Current Affairs

The Phoenix Suns acquired Shaquille O'Neal last week in a surprising trade with the Miami Heat.  The Suns sent Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks to Miami in exchange for O'Neal.  This move should put Phoenix in better contention for the NBA Finals in 2008- assuming both O'Neal and Grant Hill can stay healthy as well as barring any unforeseen injuries to anyone else on the roster.  O'Neal "may" play in a Suns' jersey as early as Wednesday, February 13th against the Golden State Warriors; however, it seems more likely that he will be available to play on the 14th against Dallas.




It seems that the Writer's Guild strike in Hollywood may be coming to an end.  Apparently, concessions have been made and hands have been shook.  It's all up to the rank and file members of the Writers Guild of America.  It is being foretold that the deal should be accepted as each side's Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement gets much worse if the strike continues.  This is presumably because writing must begin now in order to be adequately prepared for the sweeps television season which begins in only a couple of months.  The sweeps time period entails assessing viewership of programs which- in turn- determines how much can be charged for advertising on individual programs.  The new deal allegedly includes:

"a doubling of the residual rate for movies and TV shows sold online and secures the union's jurisdiction over content created specifically for the Web, above certain budget thresholds. Like directors, writers also would receive a 3.5% increase in minimum pay rates for television and film scripts work.”





The race for U.S. President 2009 claimed Mitt Romney as a victim last week.  Romney dropped out of the race for Republican nominee for the top U.S. executive office after fairing poorly during Super Tuesday.  John McCain came out of that race the lead candidate; however, Mike Huckabee seems born anew from better than expected results.

On the Democrat side of the race, Clinton and Obama are still neck in neck.  Clinton came out of Super Tuesday having won more delegates while Obama won more states.  Barack Obama, however, has swept Saturday's set of primaries in Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington and the Virgin Islands as well as Maine's caucus on Sunday.

One of the interesting quotes to come from last week's primary contests was from Mike Huckabee.  The morning of Saturday, February 9th, Huckabee addressed the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.  During that speech Huckabee was quoted as saying with regard to winning delegates, "I know the pundits, and I know what they say: The math doesn't work out.  Well, I didn't major in math; I majored in miracles. And I still believe in those, too."

The group Huckabee spoke to, had been quoted earlier in the week chanting, "Four more years, four more years" at a speech given by President George W. Bush.  During his speech, some presumed Bush was attempting to carve a soft spot into the hearts of conservative Americans for John McCain.

Our Nation is Now Dumber for This…Thank You for Your Participation!

The U.S. Congress passed legislation to cut working Americans- individually making less than $75,000 a year- a check in May 2008.  To listen to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell one might think Congress has diverted the economic recession that many are currently predicting. 

"This is the Senate at its finest, recognizing this was an opportunity to demonstrate to the public that we could come together, do something important for the country and do it quickly," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "We were able to put aside our differences not only in the Senate but with our colleagues in the House and with the administration."

The Senate "at its finest."  Don't get me wrong.  I'm going to take the money and I'm going to pay off some credit card debt.  I'm not saying that I don't want the money or that I'm not happy about getting it.  The economy sucks and the company I'm working for has declared that nobody will get a raise this year.  I can use the money; however, don't get suckered in too much by the platitudes Congress is bestowing on themselves. 

People such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said, "It's tremendous what we've been able to accomplish."  All that's been accomplished, though, is an increase the national debt.  We're in debt as a country and yet we're handing out checks to the tune of:

"$600 payments for individuals — $1,200 for couples — plus $300 for each child under 17. It would begin to phase out eligibility at $75,000 in adjusted gross income for individuals and at $150,000 for couples. Workers who can show $3,000 in earned income last year— too little to pay income taxes — would be eligible for payments of $300. Checks would go out separately from tax returns."

This is not money we have as a country.  In the grand scheme of averting a recession, this money will provide very little long term relief.  The problem seems to me that corporations want to constantly talk about growth.  Investors want to talk about growth.  Economists will only talk about growth.  Therefore, when growth slows- or even worse stops- people start freaking out as if the sky is falling.

