President Obama takes a straightforward approach to personal finances. Image: Muhammed/Ficker/CC BY

President Obama dropped in on the White House Personal Finance Summit Wednesday to give his opinion on a variety of budget related issues. He seemed a bit blind-sided when asked by Meg Marco, of the Consumerist, how he handles his own finances. After a brief pause, he answered, “don’t spend all your money.”

Saving some of what you earn

“My grandmother worked her way up from being a secretary to a vice president of a regional bank,” Obama told the small group of writers. “She was from Kansas, and she had a very straightforward view, which was save a little bit of what you’re earning and the magic of compound interest applies.”

College debts

“That is something Michelle and I have tried to apply, not always successfully,” the president said. “I’m very sympathetic to what young people are going through today, because Michelle and I graduated from law school with combined debt of $120,000, and it took us 10 years to pay off.”

Spending discipline

Obama said in the current economy, young people often are forced to deal with the “quadruple whammy” of unemployment, school debt, housing expenses and, often, the need to care for elderly parents. He said developing a “spending discipline is important.”

Spend on things that increase wealth

“Our first starter home was a $180,000 condo,” Obama said. “That was still a good investment. … It remains smart to spend on things that will increase productivity and income in the long term.”

The President finished by applying his theme to the national economy. “That’s an important distinction that we as a country have to make. … The economy has to get back to producing more and not just spending more.”

Practicing what he preaches

Last month, the White House made financial disclosure reports for President Obama available to the public. Those reports reflect that Obama practices what he preaches. In 2010 he earned $1.57 million, nearly quadruple the $400,000 he earns annually as President of the United States. Most of Obama’s investments are in Treasury Bills and Treasury Notes, opting for long-term security over risky high return investments.

Sources

Daily Finance
The Consumerist
Wealthinformantics

Obama will give his annual State of the Union address on Tuesday, Jan. 25. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

President Obama is due to deliver the annual State of the Union address to the houses of Congress soon. The focus of the annual presidential address to the legislature will be on the economy and increasing competitiveness of American businesses. He will also be discussing government spending policy.

President due to give second State of the Union address

President Barack Obama is going to give the second State of the Union address of his presidency on Tuesday, Jan. 25. It’s one of the biggest political events of the year, and there’s a new theme for this year’s address, according to ABC. Instead of traditional seating, where each party has its own wing of the chamber, some seating will be mixed with Democrats and Republicans seated together. Members of Congress will be taking “dates,” asking members of the other party (often the opposite gender) to sit with them, which was the brainchild of Senator Tom Udall (D-Colo.), as a show of bipartisan solidarity in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tuscon.

Topic will focus on economy and ‘competitiveness’

The subject of the 2011 State of the Union will largely be devoted to the economy, the largest issue of the Obama presidency. President Obama is to focus on education,  job creation and initiatives to increase the competitive stature of the United States in international trade, according to the Washington Post. Obama has been emphasizing the need to be an international powerhouse economically in recent stump speeches and is expected to expand on the theme in the annual address to Congress. Fiscal policy and gun control may be topics as well; both have come into sharp focus in recent months.

Foreign relations also to feature in broadcast

Some discussion of foreign policy is also to likely be included, as nearly all troops are expected to be withdrawn from Iraq by the end of the year and from Afghanistan by the end of 2014. The State of the Union will be heavily broadcast on most major networks and news channels. State of the Union addresses typically draw huge viewer ratings.

Sources

ABC

Washington Post

Veterans Day ceremonies in the U.S. include a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington Cemetery. Image: CC cliff1066/Flickr

Veterans Day is Thursday, Nov. 11, and the nation’s 22 million veterans will be honored in public ceremonies and private remembrances. Nov. 11 will also be celebrated in other countries as Armistice Day, which commemorates the end of World War I on that date in 1919. The U.S. military has become isolated from the rest of society in recent years, and President Obama said Wednesday that observing Veterans Day should strengthen the bond between American citizens and the people who defend them.

History of Veterans Day

Veterans Day was Armistice day until after World War II, when a bill for a national holiday honoring all veterans was signed into law by President Dwight Eisenhower on May 26, 1954. Businesses, government offices and schools closed on Veterans day every year on Nov. 11 until 1971. Then a law called the Uniform Monday Holiday Act moved Veterans Day to the fourth Monday in October in the interest of having a three-day weekend. President Gerald Ford intervened in 1978 and Veterans Day was moved back to Nov. 11. Since its return to the original date, fewer businesses have observed the holiday and it’s treated as any other weekday by many local governments and schools.

Veterans Day 2010

On Veterans Day an official wreath-laying ceremony is held at the Tomb of the Unknowns in Arlington National Cemetery. President Obama, in the midst of a diplomatic mission in Asia, will address soldiers at the U.S. Army Garrison Yongsan in Seoul, South Korea. This year Obama will have missed ceremonies at Arlington on both Memorial Day and Veterans Day. Vice President Joe Biden will host a Veterans Day breakfast at the White House and accept the honor of laying the wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns.

