Taxes!
Thursday, March 12, 2009
I'm irrationally excited about getting my taxes filed, so I wrote up a quick song:
I want my money back money back money back
I want my money back money back money back
G-man, give me my cash
G-man give me my cash
Barbecue sauce
Philosophically, I do support paying taxes to support entitlements, defence, highway maintenance etc, etc. But I would be lying if my liberal leaning heart didn't go all a-flutter when the refunds roll in.
WHAT?
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Since humor like this certainly indicates that bipartisanship is a priority in Washington...
See them all at:
Deja vu? House Passed the Stimulus with No Republican Support.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Just saw the end of the vote on CSPAN.
I'm happy to see the bill passed. I'm happy to see it passed because I believe it is a good solution based on research and evaluation of many different opinions. You can see my reasoning below if you like, but it's not the point of this post.
- Aside: An overwhelming majority of economists, experts on how to deal with a hemorraging market, agree that one tactic we can leverage to reinvigorate this economuy is a spending bill -- whether your spending on building barracks or re-sodding the mall. Tax cuts, for the most part, are pandering to the voters in terms of stimulating the economy since they are dollars which are not guarenteed to flow back into the economy. In good times, a tax cut can result in econonmic growth. In bad times, however, individuals are much more likely to sit on that extra cash (really, what are you going do with it? Head out to buy a car/home/widget?). The tax cuts in this bill targeted towards business are helpful, but the truly prohibitive cost keeping small business from hiring employees is the cost of insurance. Thus, a payroll tax cut alone is unlikely to result in a hiring spree.
I'm deeply troubled by the tone of this vote.
Democrat or republican, these are people we elect to represent us. They are supposed to be informed, and to be able to think for themselves.
Under this philosophy, I would like to believe that each of the representatives who voted today did so having:
- Read the bill
- Evaluated expert opinions
- Talked to their constituents
I have a hard time believing that all 178 republicans came to the very same opinion -- consequently, the same goes for the dems. All 246 of you believe this bill is the best for your district? I came to the conclusion that it would be -- but we each have our own unique thought processes, we assign value differently, we have variying priorities. And we SHOULD.
It would be incredibly interesting to interview every single rep. and get each of their reasons for voting yay or nay.
Can bipartisanship actually exist?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Right now, our country's political parties seem like two warring siblings smiling in a posed photo. In the image, they are placidly smiling, trying to appear that they're setting aside their differences to coexist harmoniously...meanwhile each is pinching the other hard behind their backs.
Instead of making an effort to actually behave in a bipartisan manner, the Republicans and the Democrats in congress are engaged in a war to be perceived as bipartisan. It's classic, screw the country and it's "issues" like shrinking GDP, growing job loss, and markets atrophy. What's really important is that you cover your back and at all costs *get reelected.*
Offenses:
Republicans --
Proposing and passing amendments to the House bill, then behaving like kindergartners and following teacher's orders not to vote for it. This charade was a massive waste of time and energy (believe me, I watched it on CSPAN), and it burned out whatever smidgen of good will the House Dems may have had.
Democrats --
Writing a CRAPPY bill. Really crappy. So bad, Obama was secretly lobbying against it!
From: Democratic Congressman: Obama Has Been Disappointed by Pelosi's Pork
On Liberadio (!) on Super Bowl Sunday, Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., said that the White House has conveyed to Democratic leaders its displeasure at the amount of "pork" in the stimulus package.
Cooper, one of 11 Democrats who voted against the bill, said that he "actually got some quiet encouragement from the Obama folks for what I’m doing because they know its a messy bill and they wanted a clean bill."
Continued Cooper, a conservative "Blue Dog" Democrat, "Now, I got in terrible trouble with our leadership because they don’t care what’s in the bill, they just want it passed and they want it to be unanimous.
They don’t mind the partisan fighting cause that’s what they are used to. In fact, they’re really good at it. And they’re a little bit worried about what a post-partisan future might look like."
Sheesh.
Given the chance to prove that the Democratic party is committed to assisting the citizens of this country, dems instead try to eek in pet issues and projects. Yes, Ms. Pelosi, Obama won. But we elected a pragmatic leader, not someone who is going to promote a divisive agenda in the guise of "stimulus." I may agree with some of the agendas you're pushing, like the birth control spending, but this bill is not the place for them.
This bill is meant to pull this country out of economic muck and mire. And how are we doing on that?
Worst January on Record for Stocks
Time Warner reports $16 billion quarterly loss
ADP Says U.S. Companies Reduced Payrolls by 522,000
Panasonic to Cut 15,000 Jobs
Kraft posts 72% decline in profit, cuts 2009 view
Oh, right. So...