In the grand scheme of things, companies could simply look at getting by.  Investors could start working for a living and stop worrying about whether their money is shrinking or remaining static.  If you don't have enough money: get a job!  If you've got enough money: stop being depressed and enjoy your peace of mind quietly.

The country is not like that though.  We talk about growth because some people need to know that their money is not being lost.  They need to know that their millions are making even more millions if for no other purpose than simply their money is growing.  The growing has stopped though. 

People aren't buying garbage that they don't need this year.

Walmart's sales growth slowed last year.

Is it a recession?  Or is it people saving their money?  And what happens if people stop spending and start saving? 

That's a good thing, right?

What happens in that scenario is that growth stops and people start worrying about inflation or recession or stag-flation or the end of the universe.  People get fired.  People get laid off.  Raises get cancelled.  Politicians get voted out of office.

"In all, the tax checks will cost the Treasury $105.7 billion, all of which will be added to the budget deficit."

After the month of May is over, and the money has been spent, does anyone really expect that recession will no longer be on the horizon?

Nonetheless, I will be spending $1,800 to free up credit card debt when these checks are cut.




Question of the Week

What qualities do we like in a president?  What qualities do we need in the President?  Are these qualities the same thing?  What does a President actually do?

These questions are important as we look to select the next person to fill the post in 2009.  However, you may criticize me because I seem simple here.  You might say I'm taking this issue back to a place where it need not go.  It might be suggested that only someone who may never "get it" might make such an inquiry.

Still I think it is important to ask these questions, because the answers generally aren't so simple after you've peeled away layers.  For instance, from the simplest of levels, presidents are the Face of America.  The President in this capacity will be a representative among nations. 

Regardless of desire, the President portrays a character to the rest of the world.  For this very reason, some Americans have expressed concern with George W. Bush's conduct in past years.  This judgment isn't intended as a criticism, but merely as an observation from a contemporary U.S.

President regarding the issue at hand.  If the face quality of a president is the most important thing, then what do we value the most in this capacity?  Does honor outrank well-spoken?  Should truthfulness trump name-recognition?  Face is indeed an important part of the President's function for the nation.  It is only one part though.

So, back to the questions then.  What qualities do we like in a president?  It depends on how you feel about life, I suppose.  That is as definitive as we can ever hope to get in describing the answer to that question.  Without a specific situation to apply judgment, you can never say with certainty what the correct answer is and it must simply be left at that. 

If gas prices are climbing, we're weak in foreign policy and the economy is going in the toilet, Ronald Reagan looks really good. 

When a major government scandel rocks the country, Jimmy Carter's the salve. 

These answers seem trite though.  So it would seem that to determine what a president should be, we will first be required to determine what a president does.  This is so because again, the answer is not as simple as the question might first suggest.

The U.S. Constitution requires that a president:

-Function as boss of the Army and Navy (Commander in Chief.)
-Determine the final validity of judicial rulings over individuals (pardons and reprieves.)
-Function as the CEO of any governmental organization created by Congress (essentially hiring and firing.)
-Establish relations with foreign countries by assigning Ambassadors.
-Appoint members to the third check-and-balance component of the American government (Supreme Court.)
-To a lesser degree of authority, appoint members to the second check-and balance component (temporarily vacant seats in Congress.)
-Develop and deliver an annual presentation for Congress (State of the Union.)
-(in extraordinary Occasions) serve as referee of Congress.

That's all the U.S. Constitution requires a president do.

Recently, George W. Bush released a budget proposal for 2009, but did he really create that thing?  Would any president?  When you ask so much of one person, you eventually arrive to a point where you say, "there's only so many hours in the day."  There is a limit and I'd have to imagine researching and writing a 22-department budget proposal would take one person a really long time.  So, I revisit a variation on my original question. 

Does a good president need to have a finance background?  The budget proposal has the President's face on it, but should a president have to understand what's being presented or offered in that proposal?  The 2009 budget proposes, "an 8.2 percent increase in total security spending....used to maintain a high level of military readiness that can support the Global War on Terror and respond, if necessary, to other military threats."

