Rest in Peace

I am a massive fan of Michael Jackson. He is the ultimate entertainer. A legend. A musical genius. He created a new genre of music, Pop. His dance skills were perfection. His personal life was confusing, but his music was amazing.

With that said, I am so tired of every aspect of his life and death dominating every news channel. Even if I wanted to know what else is going on in the world, I would have to become an investigative journalist and scouer the internet for non-Michael Jackson news. What is happening in Iran? What is really in the "Cap-and-Trade" bill? Was Bernie Madoff's sentencing fair? What is going on in Hondurus? There are hundreds of things that Anderson Cooper and Charlie Gibson and Bill O'Reilly should be talking about, and yet ever since last Thursday, they have talking almost exclusively about Michael. Thank goodness for local news. It gives me a half an hour breather from everything Michael Jackson. And I am disappointed that credible news channels have transformed into a glorified Access Hollywood or Entertainment Tonight, where the only thing that differentiates the two is the running ticker at the bottom of the screen. What is wrong with the news industry? I will miss Michael Jackson, but I can not wait for this news story to Rest in Peace.

Now THIS is how you have an affair!

I know this is a far cry from my last post, but since it is the "Hot Topic" in the news reel today, I must put in my two cents.

When you think of political sex scandals, you typically dry heave in your mouth and try to think of happy thoughts. They are typically conducted by an unattractive, womanizing, yet awkward politician who typically has to pay for favors (Spitzer), use his extreme power or 'charm' (Clinton), swing the other way (Greevy), or tap his feet (Craig). Those stories are a thing of the past! We have the 7 new guidelines on "How to have an affair: Politician Edition", written by South Carolina Governor, Mark Sanford, and Foreward written by former President Bill Clinton.

1. Go international! Forget the days of sleazy interns, New York City call girls, or underage congressional pages! Make it a destination affair, it will be all the more enjoyable and relaxing.


2. Instead of explicit texts or phone calls, take notes from Danielle Steele, and make your e-mails masterpiece literature. Instead of your affair infuriating the stay-at-home mom voting population, they will secretly wish you were their Fabio and taking them somewhere south of the border! (Read a selection of his e-mails HERE).


3. No need for an elaborate excuse to make your escape, just tell everyone you have gone hiking…or grocery shopping…or walking your dog. It will only make your actual story all the more glamorous when you get home and tell them what you’ve really been doing!


4. Immediately flaunt your newly acquired Argentine sun tan at press conference.


5. Have the hanky ready, to wipe your tearful indiscretions away, and ask for forgiveness.


6. Don’t share camera time with your bitter and miserable wife. Her facial expressions will always discredit your words.


7. Don’t resign from everything. Start small, then find some middle ground with your angry constituents. It is the art of political bargaining.

If you follow these guidelines, you will not only get your wife to be willing to "resurrect your marriage", but also romance your female (and some male) constituency with your story-book affair.

Iran's Cry for Help

After Iran's Presidential Election, and the announced win of incumbent Ahmadinejad, the Iranian people who backed the defeated Mousavi took to the streets to protest the results. Mousavi encouraged peaceful demonstrations, but the Iranian government, who majority of Western news agencies placed in Tehran claim rigged this election, is crushing the protesters with lethal force. The Iranian government has cut majority of Western media coverage within the country, and is having more difficulty in preventing the Iranian people from documenting the devestation.


What is the United States response? "The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States," President Obama stated. He responded in an interview that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling” in the disputed Iranian presidential election. This position does not surprise me. It is a very 'diplomatic' attitude, not taking sides, or involving the United States in anyway. However...


What do we stand for? Why on earth do we have values and principles and a belief in freedom and democracy and the right to voice your opinion....AND NOT VOICE IT?!?!? We need to speak out against the tyrranical government's actions: cutting off media communications, lethal force, ignoring blatant voting fraud, the list continues. Do they need our support? Do the protesters want a "stamp of approval" from the United States? I argue: ABSOLUTELY YES!


How did the Iranian protesters get pictures and video and information out to the rest of the world? They used United States social networking websites Facebook, Youtube and Twitter. Even the leader of the opposition, Mousavi, has a facebook account. Another thing I found interesting is how many of their protest signs were in English. Of course a majority of the world speaks English along with their native language, but why wouldn't they use their native language if they didn't want the United States and the Western world to not only understand their plight but to stand with them, voicing an opinion against an oppressive regime?

