http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2008/11/28/2008-11-28_worker_dies_at_long_island_walmart_after.html
I never thought "Black Friday" would have a literal meaning.
Pretty disturbing. At first I was disgusted not only by the death but also by the behavior of the American consumerism. I thought, how could consumerism reach a point like this when our economy is on a course toward a recession? I realized its not an escalation of consumerism, it is a display of desperation. Mobs trampling workers to death and unhinging doors to get the ultimate savings. Its definitely a sign of the times and it shows some people will stop at nothing to save save save.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Monday, November 17, 2008
The grass is greener on both sides.
I wanted to quickly discuss something my friend brought to my attention. President-Elect is in a very cushy position as he soon will take the White House. He will, at least for a honeymoon period of his administration, any and all problems can all be scape-goated back to Bush's administration. For example, if Iraq all of a sudden goes to hell-in-a-handbasket, his administration can point all the blame back at Bush, as it was "his war" and a mess they inherited. On the contrary, if the war is successful Obama and his administration will be credited for victory in Iraq and they will be painted as "saviors." Same goes for the economy. If the bailout of the financial sector (and possibly the auto industry) fail to lift our economy out of a looming recession, again, all blame can be sent Bush's way. "He was the one who left the economy in shambles for Obama and Congress to repair, so its not our fault we could not repair it." On the other hand, if their policies work, well naturally, everyone will be singing Obama's praises.
In a bigger picture, I see this grace period possibly enabling the new administration and Democrats as a whole, at least for the first year or two, alienating the Republicans. And why shouldn't they? They have the presidency and congress. The 2008 election gave the party a revitalization of strength and unity. One must also look at who Obama is surrounding himself with. So far, his cabinet is a rollback to the Clinton Era, literally. He has appointed Rahm Emmanuel as Chief of Staff, a key player from Clinton's administration and an influential fundraiser. Second is his new appointment of Secretary of State, Senator Hillary Clinton herself (I will cover my frustration over this later). It seems Mr. Obama is going to throw fellow party members into his cabinet, disregarding the use of experts and seasoned foreign policy veterans to give him advice. Mesh all of this together and it clearly breeds an environment of partisanship and a "get out of jail free" card for the next one or two years of Obama's administration.
In a bigger picture, I see this grace period possibly enabling the new administration and Democrats as a whole, at least for the first year or two, alienating the Republicans. And why shouldn't they? They have the presidency and congress. The 2008 election gave the party a revitalization of strength and unity. One must also look at who Obama is surrounding himself with. So far, his cabinet is a rollback to the Clinton Era, literally. He has appointed Rahm Emmanuel as Chief of Staff, a key player from Clinton's administration and an influential fundraiser. Second is his new appointment of Secretary of State, Senator Hillary Clinton herself (I will cover my frustration over this later). It seems Mr. Obama is going to throw fellow party members into his cabinet, disregarding the use of experts and seasoned foreign policy veterans to give him advice. Mesh all of this together and it clearly breeds an environment of partisanship and a "get out of jail free" card for the next one or two years of Obama's administration.
Newspapers get a jab from down under...
This article could not have come at a better time:
one of the many reasons why I decided to start blogging
Its just too bad this came AFTER the election. If you were surveying newspapers and channels alike during the campaign season, it was very clear who big media was for and I have no doubt in my mind that significantly helped President-Elect Obama to win the undecided votes and swing a few states in his favor. TV, being the most popular and widely utilized means of media, would never, and did not, endorse Obama, so many of the networks stuck to implicit means toward favoring Obama. It was the printed media, especially those established on the liberal coasts, that pulled no punches in endorsing the Democratic nominee. How is this, in any way, shape or form, objective? How is endorsing a candidate, no matter what party, good journalism when there is obvious partisanship, and even worse, agenda and bias. Murdoch is right on the money in that when editors dictate what should and should not be printed you lose your credibility as a news source. Even worse, you lose your clientele because you are slapping them in the face by spoon-feeding their opinions, instead of allowing for the formulation of their own.
And so, better late than never, a corporate media mogul is calling out the editors and writers of mass media. A step in the right direction, I say. If you feel the same way by your local newspaper, boycott them until they change or go out of business. It is their choice to adopt or fail.
one of the many reasons why I decided to start blogging
Its just too bad this came AFTER the election. If you were surveying newspapers and channels alike during the campaign season, it was very clear who big media was for and I have no doubt in my mind that significantly helped President-Elect Obama to win the undecided votes and swing a few states in his favor. TV, being the most popular and widely utilized means of media, would never, and did not, endorse Obama, so many of the networks stuck to implicit means toward favoring Obama. It was the printed media, especially those established on the liberal coasts, that pulled no punches in endorsing the Democratic nominee. How is this, in any way, shape or form, objective? How is endorsing a candidate, no matter what party, good journalism when there is obvious partisanship, and even worse, agenda and bias. Murdoch is right on the money in that when editors dictate what should and should not be printed you lose your credibility as a news source. Even worse, you lose your clientele because you are slapping them in the face by spoon-feeding their opinions, instead of allowing for the formulation of their own.