What exactly does that mean except some people may want to attack Iran?

It is suggested, however, that the proposal is "to reflect the President’s priorities of promoting economic growth and restraining Federal spending, which benefit both taxpayers and the Nation’s treasury."  This is inspite of the fact that the budget has expanded every year George W. Bush was in office, yet now he proposes a path to decrease the national deficit after he leaves office. 

This seems a bit disingenuous and hypocritical, yet the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington claim they want four more years of George W. Bush.

What qualities has he exemplified to suggest amending the U.S. Constitution to allow him another term in office?  Would determining these qualities help us at all in trying to define what qualities we may want or need in a president?

What about military experience?  As Commander in Chief, a president has a tremendous amount of authority and power.  Is restraint to be valued more or less than military prowess?  Should the President be held accountable to the level of what armaments are purchased and utilized in the field?  Is George W. partially to blame for purchasing the new Stryker used in Iraq that has affectionately been called, "a piece" by soldiers in Iraq?

It hardly seems sensible to require that kind of accountability for a president.  Cutting to the chase, the suggestion that bothers me the most is the notion that someone should be chosen for president due to their experience.  What kind of experience can possibly prepare someone to be the President of the United States of America? 

It seems to me an absurd notion, because of the large amount of responsibility as well as the unique nature of the work.  Besides which the job is seemingly difficult to define in concrete terms.  If you can't tell someone what they will be doing, it is difficult to forcast the skills that will be most beneficial for them to possess.  On the other side of that, should we be a little worried if someone suggests that their experience makes them the right candidate for the presidency?  I must only assume that such a person has an agenda and if their agenda is not clearly stated before hand how can you trust that their skills will match your needs?

However, that is just my sense of it. 

Feel free to chime in.




Tip of the week

Gut it out.  Misery is as bad as it can get.  Climb over misery to bask in a whole new world.



Birthday Shout Outs (Feb 10th to Feb 16th)

2/10
(1939) Roberta Flack- She sang a hauntingly, beautiful song.
(1955) "Gentleman" Chris Adams- One of my all-time favorite wrestlers.

(1962) Cliff Burton- The heart and soul of Metallica.


2/11
(1847) Thomas Edison- What's to say?  He's an enigma as a heroic character.  He was a self-promoter as well as a frequent petitioner of the courts.  He had a nice house in Florida though.
(1936) Burt Reynolds- "Smokey and the Bandit" is an all-time great comedy movie.
(1962) Sheryl Crow- She's grown on me as a musician.  I really like her work.

2/12
(1809) Charles Darwin- A shifter of paradigms.
(1809) Abraham Lincoln- He was the 16th President of the United States of America.
(1935) Ray Manzarek- The Doors had their moments.
(1938) Judy Blume- She wrote Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing as well as Superfudge.  Blame her for encouraging my literacy.
(1956) Arsenio Hall- I'm not exactly sure what he did or when he did it, but he caused a hell of a sensation for himself for a period of time.

2/13
(1944) Jerry Springer- Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry...bring back the raw wonder and drama of low class America.  Your show reminded me at one time of the One Minute Hate in 1984.
(1944) Peter Tork- The Monkees were more than a poor man's version of the Beatles.

(1950) Peter Gabriel- An interesting musician with flashes of brilliance.

2/14
(1894) Jack Benny- It took many years after his death for impersonations of him to become foreign.  That says something about the man.

2/15
(1564) Galileo Galilei- Another shifter of paradigms.
(1944) Mick Avory- The Kinks had their moments.
(1954) Matt Groening- Creator of the Simpsons.
(1964) Chris Farley- One of the funniest people to ever have performed on Saturday Night Live.
 

2/16
(1909) Hugh Beaumont- I think I will always have his name stuck in my head along with the traipsing "Leave It to Beaver" opening soundtrack playing behind it.
(1957) Levar Burton- You can blame him for my literacy as well.
(1958) Ice T- OG.

Belly Laugh

Love him or hate him, Gilbert Gottfried leaves few people on the fence about how they feel about him.