Obama-Romney is the new Kennedy-Nixon

The American political headlights are fixed on the Presidential debates. October 3rd, 16th and 22nd mark the candidates’ final opportunities to influence the mercurial American electorate. Polls give neither candidate significant advantage. It makes sense to look to history as a barometer of the outcome. Only one election comes close to Obama-Romney in terms of precursors, divisions, and implications: 1960’s Kennedy-Nixon election.

Even with a 42-year time difference, the analogies between the elections are uncanny. Both come on the heels of economic downturns featuring long-fought wars as backdrops. The key similarity, though, is the clash of cultures that the candidates from both elections depict. Romney and Nixon are two older liberal-leaning Republicans with shakily wavering stances. Both considered awkward and disingenuous unless calculated, they draw support from a fervent, ideologically-rigid base. On the other hand, the younger Kennedy and Obama appeal to the progressive-minded and minorities, are gifted orators, air toward populism, and are the ‘rock stars’ of their respective campaigns.

Implication-wise, both elections are at historic social junctures in America. 1960 came at the precipice of counterculture becoming mainstream, while 2012 underscores a divisive tension between the rich and poor. 2012’s debates will undoubtedly be the fulcrum of the election. Americans will see Romney, like Nixon, in the wild, and Barack Obama, like Kennedy, taking on a fierce ideological adversary. If history holds true, Obama’s calm, Kennedy-like demeanor should outshine Romney’s shifty, deliberate Nixon-esque approach. Though the times, they continue a’changin’, 2012’s significance emulates that of 1960 effortlessly.

Dear Congress (re: Debt Deal)

You didn't push the button... You made a deal to make a deal to push the button if you can't agree to push the button.

via The Huffington Post:

Congressional leaders and President Obama on Sunday night announced they've cut a deal to avert a historic U.S. default, saying they have assembled a framework that cuts some spending immediately and uses a "super Congress" to slash more in the future.

The deal calls for a first round of cuts that would total $917 billion over 10 years and allows the president to hike the debt cap -- now at $14.3 trillion -- by $900 billion, according to a presentation that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) made to his members. Democrats reported those first cuts at a figure closer to $1 trillion. It was unclear Sunday night why those two estimates varied.

The federal government could begin to default on its obligations on Aug. 2 if the measure is not passed.

The next round of $1.5 trillion in cuts would be decided by a committee of 12 lawmakers evenly divided between the two parties and two chambers. This so-called super Congress would have to present its cuts by Thanksgiving, and the rest of Congress could not amend or filibuster the recommendations.

But if the super Congress somehow failed to enact savings, the measure requires automatic cuts worth at least $1.2 trillion. Those cuts would be split equally between military and domestic programs. Social Security, Medicaid and programs for the poor would be spared, but Medicare providers -- not beneficiaries -- would take a hit.

Compromise is a concept that everyone likes to espouse. It is so lauded and aggrandized in mainstream society, yet few people are truly willing to compromise. In this age of opinions, we like to say that everyone's opinion matters, yet when it comes time to move, most people are so stuck holding up their ideologies that they can't even begin to agree. Such is the case with you today, Congress.

Throughout the summer, and dating back to the 2010 midterm elections, the rising national debt has been a topic of hot debate. The hard (or imagined; no one really knows) date of August 2nd was engraved in our country's mind as the day when the United States would no longer have cash to sustain its spending. Congress, you were entrusted with finding a solution that would not only stop the bleeding from our credit cards, but also to bring in some additional cash so that maybe we wouldn't have to resort to rampant borrowing to make ends meet. I won't go into the specifics of whether I supported cuts or new revenues (you can look back at my other letters for that). The debt deal is already done, so having a written standoff about the ideological standpoints is futile. What I will take a stab at, though, is that the deal is little more that a deal to make another deal.

Congress, your job is simple: enact laws and legislation that reflect the views of the American people, and the realities of an eminent future. The months leading up until tomorrow have been a political three-ring circus, to say the least. Your simple duties have been absconded in a haze of filibusters, name-calling, misguided lone-rangering, misinformation and inactivity. From the Tea Party and GOP's unwavering insistence that everything with a pulse be cut, to Obama's 'holier-than-thou' approach, to the Dems disappearance, it seemed like no one on Capitol Hill really had the cojones to do what was right in the shadow of an impending financial collapse. Since none of the key players or sides in the debate were willing to concede, and our President forgot that he is the Executive of our fair country, we ended up with a deal that does nothing other than postpone our D-Day until Christmas. I can just feel the holiday cheer already.

Yes there are cuts, but they're mostly discretionary, and to things that already had one foot out of the door. Medicare and Medicaid, while pet programs of the Dems and sworn enemies of the GOP, are essentially going to be outmoded by Obamacare. Defense, with the Iraq and Afganistan wars simmering, was already a target. No new taxes or elimination of tax loopholes. No creative solutions to spur the economy. No infrastructure or educational plans to get the wheels rolling. Just... a deal to make a deal, and another 'bipartisan committee' to place the onus on balancing our books on. That's just not efficient, Congress. While I am liberal to the core, I understand what conservatives mean by there being too much 'government' when I think about a 'trigger' for more cuts or the new committee.

Congress, your task was to compromise so that we as a country don't have to think about defaulting on our national debts in another year's time. Instead, you effectively put off the hard decisions for no reason. We aren't any closer to a balanced budget than we were a year ago, because there is so much posturing, so many 'my way or the highway' leaders, and too many opinions (some corporate-funded, some just asylum-insane) for there to be any real consensus. If you think for a minute that this deal accomplished something more than attempting to placating the media and the few political extremist hell-bent on their own ideologies, you're dead wrong. This debt deal, and the negotiations that brought it along, proved that you are running about as efficient as a Ford Pinto with rear-end damage right about now, with no plans to put the fire out anytime soon.

