even some of the Blue Dogs Democrats are barking like they don’t want to support anything that could increase our deficit.

And unlike getting pregnant, you can get ‘a little reform’ when it comes to health care. I’ll be relatively pleased if a bill passes that takes active measures to limit cost inflation by reducing waste or fraud or increasing efficiencies in the system and includes regulations forbidding insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions or dropping people when they get sick.

But I wonder how many other compromises will find its way into the legislation before it reaches the President’s desk. Already, DF pointed out a blog post that indicated the administration agreed to some fairly serious concessions to the pharma industry in order to get it to agree to close the Medicare doughnut hole in prescription coverage.

When it comes to this nation’s health care system, the patient is very sick and needs a very strong prescription. A placebo won’t do. If and when this plan finally passes, will it have any teeth in it?

Or will it just be another example in a growing list of measures that Obama has either avoided pursuing or gotten passed only after it was strongly watered down. A stimulus bill was passed, but only after its size had been slashed, and several of the more left-leaning initiatives removed. An effort to end military tribunals was abandoned. Energy reform and cap-and-trade (an interesting idea that will likely do far too little to reduce global warming) linger in legislative limbo. Meanwhile, Obama has been silent on immigration reform, avoids changing don’t-ask-don’t-tell, and decides to fight the release of torture photos.

The area where Obama has had his biggest successes has been in the economic arena, yet many of the initiatives there – such as forcing GM into bankruptcy and doling out hundreds of billions of dollars in bailout money to banks and Wall Street institutions – hardly qualify as furthering the liberal agenda.

Why are liberals so friggin afraid of their own ideology? Can you imagine the Bush administration hemming and hawing the way Obama’s team has? They wanted tax cuts, they got it done. They wanted authorization to go to war with Iraq, they got it done. They wanted the Patriot Act passed, they got it done.

Granted, there’s very little on a political level that I want Obama to emulate from the Bush team. As someone who finds strict, unwavering adherence to an ideology a bit disturbing, I like the fact that Obama is open to compromise. Often, many of the most successful initiatives a president will accomplish come by reaching across the aisle in areas not normally associated with their side’s ideology (like Clinton’s welfare reform or Bush’s AIDS relief work).

But look, the folks on the other side had their chance. They messed up, and Americans voted for change. Not just change in process – in how things got done in Washington – but voted for change in policy, too.

Troubling public opinion polls and frequent displays of hostilities at town hall meetings shouldn’t matter much if you think the results of policy change will be successful.

Democrats now control both houses of Congress. There’s no justification for deadlock or watered-down, half-assed measures.

For at least the next three years, the Left has been given the opportunity to lead this country. It’s time they do just that.

Twist and Shout: Why the Politics of Anger Makes Me Want to Cry

“…it is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”

I was livid when I first saw video from the health care town hall meeting that took place last week in my hometown St. Louis.  I had already seen enough similar footage from other cities, but the fact that these were in some ways ‘my folk’ infuriated me.

Ignorant rednecks, I thought, the whole lot of them.

Judging by their age and apparent socioeconomic status (yes, I was stereotyping), I couldn’t help but figure that many of these folks were already receiving a substantial amount of government-financed health care in the form of Medicare and Medicaid. I was convinced many of them were either paid shills of the health-care industry or just sheep lathered up into an unthinking rage by the reactionary talking heads that now populate the airwaves.

These people are the ones who have been chewed up, spit on and totally ignored for years. They have seen their jobs shipped overseas, their communities neglected. They may have a right to be angry but they should be venting their rage at the fat cats on Wall Street, who plundered and pillaged this country for a decade and then received trillions of dollars of our money, bailed out of the damage caused by their own incompetency and malfeasance.

But instead, of all issues, the thing that finally tipped these people over the boiling point was the prospect of trying to find a better way to provide health care for all of our fellow citizens, of trying to fix a broken system that eats up way too much of our GDP, that doesn’t work nearly as well as other less resource-rich countries, and threatens to topple our nation’s already creaky balance sheet.

Fucking uncaring, unthinking, rude, selfish idiots. That was what I thought of these people.

But now I realize that by thinking this way, I was engaging in their game, letting my emotions get the best of me. I was demonizing them just as they were demonizing Obama and The Other that frightens them so much.

