What the h_ _ _ were/are you thinking?
$87,000 rug?
$25,000 pedestal table?
$68,000 credenza?
$19,000 pendant light?
$28,000 for four curtains?
$87,000 pair of guest chairs?
$18,000 George IV chair? (One recently sold at Christie's for $2210!!!)
$2,700 for six wall sconces?
$1,400 parchment waste can? (Are you serious???-thanks SNL!)
$18,282 Roman shade?
$5,852 coffee table?
$35,115 antique commode?
An article on CNBC.com listed these items and the price Thain paid for them. Then they showed comparable articles for faaaaar less than these items. John Thain (Merrill Lynch)--shame on you!!! whether or not your company was losing money, which it was!
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
A Word from David Horowitz
How Conservatives Should Celebrate the Inauguration
By David Horowitz FrontPageMagazine.com Tuesday, January 20, 2009
"If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer."
- Barack Obama, Victory Speech, November 4, 2008
Yesterday was Martin Luther King's birthday, which is America's only national holiday to honor an American citizen. The day before, which was Sunday, the incoming Obama administration staged an Inauguration Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial around the theme "We Are One," which was also the theme of his presidential campaign. As several of the speakers -- including the president-elect -- noted, the Lincoln Memorial was the site of Martin Luther King's historic civil rights march and his famous dream for the American future. The president-elect reiterated that dream -- that Americans would judge each other by the content of their character and not their racial or ethnic identity. Today America welcomes Barack Obama as the first black president in its 232-year history.
How should conservatives think about these events?
First we have to recognize and then understand that whatever happens in the Obama presidency, this Inauguration Day is a watershed moment in the history of America and a remarkable event in the history of nations, and thus a cause for all of us who love this country, conservative and liberal, Democrat and Republican, to celebrate.
Second, in order to do this as conservatives -- as conservatives who have been through the culture wars -- we need to get past the mixed feelings we will inevitably have as the nation marks its progress in moving away from the racial divisions and divisiveness of the past. These feelings come not from resistance to the change, but from the knowledge that this celebration should have taken place decades ago and that its delay was not least because our opponents saw political advantage in playing the race card against us and making us its slandered targets.
If we celebrate Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday at a time of presidential inaugurals, this is thanks to Ronald Reagan who created the holiday, and not to the Democratic Congress of the Carter years, which rejected it. If Americans now have accepted an African American to lead their country in war and peace that is in part because an hysterically maligned Republican made two African Americans his secretaries of state. And if, after the passage of the Civil Rights Acts, race has continued to be a divisive factor in our politics over the last 40 years that is because the generation of Sharpton and Jackson and their liberal supporters have made it so. What conservatives need to recognize in getting past these feelings (and therefore to celebrate) is that because of this political reality, it is only they themselves who could end it.
Third, as conservatives who embrace the institutions our founders created we need to separate the two roles of the presidency -- symbolic and political. Today the symbolic role takes precedence and we need to appreciate the specific aspects of that symbolism in the new presidency of Barack Obama, and put aside our anticipations of the policies he may later put in place. There will be time enough for that.
The Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln memorial was given the theme "We Are One," which continued the unity theme of Obama's presidential campaign. This theme has a special resonance for this moment in our history, when we are more divided as a nation than at any time since the Civil War. In his victory speech on November 4th, Obama said that his victory was "the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled -- Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America!"
Rich and poor, black and white, we are one -- the Inauguration Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial was designed to dramatize this idea. In his own speech at Celebration the president-elect paid specific tribute to Lincoln for saving the union, and to Martin Luther King Jr. for dreaming of a nation united beyond race. There were more black faces on the stage of this celebration and more black faces in the hundreds of thousands who attended it than at any time for any inauguration-related event in the nation's history. This was already a testament to Obama's success in advancing his vision.