Facts about U.S. veterans

On Veterans Day 2010, one-third of all living veterans — 7.8 million — are Vietnam War veterans. From the first Gulf War to the present, 5.2 million veterans served in Iraq and Afghanistan. The oldest living veteran in the U.S. is Frank Buckles, who turned 109 on Feb. 1 2010. Buckles is also the last living American veteran of World War I and the second-oldest military veteran in the world.

Sources

Long Island Press

Washington Post

Wikipedia

This is Barry the Liberal Claus, according to Tea Partier David Hedrick. (Photo Credit: CC BY-SA/Andrew Mager/Flickr)

Losing an election can bring out the Grinch in any politician, and defeated Washington State Tea Party Congressional candidate David Hedrick is no exception. Straight from the discard pile of Election 2010, Hedrick has come back swinging with a children’s book entitled “The Liberal Claus(e): Socialism on a Sleigh.” According to Newser, the book tells the tale of how Barry the Liberal Claus, wife Lichelle, Elf Peloosi and Mr. Snore ruin Christmas. The children of the Tea Party eventually save the day, with a little help from that hallowed document, the Christmastution.

Discover how Obama stole Christmas — for $20

The North Pole Treasury is bankrupt, Hedrick told the Portland Mercury, so Barry the Liberal Claus borrows wherever he can, “eliminates toy specialists and commits other atrocities.” But once the elves unplug his teleprompter and wave copies of the Christmastution in his face, Barry flees the scene and leaves Christmas to appropriately conservative little Tea Party boys and girls. The underlying message, said Hedrick, is “Never forget that free goodies from liberal elves often come at a price.”

Satire, illustrated for childhood indoctrination

David Hedrick may have written “The Liberal Claus(e): Socialism on a Sleigh” in reaction to what he views as liberal indoctrination of America’s youth, but many critics question whether leaning to the opposite extreme is appropriate. Indoctrination of children – whether it be into politics or religion, topics philosophers consider deeply intertwined – has been openly criticized by noted authors and educators like Nicolas Humphrey, Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins. An example biologist Dawkins cites involves labels. Calling someone a “child of Christian parents” rather than “Christian child,” is significant. According to Wikipedia:

“Dawkins hopes that the phrase will also make children aware that belief is not something that is inherited automatically like eye color; that they do not have to follow in the religious footsteps of their family. He has tried to raise people’s consciousness of this matter, and hopes that phrases like ‘Christian child’, ‘Muslim child’, or ‘atheist child’ will ‘grate like fingernails on a blackboard.’”

Sales numbers for David Hedrick’s “The Liberal Claus(e): Socialism on a Sleigh” have not been made public as yet. Whether his message to children strikes a chord or grates like fingernails on a blackboard remains to be seen.

Sources

Newser

Portland Mercury

Wikipedia

Take a sneak peek

President Obama says that there's no such thing as "shovel ready" jobs in Washington. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

In a recent interview, President Obama said that are is no such things as “shovel ready” jobs. One of the constant criticisms of his administration thus far is the lack of job creation. The president pledged, while he was on the campaign trail, that the government would create jobs . Unemployment has dropped about 1 percent since he took office. Along with opposition to health care reform and Wall Street reform, he has been panned for not creating many jobs.

No such thing as shovel ready

Obama is almost halfway through his first term as president. The stimulus programs he spearheaded were thought to be vehicles toward job creation. Critics on both sides of the political aisle have condemned stimulus programs as wasteful and ineffective. Recently, Obama sat down for an interview with the New York Times. The president addressed the lack of job creation among other issues. He said that it became clear to him once he got to Washington that there were no such thing as shovel ready projects in the public works sector to get people working. Franklin Delano Roosevelt authorized many public works projects during the Great Depression to keep people employed.

Obama looks to long term

Obama stresses that his concern has always been to do good over the long term. He, and others quoted in the interview such as David Axelrod, maintain that popular opinion is swayed by the short term. The appearance of a lack of success gets him portrayed as a villain, due to no one being able to focus on benefits that may come from his policies in years to come. Obama says in the interview with Peter Baker that in a democracy like the United States, things always take longer than anticipated, but patience is never regarded as a virtue. The Obama “shovel ready” comments certainly make it seem so.

Wither Washington

In the classic film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” an idealistic man becomes a Congressman, then he is broken by the cynical Washington machine. It is difficult to know whether Barack Obama is falling victim to similar circumstances. Departures of high level staff, such as Rahm Emanuel make it appear he is struggling.

Sources

New York Times

Rahm Emanuel will be leaving the White House to run for Mayor of Chicago. Image from Wikimedia Commons.

There has been a lot of speculation over the future of Rahm Emanuel. Rahm Emanuel, the fiery White House Chief of Staff, is likely going to quit his post. He will be leaving the White House to run for mayor of Chicago. The current mayor is finishing out his term and won’t seek reelection. Since the announcement from Mayor Daley, Emanuel was a suggestion almost right away as a possible replacement.

Rahm to the hills

Speculation about Rahm Emanuel leaving his post for the upcoming Chicago mayoral election has been rampant for weeks. It is not official that he is running yet, but there have been numerous reports coming from Washington D.C. that he is. According to the Washington Post, an official announcement is due soon from the White House. President Obama will address the issue in a later press conference. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs confirmed that there are personnel changes that will be discussed in a press conference at the White House soon.