You, Congress are in session for less than half of the year, usually taking summers off. That none of this became urgent until mid-July showed how truly disorganized you are. A compromise was your only task, and you couldn't even get a real one. Just a nice story for the papers, and another six months of uneasiness and anxiety for the American people to have to cope with. We elected you to make decisions for the country, not argue about who really cares about the country. Rather than be talking heads, why not be thinking ones? Thinking heads who look at the facts above all else and put strict party lines on the back burner to get the job done. Thinking heads who take the lessons of the past into consideration to make for a successful future. Thinking heads who have innovative plans while continuing to listen to the constituents that put them in office. Democrat or Republican, Independent, Moderate, Progressive or Tea Partier, liberal or conservative, you have to share the brunt of these decisions. Compromise doesn't mean anything if the status quo continues to be protected. Perhaps it's time you began compromising like there's more at stake than re-election...

Dear President Obama

Sometimes, you've got to walk away from the table to let them know you're serious.

via CNN:

A fourth straight day of talks intended to head off a possible government default ended on a tense note Wednesday, with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor saying President Barack Obama cut him off by saying "I'll see you tomorrow" before walking out.

The exchange concluded almost two hours of talks that failed to achieve a breakthrough. Another session -- the fifth in five days -- was set for Thursday, participants said...

Cantor, R-Virginia, told reporters after Wednesday's meeting that he proposed a short-term agreement to raise the federal debt ceiling, a position Obama has previously rejected.

"That's when he got very agitated and said I've sat here long enough -- that no other president -- Ronald Reagan -- would sit here like this -- and that he's reached the point that something's gotta give," Cantor said, adding that Obama called for Republicans to compromise on either their insistence that a debt-ceiling hike must be matched dollar-for-dollar by spending cuts or on their opposition to any kind of tax increase.

"And he said to me, 'Eric, don't call my bluff.' He said 'I'm going to the American people with this,' " Cantor quoted Obama as saying.

"I was somewhat taken aback," Cantor said. When he continued to press the issue, Cantor said, Obama "shoved back from the table, said 'I'll see you tomorrow' and walked out."

There comes a point when compromise is no longer an option; when putting your cards on the table in a motion of humility is best replaced by flipping the table over and throwing chairs... Well, perhaps that wouldn't work in the White House. But the furniture is all the same. President Obama, for the past two months, the country (or the more informed/interested parties of the country) and it's government have been embroiled in a vicious economic, philosophical and sociological debate about the deficit. I won't sit here and go through all of the ins and outs, because I'm sure you've had enough of it, and by your reaction yesterday it's obvious the debate has hit an impasse.

GOP Leaders like John Boehner, Rick Perry and Eric Cantor have stuck to their guns, claiming that raising taxes on the rich would hurt the 'job creators' and that cutting social programs and taxes are the quickest way to cut the deficit. Barack, I am proud to know that you finally called their bluff and walked out of the futile negotiations. I'm tired of Republicans protecting the corporate big wigs whose pockets they're holding. I'm tired of them wanting to cut social programs that most Americans rely on, all while refusing to cut military spending that has blown way out of proportion since the Iraq/Afganistan Wars started. I'm tired of a Congress so hell bent on not raising taxes on the rich that they would allow the country to go into a default in August. I'm tired of reading the news and seeing these same Republicans claiming that they will not budge when you're clearly trying to come to a centrist, middle-of-the-road compromise that encompasses some of their social cuts and the new tax revenues you're seeking.

You finally put your foot down and decided that sitting at a table with a bunch of GOP blowholes who keep spinning the same record about tax cuts and social program cuts was about as useful as a pee-flavored lollipop. You even brought up the GOP Messiah, Ronald Reagan, claiming that not even he would subserve to such draconian measures. It's been proven, by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Federal Reserve, numerous polls and independent researchers that cutting taxes (especially to the rich) will NOT FIX THE DEFICIT. And you know, just like I and most non-FOX News watching citizens, that those same tax cuts were the impetus for this Great Recession that's threatening to collapse our economy once again. The Republicans would rather drive us into the ground to protect an outmoded and unsustainable ideology, than come to a compromise that, quite frankly, employs a lot more of their ideas than yours.

Obama, you said that a change was necessary in 2008. For the past year, I've felt that you've kowtowed too much to the devices of the Party of No. Yesterday, I think that the Obama that I voted for was reincarnated with a vengeance, and I LOVE IT. By walking out of the negotiations yesterday, you proved that you're not going to give up the high ground. Yes, the GOP has a majority in the House. Yes, their personal media conglomerate FOX News, continues to purport lies and falsehoods to the same people that are being downtrodden by this recession. And yes, John Boehner and Eric Cantor are about as fiscally sound as Donald Trump in a store full of toupees. But you're the President. You're the person in command. You set the stage, and yesterday you took the stage right from under the those GOP blowholes by walking out. If this fire is an indicator of what's to come, then maybe I'm not as worried about what 2012 will bring (fiscally, that is) anymore. Walk hard, Barry. Walk hard...

Dear Donald Trump

If 'the Man' were a real person, I'd imagine his physical make-up to be something like this:

- white, Anglo-Saxon male
- the brain of Sarah Palin
- the enraptured soul of Ronald Reagan
- the torso of Ed Wuncler (word to Aaron McGruder)
- the physical fortitude of a newborn kitten
- the voice of Glenn Beck

... and last, but not least, the hair of none other than you, Donald Mothaf*ckin Trump. Your comb-overed idiocy never really registered on my Richter Scale, simply because you were too much of a big wig, fat-walleted blowhole to really matter. Your forays into real estate (yes, they did some wonders for the NYC skyline) have turned your already inflated ego into a gargantuan facade, much like those said buildings. Hell, even your show is an overstated testament to how important you believe yourself to be. Now that it's 2011, and the 2012 Presidential Election race has had its unofficial start, the talk of your impending run as a GOP candidate has me scratching my head, and wondering 'Are we really taking this guy seriously?'

