Political Rantings
About that Mosque…
Thursday, August 12th, 2010Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably heard that an Islamic group has received permission to build a mosque two blocks away from Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan. Everyone from Newt Gingrich to Sarah Palin to Glenn Beck has weighed in against the project, claiming that the mosque’s presence would be seen by some as a victory for the 9/11 terrorists. Others have taken a more passive-aggressive tack, claiming that they, personally, don’t mind a mosque, but that putting one so close to Ground Zero would be a cruel reminder of the attacks for the families of those who died there. A smaller contingent is in favor of the mosque, pointing out that one of the things the terrorists attacked on 9/11 is our freedom of religion, with which any American has the right to worship as he/she chooses.
Fortunately, that last group includes New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who, surrounded by religious leaders of many different faiths, gave an impassioned speech about religious freedom while announcing that the petition for the building’s landmark status has been denied, clearing the way for construction to begin.
Today, the New York Times ran an article about the woman in charge of the mosque project. Here are some things I learned from reading the article that I’m sure Newt, Sarah & Glenn don’t want anyone to focus on:
Categories: New York, New York, Political Rantings | 13 Comments »
Presidential Quotable Quotes
Monday, August 9th, 2010Some kids memorize the words to Elmo’s World. Some kids know all of the Jonas Brothers’ names. Then there’s this kid, who’s parents have taught him to memorize some altogether different fun facts:
Categories: Political Rantings, Random Acts of Blogging | No Comments »
Taxation without Representation – Again?!?
Tuesday, July 20th, 2010Britain’s fiscal year has ended, and the results of its 50% tax on bank bonuses have been tallied:
LONDON—U.S. banks have paid the bulk of the £2.5 billion ($3.81 billion) the U.K. has collected from its bonus tax designed to curb excessive pay, hitting banks’ second-quarter earnings while creating a windfall for the U.K.’s new government.
The one-time tax to collect 50% of bank bonuses above £25,000 was introduced in December by former Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling, who initially estimated it would raise £550 million. . . The charge applies to all bank employees working in the U.K., regardless of where the parent company is located.
According to statements in the past few days from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the four banks collectively paid at least $2 billion toward the tax in the second quarter. The U.K. five major banks by assets–Barclays, HSBC Holdings PLC, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC and Standard Chartered–collectively paid about $1.1 billion to cover their bonus tax bills.
(NOTE: The Wall Street Journal may ask you to pay to read the whole article. Don’t – read it for free.)
So that’s $2 billion less for these banks’ (predominantly U.S.) shareholders, or $2 billion less in available capital to modify underwater (American) mortgages, or $2 billion less to loan to (American) small businesses – take your pick. Either way, it occurs to me that as an employee, shareholder and customer of one or more of these banks, the British government just levied a tax on me, even though I didn’t get a vote in their election. And the recently elected government is “warn[ing] the industry to be on alert for further taxes and regulations, particularly relating to compensation.”
Haven’t we been down this road before, England? Don’t you remember what happened the last time? I’m pretty sure it made all the papers. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I think I’ll go get myself a cup of tea…
Categories: Money Talk, Political Rantings | 5 Comments »
Long time, no politics…
Sunday, June 13th, 2010It’s been quite a while since I posted about politics around here, but tonight I want to talk a little about two of the hot-button topics that have permeated politics in recent months: health care and financial reform. And while I’m at it, I’ll throw in a little about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, just for good measure.
Not interested? No offense taken. Move on to bigger and better things. Up for the discussion? Read on…
Categories: Political Rantings | 3 Comments »
President Obama’s NCAA Bracket – 2010 Edition
Thursday, March 18th, 2010In the last three days, the post I put up a year ago showing President Obama’s 2009 NCAA Bracket received 565 pageviews (in the previous three days, it received seventeen). Since there’s so much apparent interest, here’s the 2010 version:
(click to enlarge)
Have at it, folks…
Categories: Political Rantings, Sports Talk | No Comments »
Rush to Judgement
Saturday, January 16th, 2010I hate it when this happens. I hate it when everyone gets all over someone who I fundamentally disagree with on most things, but does so in a disingenuous way. Because disingenuity, particularly in the form of partisan spin, is more repulsive to me than political disagreement. And so I find myself wanting to defend someone I don’t like.
Here, word for word, is what Rush Limbaugh said about Haiti (the audio, in case you don’t believe me, is here):
Rush Limbaugh: OK, back to the phones or to the phones. We’re going to start in Raleigh, NC. Justin, you’re first today. Great to have you with us. Hello.
Justin: Mega-Rush, baby, ditto. My question is, why did Obama, in the soundbyte you played earlier, when he’s talking about if you want to donate some money, you can go to whitehouse.gov to be directed…you know, to direct you how to do so. Why would…if I want to donate money to the Red Cross, why do I need to go to the whitehouse.gov page and . . .
