Obama and Gore

President elect Obama is set to meet with former vice-president and environmental advocate Al Gore leading to speculation that Gore may be receiving a position in the new administration. While democratic officials and spokesmen for Gore say Obama is not looking to give Gore a position, and Gore has no interest in a position, the highlighted meeting in Chicago is an interesting situation. Liberals in the wing have been critical of Obama's cabinet selections which include no liberals, a secretary of state who voted for use of force in the Iraq war, and Robert Gates, defenses secretary of the Bush administration being kept on by Obama. In addition, Obama's liberal supporters have raised questions and voiced concerns regarding the President-elects reversal on the immediate repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, opting to letting them expire at the end 2010 and shift of position from immediate withdrawal from Iraq on his first day in office to a more gradual withdrawal. Gore has made millions and became extremely popular since his Vice-President days and would provide a political celebrity within the administration. Perhaps too big of a shadow for Obama to stomach. The a hilarious, yet interesting note being a statement made by a "close friend" of Gore's said that he "would not burn that much carbon to fly to Chicago just to talk."

link to entourage message board

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387199/board

The Swiss and Heroin

Switzerland has voted into law a comprehensive program which legalizes the use of heroin for its addicts. The program which started in 1994 to curb the number of addicts shooting up in public locations such as parks has become a permanent fixture in Swiss society. Proponents of the program argue that the measure has reduced crime while providing a better life for addicts. The goal behind the program is to make the addicts functional members of society. Oddly, these are the same Swiss voters who simultaneously voted against the decriminalization of marijuana. 68% of the Swiss voters approved the legalization of heroin while 62% voted against decriminalization of marijuana (whats the deal with the Swiss). The 1,300 addicts on the program go to centers in which they receive an injection two times a day of government manufactured heroin with clean needles and safe equipment. Sabina Geissbuehler-Strupler a member of the right wind republican party in Switzerland reported that 95% of the addicts on the program where unable to recover. Consequently, it appears that the Swiss are giving up on the problem of drug abuse by facilitating heroin injections in a controlled atmoshere at a cost of $22 million a year. Personally, if I where a Swiss citizen I would be enraged at having to pay for junkies to get their fix. In short Switzerland is facilitating a killer drug that ruins lives, while users of marijuana (a plant which has recorded no deaths in its long history) are sent to jail. This "progressive" measure to me seem counter-productive. If however, the governement legalized heroin to lower the purchasing cost which in turn would reduce criminal activity surrounding the drug, I would not raise such strong objections, however a government directly facilitated drug abuse is unpalatable. Give addicts clean needles (preventing costly AIDS infections) and information regarding the adverse affects of heroin, do not give addicts their fix.

Role of Government

I have become confused recently regrading the role of the United States government. I don't recall our governments role being to bale out failed corporations left and right, throwing money around in all directions with no concrete direction to this madness. It appears to me that the worsening financial crisis has politicians desperately scrambling to solve the problem by handing out money, were a more long term/ sustainable solution is desperately needed. Its like the analogy of band-aid for a bullet wound. Where do you begin to draw the line? Can any company come on there hands and knees expect to be saved. Are we going to borrow more money from China, increase deficits so that the government can rescue every company? Saving a company from going bankrupt does NOTHING to stabilize the long term issues that created the problem in the first place. What is going on here. It's unfathomable to me that our representatives are giving money to companies that are going under when market forces are driving the bankruptcy and the population says nothing. Why does that call for government intervention, why is the government playing a huge role in the PRIVATE markets? Private meaning no government! Where, I wounder is the FREE market principles of Adam Smith? And why do I feel like nobody else comprehends the macro-economics at play? For example the auto industry particularly G.M is facing bankruptcy and asking for $25 Billion in assistance to say afloat. Now that $25 Billion would keep the company running for 6 months or so, then what are you doing to do, give them more money? Can I get some logic! Maybe the reason G.M is loosing so much money is because they offer a inferior product and are technologically lacking. Why do I have to pay for G.M lack of a sustainable business model, while there executives make millions? Sure it looks good to the uneducated citizen, "oh the government is trying to help." No, that type of spending dose not help AT ALL. Why people don't understand basic economic principles I cannot begin to comprehend. Where are the good old days of personal accountability? Socialism here we come.

Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodi,_Wisconsin

I'm from Lodi,WI so I thought that I would add to the wiki page on Lodi. I added the History of Lodi, and the Ice Age Trail portions.

Early Voting

So far, more than 24.4 million voters have cast their vote for Obama or McCain in 26 states allowing early voting. The unexpected large number of early voters may prompt congress to extend early voting across the country. The new mandate, if enacted would eliminate the need to provide justification for voting early and why you cannot vote on election day. Allowing early voting would make for a smother election day. Fewer people would have to wait in line and it would lessen the chaos for volunteers at the polls. I believe it will also increase the number of votes casted in elections, definitely needed with the traditionally embarrassingly low voter turnout. Anything increase voter turnout would be a welcome change for my standpoint. Critics contend that early voting would create two campaigns reflecting socio-economic standing. One for loyal voters, those likely to vote early in higher socio-economic classes and another for less partisan voters of a lower socio-economic class. Other possible down falls to early voting would be the emergence of new information after casting your early vote, which might change the course of the election. Although both are reasonable concerns, I feel as a participatory democracy, any mandate to increase participation in elections would constitute a step forward. The increased popularity from 2000 with 16% of votes casted early, to 2004 with 22% casted early, and an anticipated 33% of voters casting there ballets before the November 4th election this years reflect an important trend. Lazy Americans would be able to participate in our democracy right from there comfortable positions on the couch.

Early Voting

Link to Review #2

http://books.google.com/books?id=yreSJwI8TwIC
The Review is on the right side in the middle and has to be expanded.

Pirates on the Loose

NATO warships have arrived to the Gulf of Aden, to fend of thats right you said it, Pirates from Somalia. Now at first, I have to say I was all for the piracy, finally some good old fashion Buccaneers bringing the ruckus to the high seas. But unfortunately, after finding out some of there antics, it hurts me to say NATO should being them down.
NATO has received permission from Somali Prime Minister Nur Hassan Hussein to carryout any military action to deter the pirates. The NATO ships will specifically be protecting the U.N World Food Program carriers containing vital relief supplies. It has been reported that the pirates have attacked 60 ships this year alone, with ransoms reported between $18 to $30 million. The ransoms are being used to fund the war in Somalia, suspending my sponsorship of there organization. Currently, the pirates are holding a Ukrainian ship with cargo of Soviet made tanks and other war supplies for a hefty ransom of $20 million. A even more frightening thought considering one of the recipient of the pirates loot is Al-Shabaab, an Islamic militant who has been named to the terrorist organization list by the U.S. For a modern pirate organization, I shamefully say I'm impressed.
My Dreams of a Captain Jack running the seas fell flat on its face, upon hearing the atrocities the pirates commite. It was all too good to be true. The days of 17th century pirates, I sadly must realize are over.

$

$70 Billion bailout divided by the 227,719,424 American's over the age of 18 = $3,074 per person. If you take into account money from other bailout packages the number only grows. Which brings me to an interesting question. Would putting more money directly into the pockets of out citizens produce a greater finical stability and resurgence of the economy? The $3,074 would amount to more money than the stimulus package distributed over the summer, which was a bandaid for a bullet wound. Perhaps it would have been in our interest to let the banks fail and start over with a clean slate. Although reflecting a different context, this question from Thomas Jefferson sprung into my mind when I was thinking about these question: "And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.It is its natural manure." It was also Jefferson who said, "Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies." Food for thought, reminding us all of the importance history.

Run away profits by corporate excutives

The worldwide financial crisis, the most important current issue, needs law makers full attention to alleviate economic problems developing worldwide in order to maintain resemblance of stability. Partisan finger pointing needs redirecting to the chief executives, who are begging for bailouts while most are "earning" millions of dollars. Treasure Secretary Paulson and the Bush administration, proved themselves not completely ignorant, by deciding not to bailout the Lehman Brothers firm. Finally good government. While our economy has gone to hell, and his company fell into bankruptcy, Richard Fuld when totaling stock sales, bonuses and salary dating back to 2000, Fuld managed to earn a staggering $484 million! Under what conditions could you possible justify the Lehman Brothers bailout when witnessing such greed and selfishness. I have absolutely no sympathy for executives with those business plans, and in fact hope they loose everything and go to jail. I congratulate the administration in making a common scene decision, at a time where common scene is looking more and more like genius. While Republicans and Democrats point fingers, Americans and our economy is going to hell in a bucket, and executives are making incomprehensible salaries. Traditionally, I have been a practitioner of limited government, ensuring personal freedoms (which are also diapering left and right), however I regret saying the tighter regulation may been prudent. When left to self-regulation and the doctrine of free-enterprise, the greed of mankind suffocates the lower-classes. With no relief in sight we must all strap in for a wild ride.