Take your announcement for your campaign, and subsequent latching on to the 'Birther' movement. You claim that Obama wasn't born in this country and that his whereabouts are beyond questionable. You constantly allude to a missing birth certificate, as if it hasn't been proven repeatedly that President Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, citing the lack of a 'birth certificate'. Newsflash, Trump. In Hawaii, the document is called a 'Certificate of Live Birth' and is the equivalent of what you would call a birth certificate (the whole discrepancy is reminiscent of every state's little legislative differences, that your party seeks to protect, so why the contradiction?).

Next, you attack Obama's academic record, saying that his status as a Harvard and Columbia grad is a farce, and that his Ivy League matriculation was 'undeserved'. Look at you, Trump! Your dad was a real estate tycoon, and you most likely got into UPenn based off his connections than anything. How can you try to discredit another man's rise in academics, when you got around on your daddy's name? How can you try and mudsling on another man's merit, when you've proven through your own grandiose lifestyle that you have little to merit yourself? I'll tell you why... It's because you have little if any platform to run on, and are essentially running on a 'F*ck Obama' campaign.

Where are YOUR political credentials? Where do YOU stand on the issues? So far, everything that's come out of your mouth is a hair away from slanderous and has little if anything to do with improving the nation or its economy. It's like you have nothing to add to the discussion so you're going to fling mud at everyone else in some vain attempt to hide your own lack of expertise or political savvy. It's sickening, Trump. Do you have ANYTHING to add to the conversation other than slander? Then you've got numbskulls like Sarah Palin giving you pats on the back? Come on, son... If Sarah Palin is endorsing you, then there's something terribly wrong with what you're saying.

You stand for everything bad about the GOP: distortion of fact, lack of discernable political intelligence, and an overall hubris that will eventually be you and your party's demise. Never mind the fact that the GOP has no candidates worth the pieces of paper they're balloted on. Never mind the fact that you'd be the 2nd GOP candidate to have a reality TV show. You're just out of line. Why don't you just flip that combover over to reveal the vacuous abyss that is your mind, and let the American people see just what you're made out of: money and nothing more. Then again, so are most of the GOP hopefuls. Why don't we just chalk your idiotic campaign up to the GOP's impending implosion (#shoutout to the Tea Party), and have you go back to hawking real estate. I don't mind you working in NYC, but the White House, you need to stay out of, for all our sakes...

PS: According to CNN, Obama was 'absolutely' born in Hawaii. What the hell are you going to run your campaign on now, Trump?

Dear Tucker Carlson

I always find it sad when political 'pundits' weigh in on certain issues, especially ones dealing with race, crime, the President and facets of culture unfamiliar to them. They speak so freely about such issues, usually with misinformation and hateful dialogue, but blast anyone with a slightly different opinion. They come out saying things, that if the people they were criticizing said, the entire world would grab pitchforks and ready the gallows. Your rhetoric is right up that alley, Tucker. I usually don't like commenting on anything you do, simply because it's as useless picking an intellectual argument with a 1st grader. Even if what you're saying makes little sense, you're still going to pull out the 'But you've got cooties/you're stupid/you're a booger-face' argument. That said, I can't let these comments pass.

Tucker, first of all, where in tarnation do you get off saying that Michael Vick should be executed for his dog-fighting incident? You said you're a Christian, and 'believe fervently in second chances', so what gives? Let the man live! You say he's some 'creepy, rich, overpaid football player'. The last time I checked, you weren't rubbing pennies together to heat your house, were you? Your friends (who usually are just as dumb as you) are right. My reservations and about the severity of his acts aside, Vick paid his debt to society and is constantly reminded of what he did every time he has to show his face at some PETA event to save face. Execution for dog-fighting? Come on, Tucker... You own dress shoes and belts, and eat meat. Do you feel any ill-sentiment about that? Maybe you should be executed for driving a car with leather seats, or wearing wool sweaters. You eat chewing gum or Jello? We should put you in the electric chair, then. Tucker, my point is that we use products from animals every day. That Vick got into it with dogs pales in comparison to the cruelty that livestock and other animals used for production face. We don't execute the guys who kill bears that attack people. Should we really still be vilifying Vick?

Second off, since when is it wrong for the President to have an opinion on things? For God's sakes, if our President can't have a stance on an issue, then who can? Barack is a football fan, so he's got to have something to say about the whole Michael Vick saga. Why are you allowed to have a section on your show completely dedicated to thrashing the name of anyone you disagree with, but President Obama can't laud the efforts of the Philadelphia Eagles to give someone a second chance? If you can spread hate, misinformation and right-wing agenda like they're popsicles, why can't the President spread love and admiration for a man who laid not a finger to another human being?