RL: Exactly. Exactly. Would you trust that the money is going to go to Haiti?
J: No.
RL: But would you trust that your name is going to end up on a mailing list for the Obama people to start asking you for campaign donations for him and other causes?
J: Absolutely.
RL: Absolutely right.
J: That’s the point.
RL: Besides, we’ve already donated to Haiti. It’s called the U.S. Income Tax.
J: Rush, my mother was going to be on a missionary trip. She was gonna leave at 4:30 this morning to go to Haiti from our church.
RL: That’s another point too. Churches…
J: No government money, Rush.
RL: There are people – exactly right. There are people who do charitable work every day in Haiti. It’s not as though…like Debbie Wasserman Schultz – “It’s our fault.” Like Reverend Wright – “It’s our fault. There’s no excuse for such poverty when there’s a nation as rich as we are so close.” There are people that have been trying to save Haiti just as we’re trying to save Africa. You just can’t keep throwing money at it because the dictatorships there just take it all. They don’t spread it around. And even if they did, you’re not creating a permanent system where people can provide for themselves. It’s a simple matter of self-reliance. Nobody takes that approach down there because this has always been a country run by dictators – incompetent ones…
Now, call me crazy if you wish, but nothing in this exchange suggests to me that Rush Limbaugh doesn’t think private individuals like you and I should donate to Haiti. In fact, it seems pretty clear to me that the opinion he’s expressing is that people, like the caller’s mother, who go to Haiti and help the people directly, are being more effective than our government is being by sending our tax dollars to their government. He’s suggesting that the foreign aid the United States provides to Haiti doesn’t make it to the people who are suffering, and so the Haitian people are better served by private individuals, churches, and the so forth donating time (and, presumably, supplies?) directly to the people who need it.
Now, I have no idea if he’s right about that, and I certainly wouldn’t take Rush Limbaugh at his word about anything. But I think it’s quite a leap to go from the above quote to “Rush Limbaugh [says] Don’t Donate to Haiti Victims,” which is the headline of the above-linked article.
Sadly, though, the public zeitgeist has been poured and hardened: Rush Limbaugh thinks we should just let the people of Haiti suffer. And, thanks to Pat Robertson’s preaching about “pacts with the devil” on the same day, the two men are now inextricably linked in every news article, suggesting that Limbaugh believes that Haitians are devil worshipers as well. To dispute this storyline is as foolhardy as spitting into the wind.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go wash my face…
Categories: Political Rantings | 8 Comments »
Closing the barn door after the tomatoes have run away…
Friday, December 18th, 2009Those who follow Sarah Palin (either with amusement or disdain) may have heard that at a recent book signing in Minneapolis, a man threw two tomatoes at her from a second floor balcony.
So when she showed up at a Costco in Salt Lake City, the store manager took steps to prevent another drive-by fruiting:
While going through the check-out lane, again with no wait, [Helen Rappaport] told the clerk she forgot to get some grape tomatoes, which she loves, so she would be right back. That’s when the bells went off. The clerk told her they had no tomatoes that day. No tomatoes? At Costco?
As she was leaving, she noticed a man with a store manager’s name tag and asked him why they had no tomatoes. He informed her the store did have tomatoes, but they were taken off the shelves for a few hours. It turns out that Palin had been pelted with a tomato at an earlier stop on her book tour and the management at the Costco was determined it wouldn’t happen here. The manager told an employee to go into the storage area and get Rappaport some tomatoes, which he gave her for free.
The Costco store manager believes, apparently, that someone out there had decided to throw things at Sarah Palin when she visited the local Costco, went to Costco empty-handed, proceeded immediately to the tomato aisle, saw there were no tomatoes available, and then decided to give up and go home, rather than, you know, throwing something else at her.
Score one for the ingenuity and quick action of the Salt Lake Costco manager…
Categories: Political Rantings, Random Acts of Blogging | 2 Comments »
Random Acts of Blogging – 12/3/09
Thursday, December 3rd, 2009So many blog-worthy things going on in the world all at once! So, some quick thoughts on several things:
Adam Lambert emerged from his #2 finish on American Idol as one of the most promising singing talents in years. At the American Music Awards, he decided to make his performance a social statement, rather than make it about the music. He’s since been cancelled by ABC from Good Morning America, Jimmy Kimmel Live, and New Year’s Rockin’ Eve. And the shows that are letting him on suddenly want to talk about nothing else but the AMA’s. I’m disappointed. Not because I have a particular opinion about his “cause,” but because he’s allowed his cause to overshadow his music, which I was looking forward to enjoying. On the upside, I think maybe he’s realizing his mistake. Here’s what he told Ellen Degeneres:
It was maybe a little too far. I think in hindsight I look back on it and I go, “OK, maybe that wasn’t the best first impression to make again, the first second impression.” I mean, I had fun up there, I had a good time, my dancers had fun and the band had fun. I respect people and feel like people walked away from that feeling disrespected. I would never intend to disrespect anybody. So that was not my intention.