Calling it a Daley

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley decided earlier this year not to seek reelection next year. After his current term expires, he will retire. According to the New York Times, Daley decided that the time was right to leave it all behind. His retirement is the end of a Chicago dynasty. His father, also named Richard Daley, was also a long time Democratic mayor of Chicago. The elder Daley served in the post from 1955 to 1976 and died while in office. The younger Mayor Daley was elected in 1989, and has been the mayor ever since. For the last 55 years, a Daley has been at the helm of Chicago for all but 11 of them.

Rahm known to want the job

Rahm Emanuel is known to have wanted the job for some time. Chicago is a Democrat stronghold, and for the firebrand Emanuel, it may be a good fit.

Sources

Washington Post

New York Times

File photo of Austan Goolsbee, President Obama's new chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. (Photo Credit: CC BY/Samantha Appleton/Wikipedia)

President Obama has taken a political beating from all sides over how he has dealt with the economy. In the recent jobs speech he delivered in Cleveland, he appeared to be somewhat disconnected when it comes to understanding “the plight of the middle class,” as Arianna Huffington puts it. Obama said “Not everything we’ve done over the last two years has worked as quickly as we had hoped, and I am keenly aware that not all our policies have been popular.” In large part, this appears to be what prompted the president to nominate longtime adviser Austan Goolsbee to the position of chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, reports the Wall Street Journal. Goolsbee’s nomination has already cleared the Senate.

Austan Goolsbee: University economist and advisory board member

Austan Goolsbee is currently an economist at the University of Chicago business school, as well as the executive director of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board. The WSJ says popular speculation is the president elevated Goolsbee to the White House Council of Economic Advisers chairmanship due to their personal friendship and association within the administration’s inner circle. Goolsbee will replace former Economic Advisers chairwoman Christina Romer.

The WSJ reports that Goolsbee assisted in drafting policies during Obama’s first year, including expanded health care access, higher education aid and an energy push to generate jobs. These areas have been part of the president’s “New Foundation” for middle-class economic security – at least in theory, says the Huffington Post.

Austan Goolsbee may not be the change for which critics are calling

Unemployment continues to plague America, and economic recovery during the current recession has been sluggish at best. Outrage has been palpable, even in Democratic circles, where the potential firings of Treasure Secretary Tim Geithner and National Economic Council Director Larry Summers have been discussed openly by lawmakers. But placing Austan Goolsbee in charge of the White House Council of Economic Advisers isn’t a sign of new policies to come, writes the WSJ.

Sources:

Chicago Sun-Times

Huffington Post

Wall Street Journal

Austan Goolsbee on CNN’s “Late Edition,” Sept. 21, 2008

President Obama is following through on his promise to remove troops from Iraq. CC by Lee Craker/Wikimediea Commons

Getting the troops out of Iraq was part of President Obama’s campaign platform. Creation of a plan for the withdrawal of U.S. troops started just after his election. Soon a plan was put together, and the White House has kept it on schedule. By Aug. 31, only 50,000 service personnel will remain in Iraq. All American troops will be gone by the end of 2011.

Iraq to be returned to Iraqis

The president announced that Iraqi authorities will be put in control of military operations by Aug. 31, according to The Guardian. The announcement was made as the President spoke before the Disabled American Veterans conference in Atlanta. He recognized that withdrawing troops from Iraq was included in his campaign promises. About 90,000 troops have already been withdrawn from Iraq since he took office. Tentatively, full authority over military operations will be handed to Iraqi authorities on Aug. 31, and 50,000 American troops will remain in an advisory capacity. American combat maneuvers will then cease.

Focus to shift to Afghanistan

The war in Afghanistan is still ongoing, though the Iraq war is winding down. Obama says he won’t stand for the Taliban or Al Qaeda returning to power, according to CNN. The Afghan war has been a subject of great controversy. The Rolling Stone interview with Stanly McChrystal led to the general being fired, and the Wikileaks documents release of 90,000 pages of Afghan war documents has created a great deal of outrage.

The beginning of the end; or the beginning’s end

The withdrawal from Iraq is proceeding according to plan. The conflict in Afghanistan is far from over. Afghanistan has more U.S. troops than Iraq, and there is a growing belief that the war in Afghanistan is not winnable. There is still no real end in sight for Afghanistan.

More information on this topic:

Guardian

CNN

The President and Vice President Biden just released their financial disclosure forms. Image from Wikimedia Commons

The White House just released the financial statements of both the President and the Vice President.  Though neither of them are exactly Bill Gates, both Vice President Joe Biden and President Barack Obama are not the wealthiest of Washington impresarios but still not exactly hurting for a cash advance these days.  The President in particular did fairly well for himself as a result of advances and payments he received for his second book, which was a runaway success with readers and sold a lot of copies.  The Bidens, as it turns out, are fairly modest compared with many other Washington heavyweights.

Most expensive gift Biden received was a book

Reportedly, the most expensive gift that Vice President Biden received last year was a book. Granted, it wasn’t an ordinary book, but rather a rare first edition of “Anna Livia Plurabelle,” by James Joyce.  It was actually signed by the author, and is valued at more than $3,000, according to the Houston Chronicle at http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7009468.html.  Joyce is one the Vice President’s favorite authors. Joyce died in 1941, about two years after the publication of the novel, so signed copies of it are rare indeed.