Thirdly, is it just me, or do political pundits like yourself catch erections from seeing a public figure (most of the time, black) lost in the criminal justice system? Seriously, Tucker. I guarantee if John Doe from Anytown, USA was caught doing the same thing, his punishment would be little, if any compared to Vick's. Americans have a nasty habit of holding celebrities and athletes to higher standards than themselves. We can cheat, lie, steal, fornicate, kill, and do every other crime under the sun, but if a public figure does it, the entire world turns against them. I'm sick of the American media making celebrities of people and then tearing them down when they inevitably make lapses of judgment. Why do a celebrity's illicit acts hold more gravity than that of every other man? Do we really have to invest that much into what someone in the public eye does? I know this is a media-based society, but sheesh! Tucker, it's clear you're the type of personality that thrives on sensationalism when dealing with anything you don't agree with. It's as if you're a controversy-sniffing dog (pun intended). Tell you one thing... I wouldn't mind if Vick had put your fear-mongering behind down. *hides from PETA backlash*

Dear Warren Buffett

I BANGS with this white man...

via ABC News:

In an exclusive interview on "This Week," Warren Buffett, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, told Christiane Amanpour that the rich should be paying more taxes and that the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy should be left to expire at the end of December.

"If anything, taxes for the lower and middle class and maybe even the upper middle class should even probably be cut further," Buffett said. "But I think that people at the high end -- people like myself -- should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we've ever had it."

The full Buffett interview will air on a special Thanksgiving edition of "This Week" focused on The Giving Pledge, a major philanthropic effort spearheaded by Buffet, and Bill and Melinda Gates. The billionaire brushed aside Republican arguments that letting tax cuts expire for the wealthy would hurt economic growth.

"They say you have to keep those tax cuts, even on the very wealthy, because that is what energizes business and capitalism," anchor Amanpour said.

"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you. But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on," Buffett explained.

It's ironic that sometimes the most well-off people in the world can be the most well-intentioned and well-read. When we think of wealth, we have a tendency to couple it with ignorance and selfishness, regardless of whether the person displays those traits outwardly. Wealth usually is coupled with those things as a subconscious way to keep that wealth, rather than say, donate it to those less fortunate. Such is the story of your case, Mr. Buffett. For the past decade the 'World's Richest Person' contest has been a two person race between you and Bill Gates, with your wallet weighing in a little heavier over the past few years. That said, you aren't like most billionaires, whose concerns only detail how they're getting their next buck, and who they have to run over to get it.

In a harrowing show of grace, you, Bill Gates and a number of other of the nation's wealthiest have pledged to give away a tremendous amount of your money to charity, which is commendable. Yet, that isn't even your most gracious act. With your platform and fame, you've spoken out against our 'bi-partisan' government and the GOP's plan to preserve the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, a group you're a part of. Not only does your stand make all the sense in the world, it's probably the most honest assertion that a rich man has made in the past decade.

Warren, you're the richest man in the world. By default, you have to know a thing or two about money, how it's made, how its spent and where it's going. We'd have to be pretty stupid not to heed whatever warning you give about the nation's finances. That you essentially endorsed Obama's agenda to end those tax cuts is indicative of your financial prowess. To the contrary, only a truly dumb financial mind could endorse the tax cuts and be certain that they are the best route for the country. The tax cuts enabled the rich to get richer while the rest of the country languished in unemployment and lack of cash. Even better is the fact that you said the rich have 'had it better than ever'. Forget hearing it from the horse's mouth! You are the horse!

Warren, I think the best part about you speaking out is that you are in such a high and powerful position. For every bullsh*tting Republican and Tea Partier spitting out that malarkey (a favorite word of mine) about tax cuts for the rich helping the economy, you can be there to tell them different, AS a rich person. I wish more of the nation's wealthy were as honest about political economy as you were. Not only would the country not be in an almost insurmountable debt, we probably wouldn't even have to deal with a Tea Party or Sarah Palin or any of this balderdash we call 'bipartisanship' today. Oh, to dream...

P.S.: Yes, I know that if things happened your way, that you'd still have a substantial amount of money in your pocket. I think if the government stopped accepting money, you'd still have money. The point is that you're not so blinded by cash that you can't take an objective stance on the nation's financial health. That has to be worth more than a bullsh*t pledge by the GOP...

Dear GOP

via The New York Times:

The Obama administration said Monday that it would ask the lame-duck Congress next month to approve a $50 billion down payment on his long-range initiative to improve the nation’s roads, railways and air systems and to find savings to offset that cost, suggesting a new urgency to create jobs after last week’s disappointing unemployment report.

President Obama met at the White House with mayors, governors and current and former transportation secretaries of both parties to promote the infrastructure initiative, which he first proposed in September. Afterward, Ray LaHood, his transportation secretary and a former Republican congressman, told reporters that the lame-duck session would present an “upfront opportunity” to pass the $50 billion measure. Before then, however, the midterm elections on Nov. 2 are all but certain to expand the size of Mr. Obama’s Republican opposition for the new Congress that convenes in January. So Republicans returning later in November for unfinished business are likely to be in no mood to compromise with the White House when they will have the strength of greater numbers in the new year.

Approving $50 billion more for construction projects would be difficult enough, given that many Democrats have shied away from supporting more economic stimulus spending and that Republicans have convinced many voters that Mr. Obama’s initial two-year stimulus program, which included roughly $40 billion for transportation projects, failed to create jobs. But trying to agree on offsetting savings also would be contentious.

It's been said in numerous political arenas that the government is to do for the people what the people cannot do for themselves. Some take this to mean that the government should provide aspects of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness such as health care, education and protecting citizens. At the same time, oters feel that this tenet shouldn't include much at all. GOP, you're really taking this 'we hate big government' thing a little too far. President Obama introduced a $50 million bill that would jump-start initiatives to rebuild America's infrastructure, including its roads, railways and air systems. And you guys are doing what you've been doing for the past two years under Obama: say 'no'.