President Obama doesn't want the U.S. to be a distraction used by the Iranian government, but guess what? Even with his hands off approach, President Ahmadinejad has already blamed the U.S. and Brittain with intruding. When dealing with foreign relations, President Obama will learn that the United States is damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Since the outcome is the same, we must stand for what we believe. What is the point of having principles if we don't apply them and stand with those who are fighting for the same rights? If we don't, they are worthless.

Call me Senator Boxer if you're nasty!

As a student of history and politics, I have always held extreme reverence for titles, oaths of office, the formalities and history behind our political system. In writing about our leaders, I have tried (probably not perfectly) to use their titles, President, Vice President, Secretary, etc. It is a sign of respect. There are other terms to show respect, and living on the edge of the south, "ma'am" has become a term I absolutely enjoy. Apparently, Californian women don't appreciate being called ma'am.

While questioning Brig. General Michael Walsh about the New Orleans levees, an interesting exchange happened. He responded to her as "ma'am", where she interrupted him by saying, "Could you say 'senator' instead of 'ma'am'. It's just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title. I'd appreciate it." You can view the clip here. (Don't worry, the clip doesn't involve any "right wing" commentary or introduction.) When I heard the exchange, it sounded vaguely familiar....where had I heard the line "I think I've earned it" before....???

That's right! The overly inflated, egotistic Colonel in "A Few Good Men" played by Jack Nicholson insists that Tom Cruise "addresses me as Colonel or Sir. I believe I've earned it". I wish I could see a full clip of the questioning of Brig. General Walsh, to see if Senator Boxer ever referred to him as General or Brigadier or even Sir. Possibly her history of having a relatively hostile attitude with honorable men in the military has elevated a simple exchange to something newsworthy. My only wish was that instead of saying, "Yes, Senator."; Brig. General would have responded the way Judge Randolph did in "A Few Good Men" to Jack Nicholson's arrogant behavior saying, "And the Senator will address me as Brigadier General or Sir. I'm quite certain I've earned it. You may continue." It appears he is much more of a gentleman, or one of our own few good men.

Health Care

There has been MUCH talk about health care in the news lately. And MUCH talk about health care in our home as well. I've read the text of President Obama's speech, and the text of the Republican's proposal. I completely disagree with major concepts in both. First, President Obama's proposal. His speech covers everything from paperless medical records to preventative care. From compensating doctors based on the patients outcome instead of cost of treatment, to revamping Medicaid and Medicare. All with the price tag of around $1 trillion over the next 10 years. While reading his speech, he kept using the phrase "we need to..." and I want to know who the "we" is. He was speaking to an audience of the American Medical Association, i.e. doctors. Does he mean the medical industry? Or the more likely answer, the federal government. Does that mean that within the Department of Health and Human Services, Sect. Sebelius would have control over all that he suggested? Would a new government agency be formed? I find that the most likely answer to all of those questions extremely frightening.

Now for the Republican Response. Of course there is a counter argument, this is politics. In typical fashion, the Republican proposal is considerably less wordy. I've seen longer prescription ads in my favorite hollywood magazines. Yet, I found their ideas almost as disturbing. First they suggest the states create a "State Health Insurance Exchange", which sounds like a government version of Progressive Auto Insurance (with that annoying spokeswoman, which was thinking about tacos...you know the ads). At least they didn't suggest a Federal Health Insurance Exchange, I'd run for the hills! Second, they suggest taxing the money employers spend on health insurance. Why on earth would employers continue to provide benefits to their employees? They wouldn't! And the best coverage I've gotten is through employment. Lastly, they want to revamp the Medicaid and Medicare systems.

All I have to say is, when has more government involvement been a good thing. Please give me one example! And recently, the insurance company that the state employees use here in Oklahoma hadn't paid the doctors and dentists for their services for over 6 months. One local practice was owed over $100,000, which is only now being paid. How will that help the "small business or self-employed" both parties insist they are helping? It actually does the opposite.

A Must Read

What kind of qualifications do you need to dismantle General Motors, the fourth largest bankruptcy filing in US history? Decades of hands on experience? An understanding of the auto industry or at least the industrial industry? At least an MBA or business experience? Nah! Why not tap into the brain of a not-quite law school graduate working in his first government job? You will be shocked when you read this article found in the New York Times about Brian Deese, who serves on the National Economic Council, a special adviser to the President, and the GM Dismantler. I feel confident in the "uniquely qualified individuals" President Obama has given the authority to "rewriting the rules of American capitalism" in "what may become President Obama's biggest experiment yet in federal economic intervention".

Read more HERE.

News Review

There have been many interesting news stories that have caught my attention the past few days, and instead of doing a typically in depth post about each, I only have time to give my slant on several at one time. So here is my news review.