And so, better late than never, a corporate media mogul is calling out the editors and writers of mass media. A step in the right direction, I say. If you feel the same way by your local newspaper, boycott them until they change or go out of business. It is their choice to adopt or fail.
Propostion 8: My reaction
Since late-Spring/early-Summer, much of my attention had been concerned mostly with national politics. As state and local politics go, I usually vote no on most ballot measures because I am usually against needless bonds and new spending which reflect upon the taxpayer, unless of course I have some sort of compelling interest upon the issue. Prop 8 came to my attention late in the game and as I heard both sides' arguments, I remained on the fence with the issue of same-sex marriage in the state of California.
After a long discussion about Prop 8 with my friend as we stumbled from a pub-crawl, I was struck by his comment: "the government has no business in people's bedrooms." In hindsight, it seemed a bit rhetorical, but all that aside, what caught me was the notion of "no business" aspect of the government's role. My libertarian side soon pushed me off the fence. I realized that, no matter who you are, the government should have no authority over who you marry. As I recall, one of our founding fathers, Patrick Henry once said, "[The Constitution] is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." As so, on November 4th, I voted no on the measure. Lo and behold, and without any surprise (remember eight years ago?), the measure passed and much anger would ensue.
Not from me, but from the anti-eight protesters. The next two days, West LA saw wide spread protesters from the Wilshire Federal Building to the Moron Temple. Although it was labeled "peaceful", some bad seeds destroyed property and toppled police cars. Now, if you wish to express your first amendment rights go right ahead, but remember to respect others and their property (and if you're stupid enough to mess with the LAPD, you have bigger problems). What angers me is the outright disrespect and childish behavior of these individuals. What I mean is that the voters made their choice and the protests were a knee-jerk reaction, almost pre-meditated, admitting no respect or understanding of our system of general elections.
Immediately, the anti-eighter's are going back to the state supreme court to find a way to legally overturn the vote. What is wrong with this picture? A lot. But mostly this; I find it very disturbing that appointed judges have the authority to overturn the majority. This leads to a minority backed by the government dictating what is right and what is wrong. Now you might be asking "how is this passage of Prop 8 equal in the first place?" By challenging the will of the majority undermines our democratic system. If the courts overturn the amendment in our state constitution, it is as if the vote of 52% of voters didn't count and they might as well have thrown away their ballot.
The answer isn't in the courts, it is in the populace. Try again next time and keep working on a sucessful and convincing campaign. I will later post how I feel this issue can be solved, possibly.
After a long discussion about Prop 8 with my friend as we stumbled from a pub-crawl, I was struck by his comment: "the government has no business in people's bedrooms." In hindsight, it seemed a bit rhetorical, but all that aside, what caught me was the notion of "no business" aspect of the government's role. My libertarian side soon pushed me off the fence. I realized that, no matter who you are, the government should have no authority over who you marry. As I recall, one of our founding fathers, Patrick Henry once said, "[The Constitution] is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." As so, on November 4th, I voted no on the measure. Lo and behold, and without any surprise (remember eight years ago?), the measure passed and much anger would ensue.
Not from me, but from the anti-eight protesters. The next two days, West LA saw wide spread protesters from the Wilshire Federal Building to the Moron Temple. Although it was labeled "peaceful", some bad seeds destroyed property and toppled police cars. Now, if you wish to express your first amendment rights go right ahead, but remember to respect others and their property (and if you're stupid enough to mess with the LAPD, you have bigger problems). What angers me is the outright disrespect and childish behavior of these individuals. What I mean is that the voters made their choice and the protests were a knee-jerk reaction, almost pre-meditated, admitting no respect or understanding of our system of general elections.
Immediately, the anti-eighter's are going back to the state supreme court to find a way to legally overturn the vote. What is wrong with this picture? A lot. But mostly this; I find it very disturbing that appointed judges have the authority to overturn the majority. This leads to a minority backed by the government dictating what is right and what is wrong. Now you might be asking "how is this passage of Prop 8 equal in the first place?" By challenging the will of the majority undermines our democratic system. If the courts overturn the amendment in our state constitution, it is as if the vote of 52% of voters didn't count and they might as well have thrown away their ballot.
The answer isn't in the courts, it is in the populace. Try again next time and keep working on a sucessful and convincing campaign. I will later post how I feel this issue can be solved, possibly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