They actually have to

The President, Vice President and many other government officials are required by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to post statements regarding their financial status annually.  The act was signed by President Carter in the wake of the Watergate scandals to prevent financial conflicts of interest.  You can view the statements in depth at the White House Blog, but you”ll need Adobe to read them. The exact figures aren’t available for security reasons.

The President cleans up

It has been rumored that President Obama received millions for the two autobiographical books that he published. The Bidens, on the other hand, hold less than $750,000 in assets and only one home.  That’s a lot for most people but pretty modest by Washington standards.

A Blagojevich Obama subpoena may be just a dodge. From Wikimedia Commons.

The case against disgraced former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is progressing, and his defense team plans to attempt to call President Obama to the stand.  A Blagojevich/Obama subpoena could mean nothing.  It may also spell disaster for either the indicted ex-politician or the president.  The kind of legal team necessary for this case would send anyone running for a no fax cash advance at least. It wouldn’t be the first time a sitting president has been given a subpoena to testify, but there is a wide latitude in avoiding the witness chair should he be served.

Blagojevich Obama ties do exist

Allegations of Blagojevich/Obama ties have been surmised since the former governor was arrested and later thrown out of office.  President Obama was a Senator in the state where Rod Blagojevich was governor, and they are familiar.  The judge presiding over Blagojevich’s trial, District Judge James Zagel, for trying to sell a Senate seat has been requested to subpoena the President, as the defense claims President Obama has knowledge relating to the alleged events.  So far, there doesn’t seem to be any suggestion of impropriety on the part of the President, though it seems he did offer notes on proposed replacements in the Senate.

Motion accidentally leaked

The motion filed with the court by the defense was leaked onto the internet.  Parts of it were blacked out when posted. It was discovered, however, that the blacked out portions would be uncovered if copied and posted out of the online court document. A link is available on Fox News.  It isn’t known if President Obama has pertinent information, or if Blagojevich needs small loans for more smoke and mirrors.

Senator Durbin subpoenaed; judge advises less showboating

It is getting widely covered that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) has been subpoenaed as well.  Durbin has maintained his innocence of any wrongdoing. He says barely spoke with Blagojevich, and only spoke with him concerning replacements to the vacant seat. Meanwhile, according to the Chicago Tribune, Judge James B. Zagel advised Blagojevich that he would not subject a jury to all 500 hours of FBI tapes of his conversations.  He also admonished him to knock off all the showboating.

What if he does subpoena the President?

If the Blagojevich/Obama subpoena were to go through, there are several things that can happen.  The president is, after all, the president.  National security matters and scheduling could prevent his testimony, and those are perfectly valid excuses.  Rod Blagojevich, meanwhile, could face up to 20 years if he is convicted.

The Arizona immigration bill has been derided by President Obama as misguided. Photo from Wikimedia Commons

Arizona Senate Bill 1070, also known as SB 1070 or the Arizona immigration bill, has caused a firestorm of controversy.  Allegations of racial profiling and discrimination, among other things, have been flung in the debate.  The President of the United States himself condemned it, while his former campaign nemesis John McCain has come out in support of the bill.  The Arizona immigration bill has also drawn the ire of the Catholic Church.  Despite protests on either side of the debate, the fact remains that Arizona will soon need debt management dealing with the problem.

President Obama slams Arizona immigration bill

The President has condemned the Arizona immigration bill, SB 1070, as being “misguided,” as reported by CBS.  He also said the bill could potentially “undermine basic notion of fairness that we cherish as Americans” and that it threatened the public’s trust in law enforcement.  The bill would allow police officers to ask for identification of anyone suspected of a crime they believed to be in the country illegally. The Mexican government has passed a resolution asking for Governor Brewer to not sign the bill, as they believe the bill will be an impetus for discrimination against Hispanics.

John McCain backs bill seemingly reversing course

Senator John McCain, according to a New York Times blog, has voiced his support of the Arizona immigration bill.  Senator McCain had previously adopted stances more favorable to immigrants, and this seems to be a reversal of posture.  In an interview on Fox News, he told Bill O’Reilly that he thought the state was doing what is believed to be the best thing.  The federal government, as he and others have pointed out, has failed to do much about illegal immigration.  The state of Arizona is on the verge of needing money now to deal with illegal immigration in the state.  Arizona officials deal with this problem more than almost any other state.

It all comes down to Gov. Jan Brewer

The Arizona immigration bill is set to go to Governor Jan Brewer’s desk for approval.  There have been repeated calls for her to veto the bill.  The Mexican government, the Bishop of Tuscon and the Archbishop of the Los Angeles Diocese are among the many who are calling for a veto.  Several Latino members of Congress, including Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva have denounced the bill as racist.  President Obama has announced that he will have staff reviewing the legality of the legislation, should it pass.

