Archive for the ‘International Politics’ Category

Wait, President Obama Won The Nobel Peace Prize?

Saturday, October 10th, 2009

Are you serious? Look, I like President Barack Obama. By and large I think that he’s doing an okay job. No, he’s not the best President that America has ever had and no, he’s not the worst. Frankly, he’s not been around long enough for anyone to make such judgments. However, it appears that whatever set of dummies that run the Nobel organization have decided that he has been around long enough to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

Again, I’m as American as the next guy in this country and I love the fact that an American won the award. Yet, I can’t help to wonder the basis of President Obama’s nomination or his award. What…exactly…has he done to warrant such a prestigious award?

Could President Obama be the spark that creates great forms of positive change in the world? Well, yeah, I guess. But then again – you or I could be that same spark. Some would argue (successfully, too) that President George W. Bush was such a figure. Others might say that the work that President Bill Clinton has performed since he left office make him a clear choice for the Nobel Peace Prize. But President Obama?

Hmmm…

I think the folks behind this award are suffering from a form of premature exasperation. That’s right. I think that they hear President Obama speak about good will and their hearts flutter. I used to work for a guy who was absolutely euphoric over President Obama winning the White House (he was later fired from the office due to incompetency). It appears that the folks behind this award are absolutely euphoric, too.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to let President Obama actually become the force for good that everyone thinks he can be and THEN reward him for it? Oh wait, I forgot that he’s a liberal minded politician leading a world power during the localization of the globe. In other words – he can do no wrong in some people’s eyes… which is a damn shame.

Congratulations, President Obama. I hope that you live up to this award.

Bring Sean Goldman Home – Now

Saturday, March 14th, 2009

For those of you living in Tinton Falls, you may know this story of a local man whose son has essentially been kidnapped by Brazil (my interpretation of the facts). Eight-year-old Sean Goldman, son of David Goldman, has been in Brazil ever since 2004. A story on FOX News gives a brief description of how the young boy came to be where he is today:

Sean’s mother took him on vacation to Brazil in June 2004, but instead of returning to New Jersey, she divorced David Goldman and remarried in Brazil. She died last year, but Sean’s stepfather continues to raise him in South America and claims custody rights.

Pretty ridiculous, huh? Thankfully, the House of Representatives passed a resolution yesterday calling for the boy to be brought back home as soon as possible. Also, President Obama is meeting with the Brazilian President today and among the topics they will talk about is the Goldman case. This seems like a no brainer to everyone who hears the details of the case as cited above. Sean Goldman should be brought home and his father should be the one who raises him, not the stepfather who drew his mother away from his father in the first place.

If our top diplomats – as human beings – can’t manage to get Sean back with his father, then how can anyone believe that there is any hope left for common sense and decency in this world? The kid should be home with his dad, period.

Uhhh Ohhh… Guantanamo is Humane!

Sunday, March 8th, 2009

Sometime in February I bookmarked a page on the FOX News website that talked about a report on the Guantanamo Bay prison which was prepared for President Barack Obama. Some interesting information pulled directly from the report:

As a presidential candidate, Obama criticized the detention center that human rights groups and many in the international community widely condemned for harsh treatment of prisoners during the Bush administration. The military has defended its actions, saying prisoners have been treated humanely since the center was set up after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

The report found the camp to be in compliance with the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3, the international rules that require the humane treatment of prisoners taken in unconventional armed conflicts, like the war on terrorism. The camp’s controversial force-feeding of prisoners on hunger strikes was also found to be compliant with the Geneva guidelines, a second government official confirmed.

I can appreciate that Obama will probably read this report and change his position during the election on whether or not Guantanamo is/was a humane place to keep prisoners. In fact, I would assume that the President is privy to higher levels of information now that he’s the Commander in Chief and that, in this role, he knows things about Guantanamo that we will never know about. I get it – he’s the President, he should know those things.

But what gets me is that you’ll never hear about this story being covered en masse by the mainstream media. You’ll never hear the political extremists come back and say, “Oh golly. Looks like we goofed on that whole ‘inhumane’ thing down at Guantanamo Bay. Our bad!” Not going to happen. However, if this report for President Obama proved the opposite – that Guantanamo was a disaster and that it was an inhumane place to keep prisoners – then you’d have people calling for President Bush’s head right now!

Isn’t that annoying? Isn’t it annoying that we have extremists in the mainstream who will call for the prosecution of a President based solely on their own ideas and thoughts? However, when those ideas and thoughts are proven wrong by the administration of their favorite son, the extremists won’t turn around and say, “Wow. We were mistaken. Our apologies.”

What a sad commentary on the loud voices…

Why The Rest Of The World Should Be In Fear…

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

According to one report in an international newspaper, now is the time for the rest of the world to start getting a little bit worried about a rise in American power. No, we’re not coming at you with preemptive wars and no, we’re not going to try nation building in new parts of the globe. No, we’ve got something much more positive in store…for us, at least.

Americans are saving their money again.

