Holy ethics part 2

Things surely can't get any worse? First we had octomum and lets be honest, her story was pretty low on the moral chart. Now there is a new shocker.

Aflie -as pictured- is a proud father. He is still a child himself. He is 13. Yes 13 and his blushing girlfriend is 15. Where do I start?

This is a prime example of the wearing away of Britain's moral values. Alfie was 12 and Chantelle 14 when they conceived. Really? I was playing with Barbie dolls at Emma Magee's house up until age 11. Not to mention, Alfie looks like he's eight or nine and I don't mind saying what you are all thinking. How literally did it happen? She looks a lot older. If he looks like this at 13 imagine how much younger he looked a year ago.

This story is such an embarrassment.

So you have just found out your 13 and going to be a father. What do you do next? Tell your parents of course. Yes. And what do said respectable parents do? Sell your story to the highest bidder- silly. Make a laughing stalk of your life and the biggest mistake you'll probably ever make. Although this may not turn out to be Alfie's only mistake given his obvious lack of support network.

Apparently they now have a publicist and like Miss Octomum are awaiting the pay check.

Children make mistakes and it's an easy cop-out to blame the parents. But.. In this case, they are making the whole thing worse. Alfie is not the first 13 year old father in Britain, he just has the added misfortune to have numskull scummy parent's who are happy to exploit him.

Not to mention the blushing new mother. The latest news is that several other boys have come forward saying they could be the father. Well isn't she the apple of her parent's eye.

14 and inviting all the local boys around. Now poor Alfie says he wants a paternity test. How the plot thickens. Next, we'll see the headline, 'Chantelle: 'my bleeding heart for Alfie''

Give me a break!!!!

Surely we need to look at ourselves? What is going on when children as young as 12 are having sex? Earlier I said it's the easy option to blame the parents. In this case I think we have to. Are they being told as youngsters 'have sex, have babies, get a house, go on the dole, it's easy, the gov will pay?'

In one of his many 'exclusive' Sun interviews Alfie said this weekend:

"I thought it would be good to have a baby"

"I didn't think about how we would afford it. I don't really get pocket money. My dad sometimes gives me £10"

"I didn't know what it would be like to be a dad. I will be good, though, and care for it."

I recently re-watched the film the Magdaline Sister's. If you haven't seen it, it's about the Magdaline Asylum's which existed in Ireland up until 1996. These 'asylums' were used as dumping grounds for pregnant unmarried women. Families who couldn't bare the embarrassment of pregnancies would forcibly place girls and women in these institutions. Nun's ran the asylum's as work houses. By all accounts, they were not pleasant places to be and the film at least was extremely harrowing.

The film got me thinking whilst reading this 13 year old dad story.

In forty years look how far we have come on moral issues. We have come from hiding pregnant women in asylums to flaunting 13 year old dads on newspapers. Is either better or worse? Is it not as shaming to humiliate a child like Alfie on a paper cover, as to commit a pregnant girl to an asylum? And clearly whatever we are doing to promote sex education is working as well as telling children it's a mortal sin. In fact maybe we should resort back to lying. Maybe by telling them they will burn in hell, little Alfie's might keep their trousers on. It appears we have regressed to the 60's. Things today are no better than the asylums and shaming of the 60's. We can't stop them getting pregnant and we have terrible methods of dealing with it when they do.

Need I say anything?

I think this photo speaks volumes don't you? And illustrates beautifully why, as Brant so eloquently put it, 'it's isn't a clown cart'. I can't even begin to understand why anyone would choose to do this to themselves. Imagine the pain. Imagine the sleep deprivation- I think it's safe to assume she never slept. There are sooo many whys? I also think the picture illustrates how the female body is NOT designed to be pushed to this limit. This picture has left me in shock. I have nothing else to say. 

It Isn't A Clown Car

Holy ethics, how about this story? As if using fertility drugs to birth to octuplets after already having had six children wasn’t controversial enough, we now learn she is a single mother… on welfare… with literally no way to pay for any of them.

How on earth was she allowed to have the embryos placed in her womb in the first place? According to the story, she used her disability money to pay for the in vitro fertilizations. Umm, what? If this is indeed the case, she should be shut off from receiving any additional state funds, immediately. If she can’t afford to take care of the kids, they should be auctioned off to the highest bidder and made indentured servants until they can pay off their debt to society. Of course, I’m kidding about that part, but there are plenty of families that desperately want to raise a child with the means to do so that cannot have children of their own that would be more than happy to adopt one of these children.