An Obama Supreme Court pick may report by fall if confirmations go well. From Wikimedia Commons

Choosing a new Supreme Court Justice is a daunting task for any president, and the Obama Supreme Court pick to replace John Paul Stevens is an item of contention.  Justice John Paul Stevens is widely considered one of the more liberal members of the Court, and the president has begun discussion with the Senate about one of the biggest sticky wickets of nominating a Supreme Court justice.  It’s thought that Congressional Republicans will do everything up to getting paycheck loans to block any perceived liberal nomination.

Obama Supreme Court pick and the litmus test

Ever since the decision in Roe vs. Wade, the litmus test for any Supreme Court nomination has been that case, or specifically, abortion.  Par for the course is for the issue to be carefully tread around during confirmation hearings.  The president has stated he has no interest in that particular litmus test. His concern, from the Huffington Post, is that the Obama Supreme Court pick will be respectful of individual rights, including women’s.  That could be taken to mean that he desires to pick a justice who will uphold Roe v. Wade without directly saying it, or it could not.

Litmus tests

There are numerous litmus tests for public officials, and Supreme Court Justices are subjected to several litmus tests.  One is asking them how they feel or would decide regarding abortion, or Roe v. Wade.  The terms “judicial activism,” “interpretation” and “legislating from the bench” are also big players in Supreme Court nominations.  These litmus tests don’t always indicate whether a justice will decide as certain liberals or conservatives would like.  Chief Justice Burger, for instance, often ruled contrary to how many wanted him to.  Many interested parties wanted him to overturn Warren Court decisions, which he didn’t.

Replacing John Paul Stevens no easy task

John Paul Stevens is the fourth longest serving Justice in Supreme Court history.  He is 90 years of age and joined the Court in 1975, and is the last member of the Burger Court.  Confirmation hearings can take longer to wrap up than debt consolidation, and with the contentious air in Washington, it’s anyone’s guess as to whether an Obama Supreme Court pick will be installed in time for the fall docket.

A nuclear bomb, one of the many topics of the nuclear summit. (Photo from Wikimedia Commons)

Perhaps the gravest threat to global security are nuclear weapons.  Since the world’s nuclear arsenal appears to not be completely secure, a nuclear summit is being held between the U.S. and other nuclear powers to discuss the state of affairs.  It’s worth more than a little bit of instant cash to keep all nuclear weapons secured, to say the least, and the emergence of new players onto the scene of nuclear powers has only complicated matters.

Terrorists and rogue states a grave concern

Since the emergence of Al Qaeda and other rogue groups onto the global scene, it is vital that their access to nuclear materials be entirely restricted. According to this article from the Christian Science Monitor, the concern of the nuclear summit is not just access to nuclear weapons, but access to nuclear fissile materials.  Warheads are accounted for and secured, but the materials necessary to improvise a nuclear explosive device are something else entirely.

Two types of materials needed

There are two different elements that can be used as nuclear fissile material to create a nuclear bomb.  Highly enriched uranium, or HEU, or plutonium, can both be used to create the fission reaction necessary for a nuclear detonation.  The process for thermonuclear weapons (the hydrogen or H bomb) is quite different, and only six countries actually have developed those capabilities, which takes a lot of talent, knowledge  and more than a few personal loans to develop.

Uranium can be enriched in a reactor, and there are research all over the world that have amounts of enriched uranium.  The CSM article reports nearly 1.6 million kilograms of highly enriched uranium and 500,000 kilograms of plutonium, in 130 countries having research reactors .  Merely 25 kg of HEU or 8 kg of Plutonium is necessary to create a small nuclear weapon.

Obama nuclear summit called for NPT countries

Last year, President Obama called for a summit on the state of affairs and updated security measures for NPT or nations that have signed the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty, which convened recently. The NPT was created in 1968, and extended indefinitely in 1995.  Pakistan and India declined to sign, and North Korea withdrew in 2003.

With the known interest of terrorist groups in acquiring nuclear materials and recent developments in Iran and North Korea, it’s vital that a global consensus be reached concerning nuclear weapons.  It would be the most grandiose and perverse foolishness for millions of the world’s citizens to perish because of conflicts between their governments.

The Obama nuclear policy revisions don't completely mean no nukes. From Wikimedia Commons

President Obama has conducted a Nuclear Posture Review and updated the nation’s policy on nuclear weapons, which has led to some criticism of the Obama nuclear policy.  Overall, the policy changes little, though components of it have angered some of the more hawkish types among Congressional Republicans. If the government were to put any fast cash into any more nuclear supplies, it would be for reactors, not for any more nukes.

Stark raving MAD

According to the article in TIME, the updated Obama nuclear weapons policy changes nothing regarding the default status between Russia and the U.S.  Since the dawn of the Cold War, what kept a nuclear exchange from taking place between the two largest nuclear powers was something called “Mutually Assured Destruction,” wherein the nuclear deterrence held by either country would be deployed in the event of the other attacking with theirs.

Essentially, this means that neither side will benefit from a nuclear attack because both would be damaged far beyond the extent a few payday loans can cover in the event that a nuclear exchange would take place.