What he needs now is a musical “reset” – another spotlight moment, like the AMA’s, in which he knocks everyone’s socks off musically, and convinces people that music is his thing, not social commentary.
Tiger Woods released the following statement yesterday:
[N]o matter how intense curiosity about public figures can be, there is an important and deep principle at stake which is the right to some simple, human measure of privacy. I realize there are some who don’t share my view on that. But for me, the virtue of privacy is one that must be protected in matters that are intimate and within one’s own family. Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn’t have to mean public confessions.
Whatever regrets I have about letting my family down have been shared with and felt by us alone. I have given this a lot of reflection and thought and I believe that there is a point at which I must stick to that principle even though it’s difficult.
I wish every celebrity in the world would memorize these two paragraphs and recite them whenever some nosy reporter presumes to suggest that his/her private life is somehow my business.
Tiger had a car accident and knocked over a fire hydrant. He needs to explain that to the police, and hence, to the public. If someone were knocking over fire hydrants in my neighborhood, I’d want to know who, where and why. That’s a public safety issue and a law enforcement issue. However, if the answer to “Why?” is “domestic dispute” or “private matter,” then I have no need or desire to know more.
Michaele and Tareq Salahi are the latest in a series of Reality TV inspired stupidity. Years ago, people would do dumb things to get noticed, to be sure, but the result was rarely more than the standard fifteen minutes of fame. Today, with the institutional backing (and financing) of a Reality TV Show’s production company, exhibitionists like these have the capability of distracting the entire nation for fifteen days, not fifteen minutes. The Salahi’s, like the Balloon Boy family before them, only benefit from their actions if they get caught. And even though the news media knows this, they play right into the perpetrators’ hands, because they also know that it sells soap. My only hope is that the largely negative reaction to both the Salahi’s and the Heene’s dissuade Reality TV producers from pulling stunts like this in the future. Because the media is certainly not going to show any restraint.
HBO recently aired the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame’s 25th Anniversary Concert. Culling through two nights of music, they presented a “mere” four hours of musical genius, ranging from Stevie Wonder to Simon & Garfunkel to Aretha Franklin to Crosby, Stills & Nash to U2 to Metallica to Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band. Add to that a truly amazing array of “guest stars,” such as James Taylor, Joe Cocker, Smokey Robinson, Sting, BB King, Bonnie Rait, and Billy Joel. As I watch these folks float on and off the Madison Square Garden stage, all I can think is, “These are the masters that today’s musical acts can only dream of approximating.” I’m not a fan of every musical style in the show, but the amount of raw musical talent on display is so far and away beyond the artists of today, that one wonders what the 50th Anniversary show could possibly have to offer. Maybe it’s just my age showing…
Categories: News and/or Media, Political Rantings, Random Acts of Blogging, Words about Music | 4 Comments »
The Wall on the Highway – A Parable
Saturday, November 28th, 2009One afternoon, two men were walking alongside a highway. As they came over a small hill, they were surprised to see that someone had built a brick wall right in the middle of the road. The wall was perpendicular to the road, and went from shoulder to shoulder, making it impossible for anyone or anything to pass. As the two men discussed how impractical the wall was, a car came driving over the hill. Failing to see the wall in time, the car crashed into the wall head-on, killing everyone inside. The men were outraged. “What a senseless tragedy!” shouted the first man. “Something must be done!” agreed the second. The two men shook hands and made a solemn vow to do everything in their power to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.
Categories: Political Rantings | 10 Comments »
Truth or Consequences – But Not Both!
Wednesday, November 18th, 2009As we move toward the passage of a health care bill, the opinion polling isn’t necessarily getting more useful, but it is certainly getting more entertaining.
Our friends at the Associated Press do their best impression of Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking” routine:
A ban on denial of coverage because of pre-existing medical problems: 82% in favor
A ban on denial of coverage because of pre-existing medical problems that would probably cause most people to pay more for health insurance: 43% in favor
Everyone should be required to have at least some health insurance: 67% in favorEveryone should be required to have at least some health insurance, or face a federal penalty: 28% in favor
All companies should be required to give their employees at least some health insurance: 73% in favorCompanies that don’t give their employees at least some health insurance would face a fine: 52% in favor
So, to sum up: require coverage for more people, but don’t raise my premiums and don’t penalize in any way those who ignore this new requirement.
Ah, democracy…
Categories: Political Rantings | 11 Comments »