Because here’s the truth: I have bought into The Politics of Anger. How could I not? It is now in full force. Everywhere. We should just call it ImPolitics.

We can’t have a rational debate anymore about anything without feeling the anger, letting it seep into our thoughts and words to the point where we no longer are listening to each other but shouting at each other. And when the issue at stake is something as important and as personal as health care, the tempers run even higher and hotter.

And while the extreme right may practice this form of politics with much more enthusiasm and effectiveness than most, they don’t have a monopoly on it.

Admit it, you think the religious right are a bunch of hypocritical assholes. You thought Bush and Cheney were evil. You’ve compared them to Hitler and the Nazis once or twice, at least in your thoughts. And this was before they abused the power of their office, led us into a war on false pretenses, and took away a number of our personal liberties. Perhaps you felt this way as soon as they were elected, when they clearly stole the election, using their mob tactics in Florida (some of those scenes in the election offices in Miami-Dade County certainly do have an eerie resemblance to the rage we’re seeing now).

I’d like to think I’m better. I have a sensitive soul and an open mind, after all. I appreciate fine art and literature and film and music. I can appreciate nuance, see things in colors other than black and white. I am enlightened. I know and appreciate how precious and short life is, and how we too often get distracted by issues that don’t truly matter.  For whatever we may think lies beyond, if anything, we should at least agree that we would make our temporal lives a lot more pleasant if we tried to understand the common humanity that links us all, binds us to the same shared fate.

But then I see the terrifying rage at these meetings, and it makes me wonder.

I know it’s the insult of the day to throw out the term Hitler and raise the specter of  Nazism whenever you disagree with your opponent. Both sides do it, and the inappropriateness of the metaphor has rendered it all but impotent.

But I wonder if the rage you see at these meetings doesn’t indeed spring from the same place that led us to a world where such a thing as the Holocaust – and all the other holocausts, the Rwandas, the Cambodias, the Bosnias, the Darfurs, etc. etc. – became possible, perhaps even inevitable. That perhaps the rage at these meetings, and the rage that rises in me as I watch, is the true realization of the common humanity of which I speak, and of which binds us to the same shared fate.

And then my rage dissipates, and is instead replaced by a deep sadness. It is much less fulfilling. I hope it is just as inappropriate.

Is the Postal Service obsolete? And what does it mean for health care?

So apparently, the U.S. Postal Service is in a peck of trouble. Despite raising postage fees numerous times during the past couple of years, the USPS announced earlier this week that it had lost $2.4 billion between April and June and would be $7 billion in debt by the end of September.

Are you kidding me? $2.4 billion in losses in 3 months?? Are you sure the USPS isn’t making cars or selling subprime mortgages?

I know the economy is tough, and more and more people are communicating digitally nowadays, but there’s no excuse for this kind of performance. FedEx and UPS are still making money, after all.

If the USPS was a normal private company, changes would be made pronto to get its fiscal house in order. But because we’re talking about the government here, our lovely elected officials can seemingly do nothing but berate the Postmaster General John Potter for the agency’s performance while hemming and hawing over the implementation of some of the common sense changes he’s asking for – like the elimination of Saturday service, closure of hundreds of offices, and changes in retiree pay. Even certain Republicans – like Missouri congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson – are worried about cutting back too much. They’ve got constituents to think about, after all.

Of course, the union thinks Congress is already going too far and ‘declaring war’ on the postal workers. I’ve known a couple of people who work for the postal office and like most government workers, they have some of the most secure, cushy jobs out there. Anything that threatens the status quo is anathema to the postal union.

In the end, however, the union may have to accept certain changes, like the end of Saturday delivery. Meanwhile, I wonder if we even need residential 5-day delivery anymore? Why doesn’t the USPS do like the garbage folks and stop by two or three days a week. I know that 90-plus percent of the mail I get nowadays is either junk or not particularly time-sensitive. The rare items that I want to get as soon as possible – Netflix movies, magazines – could probably be delivered through one of the private couriers.

Don’t get me wrong. In many ways, I’m impressed by how well the postal service works. Sure, going to the post office and getting service is a nightmare, but when you think about the millions of pieces of mail that get delivered on time and to the right address every day, it’s a remarkable system.

In fact, when people have complained that a government-run health care plan would be a total disaster, the USPS was one of the examples I would give of government doing a big job pretty effectively.

Unfortunately, I’m not so sure anymore. Perhaps the naysayers have a point.