GOP, in what universe is improving a nation's infrastructure considered frivolous spending or too much interference from the government? I thought the government was supposed to regulate things of that nature and improve those systems when they begin to deteriorate. In terms of roads and railways, we're slowly falling behind other countries. In Japan and Europe, high-speed rails have all but replaced the Amtrak-style trains that have not only become ridiculously expensive, but also lag behind buses in efficiency. In terms of roads, every US city has thousands of miles upon miles of roads that are dilapidated and in desperate need of repair. Airline travel has become an inefficient luxury because of lack of regulation and airlines constantly folding. And you'd rather be a roadblock (no pun intended) to improving those systems for some vain reason, than just work to do... something with your power? Come on, son...

The thing is, these initiatives proposed by the Obama administration would cost us virtually nothing compared to the dearth of wealth we've just tossed away trying to 'rebuild' Afghanistan and Iraq. The transportation initiative is even going to create jobs, something that your policies have yet to do. Yet and still, you guys continue to say 'no'. Why? What is the point of saying 'no' for the sake of saying 'no'? Something as rudimentary as infrastructure-building shouldn't be a political divider, no matter how much contention or animosity there is between the parties. President Obama is trying to do an Eisenhower-esque overhaul of our outdated infrastructure. Are you really going to stand in the way of that, cutting corners for the sake of an outmoded platform? Midterms are probably going to shift the tides of Congress back your way. You've already fudged up the health care and stimulus bills. Don't stymie the arteries of our nation...

Dear RIAA (re: Piracy)

5 years ago, I would've laughed.. Now I shudder, because it really could get this bad

via Information Liberation:

While they may never be able to truly defeat piracy and drive it from the lurking depths of the internet, copyright protection attack-dog organizations like the RIAA and MPAA have long dreamed of the day when they would no longer have to pay for their own copyright enforcement. Now that dream is on the verge of coming true, thanks to the Obama administration. After countless lobbyist dollars from the music and film industry and a brief "public review", the administration rolled out its vision to fight piracy yesterday afternoon. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden -- whose blunt speech has sometime left him in trouble -- did not mince words.

He states, "This is theft, clear and simple. It's smash and grab, no different than a guy walking down Fifth Avenue and smashing the window at Tiffany's and reaching in and grabbing what's in the window." The sound-byte comparing downloads to stealing jewels from New York City's finest jeweler quickly lit up the web. Bob Pisano, interim chief executive officer at the Motion Picture Association of America praised the VP, "It is especially critical that the United States has an effective framework for protecting creative content online and enforcing intellectual property rights in the digital environment."

According to the Obama administration, the RIAA, and MPAA, the world economy is pretty much doomed if we don't start prosecuting pirates at home and abroad. Without such a crackdown, businesses will go bankrupt the coalition argues. Biden states, "Piracy hurts, it hurts our economy."

The White House press release was full of buzz phrases, but short on details. It did however indicate that the U.S. government may increasingly monitor filesharing networks and BitTorrent sites and assist media groups in their prosecution/threat letter efforts. It speaks of improved "law enforcement efforts at the Federal, state and local level." The biggest effort, though, will be devoted to cracking down on piracy websites in the U.S. and overseas. The administration was short on details of how exactly it would convince piracy-loving nations like China to change their ways, but it did say it would try to do so by "being as public as we possibly can" about infringement.

This is a hard letter to write... As an avid music fan, I find myself always finding new music. The problem is when I want to own it for myself, and don't feel like dropping $14.79 (it's never on a round number, is it?). I remember in elementary school, we used to record over tapes, in middle school, we burned CD's, and in high school we used Kazaa & Limewire to download loosies. Now, I get my music through other means, that shall not be revealed at this time. Regardless, those three eras in my life were pervaded by something that is finally coming for its day in court: music piracy. You, the RIAA, have been waiting forever for the government to back you up on this whole copyright thing. To me, though, this has failure to adapt written ALL OVER IT.

RIAA, you never were down with the digital revolution, and now you're paying the price. When Napster first came out, and every person under 16, without a job and the subsequent funds to purchase music suddenly had said music at their fingertips, that should've been a sign for you. You should have seen it coming. The internet was young, and full of little loopholes and ways to impress your idea on a small population of users. Instead of innovating around this new technology, you tried to stifle it. You called every aging rock star who needed a booster check you could find, and made sure they spoke out about Napster and illegal downloading. When filesharing sites became the norm, rather than encourage music labels to embrace the new norm and try their hand at it, you had Congress fine teenagers millions of dollars for downloading a couple hundred songs. RIAA, you're the worst type of managing entity, because you only take action when you see your bottom line dropping. And it's sad, because the music industry is always going to be in a state of flux if you don't solidify it with fair and balanced rules on filesharing. Honestly, I think that you guys are lying about how much money you're losing. For all of the talk about how much piracy is messing with your wallets, I don't see you guys rushing to drop any figures or for your participating companies to drop any artists.

By all accounts, aside from yours, the music industry is alive and well. There is a vibrant and ever-expanding online presence from the music industry, with blogs, online publications and Twitter making big moves for artists and labels. Yet and still, you seem to focus more on what you're losing through music piracy rather than what you could gain through the new technology at your fingertips. There have to be at least two halves of an idiot in your entire organization who can find a way to placate the artists and labels being pirated, without discouraging fans or even making the problem worse. It's not that hard... If guys like Curren$y can be thriving in the industry without labels and your backing to keep their music private, why can you find a compromise or common ground that we can all agree on. No, I'm not going to say that illegal downloading and music piracy is right. However, of all the things to nitpick about and waste your time over, this should be at the bottom of the list. The fact that the government has to help you clean the mess up is even more indicative of your organization's inefficacy. To say that you're behind the curve is an understatement at this point. Then again, Obama does seem pretty serious about this new initiative. Guess I'll keep re-finding torrents until his boys come knocking on my door...