That’s right. Americans have finally begun to reverse their trend of spending more money than they earn, at least in some small part. The good folks north of the border at the Globe and Mail ran an article about this returning phenomenon the other day where they shared some historical stats:

Americans are suddenly spending less than they earn. While that might not sound heretical or surprising – how long can you go on spending more money than you earn? – it is an epochal moment for the free-spending United States. After saving an average of more than 7 per cent of disposable income until almost 1990, the United States went into a savings tailspin. Savings rates fell, in fits and starts, from 8 per cent, through 6 per cent in the early 1990s, to 2 per cent around 2000, to the ignominy of a negative savings rate by mid-2005.

Now, however, that is changing rapidly. November economic data showed U.S. savings spiked to 2.8 per cent of disposable income, up from zero at the beginning of 2008. Is it that Americans have suddenly figured out that saving is a good thing, or are they taking some sort of moral stand against profligate spending?

Look at that! At the beginning of 2008, Americans were saving zero percent of their disposable income, but towards the end of the year we were up around three percent. Alright! Go America! What does this mean for the world? The writer of this piece, Paul Kedrosky, gives us some idea…

To put it in context, a U.S. savings rate of minus 1 per cent meant roughly $2-million a minute was flowing out of U.S. consumer savings into other things, mostly consumption, like TVs and home renovations, and so on. Or, on an annual basis, that worked out to almost $1.3-trillion exiting the U.S. banking system for other places.

Turn that around, however, and things get very different, very quickly. At a 3-per-cent savings rate, the United States will see $3.8-trillion showing up next year in the banking system just from domestic savers. At 7 per cent, almost $9-trillion will come rushing in as part of the savings tsunami. It is a fire hose of money pointed at the banks, and it’s just beginning.

Ha! How about that, world? The market is up the creek right now, but America is going to get its value back and we’re going to get it from saving more of our own money. It’s simple cause and effect, right? If you want more money in the banking system without draining more taxpayer dollars, then you PUT IT there via savings accounts.

And that’s just what this country is fixing to do. Let’s go bigger and better than a 3% savings rate. All Americans should sit down and look at their personal annual budget and try to earmark 5% of their annual earnings for savings only. And why not go even bigger and better than that? Budget 5% of your income for savings and another 5% for donations to one or two United States-based charitable organizations of your choosing. Your first 5% helps provide for your future and your second 5% helps to build up another community within your own nation.

If you can afford to do it, then why not?

I.O.U.S.A. – The 30 Minute Documentary

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

The other day I shared my favorite commercial from the holiday season with you all and today I’ll be sharing a documentary that I watched over the Christmas season which is eye-opening and scary at the same time. It’s 30 minutes long, so sit back and relax while you watch this one.

Pretty scary, huh? For more information on this growing debt crisis you can head over to the official movie website or to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation website.

I have two concerns with the documentary and the supporting websites. First, it becomes obvious that the filmmaker has a thing against President Bush and his administration as well as President Ronald Reagan and his trickle-down economics approach to governing the market. Honestly, that’s fine and I don’t really care about those concerns. People will always go after President Reagan since he was the beginning of modern conservatism and I think it’s obvious that President Bush will continue to be castrated in the popular (and independent) media for the rest of our lifetimes.

My second issue, though, is that when you look through the supporting websites there are no concrete examples of how to fix this massive debt problem. Sure, the Peterson Foundation website has a 10 point “what you can do” list, but it boils down to being engaged in local, state, and national government and keeping better financial controls in your personal life. Well, those are things that we should all be doing anyway!

I encourage you to watch the documentary when you have the opportunity. But I wish that there were better examples of how concerned citizens could help to alleviate this problem.

OPEC Pushes Back a Decision on Oil Output

Friday, December 5th, 2008

How disgusting is OPEC? I know this entry is a few days late in coming, but the word going around is that the cartel wants to set a standard rate of $75 per barrel of oil worldwide. These dummies don’t understand that price controls do not work in the type of worldwide economic downturn that we’re seeing. From the article:

OPEC, which accounts for more than 40 percent of the world’s supply, will next meet in Oran, Algeria, on Dec. 17. In a statement after yesterday’s meeting in Cairo, the group warned demand will be “much lower” than expected a month ago. The cost of crude has continued to slide even after the group agreed last month to lower production by 1.5 million barrels a day.

There shouldn’t be a problem with reducing the amount of oil that is generated by the oil cartel since worldwide demand is decreasing. That’s fine – that’s simple supply and demand: when demand goes down, supplies do not need to be as high. However, to reduce supply of a vital resources to a point where prices skyrocket is unacceptable. The world is taking notice of what OPEC does and its people will respond in turn.

Remember last month when OPEC cut their production by 1.5 million barrels per day? The purpose of the cut was to drive prices higher. Instead, prices sunk a few dollars per barrel on the very same day the cut was announced. Thankfully, the people of the world are beginning to seriously consider alternative energy sources and they are moving in that direction in large numbers. This shift away from a petroleum-based life is what the world needs to cut off some of these middle eastern countries who try to dictate their financial needs upon the world.

Let’s hope that demand continues to decrease as consumers continue to purchase energy efficient vehicles, household items, and renewable/resuable resources.


© 1996 - 2010 Usable Web Solutions, LLC
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

All content is exclusive to this site and may be reprinted only with express written permission of the Owner of this site.
Privacy Policy | Contact Us