Ideally, one would rather not separate a child from its birth mother, but I haven’t been able to conjure up the slightest bit of sympathy for this woman. We know at the very least she’s unfit financially to raise her children. She very well may also be unfit mentally. Think about it, she used the system for her advantage to continue to have children when she knew she had no way to support them. She’s either a criminal or she’s insane.

I’m not opposed to multi-children families, people can have as many offspring as they like. I’m actually a huge proponent of the process of reproduction. However if you are supported by the State, your decision to continue to procreate should come with strings attached.

People supported by the State should not be allowed access to fertility drugs. If they are found making a conscious effort to do so, they should be cut off, immediately.

If you don’t want strings attached to your baby-making abilities, get a job and support yourself then get off the system’s payroll. Until then, keep the clown car in the garage until you’ve got the money to drive it.

Why is it so cute?

Ever thought why we gravitate to small creatures or why it is we go gaga over little people?

Standing at just 2ft 5in high, He Pingping, from China, has been officially named the smallest man in the world. In January 2007, Mr Pingping was invited to take part in a television programme in Tokyo, and has since become somewhat of an icon.

Following the death of 2ft 3in Nelson de la Rosa in 2006, a number of possible contenders came forward including Pingping for the title, and prior to the decision Channel 4 presenter Mark Dolan set out to find them.

At 6ft 5in Mark must of intimidated the little fella's, non-the less he firstly met a 16 year old boy called Khagendra Thapa Magar, who stands at only 2ft. Once of age, Magar, will be in contention for the overall world's smallest man title.

Watching Mark carry Magar in a plastic bag, (which he apparently likes to be carried in) made my cuteness barometer go through the roof and I was left asking a few questions - Why does this feel wrong? Why do we find little creatures/people so cute? Why is it that even grown men oh and ah at newborns, puppies, kittens and baby platypus?

So what causes us, even as infants, to go weak at the knees for cute and cuddly?

Well, according to leading scientists there are some basic human instincts which are key to these reactions.

Apparently it is a natural human response to find the vulnerable and innocent cute. Duhhh.

It is mother nature's way of protecting. As humans we obviously take the whole cute baby thing a lot further than naturally expected.

What then to the little people? Is it our fascination with vulnerable innocence which leads us to ohh and ahh over an adult, albeit a little one? In a way it's perverted, right? Lord knows there are whole websites devoted to Dwarf fetishes.

Although we may look with equal fascination at unusual people, small, tall, fat and thin, you never hear 'Oh how cute is that 9ft man'.

So it's back to the whole small cute thing again. I'm not convinced it's necessarily over vulnerability, but rather cuteness in proportions which turns us in a tizzy for small critters and small people. Perhaps as it's simply because babies, and infant animals are evenly proportioned, and thereby more aesthetically pleasing, that we swoon.
I'd be willing to bet that the world's smallest man/woman is the biggest draw to the Guinness book. After all, that's what we want really want to see, right?

Rugged and Ready

Pit stops are a vital component of the American road trip experience. These brief interludes provide an opportunity to stock up on snacks and beverages while relieving one’s self of the previous stop’s snacks and beverages. It’s a chance to stretch the legs while discussing the next leg of the trip. However, before the adventure resumes, the restrooms are provide another adventure unto themselves.

Only God knows (any time someone starts a sentence this way, assume the worst) what fate befalls the wary traveler when entering a highway rest stop or gas station restroom but it’s almost always a time that leaves the discoverer with a host of perplexing questions.

Would it have been that much more difficult to flush?

How hard is it to get it in the toilet?

Does the sink handle really carry more disease than the toilet seat?

How the hell did they get THAT on the walls?

Why would George Michael and gay Republican Senators select such a filthy spot for a randy rendezvous?

On a recent road trip returning from Chicago to Nashville, I noticed a metal container in a truck stop facility selling various prophylactics including one that was declared a womb-be-damned “Rugged and Ready”, which prompted my own question,

What the hell does that even mean?

Trucks are rugged. Tools are rugged. Lumberjacks are rugged… but condoms?