Dear General McChrystal

Yeah.. My pimp hand is to be reckoned with...

via The New York Times:

By the time he woke up Wednesday morning, President Obama had made up his mind.

During the 36 frenetic hours since he had been handed an article from the coming issue of Rolling Stone ominously headlined “The Runaway General,” the president weighed the consequences of cashiering Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, whose contemptuous comments about senior officials had ignited a firestorm.

Mr. Obama, aides say, consulted with advisers — some, like Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who warned of the dangers of replacing General McChrystal, others, like his political advisers, who thought he had to go. He reached out for advice to a soldier-statesman, Colin L. Powell. He identified a possible successor to lead the war in Afghanistan.

And then, finally, the president ended General McChrystal’s command in a meeting that lasted only 20 minutes. According to one aide, the general apologized, offered his resignation and did not lobby for his job.

After a seesaw debate among White House officials, “there was a basic meeting of the minds,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff and a major player in the deliberations. “This was not good for the mission, the military and morale,” Mr. Emanuel said.

I never thought I'd be quoting 50 Cent to start out a letter. Then again, I never thought George Bush would get re-elected in 2004 and we all know how that ended. Yet, 50 sheds some great knowledge on 'Patiently Waiting':

You shouldn't throw stones if you live in a glass house / and if you got a glass jaw, you should watch your mouth

It's pretty sad that you're not a rap fan, General McChrystal, though even a blind man could've seen your termination happening after your comments in Rolling Stone against Obama's administration and their handling of the ongoing war in the Middle East. My question is, did you really think you'd be able to pull that off? I mean, seriously, Rolling Stone is one of the most famous magazines in history, read worldwide by millions of aging punk rock fans with their post-60s & 70s ideals of democracy and foreign policy. If there was any magazine not to bash the President and his people in, it was Rolling Stone. Also, what was up with how you were acting in the spread? You more or less personified every redneck to ever grace a voting booth in the interview. What kind of military representative begins an interview by giving the interviewer the finger? I thought we were past the whole MTV-age, shock value publicity stunts. Next, why would you call a dinner with a French dignitary gay? My man, you sound like a 12-year-old with a limited vocabulary.

I'm not going to lie though. I don't support the war. Obama should've had a better plan for exit, rather than leaving it up to the military to finish what they know they couldn't complete. That said, whining about it to the press doesn't do the military, or more importantly, you, any good. Making snide remarks about the boos on any other job will get you canned faster than tuna fish. Doing it with the President will likely have a WMD mailed to your front step. Okay, maybe not that serious, but you'll definitely have time to look out for it, now that you've been replaced. At the same time, I don't even feel sorry about you, considering how much movearound there is among the political ranks these days. You should have another gig in no time. Maybe this time you won't get drunk with your gun-wielding people and start mouthing off about stuff you have no business talking about...

Dear 'The Boondocks'

Let's just get it out of the way: people have indeed been d*ckriding Obama. It's not a bad or good thing. Politicians (and more so celebrities) carry cult-like followings that sometimes supersede all understanding, whether the person being followed is a good person or not. As a matter of fact, people tend to follow the bad ones more than the good (coughcoughKimgoughKardashiancoughcough). Regardless, Barack Obama, while (in my humble opinion) has been a good president and done right by the nation, has had some pretty rough times. He's been soft against the Republicans at times and had been too wavering occasionally. There are tons (and I mean tons) of people out there who see no wrong in the man. Boondocks, you just solidified yourself as the best show by poking fun at it. Grabbing Will.i.am, who did the song below, for the track was classic. Even Gangstalicious had some jewels dropping on the track. As a show, you really are unafraid to take on issues that are invading the minds of black folk. The trailer for your final season was an overload of satirical n*gga sh*t. And if this ode to folks forgetting that Obama is human too is any indication, the 3rd final season should be classic, to say the least. My calendars are set. Hurry up and give people something to laugh at without knowing the true meaning...

Whoever produces music for Aaron McGruder is a genius, because that interpolation is INSANE...

Dear Congress

The biggest piece of legislation since my generation was born...

via The New York Times:

House Democrats approved a far-reaching overhaul of the nation’s health system on Sunday, voting over unanimous Republican opposition to provide medical coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans after an epic political battle that could define the differences between the parties for years.

With the 219-to-212 vote, the House gave final approval to legislation passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve. Thirty-four Democrats joined Republicans in voting against the bill. The vote sent the measure to President Obama, whose yearlong push for the legislation has been the centerpiece of his agenda and a test of his political power. After approving the bill, the House adopted a package of changes to it by a vote of 220 to 211. That package — agreed to in negotiations among House and Senate Democrats and the White House — now goes to the Senate for action as soon as this week. It would be the final step in a bitter legislative fight that has highlighted the nation’s deep partisan and ideological divisions. On a sun-splashed day outside the Capitol, protesters, urged on by House Republicans, chanted “Kill the bill” and waved yellow flags declaring “Don’t Tread on Me.” They carried signs saying “Doctors, Not Dictators.”

Inside, Democrats hailed the votes as a historic advance in social justice, comparable to the establishment of Medicare and Social Security. They said the bill would also put pressure on rising health care costs and rein in federal budget deficits.

“This is the Civil Rights Act of the 21st century,” said Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 Democrat in the House.

Kudos Congress, kudos. Though there was arm-pulling, hair-pulling and numerous shots fired (all metaphorical), a bill that will change the social course of the United States is officially a GO. By a vote of 219 to 212, you in the House and Senate finally passed the Health Care Reform that President Obama promised in his epic 2008 election. That said, I have one question: WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG?? Congress, (or the House, more specifically) ALL of you have above satisfactory health care. In fact, none of you will ever need to go through the bureaucracy, heartache and bullshit that 32 million Americans faced up until this bill's passing. Why was it so hard to make that move for the people who put you in office. Whether it was the insurance companies in your pockets, or the incredulous screams of 'death panels', nothing should have kept America from making good on the 'life' part of it's promise of 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'. Every piece of reasoning that you guys pushed in front of the bill dwindled when compared to the savings and overall good that the bill would ultimately do, and you know it.