Non-aggression, with exceptions

Part of the updated nuclear weapons policy is that President Obama has pledged to never initiate a nuclear attack, except against states that do not participate in the Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty. He also pledges he will never use nuclear weapons against states that aren’t known to be developing nuclear weapons. Essentially, it’s equally a carrot — for states to not develop them — and a stick for — those that would. It insinuates we may nuke rogue states that are developing nuclear weapons.  More or less, it says we won’t be nuclear aggressors, but with broad room for exceptions.

New nukes nixed

The President has also made it clear we will not build any NEW nuclear weapons.  The hawkish among Senate Republicans have balked at this idea, and our nuclear arsenal is aging. But then again, the weapons grade isotope of plutonium, Pu-239, has a half life (the amount of time an element stays in one form, before it decays) of more than 24,000 years, so we’re good for the time being.  The half lives of the other two weapons grade radioactive isotopes, Uranium 233 and Uranium 235, are 160,000 years and 703,800,000 years, respectively. However, what constitutes “new” isn’t defined.

Terrorists will pay, and me bomb es su bomb

The Obama nuclear update on our policy also includes no change to existing doctrine that states harboring or enabling terrorists will not be spared the nuclear rod in the event of an attack.  Also, any country that is currently host to any of our stockpiled weapons (such as Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Italy) can make use of such weapons with our approval in case they seriously need to.

And Iran so far away

From an article from Reuters, Iranian President Ahmadinejad is apparently none too pleased. He said that Obama is “inexperienced and an amateur politician.” He further added that “American politicians are like cowboys. Whenever they have legal shortcomings their hands go to their guns.”  The revised Obama nuclear policy, in reality, changes little.

Samuel Johnson, who wrote the first English Dictionary, where people can find the definition of vitriol. From Wikimedia Commons

For those of us who pay attention these sorts of things, Google Trends and Google Hot Searches can be quite telling.  One of the big searches for Friday, April 2, was the term “vitriol.” Granted, it is sort of an obscure word. Some people put a lot of instant cash in them that their college, where they get all smarty pantsed and high falutin’ but even some of them need a definition.

What DOES vitriol mean?

The Merriam-Webster entry for vitriol defines it as either a sulfate of various metals, that being the antiquated definition, and the more common definition as something having a caustic (meaning corrosive or acidic) quality, usually speech. There – no need to go out for payday loans to get a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary.

We’re still having confused

Yes, that was, and those above were, deliberate grammar mistakes. Still haven’t got it yet? OK; say hello to my little friend.

“I call him Governor Bush because that’s the last legal position he held in this country.” – George Carlin

That’s an example of vitriol.

How did this word get brought up?

A lot of the statements and attitudes coming from the more conservative camps have been increasingly nasty.  According to a recent post on the USA Today web site, President Obama had a recent interview with CBS News where he strongly objected to the amount of vitriol in the nation’s discourse.  After the health care reform debates, this recent Guardians of the Free Republics fiasco, and Hutaree Militia – there is certainly a lot of vitriol.

It seems that so many people seem to think that they know so much better than anyone else the way things ought to be, and when it appears that their vision of heaven on earth is not going to be happening, they get incredibly mad, on either side of the aisle (the Dems were just as fire and brimstone several years ago) and perhaps it is indeed time for us all to take a breath, relax and remember it’s all just a ride.

Joe Biden is well-known for his verbal missteps. Image from Flickr.

Nobody has ever accused Vice President Joe Biden of being the most tightly laced politician. During the press conference where Obama announced the signing of the new health care bill, though, Vice President Joe Biden added his own unique take on the moment by saying “this is a big f-ing deal” to President Obama. I’m sure Joe Biden is wishing now that he’d been able to use instant cash loans to make sure the microphones were off.

Biden drops the F Bomb

After announcing President Obama to the press corps outside the White House, Vice President Biden turned away from the microphone to welcome the President. During a quick hug, Biden said into the President’s ear “This is a big F-ing deal!” Biden’s F-bomb was captured on every microphone, video camera and camera in the area. Biden almost certainly meant this to be a private moment, but it ended up being quite public. The White House has reacted to Biden’s F-bomb with amusement more than anything, with the official U.S. Press Secretary’s Twitter account saying “And yes, Mr. Vice President, You’re right…”

See Video of Biden’s “Big Deal” moment

Joe Biden’s history of gaffes

Vice President Joe Biden is fairly well known for saying the things that many others may just be thinking. The signing of the health care bill is not the first time Biden has been caught dropping the F-bomb on live microphones. On March 13, 2009, Biden was caught saying “An hour late, oh give me a f-ing break.” The Vice President has become rather infamous for his “Bidenisms,” and there are some web sites, such as Slate’s Bidenisms, dedicated entirely to recording the Vice President’s gaffes, misspoken statements and outright mistakes.

Biden was right – health care is a big deal

The new health care bill, which President Obama signed into law today, is most definitely a big deal, as Joe Biden pointed out. The health care bill makes significant changes to the health care system over the next 10 years. To see a summary of the new health care bill, see Health Care Reform basics Part 1 and Health Care Reform basics Part 2.

Democrats have hailed the passage of the health care bill as “historic,” while Republicans such as Randy Neugerbauer and David Frum are calling the passage of the bill “tragic.”  The cost of the health care bill is hotly debated, some saying it will start the government on the path of credit repair, others claiming it will cost more than an online cash advance. Either way, Joe Biden was right – health care reform is a “big f-ing deal.”