Where in THE hell does one intend to put something that needs to be covered by a piece of latex marketed as “rugged?” I mean, assuming one was to use this for it's designed purpose, and in the course of doing so needed the protection afforded by a rubber deemed “rugged”, wouldn’t it prudent for the purchasing penetrator to reconsider copulation with the penetratee?

There are a many instances in life when you should reassess whether or not to get to know biblically whatever creature you have found at the bottom of a Bud Lite Tall Boy. At the very top of that list are the following two situations:

1) You are purchasing a condom in a truck stop bathroom
2) You consciously recognize your need for something “rugged” for “extra protection”

You don’t need a “rugged” condom; you need a willing participant that doesn’t make the Ebola monkey look like a Quaker’s daughter.

Just my two cents. Party on.

Is that a pigeon in your trousers or are you just glad to see me?

So you know the drill, you disembark your long flight, go through passport control, can't wait for a cup of coffee, head through customs, hand over your smuggled eggs and pull your trousers down to reveal pigeons in your tights. Wait a second, what?   

Yes you read correctly, pull pigeons from your trousers. You mean all men don't normally hide birds in their trousers during flights? Pardon the a double-entendre.

It seems drugs and bombs are the least of our worries, given that a bloke was left cooing with his trousers pulled down around his ankles after customs discovered bird eggs. 

The discovery of eggs led the officers to probe a bit further and low and behold, the passenger had smuggled two unsuspecting pigeons in tights warn under trousers found half way down his legs. 

Who need worry about shoe bombs with guys like this catching flights? This story definitely deserves a 'how very strange' quip. 

Amazingly the pigeons survived the 10 hour flight, despite being tightly wrapped in paper and stuffed into envelopes with just their heads visible. 

On another note, how could we all forget the 2004 Super Bowl nipple debacle which landed broadcaster CBS with a $550,000 fine? Well Super Bowl 2009 turned out to be just as entertaining for some Arizona folks, even despite the loss. Certain lucky viewers had the football interrupted for a pornographic snippet. Said interruption showed a woman unzipping a man's trousers, followed by a 'graphic act between the two'. I'm no professional, but perhaps it's safe to assume the 'graphic act between the two', was considerably more lurid than Ms Jackson's nipple. What's to happen to the poor station who broadcast this, or the nerd who hacked the system and uploaded the image, where can we send our congrats? 

Live TV blunders are so delectable. We need more of the same. Maybe next year a streaker will make it all the way down the field. Here's hoping. 

Different types of wonder.

Another week and more strange and wonderful news stories hit the headlines the world over.

Among those which got tongues wagging on this side and across the pond was the heart-warming and uplifting story of the young Californian woman who gave birth to eight babies.

The world oohed and aahed in unison over the thought of eight identical little critters and, we all felt such compassion for the poor wee woman who was blessed with the wonderment. Yes, it's safe to say the world grabbed onto the story with both hands, yanked it to it's bosom, raised it in the air and screamed 'See not everything is doom and gloom, not every story ends with crunch'.

Alas, it appears every story does end with 'crunch', because as the news settled and nosy journalists did their jobs, all was not so rosy through those operating doors. Sadly it turns out there are a few crunches and bites to this fairytale. Crunch number one; the little lady was not in fact a barren infertile wasteland; to the contrary, she already had six children. Begging the question of course, why shoot for medical help to have children?

Crunch number two, mother octuplet, lives with her parents and her 14 children in a three bedroom house; talk about a tight squeeze.

Crunch three, she is single, unemployed and did this to herself. Leaving the world's media grasping for answers to the riddle. How and why did this happen? And who is to blame? Hopefully these and many more questions will be answered in the coming weeks, as said little lady is in a bidding war with magazines as we speak. At least she now has a form of income.

Excuse me as I slowly raise an eyebrow.

This story brings up so many moral/ethical questions. If it was the case that she received infertility treatment and that embryos were inserted, show me the doctor we can blame. Is there a governing body we can scapegoat here? Can strict rules and regulations not be put in place to safeguard other, mentally ill women from falling fowl of this form of self inflicted body torture?

Now to something completely different and a bit more lighthearted.

I want you to look at the picture and try to work out what you're looking at. Any further along?
Okay what if I give you two hints: Burmese python and alligator?