Senate Lacks Votes to Pass Stimulus
This bill is meant to pull this country out of economic muck and mire. And how are we doing on that?
Worst January on Record for Stocks
Time Warner reports $16 billion quarterly loss
ADP Says U.S. Companies Reduced Payrolls by 522,000
Panasonic to Cut 15,000 Jobs
Kraft posts 72% decline in profit, cuts 2009 view
Oh, right. So...
Senate Lacks Votes to Pass Stimulus
Stimulus Bill Passes the House
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The House of Reps passed the stimulus bill...without a single "yay" vote from the republican side.
If you're curious about where the money is going, this google doc lays out the spending by agency/initiative:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p-kX0k_KXgtwwzHnvEn4eCA
The vote stats and acutal bill text can be found here:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1/show
A change of pace...
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
In the photo above, Beyoncee is wonderfully out of focus.
Is it me, or do celebrities seem more irrelevant than ever right now? Scrolling through the inaugural photo albums, I couldn't help but cringe when I came across a familiar face from LA. January 20th was a day to celebrate our government and our new president, not a chance to market a film or get a little extra press.
The video below is not for the faint of heart. For those of you who watch 30 Rock, from time to time the "actor" characters on that show get upset when people forget how important they are. They then do something incredibly inane and frequently damaging to remind everyone of their magnificence and relevance.
Behold, life imitates art (ok, I know calling 30 Rock art is a little...much):
Incredible.
Yo-Yo Ma and Itzhak Perlman
Friday, January 23, 2009
If you'd like to d/l the "performance" from Tuesday, it's here.
Thoughs on Jan 20th
Was it possible to watch the inauguration on Tuesday and avoid at least a small tug in your gut from the obvious tide of emotion?
Some will say yes, for me, while I was not sobbing with joy I did experience an intense rush of relief. Relief, followed by a looming awareness of intense anxiety. The anxiety one feels when something you very much want to believe in actually has to live up to your expectations. I think that queasy anticipation is what has kept me from writing about Tuesday thus far. I was waiting to see how things would begin to fall out -- to see whether it was actually possible for Barack Obama to live up to his oratory.
Frequently, when I hear President Obama speak, I get the uncanny feeling that he's putting into words something I consider an essential truth -- but couldn't articulate for myself if my life depended on it. Others have pointed out that this is part of Obama's political skill; the generalities he expresses can be interpreted in myriad ways, at once satisfying many disparate outlooks and philosophies. I agree, though it's not necessarily a negative truth. His words resonate with and comfort an undeniable majority. Comfort at a time when so much is uncomfortable has value. However, it is then our responsibility to take these amorphous messages and look beyond his words to his actions when we assess whether our expectations are being met.
So, I cross my fingers and hope that his inaugural address, or my understanding of it, is realized.
Things that I like so far:
-Executive orders that rebuke executive privilege and keep lobbyists at bay.
-Executive orders that shut down Guantanamo, and prisons we didn't even know existed.
-The BarackBerry, because at some point the White House will have to catch up to keep up.
-McCain making trouble.
Things that I do not like so much:
-Partisan ridiculousness in congress, on the part of the Democrats.
-Indications of future P/VP rifts.
An informative take on Israel-Hamas
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
I've been searching for an article that can describe what's going on in Gaza in what appears to be an objective lens.
I think I've found one that at least present both perspectives to a certain degree. It's from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), which is a bipartisan foreign policy think tank in Washington, DC.
THE WAR IN GAZA
Tactical Gains, Strategic Defeat?
Anthony H. Cordesman
Here's a quote that I think outlines the crux of the issue:
The fact remains, however, that the growing human tragedy in Gaza is steadily raising more serious questions as to whether the kind of tactical gains that Israel now reports are worth the suffering involved. As of the 14th day of the war, nearly 800 Palestinian have died and over 3,000 have been wounded. Fewer and fewer have been Hamas fighters, while more and more have been civilians.
The article's answer is, no, the gains are not worth the suffering. The reasoning behind that answer covers a somewhat moderate, academic perspective.
What is "Smart Power"?
America's new brand of foreign policy: Smart Power
In today's confirmation hearings, future SoS Hilary Clinton (she'll be confirmed easily, her hearing was far from the brawl the press predicted) continuously referred to the concept of Smart Power. ( See: instant media coverage)
I had never heard of it before -- and wasn't even sure it was a phrase to be capitalized as opposed to a less than veiled dig at the Bush Doctrine. Which would, by comparison, be Dumb Power? Heh.
Smart Power "means knowing that the United States’ own hand is not always its best tool: U.S. interests are furthered by enlisting others on behalf of U.S. goals, through alliances, international institutions, careful diplomacy, and the power of ideals" (Nossel, 138).