The health care bill vote will likely take place Sunday. From Wikimedia Commons

The fight over the health care bill in the House of Representatives continues, and the bill is set for a vote on Sunday. The current bill was sent to the House by the Senate, and the House will require 216 votes in order to pass it, and that is what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D – CA) is gunning for. Ohio Rep. John Boccieri (D) has crossed the aisle and pledged to vote for the bill. House and Senate Republicans are bound and determined to keep the bill from passing either house, despite CBO estimates that the bill will save a lot of payday cash for consumers and the government alike.

John Boccieri says ‘Yes’ to health care bill

A freshman legislator, Rep. John Boccieri (D-OH) has, according to the Washington Post, decided to support the legislation and vote in favor of the health care bill in order to pass it through the House and send it back to the Senate.  If the bill clears the Senate without further alteration, it will be sent to the president.

Falling into line

Several other House Democrats who had previously held the bill in dubious esteem, including Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Betsy Markely (D-CO), and Bart Gordon (D-TN) have recently also committed to voting for the bill. The bill has likely appeared more palatable because of recent Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill, with a price tag of more than $940 billion – that’s a heck of a cash advance – will trim up to $138 billion from the deficit over the next 10 years.

Possibly not the end of the line

The success of the bill on Sunday depends entirely on getting enough votes to pass the House, and the House revised bill passing the Senate, and of course, for the President to sign it.  President Obama is deeply committed to health care reform, as health care costs are the cause of more than 60 percent of all bankruptcy filings. Medical debt has the potential to become a far greater problem in the next 30 years, as the baby boomers begin to retire.

President Obama urges action

In a recent speech, President Obama urged Congress to pass the bill as soon as possible.  The specter of health care reform is looming large over Washington, as many want something to be done and just as many oppose intrusion by government into a business as important as the health care industry.  It has become a cornerstone issue of the Obama presidency, and regardless of the outcome, it will likely be one of, if the not the, defining issue for his administration.

The Senates’ number one priority

Majority Leader Harry Reid (see http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/12/health_care_overhaul_set_for_p.html) said, “I don’t know if there is a senator that doesn’t have something in this bill that was important to them, and if they don’t have something in it important to them, then it doesn’t speak well of them.” Reid is making reference to the massive legislation that makes up the health care plan. It includes a $100 million fund to pay the cost of Medicaid expansion. The plan’s main feature is that it would extend health care coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans. The cost is projected to be $1 trillion over a 10-year period.

How the health care plan works

In the new health care plan, everyone would be required to purchase insurance. There would be subsidies available to help lower-income people, ones that must make ends meet on a smaller pay day, and businesses would have various tax breaks and penalties for coverage to employees. The most-talked-about aspect of the bill is the change when it comes to “pre-existing conditions.” For years, Americans have been turned away for health care coverage on pre-existing conditions, and it’s been a difficult situation for those who need assistance but don’t qualify. This new bill makes the ineligibility for applicants with pre-existing conditions obsolete.

Also, the uninsured or self-employed would have new ways of finding coverage at storefronts referred to as “exchanges.” These exchanges would be the stage where private insurers would sell their health plans. Much like shopping for car insurance through a broker, health care would be available to consumers. A battery of questions would lead to a customized health care solution.

The American Medical Association weighs in

The AMA is endorsing the health care plan. Reid (see http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/12/health_care_overhaul_set_for_p.html) said, “America has the best health care in the world — if you can get it. For far too many people, access to care is out of reach because they lack insurance. This is not acceptable to physicians.” The AMA is in support of the latest revision of the bill after some key changes were implemented into the law. Namely the changes included:

• A proposed fee on physicians to enroll in Medicare was eliminated
• A 5 percent tax on elective cosmetic surgery was eliminated
• A 10 percent percent tax on indoor tanning services was created
• Payments were cut regarding physicians paying for bonuses to primary care doctors in economically depressed areas

These changes were instrumental in the AMA supporting the new health care plan. AMA President Dr. Cecil B. Wilson said, “The health industry needs to extend health care to the vast public and a sweeping legislation is the only way to do it… we want to build a case where everyone in the health industry benefits from the bill.”

The final days for a decision

The final days to make changes and approve the bill are quickly drawing near. Republicans can still take time to review the bill and they are most likely going to use all their allotted time. Senator Bob Corker said, “We potentially are getting ready to pass a bill that there’s no question in my mind is going to lead to huge deficits down the road.” Despite challenges, something has to be done to help uninsured Americans and this sweeping legislation is the best plan available.

Harry Reid and his racist comments have shown that perhaps he is living in a bubble.

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, racism is “the belief that race is a primary determinant of human traits and capacities, and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” I’ve been discriminated against as much as the next semi-geeky, semi- Jewish non-Hispanic child of Southern California (did I tell you there’s a city in Poland named after me?) But I certainly won’t say that I know what being the subject of racial slurs feels like. As far as I’m concerned, this world is big enough for all of us. Spare me the segregation and ethnic cleansing. Like a payday loan store, all applicants are admitted, regardless of race. Keep the birth rate under control, practice proper conservation and distribution of resources and deal with crime effectively. Then we’ll be making some headway and won’t have to skedaddle for the moon or play out the Wall-E scenario.

