Cartoon Redux

Naïve and ignorant is what the cartoon is being called over and over as people continue to protest. Seriously, is the good Reverend Sharpton famous for his chronic complaining? Is he ever in thespotlight with good news? What is truly naïve and ignorant is to look at this cartoon in a vacuum where no other news exists and where chimpanzees can only be cartooned as African Americans and not as... well chimps. Is your mind so in the gutter that this has to be racist? Has man, and the United States in particular, not made great strides against racism, particularly seeing how Mr. Obama just took the office of President? Could it not be seen, the day after a famous chimp was shot dead by police and as a stimulus "plan" faced mounting criticism, as simply a parody of current events?

For those that argue that it implies Mr. Obama should be shot because he wrote the stimulus, know that our President has better things to do than sit down and hammer out thousands of pages of a bill. He may have not even read the whole thing. For sure, he was briefed and his aids gave it the okay and he threw his support behind it, but the wording of the cartoon is aimed at the House, the Senate and the Executive, not at any one man. You need to come to grips with the fact that the bill is full of flaws (a new ice breaker for the Coast Guard?) and that it does seem that something of less than human intelligence wrote the thing. Tim Geithner (the man put in charge of the Treasury (and the IRS when he can't pay his own taxes, but I digress), shares just as much blame as do members of the House and Senate. For a miss this bad, it took lots of people screwing up.

Now I would like to move away from this cartoon nonsense and strictly focus on the plan itself. Apparently our elected officials feel the same way about their stimulus plans as they do about our financial institutions...too big to fail. Well, this bill has Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers written all over. Mr. Obama vows transparency and that he will "call out" local governments who misuse the money on pork spending. How is this even possible? You couldn't follow a single million of these dollars, let alone every single one. It is said this will save thousands of jobs and create new ones and that if we didn't have it, the economy slip to a place where it cannot be reversed. This is the justification for trying to fix taking on too much debt with taking on too much debt. As the global economy slips further (I am looking at you China) will they want to keep buying our debt? Is it still as good as gold?

Now, it is easy to not be faced with a task as momentous as Mr. Obama is (and one not of his own doing) and say how bad of a plan it is and not understand the need to do something. However, rather than that, I will offer what I would do if I were in a position to do anything about it other than blog on my blog that no one reads (Hi Mom).

My general plan would be a bit more like the way TARP had been working under Former Treasury Secretary Paulson and Former President Bush in that it wouldn't be a huge lump sum. It would be partitioned out as seen fit. Much easier to manage. Much easier to cut the unneccessary spending, which in my eyes is anything that doesn't immediately address the root of the problems (mortgages) or positively add jobs, both short term and long term. It is one thing to just build , build, build, but what happens when everything is built? You want people in steady jobs and investing in their future. Think a) helping people go to college; b) investing in a wide array of industries (alternative fuels, biotechnology or, here's an idea...the car industry and make them the best in the world again.); c) yes, rebuild our highways, bridges and rails and d) our public school system...overhaul it. Or in other words, think about what made us the world's best economy in the first place.

This would work to distribute the money as needed and with better plans. You think that, right now, great innovators will not come out of the woodwork if they knew they could go to the government and say "Hey, I got this great idea to do X and it will impact Y" and the government would consider giving you $Z, there wouldn't be another boom industry and some gem companies? Every boom comes with a bust. That is simple economics. As long as that boom is bigger than that bust, and not too much longer, we will be better off in the long run, which is all that should matter in economic policy. Short term fixes prove more costly than they are worth and are (duh!) shortsighted.

The second prong of the attack, I would be sure to shore up the next round of mortgage failings. When you are in a flood, do you stand waist deep with a bucket? No, you move to high ground, set up the sand bags and then get at the water starting ackle deep with a pump. It is the same with the thing that sparked the powder keg of this economic calamity, mortgages, specifically those which were nearly completely mortgaged against their own (rising) value. You need to start with those on the brink of foreclosure of defaulting on their payments. We can not afford another [income/situation] bracket to fall into the widening crater of defaults. Write down principal payments on those and shore up those on the brink. Next you can do what you can with those not too far under. Thats when you start doling out the remaining funds of the $50B or whichever figure (I haven't run the numbers) would be appropriate.

It is not good government to bail out people who mortgaged their house against itself to buy cars, boats and a second home or those who bought a $700,000 home with their $40,000 salary. But the banks got a bailout? The ripple on the pond is much smaller with a pebble than a rock. You do what you can, just like with some of the bailout funds with some of those that aren't too far under getting help and those (Lehman and Bear) who were already gone were let go. The "silent majority" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nFVsJ7j_ME) may have something to say about this. My thoughts on stopping foreclosures as a broad plan to help the economy are similar to my thoughts on universal healthcare. Why should I have to pay for the unheathly lifestyles of those who choose to not exercise, eat unhealthy, smoke, ect. and why should people have to pay for my drinking and not sleeping enough? Be prudent in your ways, live within your means and you will be able to take care of yourself.