Obama’s Too Big to Fail Rules Too Late to Matter

The AP has posted an article detailing Obama’s new regulatory plan that would if enacted impose serious penalties on financial institutions when they get too large.

Although there aren’t many specifics in the article about what those disincentives would be or exactly how the government would define ‘too big’, this is a much-needed step back on the road to financial sobriety. We should never as an economy or a country be held hostage to the failings of one single entity.

As deeply as I hated all of the bailouts we’ve been throwing around to woefully (borderline criminally, in my opinion) mismanaged institutions like Citigroup and AIG, I do believe their balance sheets may have been so enormous, their footprints and obligations so intertwined in the world economy, that their failure could have crippled the entire foundation of our credit-based system and brought it to its knees.

Yet don’t be fooled – our problems didn’t lie with any one or two entities, but with the entire system. What we had instead was a complete failure by the market as a whole – and even more damning, by the regulators in charge of watching those markets – to recognize the emerging credit/debt/mortgage bubbles whose eventual bursting forced this country to its day of reckoning.

A law breaking up large financial institutions or disincentivizing them from forming in the first place will help make future problems easier to spot and solve, perhaps, but it won’t by itself save us from our own worst behavior.

And it will do very little if anything to impact our current situation and economic crisis.

In fact, the most ironic thing about the Obama plan is that the entity which may now be most accurately considered ‘too big to fail’ is our own U.S. government, which through actions taken by the Fed and the Treasury has taken on much of the bad debt and obligations (and added a bunch of new ones) that will be stifling our economy for years to come.

We can only hope that the Chinese and other foreign governments continue to agree that the U.S. government is indeed too big to fail and allow us the time to work through our issues and restore some amount of fiscal and monetary discipline without cutting off their support in one fell swoop.

Yeah, I’m still in love with our president … (Obama’s Speech to Muslims)

What can you add when one man says everything you’re thinking and says it with such clarity and such poetry??

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart or whether we commit ourselves to an effort, a sustained effort to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It’s easier to start wars than to end them. It’s easier to blame others than to look inward. It’s easier to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is one rule that lies at the heart of every religion, that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

MOFT: Episode 16 (PokerStars)

You’ve seen a lot less of me on dagblog lately, and while I’d love to put all of the blame for my absence on my Beyonce and the wedding plans which have been set in hot and heavy motion (It’s mostly painful, stressful stuff, but registering at Target was hella fun – come to Papa, Wii!!), but there is a much bigger badder beast than Mrs. All-Consuming Wedding at work here – and its name is PokerStars.

The truth of matter is, if we’re going to point fingers at anyone, Genghis is really the one to blame because it was partly due to his move to Philadelphia that our weekly NYC poker game, which has been going on regularly for more than eight years, has become very hit-and-miss, and I can’t have that. I need my cards fix.

So I decided to take the plunge and join Pokerstars, which easily earns the award for this week’s My One Favorite Thing. This isn’t the first time I played poker online – A few years ago I was on PartyPoker before that company decided to give up the U.S. market when Congress passed a law banning banks and other financial institutions from funding customer deposits.

The whole issue of the legality of online poker remains in flux, which is a complete joke considering the haphazard nature of this country’s gambling laws (yeah, state lottos and ‘riverboat’ casinos that aren’t even on the water, I’m talking to you) and considering that poker is a skill game enjoyed by millions and millions of Americans.

Indeed, poker is as American an institution as apple pie, and I’m pretty convinced now that the Democrats and card-loving Barney Frank are in charge that it’s only a matter of time before online poker becomes a fully regulated, fully taxed, fully legal activity. In the meantime, I had no qualms about rekindling my little addiction by joining Pokerstars, which along with a couple of other companies decided to take the risk and continue operating in the US.

As far as the site goes, it’s pretty good, very reminiscent of the PartyPoker look and feel. While Texas Hold ‘Em is far and away the most active game on the site, PokerStars offers up enough variety for a non-specialist like me to keep entertained, and I probably most enjoy playing Omaha Hi-Lo and 8-Game (which is eight different games that switch every 5 minutes or so).