The remains of the two reptiles were found by astonished rangers in the Everglades National Park. The picture amounts to an unusual clash between a six foot alligator and a 13 foot python. The greedy python tried, but failed, to swallow the alligator whole. Rangers at the park think the gator chewed or clawed through the pythons stomach.

The python's remains were found with the victim's tail protruding from its burst midsection. The head of the python was missing.

"Encounters like this are almost never seen in the wild," Frank Mazzotti, a University of Florida wildlife professor, was quoted as saying. "They were probably evenly matched in size. If the python got a good grip on the alligator before the alligator got a grip on him, he would win," the professor said.

Mother nature never ceases to amaze.

Who made these rules?

Sam Mendes' gripping and emotional film based on the Richard Yates novel of the same name "Revolutionary Road" very well may have been slighted at the Oscars. It may well also prove to be an invaluable social commentary on the rise and fall of the American dream. The film centers around the relationship of two thirty somethings living in the suburbs of New York and melting into the beige landscape of the middle class. Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet reignite their "Titanic" flames to play a middle manager and a failed actress turned housewife desperately wanting to escape the doldrums of suburban life. As the two age and become parents they are constantly left asking the questions of how did they get to be miserable and how do they get out. To cope the pair simply float through their existence with an air of superiority. They see themselves as bright, talented and destined for more. A far cry from their neighbors who have sold out to the idea that a house, kids and a pointless job via a long commute is what responsible adults do. The couple hatch a plan to move their family to Paris to re stoke the life fire that seems to be all but smothered in their lives. At one point, Frank (DiCaprio) laments "people are alive there like no where else". As Mr. Murphy's Law works its way into their lives they are left to decide to do the culturally responsible thing and stay where they are, thus stay miserable or commit to the socially irresponsible and go to Paris. Aside from the other modern social tones of adultery and gender roles addressed in the film, there seems to be one inescapable point. Who made these rules? Are these distinctly American rules of middle class bliss to blame for the current economic crisis now spreading across the globe like a financial bubonic plague.

When did the American dream start? Who made the rules that the way to happiness is a spouse, 2.2 kids, two car payments, a house in the suburbs, pilates every Tuesday and Thursday and a meaningless job? At what point did the pursuit of material possessions and signing out of life for a one size fits all existence become the American dream? I submit that the current crisis is a direct result of what the film depicts as American life starting in the 1940's after World War II. What was once seen as fitting in with the neighbors gave way to Starbucks, Super Target, McMansions, loose credit and recession. Our striving to keep up with the Joneses has made the middle class the biggest culprits in the worst financial crisis to hit the US since the Great Depression. At some point we stopped building a dynasty and opted for the comforting bosom of mediocrity and warm glow of mass produced consumer goods. To make it worse, after the war fought by the Greatest Generation we stopped living within our means. We craved it like a recovering heroin addict craves methadone. And what did the banks, credit cards companies and mortgage brokers do? They gave us what we asked for. Why? Because they had two car payments, pilates and a 2300 square foot cookie cutter box in the 'burbs to pay for too. Somewhere along the way the American dream gave way to a stifling middle class that has forsaken creating, thinking and truly living for a lifestyle on the inside cover of some ridiculous contrived magazine. So, what is the answer? Well, for me... I'm going to Paris.

$150k for a dog, what?

Some people just have too much money!

I'm guessing this story will incense at least a few of you, as it did me.

A couple in the states just received a long awaited package- their $150k cloned new yellow labrador pup, Lanzy. The three month old Lanzy is a clone of Sir Lancelot, the couple's original beloved pet who died last year. Unlike the rest of normal society who mourn lost pets, this couple opted to simply replace like for like, all in the name of: "having life with the same dog," they said.

While we are all coping with this impending credit crunch/depression (whatever), some people are spending that amount of money on this. Is it just me or is this beyond belief? We haven't even touched on the ethics question. That's a whole other discussion. The scientist involved in this project told reporters: "People think this is a stepping stone to cloning people, but dogs are harder to clone than people." How vague is that? Is he suggesting for $100k I can clone my grandmother?

Some people just have too much money to know what to do with. It's sickening really. But it's their money to do with what they want I guess right?

'Help I'm trapped under my sofa'

Imagine getting trapped under your sofa.

What a rotten week for a 65 year old English man after he was trapped under his for 60 hours. The pensioner said he lost his bearings during a power cut and fell against his three-seater which then toppled onto him.