The Review

http://books.google.com/books?id=ry6VHQAACAAJ&dq=The+Republican+Roosevelt&hl=en

Presidental Candidates

Relating to a previous posts about the financial crisis and the Presidential candidates, a clear contrast to the leadership abilities and style surfaces between the candidates. While both McCain and Obama said they are likely to vote for the $700 billion bailout plan, there approaches were very different. Obama took a more passive, measured approach, favoring to use the philosophy of using more than one mind when examining the situation. Where as McCain took a head on attack halting his campaign to go to Washington to deal with the issues directly. McCain went as far as to call for replacing the Security and Exchange commission president, Christopher Cox. I'm sorry but the image of McCain swooping in, halting his campaign to save the day is a little too much to swallow. Even republican politicians remarked that McCain didn't even leave an imprint on the bailout plan legislation, creating a phony image, which comes of as a gimmick that sadly may people are likely to buy. The differences between the candidates style is clear. McCain is going to take an aggressive approach, hoping to exert raw political power to achieve is motives. Reflecting the structured combative past in the Navy. In contrast to Obama who will take a more gauged, calculated approach, which in consequence at times looks like a slow reaction. I only hope that voters can see the vast differences and vote accordingly.

Globalization

The full ramifications of the global market place arise out of the Finance Crisis, with the news that foreign banks may receive a bailout from the U.S Treasury Department. The theory is that the major foreign banks operating in the U.S, qualify for the United States tax payers money as they have a major stake the lives of Americans and consequently our economic future. Protecting the "system" is the call of duty. Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve chairmen Ben Bernanke told congressmen that the legislation is necessary to return stability. As necessary as it is to protect the economic future for Americans, it is aggravating that were paying the price for uncontrollable greed from millionaire executives. These executives, with enormous salaries are getting saved, and I don't think they will even muster up an appropriate thanks. The legislation outlining this clause is likely to pass thorough congress, with experts saying huge margins. Heres to Globalization.

Gatorade

Recently I have noticed the tremendous variety of Gatorade sports drinks. For example, there is the regular Gatorade with the traditional offerings of Lemon Lime, Fruit Punch and Orange. Gatorade A.M, I don't know what ingredients made the distinction of an A.M sports drink, nevertheless a great marketing idea. Performance Gatorade, Tiger Gatorade with added electrolytes, and G2 featuring less calories. Oh but the list goes on. Gatorade Rain, Fierce, Extremo, X-factor and Frost. Each with specific concoctions of flavors. What makes a Frost, from a Rain, from a Tiger, who knows. All I know is that they are good.

Politcal Ad's

We have all seen political ads countless times, and there can be no doubt American's will have the misfortune to see countless more in the upcoming weeks leading up to the Presidential election on November 4th. The content of the ads are erroneous and have little to the with the actual issues the country is facing. For example, the ad in which McCain compares Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, only serves as a distraction from more important issues. Even former Bush adviser Carl Rove said that McCain has gone 'too far' in some of his ads. Now that says something. The Obama campaign has accused senator McCain of "cynically running the sleaziest and least honorable campaign in modern presidential campaign history." However, from a political standpoint the ads are benefiting McCain in an American institution of negative attacks with well established roots. Obama contents that McCain and vice president candidate Sara Palin of avoiding the issues, focusing instead on distorting his record. The media frenzy surrounding these ads are a unexplainable phenomena within themselves. My perspective regarding the ads coming from both sides are that they are lies, with desperate attempts of persuasion. At such a critical crossroad in history, with the future of the United States the subject, I believe its time to show a little more prudence and maybe have a intelligent conversation if only for the sack of variety.