Smart Power has its roots in liberal internationalism. Liberal internationalism is credited to Woodrow Wilson, who wasn't able to apply the concept nearly as effectively as FDR, Truman, and to a lesser extent, Kennedy.
The idea behind liberal internationalism is that a world of stable, democratic nations are less likely to progress conflicts into war. Meaning that the US government should use diplomatic, economic, and military methods to advance foreign policy goals including: self-determination, human rights, free trade, the rule of law, economic development, and the quarantine and elimination of dictators and weapons of mass destruction (wmd) (Nossel, 131).
Citation: Nossel, Suzanne, "Smart Power." Foreign Affairs 18.2 (2004): 131-142.
Full article available to buy here.
Citation: Nossel, Suzanne, "Smart Power." Foreign Affairs 18.2 (2004): 131-142.
Full article available to buy here.
Also, from About.com:
In foreign policy circles, the term "hard power" refers to guns and bombs, the military force of a country. "Soft power" is used to describe other forms of persuasion a country can employ: trade deals, foreign aid, diplomacy, cultural influence (like movies and music), and more.
America frequently uses both hard and soft power to protect interests and maintain influence around the world. But a new term is catching on. "Smart power" is being used to describe how the nation can wisely use (and preserve) both hard and soft power in the world.
...Palestine isn't a country?
Friday, January 9, 2009
Flashback to Monday –
Geography has never been a strength of mine. I don’t know how, but I seem to have missed that subject in school (maybe I was playing too much Oregon Trail). As a result, whenever something with a particularly regional bent arises (Georgia/Russia, Israel/Lebanon, Darfur, Congo etc.) I turn to my great friend: Google Maps.
I enter “Palestine” into that ol’ minimal google maps UI and…it returns Palestine, TX?
At this point, I am confused, and I try a number of idiotic variations like “Palestine, Middle East” and “Gaza, Palestine.” I get nothing but Texas. Searches for “Gaza” alone bring me to Israel…but I can’t seem to find its border with Palestine.
Now I feel confused and betrayed – either google is messing with me…or this “country” that I had been lead to believe existed by the news media, in fact, did not. Isn’t Gaza a region of Palestine which is ruled by Hamas? I search for Gaza, and I realize that it’s a city in the Gaza strip, a small region google indicates is PART of Israel. Whoa. Forgive me, but I haven’t heard this conflict referred to as civil war, so what the HECK?
No, Palestine is not a country (at least not according to the USA). And Gaza is not a region in Palestine, it is a city in the Gaza Strip. I found that out this week…because of google. I know that for some of you that statement may seem horribly ignorant. But maybe for some of you, like me, it’s a bit of a shock.
With headlines like:
Israel and Hamas Rebuff U.N. Cease-Fire Call, NYT
Israel Resumes Gaza Assault, WSJ
Israel Expands Gaza Offensive, TIME
Doesn’t this war sound like a fight between established nations?
96 countries recognize the State of Palestine, none of whom are major, Western powers – it’s made up of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Here’s a "non google" map (click on it for a bigger version):
In the context of the decisions my country has made historically, I can hardly judge Israel harshly for their offensive. Nevertheless, looking at the Gaza Strip wedged mainly between Israel and the Mediterranean with a comparatively tiny border with Egypt, I cannot begin to comprehend the desperation Palestinian (?) civilians are feeling.
Best pic ever...
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Many have already pointed out that G. H. W. Bush seems to prefer Obama over W. But, why has no one noticed the buffer zone around Carter? It could be for one or both of two reasons:
1) His views on Israel/Palestine
2) He ripped one (look at that smile!)
Your choice.
UPDATE:
Also, this runner up for favorite photo. (Thanks Sam!):
UPDATE II:
Here's the script to photo 1 -- HYSTERICAL: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/01/what_do_five_presidents_talk_a.html
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Identify the two things in this sentence which indicate that Roland Burris is perhaps not the ideal choice for Junior Senator from Illinois:
"There's nothing wrong with Roland Burris and there's nothing wrong with the appointment."
-Roland Burris
On your mark, get set, GO!
UPDATE:
For extra credit: What are the names of Burris's son and daughter?
ɐpuɐןoɹ puɐ puɐןoɹ :ɐ
Please, please let this cause another Gold Rush
Friday, January 2, 2009
From the NYT: A Nevada Town Escapes the Slump, Thanks to Gold
As pirates and cowboys have always known -- gold is the key to long term prosperity.
Pack up your wagon, buy supplies at the local store, and make sure you have enough bullets to hunt buffalo.
It's time to hit the Oregon Trail!