Yes, the bill will take some time to balance out the budget that you guys unbalanced through numerous military expenditures and interest rate hikes. However, since when has your job as Congress been to protect the interest of the military or private insurance companies? Congress, your job is to represent the people; the same people that voted you in (many of whom are still in the dark about the benefits of the bill). Your job isn't to stand in the way of progress simply because you believe health care reform is detrimental to the interests of the few. Am I a political pundit? No. Am I a concerned voter who believes that everyone should be entitled to satisfactory health care? Hell to the yes.

This isn't a letter condemning your sloth in passing the bill as much as it is a regale of a 2-year long struggle. I will never understand how some of you voted against the bill, but to those of you that helped pass this landmark legislation, I give the utmost respect. It takes cojones to uproot a system so closely guarded by bureaucracy and special interest. Hopefully the ideal of bipartisan support doesn't halt any other reform, yet I can't help but think the 212 of you who voted against it are foaming at the mouth to shoot down another Obama bill. Don't let your own personal idiosyncrasies affect what's best for the people, or you might not even be around for the next big vote...

Barack vs. The Bracket

As you may or not (but should) know, President Obama is an avid basketball fan, and has made this the second year that he publicly fills out his bracket for the 2010 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. Barry doesn't disappoint me, and picks the Jayhawks from Kansas as the National Champs. However, he does have a few questionable picks and upsets on his bracket. The President even admits that he royally f*cked up last year in the first round, although he picked the eventual winner in North Carolina. Check out the rest of Barry's picks and see what the Commander-in-Chief has to say about some of the top teams in the country...

Dear GOP

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Sorry, I had to get that laugh out, you old donkeys! Let's just say it: You guys don't want Obama's initiatives to go through. It's one thing to bite your tongue of all your contentions when the entire nation is watching. It's something completely different to have Obama on your turf, with all of your opposition, with relatively few people watching. You guys had the latter at the GOP retreat this past weekend and took a worse home L than the Mavericks in 2007. Not only did you not have any evidence to back up any of your claims of Obama, you didn't have any actual plans of your own. I guess if it ain't broke, don't fix it is your policy.

To add to that, with every jab you threw, Obama had an uppercut, waiting for that jaw full of filibusters and bipartisans. He laid out his health care bill perfectly, citing the economic and social benefits the initiative could bring. The President did the same for his economic agenda, and you guys couldn't say a thing. Obama's performance was so good that some of you were questioning whether it should have even been televised. Hell, FOX News cut it off 20 minutes before it was over. That's saying a lot about you guys as a party, especially after mouthing off at the State of the Union. At least Barack had the decency to shake hands with you guys and take pictures with your families later...

Judge Alito is having a huge plate of STFU after the retreat

The 2010 State of the Union

It's that time of year again: the point when half of the US is reconsidering their votes and the other half is trying to convince everyone else that the current President is either amazing or the Devil. That's right, kids... The State of the Union Address. Our boy Barack Obama is going to speak to Congress tonight at 8PM about everything from the looming health care bill, freezing spending by the government and how in the world we're going to get out of this recession. To those watching, I'd say to watch with an open mind instead of bringing your misconceptions to the TV. People are too quick to find something wrong with what's being said instead of actually learning about what the speaker is pushing. Whatever your stance on Barry (#shoutout to AverageBro for putting me on to the nickname), make sure you fulfill your civic duty. There's no excuse for Apple's tablet (which most of you won't buy) to be breaking news when our country is at an impasse on a number of issues. The SOTU speech is being televised on all of the major networks as well as being broadcast on Youtube. Check out what Barry's up to these days...

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE STATE OF THE UNION TONIGHT!!!!

Rudy Guliani has 9/11 Amnesia

You know there's something wrong with our government when the man leading a city during a prolific terrorist attack forgets the President that the attack happened under. Or maybe he's just trying to stick up for his party-mate. Rudy Guliani claimed that no terrorist attacks happened under the reign of George Dubya Bush, while one occurred under Obama (the one over X-Mas). Not only is that false, the supposed 'attack' under Obama really didn't even happen! Is it possible that George Bush's trademarked brand of idiocy has seeped through the party? I hope not, because we'll have filibusters galore this year, if that's the case...

No Blackberries in the Oval Office

Do you want to know why Barack Obama is going to go down as one of the greatest Presidents ever? CHANGE. Yeah, that's cliche, but change (when it's done right) is something internal and external. Politically, it starts with the leaders, and even something as small as not allowing Blackberries in cabinet meetings, is a step in the right direction. If not one less thing to worry about distracting you during the day, it means during meetings there is undivided attention to the meeting and the issues at hand. Now if only we could bring every other free civilian on the planet to do the same with their Blackberries...

Dear Obama Critics

Oh you mad cuz I'm stylin on you??

It's been a year since that momentous Election Day that saw my Philadelphian brethren walk to City Hall in triumph over the election of Barack Obama. We're not going to mince words here by talking about how much I LOVE President Obama and his presidency so far. We're not even going to talk about why you guys are wrong anymore, because living in the past is soooooo Bush-era. We're just going to focus on the facts. And the fact of the matter is, in the past 9 months since Obama's election, our outlook as a country has gotten a lot brighter. What has Barack done thus far? Well, I'm glad you asked. Check it out:

- A week before he was sworn in, Obama stuffed his bank bailout down the throat of his own party — a $350 billion accomplishment.