What did Harry Reid say?

George Stephanopoulos of ABC News claims the senator was quoted in the John Heilemann/Mark Halperin book “Game Change” as saying the following of Barack Obama, America’s current racial target drone:

Harry Reid was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama – a “light-skinned” African American with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” as he said privately.

Clearly, Reid’s comments are inappropriate. Some would argue that a brewing cauldron of racist hatred brews just beneath the surface of such comments, but I would wager that this is a matter of ignorance and old habits dying hard. Reid should not be excused for this, mind you. He should have known better. Seriously – “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one?” These are the kind of people we elect to represent us in government? Reid has apologized to Obama, but he was still forced to resign as his party’s Senate leader.

Let’s not forget Bill Clinton’s racist comments

Because it’s easy to pile on libidinous horn players. First of all, Bill Clinton apparently said of Barack Obama that “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.” He also compared Obama’s run to the presidency with the 1984 campaign of Jesse Jackson, which is supposedly racist because Jackson is black. Of course Bill has a number of problems that prevent certain people in America from remembering that America’s economy prospered under his watch.

Speaking of economics, KFC has a racist way of selling fried bird lumps

Check out this recalled Australian KFC commercial:

There he is: one white fan amidst a group of black fans. And of course the peacemaker, the bridge over the menacing racial divide, is fried chicken. Yes, it’s an American stereotype, but it stirred a hornets’ nest of controversy for the good ol’ Kentucky colonel – after the commercial reached the U.S. via the Web. Because the U.S. must regulate Australians. They’re a penal colony, remember? And England is too busy to bullyrag them anymore, as they’re more concerned with “religious literacy” and young Earth creationism these days. Remember, a payday loan can buy you a paleontology textbook, if not a clue.

Na’vi-gate this racist labyrinth, moviegoers

Mustn’t forget the racist screed that is “Avatar,” of course. While the high-tech visuals are luminous and fantastic, the confrontation between Pandora’s “ethnic” Na’vi people and the white bread military-industrial complex is the same old song. Some call it racism, others call it hackneyed, uninspired storytelling. I call it a visual exodus into a new world of filmmaking where computer-generated visuals aren’t a ridiculous add-on, whiz bang widget (a la George Lucas), but a valid tool used in the creation of new worlds of entertainment.

Elitism colors me blue

Harry Reid racist comments and Bill Clinton blasts indicate that the elites of this nation aren’t so enlightened as they’d have us believe. Australians for the most part were not offended by the KFC ad – in fact, they were more offended by America weighing in on the issue – but that didn’t prevent the insipid ad from being pulled. I don’t buy into the “noble savage” stereotype that tends to permeate James Cameron’s depiction of the Na’vi, but I did consider buying into a payday loan to be able to afford to see the 3-D extravaganza.

(Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25553564@N03/ / CC BY 2.0)

Related Video:

(Photo from notionscapital, Flickr.com)

Every American knows about Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Who are the newer imposters then? Why, it’s the infamous Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac! Quite similar to the 1969 film about bank robbers Butch Cassidy and his partner The Sundance Kid, these two agencies are making millions of dollars off the poor souls who are losing their homes, and are taking your homes away, stopping you from getting good prices on the homes you want to sell, all while making millions in the process.

A story that will remain in history

The Wall Street Journal (12/24/2009) reports that the Federal Housing Finance Agency made Christmas a little merrier for their chief executive agencies, Fannie May and Freddie Mac. What makes this proposal even more preposterous is that Fannie and Freddie will be taking home remuneration packages of $4 to $6 million a year. If you were to divide that figure by the number of days in a year, it boils down to approximately $16,500 per day. The mortgage giants may consider this figure a pittance in comparison to the millions of Americans who face difficulties making that much money in a year. The figure is also more than the average payday loan approved for the millions of impoverished Americans. Fannie and Freddie must be smiling and laughing all the way to the bank. The announcement, coming out on Christmas Eve, has certainly made the holiday merrier for the two.

Please put your hand up, Mr. President

President Obama has been advocating pay packages for top executives that are in line with their long term performance. The mortgage giant regulator, in this case, seems to have paid lip service to the advice of the president, and you can be sure that there will be outrage among the public and will have many questions flying. Can Americans do anything about this? Perhaps if President Obama actually does something about this, something may still come out of it.

What happens now?

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid are probably turning in their graves wondering whether all the bullets they took were really worth it. Was a gunfight the only solution? Had they applied their minds to their activities, they could have made more money during their run and even manage to stay out of reach of the law. Fannie and Freddie have certainly made sure they will not end up on the wrong side of the law, and they know for sure that they have a godfather taking care of them at the moment. It is the average American who works his back off 8-10 hours a day or more who must face the small intricacies of life. He is the one who has to face the law if he fails to pay in full the small personal loan he had to take out. The mortgage regulator will also make sure that the average American loses his home if they find themselves running out of money to pay Fannie and Freddie. But you can be sure that they will not be asking for any personal loan any time soon.

Start Your Personal Loan Application HERE