Due to back problems, he was unable to free his 19 stone frame and consequently he was stuck for nearly three days.

His only saviour was a lonesome bottle of whiskey which rolled his way, providing the vital fluids he needed.

What a poor guy. I ask you, of all the household accidents or hazards we are warned of, a sofa? Really? Clearly it's a possible deadly adversary. Lets just be thankful this man lived through the ordeal and can go back to sitting on, rather under, his.

What happened to the auto apocalyspe?

Good news for the once thought to be dying auto industry. Chrysler LLC V.P. Jim Press said Saturday the 24th that he expects Chrysler to be "viable" by this spring. When pressed (zing) for his definition of what being viable actually meant, Mr.Press offered up what amounted to good wishes by saying this staving off of disaster will be accomplished by "remaining solvent and continuing to invest in new products, with an ability in the future to repay government loans." Okay. Well, kudos to Chrysler for launching such an audacious and vague reconstruction plan. Perhaps the thousands of small businesses facing extinction can use this forward looking plan to remain solvent themselves. I see no reason why a company that has received $4 billion in federal loans should actually have a specific plan. Perhaps I would feel better if Chrysler just came out and said "Look everyone, Floyd in marketing went over to the mall and got a Magic 8 Ball and our viability by Spring 2009 is well, decidedly so!"

I think the main question I have is not so much when US taxpayers will get their $4B back, but rather what happened to the car business apocalypse that was impending just 45 days ago? Wasn't Chrysler and the rest of the Detroit brain trust begging for help and promising complete restructuring that would take years to accomplish? Now, financial viability is only months away? As the snow melts and the flowers bloom Chrysler will reach where they were light years away from six weeks ago. Viability! Perhaps they have been Barracked into action! Surely that can be the answer? Perhaps the Detroit business models simply follow the leadership style of the current Commander In Chief. In 2008 the Chrysler business model was just plain old apathy mirroring the leadership of George Bush. Now, perhaps born anew in 2009 Chrysler looks to President Obama and sees all things possible. Maybe they misjudged how bad of shape they were really in. Hey, it can happen. Enron did it! Or, maybe we're being put together like a Dodge salesman promising his Texas blue collar customer that "9.9% is a good rate", "you do need the extended warranty" and don't worry you can trade it in a year because "these trucks really hold their value".

What in the World?

In this, my weekly 'World news round up', I will give a snippet of my favourite news stories to hit the headlines this week.

Firstly, I think we definitely need to give Brant a hand clap for his little gem of a find- 'Inauguration attack from Mars'- or as the 2010 movie is to be entitled 'Close encounter on his first day in office'. Conspiracy theories rock! Especially those involving little green men. Why no-one mentioned the threat from outer space before the celebrations on Tuesday, is beyond me. And they call themselves Secret Service! 

Anywhoo moving on to another Obamamania story which caught my eye this week. 

As is to be expected, the new President's image is now splashed on everything under the sun, from toilet tissue to classy running shoes, his image is available emblazoned on anything. I pose the question, should there be a limit? Take then the news that a toy company has released two cute little dolls named Sasha and Malia. (above) How silly I am in thinking the names and the dolls bear a resemblance to the President's children.. Silly me, as the company making the dolls has denied there is any Obama connection. So rest assured they aren't trying to simply profit off the First Children-hmm what do you think? I have my opinions firmly set, but I'll let Michelle Obama have the last word on this, "It is inappropriate to use young, private citizens for marketing purposes". (Do give your opinions on the matter. Are they fair game?)

Moving on. Of all the public service jobs one can think of, being a postman/mailman, surely requires a certain level of trust, right? Amusingly, this isn't something I have ever really considered until I read a news story this week. When you actually do think about it, imagine the amount of private documents and bits and bobs we rely on our trusty postman to deliver safely. 

Shouldn't we be doing high level security/trust testing on these people? Why I hear you ask? Simply check out the picture above. The mail pictured, went undelivered and undiscovered for six years. Unbelievably none of the recipients raised any issue. Were they living in a bubble? Perhaps not, perhaps this sort of thing is easily done, perhaps we are subject to a world wide siphoning campaign by postmen with terrorist links. Perhaps they have been infiltrated. 