- Two weeks later, he signed the Stimulus Bill.

- Two weeks after that, he announced America's withdrawal from Iraq.

- A week later, he tossed Bush's ban on stem-cell research.

- In June he got the Arab world back on our side with his speech in Egypt.

- That same June, Obama introduced Cash for Clunkers program, which has revitalized the auto industry after over 5 years of declines.

- And over the summer and the past two months, he's appointed Sonia Sotomayor, cut taxes by $228 billion, ended the war on medical marijuana, revived the credit markets and stopped the financial collapse.

ALL of that in just 8 months. And let's not forget the little public option bill that will revolutionize the health care industry in America. Seriously, if you can't see the mastery in Obama's performance up until this point, you must be blind or blindly conservative or liberal (Lord knows the man has enemies on both sides). Not to say that we are out of the tunnel in terms of financial ruin or social upheaval, but you have to admit, Obama's done a hell of a lot more in 8 months than George Bush has managed to fuck up in eight years. Obama may never quote the now infamous rap battle I ascribed to his likeness above, but he sure as hell embodies the quote right now, especially for all you critics that have salty looks on your faces now...

Dear Nobel Prize Committee

Okay, let me say this: I'm proud of Barack Obama. His campaign, election and now this health-care initiative have been revolutionary, and for the first time since the turn of the millennium, America's future looks bright. That said, was this prize really necessary? I know Barack did his 'world tour' and more or less 'apologized' for the wrongdoings of the one who won't be named (he's probably TIGHT about the award), but what else has the man done that has promoted peace? I feel like you guys gave Obama the award for what he is going to do, not what he has done. How are you going to put an award on layaway? I'm sure you guys could have found some better candidates for the Nobel Prize for Peace. Somebody is sure to have contributed to the well-being of humanity and its peace at least as much as Obama. I consider myself informed, but to tell you the truth, I'm not sure who would have been another candidate. It's funny that in today's media, we don't hear about the heroes of humanity as much as we do the detractors. I guess that's why I'm not as surprised at your decision as I was. I hope Obama does fulfill your ideal of what a Nobel Prize winner is. It's just that you called the winner of the race before anyone knew who was in it...

Dear Public Option Opponents

It the man, man!!!

via The New York Times:

The widely awaited budget analysis of a pending Senate health care bill indicates that the legislation would meet President Obama’s cost target and would reduce future federal deficits by a deeper amount than previously projected.

I hate to say that I told you so, but it wasn't even just me telling you so. For the past 8 months, we 'death-panelers' have been telling you guys that the public option not only will benefit the health industry, it will benefit the country!! And all of you were so trapped in your ways that you couldn't see what's always been your motivation from jump: money. Look at the dollars. The health care reform bill would cost us $829 billion over 10 years, but would reduce our federal deficity by $81 million. Dollars make sense fellas. We might not be out of the recession yet, but if there's one thing the recession's taught us, it's that reform is necessary. Being a stick in concrete only leads to you being broke (like the pun?), and by being so conservative in your policies, you guys have put us in the red for a LONG time. So why don't we do it like this: You guys sign off on the bill. We enact it. And then we allow positive reform to start the country off on the road to recovery. It's as simple as that.

The thing is, you guys saw the idea of changing something so deep-rooted in our society as BAD, even if it was sapping our wallets and feeding a vicious cycle. The pharmaceutical companies know that, and continue to feed into your vicious cycle. All of the interest cuts in the world wouldn't have been able to pay for the hole we were digging ourselves into health-care wise (I'm not even going to start with the banks). So, tell me who makes sense? The guy that tries to patch up the plumbing that's been leaking for 10 years, or the guy that tries to bring in new pipes? Hopefully you guys think the latter. If not, you have some flooding floors to attend to...

Dear Representative Wilson

via The New York Times:

In an angry and very audible outburst, Representative Joe Wilson, Republican of South Carolina, interrupted President Obama’s speech Wednesday night with a shout of “You lie!”

Though he later apologized, his eruption — in response to Mr. Obama’s statement that Democratic health proposals would not cover illegal immigrants — stunned members of both parties in the House chamber.

Democrats said it showed lack of respect for the office of the presidency and was reminiscent of Republican disruptions at recent public forums on health care.

The picture says it all. South Carolina is really tripping over their own feet this summer. Not only do you have adulterers finding their soulmates in South America, now you have Tourette's sufferers in your state government. But seriously, is that not the shout heard round the world in terms of the health care debate? You, Mr. Wilson, a conservative representative from South Carolina, make a random outburst, most likely out of frustration at President Obama's smooth and veritable speech. That outburst might have just saved the health care reform, with the conservatives resorting to whining and spreading misinformation at town halls, and now disrespecting the President in front of Congress and the Nation.

What's even funnier than the faces on two representatives next to you, is the fact that Obama wouldn't even hear your apology after the speech was over. He just gave you 'the look' and kept it moving like a real G (the first and only time you'll hear me refer to someone as a G). You're like the kid on the playground that got joked on every day, and then yelled the WORST yo mama joke EVER; now you just look dumb. And not to mention, the uproar of boos afterward was priceless. I wish they had a picture of you, most likely cowering in your seat, when you realized that your shout wouldn't cause a slow clap. Last but not least, Rep. Wilson, this incident probably is going to cost your reelection. In the eight hours after your own personal PR disaster, campaign donations to your probable opponent, Rob Miller topped $100,000. But I suppose you'll get over the screw-up. You and your Republican homies have endured worse. Osama bin Laden is still on a milk carton, and the only weapon of mass destruction we've found is your mouth...