Barack Obama is the head of a party whose leaders have accused the outgoing president and his Republican Party of betraying their own country by waging an illegal, aggressive, and unnecessary war and in the process destroying its Constitution and the liberties it guarantees. By contrast, in his victory speech in November, Barack Obama repeated his pledge to be president of all Americans, liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, and thanked the American troops whom a Republican president had sent to Afghanistan and Iraq in these words: “Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us.”
In the speech announcing his economic stimulus package, Obama deliberately passed up the golden opportunity it presented to blame the biggest financial disaster in the nation's history on Republicans, as Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders would inevitably have done.
At the "We Are One" celebration, orchestrated by his team, the script that was given to liberal actress Marisa Tomei included a passage from Ronald Reagan’s inaugural, a gesture that paid tribute to him as a leader who preached tolerance and compassion and a united nation. Another actor read similar sentiments from Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address without so much as mentioning its famous admonitions about the "military-industrial complex," as a Democrat invariably would. Liberal actor Jack Black then paid tribute to another Republican hero, Teddy Roosevelt, as America's pioneer environmentalist, and Tiger Woods presented himself as the proud scion of a military family, praising his family's service and paying tribute to America's armed forces. Even the music was inclusive, with country singer Garth Brooks playing an extended set.
In his appointments, Obama has also pursued the national unity theme, ceding to Republicans vital positions as heads of his National Security team, and to conservatives and centrists the key positions on his economic team. As his Secretary of State and his chief of staff, he has appointed two Democrats prominently identified with support for the Iraq war, the most divisive national issue since Vietnam, and one over which much of the leadership of the Democratic Party, including its standard bearers in the last two presidential elections, played disgraceful roles.
These appointments are not merely symbolic gestures but solid commitments to policies that are at least centrist and do not take America’s world leadership lightly. Naturally, Obama has made appointments -- and policy commitments -- to the left as well. Conservatives should and will be watching these, opposing those which are destructive to the national interest. Conservatives will also recognize that having lost the election, these battles will not be easily won.
But on this Inauguration Day, before the onset of these political battles, it is important for conservatives to focus on what has already been gained in political terms by symbolism of Obama's election and the decisions he has made.
It is conservatives who should be especially appreciative of the dual nature of the American presidency, as conceived by the Founders, which differs from parliamentary systems, where the Prime Minister is the political head of his party and the political ruler of nation. In parliamentary systems such as England’s, it is the Crown which is the nation embodied, and whose wearer is the figure around whom its citizens rally, and whom they serve in time of war.
It is the Crown function of the American presidency which the Inauguration Ceremony celebrates. Only time will tell how successfully Obama manages to unite the nation in the face of the crises and enemies which confront it. But right now with 78 percent approval ratings -- and thus even the majority support of conservatives and Republicans -- he has made an important start. Symbolically, America is united around his ascension to the White House. This ascension has political implications, whose implications -- for the moment at least -- are quite large.
All over the country Americans have invested their hopes in Obama's ability to pull his country together to face its challenges. Among these Americans are millions -- most likely tens of millions -- who have never identified with their government before, who felt "outside" the system they regarded as run by elites, who ascribed its economic troubles to the greedy rich, who bought the Jackson-Sharpton canard that America was a racist society and they were locked out, who would have scorned the term "patriot" as a compromise with such evils, and who turned their backs on America's wars.
But today celebrating their new president are millions of Americans who never would have dreamed of celebrating their president before. Millions of Americans -- visible in all their racial and ethnic variety at the Lincoln Memorial on Sunday -- have begun to feel a patriotic stirring because they see in this First Family a reflection of themselves.
The change is still symbolic and may not last. A lot depends on what President Obama will do, which is not a small question given how little is still known about this man and how little tested he remains. Some of this patriotism may be of the sunshine variety -- in for a day or a season, when the costs are not great. Or more cynically: in to show that their hatred for America is really just another form of political “dissent.” Yet whatever the nature of these changes they cannot for now be discounted. Consider: When President Obama commits this nation to war against the Islamic terrorists, as he already has in Afghanistan, he will take millions of previously alienated and disaffected Americans with him, and they will support our troops in a way that most of his party has refused to support them until now. When another liberal, Bill Clinton went to war from the air, there was no anti-war movement in the streets or in his party’s ranks to oppose him. That is an encouraging fact for us in the dangerous world we confront.