Ok getting way off track here. But it is very conceivable that in this age of identity theft mania, we need to be mindful of every avenue of possible wrong doing. Also, consider how easy it would be not to miss a few letter's here and there. 

The moral of the story has to be, question what isn't delivered by daring to step outside your bubble.  

We Are Doomed

Hopefully there are intelligent beings somewhere outside our solar system because we are clearly running an intellect deficit here on Earth.

If you haven’t heard, there is some “controversy” about an “Unidentified” Flying Object captured on CNN’s camera during this past week’s Inauguration ceremony. By “controversy” I literally mean that some fat, lazy 45 year old living in his mother’s basement saw it while watching the broadcast of said event as he was busy not being at work and has decided to make a conspiracy theory out of it to ramp up his YouTube hits. Of course, by “unidentified” I actually mean that it was in fact identified, however people refuse to believe it is what it is because it’s far more entertaining and totally rational in our otherwise boring and pathetic lives to believe it came from outer-freaking-space.

It’s a bird. No really, it’s a bird. It isn’t a U.F.O., it isn’t a flying saucer and it isn’t a Frisbee. It’s a bird.

That being said, one can only imagine why any beings of “higher intelligence” would ever have any interest in the happenings of planet Earth. It is not, however, difficult to understand why they wouldn’t want to stop in and say “hello.” After all, there’s no telling what a mass of stupid people will do when confronted with something they don’t understand. Of course, we know exactly what we’d do. We’d shoot them down. We’d kill them. Fire would rain down as far as the eye can see. Keanu Reeves would somehow be involved in the entire affair, offering up a perfectly-timed “whoa” as we stand in the aftermath pondering the implications of what we have just done.

My favorite part of viewing a YouTube clip is not the actual footage; rather I enjoy reading the comments left by Earth’s finest. Keep in mind these people are actually allowed to procreate and one can reasonably assume they are doing so, or, at the very least, engaging in acts with one another that can facilitate such. (How's that for fear-mongering?)

These are actual quotes (in italics), unedited and lifted directly off YouTube’s website with follow-up commentary provided by yours truly:

I think its real because it moves so fast. I think they came to watch what was a pivotal moment in earth history. They probably had a message to deliver to us

Yeah, that’s probably exactly what happened. Nothing gets the juices of a higher being going like seeing the walls of racial inequity in America torn to the ground. I love the “earth history” part. That’s classic American myopia if I've ever seen it. As if our electing a “black person” somehow changes the face of the earth. Hat’s off to you, sir. You’ve a leg up on the rest of mankind.

oh common get brain. There is no way any aircraft would be legally allowed to fly that low after 9/11. They would have scrambled fighter lets

Oh “common” get a brain? Awesome. You win.

Официальный контакт с инопланетянами состоялся, с чем вас всех и поздравляю.

What the hell is this, some made up nerd language? Pff. English or bust, amigo.

hey someone should get the full video of this .. i live in canada and as i was watching the inaug on cnn, i swear to got i seen that object hovering over the WH during a interview on cam .... if someone can get the complete coverage ... its in there. My wife, my kids and a few friends all seen it .... after seeing this vid .. we feel someone should check it out

Hey, great idea. We’re so on it. We ‘seen’ it too, yes sir, an we gon’ shoot the shit outta it if it come roun' these here parts again, rest assure.

And so concludes this week’s example as to why we are all totally and completely doomed. As always, it’s been real.

-B

Because I Said So

What a remarkable first five days the new president has had. He took an historic oath in front of a captive world audience and an unprecedented number of fans and supporters on the Washington D.C. Mall (who were kind enough to leave behind some 130 tons of trash). He enjoyed a welcoming reception that even megastar humanitarian and professional sunglass-wearer Bono would consider extravagant.

It hasn't all been champagne following the campaign. He’s also drawn criticism from both sides of the party line. Which is not to say that is in and of itself a bad thing; often times what is right is not always supported by popular opinion. Unfortunately, the a pair of recent gaffes go against the very platform upon which he ran.