Social Issues:
Murder of Abortion Doctor: Sunday, May 31 Dr. George Tiller was shot to death while attending religious services. The suspect, Scott Roeder, was soon after apprehended. Dr. Tiller was one of the few abortion doctors in the nation who would perform late-term abortions, and has been the victim of previous attempted attacks. Because of this attack, abortion clinics nation wide are beefing up security. Let's follow the logic of Scott Roeder and other anti-abortion violent protesters: We abhor the destruction of life, so we take the life of another person who performs such acts. Hmm... you become what you despise.


Dick Cheney Pro-Gay Marriage: Two weeks ago, Dick Cheney was proclaimed the anti-Obama spokesperson regarding the War on Terror. Most media commentators begged former Vice President Cheney to step away from the public eye, and shrink away into retirement. I was leaning towards the same attitude. And now he is back with vengeance, and most media outlets are heralding his return! What could make them have such a dramatic change of heart? He is for "equal rights for everybody that people ought to be able to enter into any kind of relationship they want." Cheney is pro-Gay Marriage? And what liberal biased drive by mainstream media broke this story? None other than the anti-homosexual, bigoted, unfair and completely imbalanced Fox News!!! He continued on to state that "the states ought to retain the ability to regulate and determine what's marriage and what the legal status of those unions are. It should not be a federal issue." Which I completely agree with. You do not apply for a federal marriage license, you apply for one within your own state. I am curious to see how this will change Dick Cheney's image within the main stream media. Before now he has been played as the master-mind behind all of the Bush Administrations evil doing, plotting the trampling of civil rights while smiling crookedly. Will he now be the poster child for the republican party? The democrats can only hope.


Ahhh...it's Date Night!: Us moms can appreciate any husband taking his gorgeous wife out on a much needed date away from The House, right? I could care less what the Presidential couple did on their date, but I think it is nice he held up his end of the bargain of taking his wife to a Broadway show. I just wish President Obama didn't make us, the taxpayers, go Dutch! Although President Obama paid the bill for dinner and the show, but the majority of the cost, $24,000 of traveling fees is charged to the Tax Payer Platinum Credit Card. Apparently, we have an unlimited credit limit (which sounds like an oxymoron right).


Which brings me to the next section....Economics!

Geithner's Comedy Tour: He must have Conan O'brien or Seinfeld writing his material, because he apparently had students at the University of Peking, China rolling in the aisles! His hilarious one liner that prompted the laughter was, "Chinese assets are very safe". Ba! Ha! Ha! Ha! He continued his shtick with "the Obama administration will cut it's huge fiscal deficits" and promised very "disciplined spending"! Ba-dum-ching! Drum roll please, for the final closing joke: "possibly including reintroduction of pay-as-you-go budget rules instead of nonstop borrowing. Thank you, and Goodnight!" I'm shocked that this comedic routine went over like it did, especially since China is the biggest foreign owner of US Bonds, and has slowed almost to a stop of their purchasing these bonds. I'm sure they can identify with us being like the sole shareholder of a failing company, like GM, who is inevitably filing for bankruptcy. I wonder if their leaders are saying to their people, "The US is too big to fail!"


How are we $546,668 in debt? We don't have any credit card debt, how can we possibly be half a million dollars in debt???? Oh, I forgot! The former President, George W. Bush had a Tax Payers Platinum Credit Card taken out in my name, and my household's taxpayer obligation is $546,668 for 2008. That crazy cowboy wracked up that much debt in one year!?!?!? And how much more will the spendaholic Obama administration deepen this debt in 2009? We need an intervention! Where is Dr. Drew? Or Dr. Oz? Or Suze Orman??? I'll take anyone at this point!


Too Big to Fail: Last November, the prospect of GM filing for bankruptcy would have been "devastating", according to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Congressman Barney Frank called it "particularly troublesome" and a financial expert explained that it would be "as close to reorganizing the whole U.S. economy as you could get". These were the blaring facts of why we had to bail out GM in November 2008. And yet, even with the government rushing in "To save the day!", they still had to file for bankruptcy? According to the previous fear filled comments, we need to prepare for an economic Armageddon! Wait, now they are saying what?!?!? CEO of GM, Fritz Henderson said that the reorganization allowed through filing bankruptcy "will create a leaner, quicker more customer and completely product-focused company, one that’s more cost competitive and has a competitive balance sheet". Everything is coming up roses! Where was this hope filled discussion before the bail outs? The fact that letting a company fail can only make it stronger, more cost efficient and competitive? I don't understand how anyone at this point can argue for more bail outs for any industry! Because apparently, this will be a good starting point for GM. I love the four words, "I told you so".