NY Post Cartoon

I am not sure how far away from NYC this has radiated, but there are currently protests going on against (and outside of) the NY Post. The reason being is seen here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090218/ap_en_ot/ny_post_cartoon. It has two cops, one shooting a chimpanzee dead and the other saying "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill." It was printed on Wednesday (2/18/09) and came a day after (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/17/travis-the-chimp-shot-dea_n_167527.html) a famous chimpanzee was shot and killed in Stamford, CT (40 miles or so from NYC) and was big news the day before. If its on my elevator news up date at work, then everyone knows about it.

The first thing that came to my mind was that they were using a current hot story (the chimp being shot), they showed their displeasure with the current government plan for the economy. But instead, a couple of bell ringers and hell raisers, like the Reverend Al Sharpton got on the case and call for the cartoonist and the editor on a pitchfork. Their argument breaks down to the cartoon harped on old racist depictions of African Americans (in this case, Barack Obama) being shot for the stimulus package. Problem is, when I think of the stimulus package, I think of failure in house, senate and the executive branch, not the failings of one man.

I find a few things wrong with this. First and foremost, the chimpanzee in no way resembles Obama or any other homosapien since at the very earliest, Neanderthals. Second, given the timing of the cartoon (the day after the local story of a chimpanzee being shot dead after going on a rampage attacking a person broke), mt mind isn't even tempted to leave that story and think something terrible.

Additionally, and admittedly this reason may vary from person to person, I think that chimpanzees wrote the "stimulus" (even Mr Obama seems to be starting to get away from calling it this) based on its complete disagreed for the past, present and future, although that is a whole other blog post. The plan the government has in place right now was not the failings of one man, but lots of politicians and lobbyists. Given, it is most associated with the most visible and most supportive backer of it. As a more light hearted honorable mention, I could go into the difference between apes and monkeys, the latter of which was often used to depict African Americans through and even beyond the 1960's and the former of which being the family the chimp belongs in. Calling for the firing of two men because of this is simply ludicrous.

Gaza

Chances are, if you are reading this, then you know Israel has been pounding the crap out of the Gaza Strip over the past two weeks. There have been calls for a cease fire from all over the world condemning the attacks and the occupation. News outlets love to point out that over 1000 Gaza residents (militant and non alike) have been killed while less than 20 Israelis have been killed from rocket and other attacks.

First, a bit of background. There has never been but a lull in violence and conflict in Israel for thousands of years. Control over Jerusalem throughout history has been one long game of hot potato. When the concept of Israel was being mulled over by the UN, the original plan was
for a partition, one Jewish and one Arab, with the West Bank remaining neutral (due to the holy sites for both sides and the fact that no one will ever relinquish/maintain control over those sites). Arab Nations (Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq) rejected this and instead attacked the newly formed Israel. At the end, Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan annexed the West Bank. Israel itself controlled a barren wasteland with no natural resources and only tourism to rely on (a real kicker to control the only land in that area with no oil).

To keep this from getting too boring, control over various regions of Israel (a small area about the size of New Jersey, mind you) moved back and forth, usually from Arab aggression resulting in their own defeat and Israel conceding the land from the resulting victories. This has been going on forever and I don't see it stopping anytime soon. The whole thing is really just so petty on both sides at this point, we should just have a bingo game to see who gets control of each area. Violence is as certain as a hypochondriac's thoughts when hearing the defintion of hypochondria.

Back to recent events. If any other country in the world was subject to unprovoked rocket attacks, no matter the casualty result, the "offensive" into the firing country wouldn't be second guessed. Can you imagine Mexico shooting rockets into New Mexico? Andorra taking on Spain? How about Germany laying a few on France (who is attempting to broker the cease fire)? Or, what would the response be to Israeli unprovoked attacks on Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, et all?

Now Gaza is claiming it will only broker a cease fire (after they broke the last one during its final days) if Israel withdraws? Hamas (which controls Gaza), is backed by Iran. Iran has gone on record saying its goal is the complete obliteration of the state of Israel. I don't think the problems with this whole thing could be anymore obvious.

Testimonials

Is it just me, or any time there are "testimonials" listed for a product or a service, that product/service is shady at best? I keep seeing the http://cash4gold.com/ advertised and I went to check it out. Gold is pretty valuable but I simply can't trust a site that has testimonials. It's like trusting the Bernie Madoff with this years tax return.

Football Playoffs

Next week's games are set. Here is the rundown:

Ravens @ Titans
Pick: Ravens 26 Titans 20

The Titans are pretty ripe for the picking. They are getting some players back (Haynesworth and co) from injuries but time will tell if they are 100% at this point. If Flacco can become Tom Brady circa 2001 and manages the gameplan well, that defense with Ed Reed and Ray Lewis can really carry them. We will see how Johnson and Kerry Collins (although as my brother says, "Never underestimate Kerry Collins") fair aginst a sound if not solid defense.