Except for This Guy, I'm Totally Serious

In my opinion, Obama made several great decisions as he assumed his new title, which seemed to be universally accepted and embraced as such across the political spectrum. One was freezing the pay of staff members in a time of recession. The second was an effort to foster transparency by halting the revolving door of lobbyists with Executive Order – Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Personnel, which states:

If I was a registered lobbyist within the 2 years before the
date of my appointment, in addition to abiding by the limitations of paragraph
2, I will not for a period of 2 years after the date of my appointment

(a) participate in any particular matter on which I lobbied
within the 2 years before the date of my appointment;

(b) participate in the specific issue area in which that
particular matter falls; or

(c) seek or accept employment with any executive agency
that I lobbied within the 2 years
before the date of my appointment.

The latter makes the appointment of William (Bill) J. Lynn as Deputy to Defense Secretary Robert Gates a bit confusing. Lynn is a former lobbyist for military contracting heavy-hitter Raytheon who falls outside the above criteria. Obama offered a waiver on his executive order, allowing Lynn to serve in the administration.

According to the AP, Lynn won’t be required to step back from all his decision making duties, but he has elected to sell his stock (essentially his personal stake in the company) and for one year will be subject to an ethics review (no word on who exactly will be conducting said reviews, though if it involves other politicians, that’s about as comforting as Winona Ryder working 'loss prevention' at a high-end department store).

So essentially, no lobbyists unless we decide we need said lobbyist. Is that really the message the administration is trying to convey?

He very well may be qualified for his appointed position. With a resume that includes time served in the Clinton administration and work done all across Pentagon, his understanding could truly be an asset. My question is simply, is there no one else that satisfies the criteria that president just laid out that can fulfill this role?

People are going to over-analyze every move Obama makes, detractors are waiting to prey on every misstep and mistake. This is not an effort to do so. I am merely pointing out that it seems fruitless to make an executive order then offer a waiver to get a guy through that doesn’t fit the qualifications that you just outlined earlier that week.

Obama Booya

The majority agree the United States is facing an economic crisis. Not everyone agrees, however, on which policies will best-serve the country on the road to recovery. Everyone knew getting the economy steered back on track was going to be a substantial undertaking and Obama’s pledged commitment to work across the aisle was refreshing. In November of 2008, Obama stated,

“America is a strong and resilient country, and I know that we will succeed if we put aside politics and partisanship.”

Yesterday, during a meeting about his plan to jump start the economy (I will analyze, breakdown, and editorialize said plan in another post), he offered Rep Eric Cantor (R-Va) the following explanation when questioned about the efficacy of his plan,

"I won. I will trump you on that”

Really?

You’re the President of the United States, the Leader of the Free World. Don't you think you could come up with a better response than “I won?”

Not everyone agrees with the president's plan. These perspectives should at least be heard, discussed, and considered.

According to the New York Post, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs responded to those who could call the meeting 'window dressing' by saying,

“The President is certainly going to listen to any ideas”

Well yeah, he'll hear them. Of course, whether he actually considers any of them still remains to be seen. Which isn't to say that all ideas should be considered. I mean, American history is riddled with bad ideas (look up Alexander Abian).

While I appreciate the candor in the President's statements, Americans deserve better than a brash because-I-said-so response from our leader. It would serve President Obama well in the future to show some of the bi-partisan pragmatism he championed ad nauseum in the 18 months preceding his inauguration.

As he stated himself, Americans don’t want more of the same and they certainly deserve better than "because I said so."

"Drunken N face" cookies at a NYC bakery

So this week has arguably seen one of biggest political milestones in American history. What better way to celebrate it I hear you ask?

Of course, how else? Bake a terribly racist cake and sell it to customers with the catchy sales pitch "Would you like a Drunken Negro face cookie with your coffee?"

What is the world coming to? When this idiotic loathsome act is deemed acceptable, in a bakery of all places.

Since talking to a Fox News reporter the, Greenwich Village baker, has apologised and asked for forgiveness in the "spirit of Martin Luther King".

The apology only came after he was inundated with hate phone calls and customer condemnation. I'd like to know what he expected?

Did he think, in Greenwich Village of all places, that people would embrace this type of openly racist hatred and not blink an eye. What an idiot? Personally I don't have much sympathy for someone who is that socially inept. If it is even ineptness? When interviewed the first time, he was unbashful and went so far as to defend his baking in the name of 'freedom of speech'.

Sadly this form of pure hatred will always be around. It was heartening though, to see his local community, who had once embraced him, shun him. A good example of how 'social shaming' is effective. What a lesson he may learn if he ends up having to shut.

What we are about

Photobucket Album