And also like PartyPoker, I am convinced that the card distribution on PokerStars isn’t totally random – there are just way too many runner-runner flush suck outs that I see the bigger stacks hit. (This won’t make sense to you unless you know poker, but it basically means that the site’s algorithm seemingly has a mysterious way of moving games along – which if true makes the site a lot more money – by enticing people with few chips to call, only to nail them later in the hand. However, it’s possible it only seems that this happens a lot because you see so many hands playing online – I generally have three games going on at any one time).

I’m trying to keep my cardplaying to at least a reasonable minimum, but I have to admit it’s definitely eating into my blogging time, and sleeping time, and eating time. I’m just thankful we have such solid new contributors to keep the site active. I promise eventually I’ll start caring again about the real world – aside from poker and weddings that is. But right now, I have a game to get to.

Baby Boom Goes the Dynamite: The Lasting Legacy

The Baby Boomers have blown it in spectacular fashion.

For much of the past 20 years, they have been the ones in charge of this country. During that time, they have…

… ignored the looming Social Security crisis, which has been simmering for decades and is now apparently coming to a boiling point much quicker than originally estimated.

… ignored the looming health care crisis, fighting alongside the dangerously powerful AARP lobby for small benefits like cheaper drugs while letting the larger issues of increasing system-wide costs and underfunded Medicare obligations spiral out of control.

… ignored the looming global warming crisis, choosing to go to war to maintain their reliance on cheap foreign oil rather than seriously pursue alternative energy sources.

… ignored the looming credit crisis, living further and further beyond their means, indulging in unbridled consumerism and rampant asset speculation.

So is it any surprise, really, that their solution to our country’s current economic crisis has been to saddle future generations of Americans with even more crippling debt, making it even harder for us to solve the numerous other looming disasters we face because of their neglect??

I had strong hopes that the election of Barack Obama – one of the last of the Baby Boomers – would lead to a change in Washington, to a recognition that there was too much at stake to play the same silly political games and to keep ignoring the spreading cracks in the foundation of the American empire. But mostly, it’s been more of the same.

Instead of trying to repent for their profligate and selfish ways, the Baby Boomers have decided to cement their legacy by throwing one last Hail Mary of Irresponsibility, in the form of trillions of dollars of tax cuts and stimulus plans and bailout packages, in hopes of putting off the ultimate day of reckoning a little bit longer.

Harry Truman had a sign on his desk that said ‘The Buck Stops Here.’ Unfortunately, I think the Baby Boom generation took that to mean it should then pocket the buck.

It wasn’t always that way. For a while, the Baby Boomers bettered our world. They fought for progress, for peace, for women’s rights, for civil rights. In business and in culture, they created and innovated, producing a tremendous amount of national wealth and prosperity. To be honest, the past 40 years have in many ways been an exciting and fruitful period for America. But somewhere along the way, the Baby Boom generation stopped thinking about the future of the country and started looking out only for its own best interests (Was it a cynicism and selfishness borne out of Watergate and other historical events or just out of normal human nature?)

It’s easy to overgeneralize about a generation, of course, and probably somewhat unfair. These are our moms and dads, after all, and individually it’s tough to fault them for the damage they’ve wrought.

It is in fact quite painful to watch as our parents finally reach the tantalizing edge of retirement only to find that their IRAs and 401Ks have been decimated and that idyllic, restful ride off into the sunset postponed, perhaps indefinitely.

Painful and tragic, perhaps, but also in some ways justified. Collectively, the Baby Boom generation is merely reaping what it has sown.

Unfortunately, for the rest of us, the prospects are even dimmer. The field now lies fallow.

The House That George Built

My friend over at dagblog.com, Genghis, has created a compelling little movie to go with a poem he wrote parodying the old nursery rhyme, ‘This is the House that Jack Built”. I wanted to share it here because it deserves to get as much attention as possible.

The dagbuzz for 3/1/09: (Obama’s War on the Wealthy)

Been away all week on business, listening to my colleagues and the talking heads on CNBC bitch and moan about Obama’s budget and economic policies. They believe he’s declaring war on the wealthy and is going to destroy the economy with his increased tax hikes.

Are you fucking kidding me?!?

Oh yeah, I feel a rant coming on …

Image: Obama's budget: huge ambitions, huge obstacles      (AP)

Obama’s budget: huge ambitions, huge obstacles (AP)

(PS This dagbuzz is far from my best performance, and you’ll probably notice a couple of rough cuts within the video. I just got caught up playing with Windows Movie Maker and eventually succumbed to fatigue. If you have any idea on how to make those cuts smoother, i’d be all ears. I’m just trying to find a way so that when I mess up, I don’t always have to restart my spiel from the beginning)

The buzz for 2/18/09: Cars and Houses and Chimps, Oh My!