Chargers @ Steelers
Pick: Steelers 20 Chargers 17

I could use this as an excuse to explain why an 8-8 team shouldn't make the playoffs. Instead, Chargers looked good but without Tomlinson, Sproles is going to be on his back courtesy of James Harrison and Troy Polamalu and I don't think Rivers has enough weapons outside of Antonio (finally looking healthy and himself) Gates to overcome the Steelers Defense.

Arizona @ Carolina
Pick: Carolina 31 Arizona 14

I can pretty much boil this down to counting scores. I can see Arizona playing the couple of big plays (2 long TD's) and a lot of 3 and outs, turnovers and losing the time possession battle kind of game. against Carolina's defense and while Julius Peppers has himself a 3 sack day on as Kurt Warner is reminded he should retire before he gets the final hit he doesn't want.

Eagles @ Giants
Pick: Giants 24 Eagles 16

I really want to pick the Eagles in this game because if anyone in the NFC could beat the Giants its them. I think that if Brandon Jacobs is a) not 100% and b) forced into less carries or out of the game by injury the Eagles have a great chance to win this game. I don't trust the McNabb/Reid braintrust to carry the Eagles to a great extent so Dawkins and the defense and Westbrook on the offensive side will need to have big days. However, I think the Giants defense and an efficient offense and field possession game will move the Giants on.

Sean Avery

If you haven't been following along, NHL's current bad boy, Sean Avery, was recently suspended for 6 games. No he didn't have another rule after him (see the Avery rule based upon his goalie screening tactics) or his constant trash talking. Well it was his trash talking, except this time about a former girlfriend, Elisha Cuthbert. Elisha Cuthbert is a talentless hack who relied on her (extremely) good looks to get a few roles in 24 and The Girl Next Door. Sean Avery calling her his "sloppy seconds" only added some publicity for someone who hasn't had any in...years.

There are a few things I find wrong with this. Is calling someone sloppy seconds really that bad? I use it not frequently but certainly when the timing is right and have never found it to be severely insulting, nor has anyone I have said it around. All it does, and in a succint way, is that you were with someone first and are no longer on great terms with that person. How does this result in a 6 game suspension from a league where fighting and checks bring ratings and cheers? Granted, Sean Avery talks a lot of trash,probably more than some teams combined and he has been warned about his antics by Gary Bettman (league commissioner and someone I consider to be one of the least fun, based solely on looks, on earth but I digress) and he probably had a suspension coming his way. But really Mr. Bettman, this is where you make your stand? Over sloppy seconds and Elisha Cuthbert? For shame.

The Blue to Your Face Media

If a recent bipartisan report released by the government is true, we should expect a biological or nuclear attack on US soil in the next five years. Now here is a matter we should look ahead to rather than Lebron James' free agent status. Or is it? I understand the need to keep sources and intelligence secret, but why is this threat becoming more believable/credible? Is it simply more access to the materials and more anti - Western sentiment? A blanket statement like this or the "unsubstantiated" report about a potential attack on the New York City subway system just continually funnels fear into our faces.

No doubt, a chemical attack on our soil, or any soil for that matter, would be catastrophic; not only to the area immediately affected, but to the flood gates of retaliation and the breaking the seal mentality for this type of attack. But it is this very tactic that is causing us more harm than good. Am I any more likely to prepare myself for an attack like this with purchasing some sort of bio suit or gas mask because of this report? No. Am I more fearful I am going to die by asphyxiation while my skin melts off? Yes. Do I look like a small wide receiver going through the middle of the secondary on the subway now? Yes. Will I stop riding the subway? No. So what's the point? The "I told you so factor" when one of these suckers goes off? It is this type of information that should be kept classified. It is this type of intel that media outlets go gaga for and it is this sort of thing that should be kept off of everyday Americans' radar screens. This type of "news" only plays into the fears people maintain and it is this sort of news which solely feeds the problem. It is only worse with our current economic climate.

As someone who is finding more hairs on my pillow each morning, to reduce stress I have maintained ongoing efforts to avoid negative coverage of everything from the terrorist attacks in India to the ongoing tanking of the economy. This has proven incredibly difficult as both were played/are playing out in the media with a constant bombardment. Hell, even watching Sportscenter is no refuge anymore as the economy has brought rare frugalness to baseball's free agency this offseason. As I have always heard, "No news is good news." The down your throat attacks through newspapers, TV and the Internet of the day to day layoffs, bankruptcies and bailouts caused by the economy's downward spiral only add to the problem. A good chunk of the economy is based on people's belief in the economy and in the capitalist system. With constant updates on the volatility in the stock market, massive layoffs and production output declines, the media is simply feeding the fire that is deepening a year old recession.

What do I expect from companies that make their bank from shock and terror stories? Well certainly not a kitten saved by a firefighter from a tree on a daily basis. But would it hurt to bring up good news every once in a while? John McCain was not far off when he proclaimed that "The fundamentals of our economy are still strong" back in September. Productivity is steady, innovation is still there and we aren't lacking in any resources or commodities (oil is even down to below $50 a barrel). There is a lot of bad debt to deal with and the housing and stock markets need to settle themselves but the biggest thing we lack right now is confidence and it is only being hurt by the constant negativity that the media brings.