I’m starting to feel the economy is like the chimp gone mad yesterday in Connecticut. You know, the one who ripped off the face of his owner’s friend.

“It’s eating us!! Listen to me, you have to shoot it!!”

Today’s economic damage tally:

$22 billion more for the car companies, 50,000+ expected jobs lost anyway.

$75 billion in mortgage relief for irresponsible homebuyers. (BTW, just got done reading through the details of the mortgage relief plan, and it actually looks fairly sensible on first blush. Bravo!)

Thanks again to Yahoo! buzz:

911 tape captures chimp owner’s horror

GM, Chrysler seek billions more, to cut more jobs (AP)

Image: $75 billion mortgage plan

$75 billion mortgage plan

Image: Recession will be worst since 1930s: Greenspan      (Reuters)

Recession will be worst since 1930s: Greenspan (Reuters)

The Buzz for 2/17/09: (Obama’s New New Deal?)

So Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 into law in Denver this afternoon. I’ve heard several pundits calling the $787 billion stimulus package the beginning of Obama’s New Deal. In today’s dagbuzz, I discuss why that comparison is foolish, and why we probably couldn’t even afford a new New Deal even if we desperately needed one.

I know Obama isn’t done with today’s bill. Homeowner and banking rescue plans are in the works and coming soon, but everything I’ve heard so far suggests that what the administration is trying to accomplish falls far short of the broad scope and scale of FDR’s New Deal plan.

The reason for our somewhat modest response may be partly that as bad as things are today, they’re not nearly as bad as they were when FDR took office (total shutdown of banking system, 25% unemployment), or maybe partly because of Obama’s more tenuous political situation (FDR got Congress to grant every single one of his ‘First 100 Days’ requests), but I worry that it’s mostly because we couldn’t begin to afford such a series of initiatives without totally jeopardizing the country’s long-term economic health and standing.

Image: Obama poised to sign stimulus into law      (AP)

Obama poised to sign stimulus into law (AP)

The Buzz for 2/9/09: (Obama, Gaza, Octuplets, Grammies, Tiger)

OK, I don’t know how many people actually listened to my first attempt at the Daily Buzz, but two people commented they liked it (with reservations), and that’s all the encouragement the vain Deadman needed to continue the process. I think I solved the sunglass glare issue, and for whatever reason the slow-motion issue seems absent this time (tho the quality of the video is still atrocious and very dark – perhaps that’s appropriate for the deadman, tho!), and alas the length is still too long at just under 6 minutes, though at least 20 seconds of the video is dedicated to showing off my new Snuggie.

Here are the Yahoo buzz! stories I run down: (The video is below)

Obama to push stimulus at rally      (Reuters)

Obama to push stimulus at rally (Reuters)

Israeli aircraft hit 2 militant targets in Gaza      (AP)

Israeli aircraft hit 2 militant targets in Gaza (AP)

Octuplets’ grandmother criticizes daughter

51st Annual Grammy Award Winners Announced!

Tiger’s son Charlie arrives, already favored at ’26 Masters

Questions: Stimulate Me

OK, so Obama’s tough talking apparently worked.

The administration got three moderate Republican senators to agree to support the stimulus package and prevent a filibuster. In return, some $100 billion in spending from the package was removed while some Republican proposals for tax cuts and credits were adopted (most notably a $15,000 credit for homebuyers).

Of course, the compromise has pissed off some politicians on the left, but likely not enough to jeopardize a Yea vote.  The bill will pass the Senate soon, and then move to a committee where the House and Senate will negotiate on the final bill.

I just spent about an hour or so scanning through the revised stimulus bill, all 736 pages, and there’s plenty of good news (assuming you like the idea of the government spending $827 billion to try and stimulate the economy).

Despite the compromises, this is still clearly a Democratic bill. While there is certainly a fair amount of money going to the military and national security, the biggest sums are reserved for the areas that most liberals care about – education, health care, environment and green technology development, public housing and the homeless, public transit and other infrastructure.

For me, the good news is that the bill is pretty explicit about how the government will track the effectiveness of the money being spent, including the creation of a consumer-facing Web site that will have great detail on every dollar (aside from potential national security issues).

This is all hugely important because if I were someone without scruples, I’d be reading through this bill and just thinking about all the ways I could get my share of what could easily become a fraud-ridden boondoggle.

So what’s the questions part of this column, you ask?

Well, I am going to list below two (or more) of the programs or projects that are currently slated to receive more than $1 billion in government money, and I want you to tell me which one you think is more important and why? Any you’d get rid of?? (This is not a comprehensive list of the billion-dollar initiatives, and there were literally dozens more falling just short of ten figures).

1) $1.2 billion for aviation security vs. $1.2 billion for youth activities (incl. summer employment, state grants) vs $1.5 bln for state and local law enforcement?

2) $9 billion for federal building funds (including $6 bln to make them green) vs $9 billion for broadband expansion initiatives vs $8.4 bln for public transit?

3) $1 billion for dislocated worker training vs $1 billion for Head Start?

4) $1,35 billion for the National institute of Health vs. $1.2 billion for research at the National Science Foundation?

5) $13.5 billion for special education programs vs $13.869 in student financial assistance vs. $13.0 bln for elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 (incl. school improvement)?

6) $17.5 billion for CDC screening and immunization vs. $14.398 for renewable energy development?

7) $2 billion for advanced battery grants (incl. vehicles) vs. $2 billion for high-speed rail corridor program?

8)$2.25 billion for redevelopment of abandoned/foreclosed housing vs. $1.5 bln for homeless prevention?

9) $4.5 bln for electricity delivery and energy reliability vs $5.5 for surface transportation (i.e. highway/bridges) vs. $5 billion for health information technology investments?

10) $1 bln for nuclear weapons program vs. $1 bln for prisons?

Questions: The Inaugural Edition

OK, so I didn’t find a way to scrounge up an Inauguration ticket. I’m certainly not going to spend one of the most beautiful weeks in recent memory being bitter. Over at dagblog.com, A-man and the Big O are at least making me feel like I’m there with their insanely comprehensive coverage (although how about a little more multimedia please!). In the meantime, I’ve been asked to do a special Inauguration version of my Questions column, and I’m happy to do it as part of my own little contribution. Now you need to contribute by answering! (As always, more comments on dagblog.com)

1) I’ve been to the mountaintop and I’ve seen the inevitable references.

Isn’t it awesome that America will officially inaugurate its first black president one day after the country celebrates the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.? How much credit do you think Dr. King can take for making this inauguration a possibility? Do you think Obama will reference King’s mountaintop speech, i have a dream speech, both or neither in his inaugural address?

2) A well-stocked Cabinet?

Aside from the Clintonites, I’m not too familiar with much of Obama’s cabinet. Which nomination are you most impressed with and why? What about the worst selection (Richardson not an option)?

3) The over/under.

Give me a time estimate, down to the seconds, for the length of Obama’s inauguration speech. Closest to the actual number wins nothing but the mad respect of all the losers.

4) In case Orlando has some free time in DC.

What’s your favorite tourist attraction in Washington D.C.?

5) For the love of god.

Will Rev. Rick Warren utter the word Jesus or Jesus Christ in his inauguration invocation. If so, how many times will he say it? If not, what word or phrase will he utter that will be closest (i.e. savior, Holy Trinity, son of God, the big J.C., etc.)?

6) First line of business.

What will be the first executive order signed by Obama? What about the first bill passed by Congress?

7) I still cannot believe his reign is over.

George W: What do you think will be the first non-vacation(ranch)-related thing of significance he does after leaving office?

8) The pundits.

Whose television coverage of the Inauguration will you be watching the most? Whose opinion of Obama’s inaugural address are you most interested in hearing?

9) It’s never too early to think ahead.

OK, let’s keep thinking big: What will be the next minority or oppressed group to reach the highest office in the land? Hispanic, Jewish, Gay, Female, Asian (I know, I know, I’ve excluded a ton of others) … List them in order of likelihood.

10) Biggest miracle of the week: Black man become POTUS, Passenger plane crashes in river without any fatalities, Cardinals make the Super Bowl for the first time in franchise history?

Super Bowl Winner, Final Score and MVP Predictions please. For those of you who don’t care about the game or follow sports, please predict whether Springsteen’s halftime act will suck ass or not.


May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Mar    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.