If it seems unfair that Barack Obama should be the source of a new patriotism -- albeit of untested mettle -- life is unfair. If the Obama future is uncertain and fraught with unseen perils, conservatives can deal with those perils as they come. What matters today is that many Americans have begun to join their country's cause, and conservatives should celebrate that fact and encourage it. What matters now is that the American dream with its enormous power to inspire at home and abroad is back in business. What it means is that the race card has been played out and America can once again see itself -- and be seen -- for what it is: a land of incomparable opportunity, incomparable tolerance, and justice for all. Conservative values -- individual responsibility, equal opportunity, racial and ethnic pluralism, and family -- are now symbolically embedded in the American White House. As a result, a great dimension of American power has been restored. Will these values be supported, strengthened, put into practice? It is up to us to see that they are.
By David Horowitz FrontPageMagazine.com Tuesday, January 20, 2009
"If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer."
- Barack Obama, Victory Speech, November 4, 2008
Yesterday was Martin Luther King's birthday, which is America's only national holiday to honor an American citizen. The day before, which was Sunday, the incoming Obama administration staged an Inauguration Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial around the theme "We Are One," which was also the theme of his presidential campaign. As several of the speakers -- including the president-elect -- noted, the Lincoln Memorial was the site of Martin Luther King's historic civil rights march and his famous dream for the American future. The president-elect reiterated that dream -- that Americans would judge each other by the content of their character and not their racial or ethnic identity. Today America welcomes Barack Obama as the first black president in its 232-year history.
How should conservatives think about these events?
First we have to recognize and then understand that whatever happens in the Obama presidency, this Inauguration Day is a watershed moment in the history of America and a remarkable event in the history of nations, and thus a cause for all of us who love this country, conservative and liberal, Democrat and Republican, to celebrate.
Second, in order to do this as conservatives -- as conservatives who have been through the culture wars -- we need to get past the mixed feelings we will inevitably have as the nation marks its progress in moving away from the racial divisions and divisiveness of the past. These feelings come not from resistance to the change, but from the knowledge that this celebration should have taken place decades ago and that its delay was not least because our opponents saw political advantage in playing the race card against us and making us its slandered targets.
If we celebrate Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday at a time of presidential inaugurals, this is thanks to Ronald Reagan who created the holiday, and not to the Democratic Congress of the Carter years, which rejected it. If Americans now have accepted an African American to lead their country in war and peace that is in part because an hysterically maligned Republican made two African Americans his secretaries of state. And if, after the passage of the Civil Rights Acts, race has continued to be a divisive factor in our politics over the last 40 years that is because the generation of Sharpton and Jackson and their liberal supporters have made it so. What conservatives need to recognize in getting past these feelings (and therefore to celebrate) is that because of this political reality, it is only they themselves who could end it.
Third, as conservatives who embrace the institutions our founders created we need to separate the two roles of the presidency -- symbolic and political. Today the symbolic role takes precedence and we need to appreciate the specific aspects of that symbolism in the new presidency of Barack Obama, and put aside our anticipations of the policies he may later put in place. There will be time enough for that.
The Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln memorial was given the theme "We Are One," which continued the unity theme of Obama's presidential campaign. This theme has a special resonance for this moment in our history, when we are more divided as a nation than at any time since the Civil War. In his victory speech on November 4th, Obama said that his victory was "the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled -- Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America!"
Rich and poor, black and white, we are one -- the Inauguration Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial was designed to dramatize this idea. In his own speech at Celebration the president-elect paid specific tribute to Lincoln for saving the union, and to Martin Luther King Jr. for dreaming of a nation united beyond race. There were more black faces on the stage of this celebration and more black faces in the hundreds of thousands who attended it than at any time for any inauguration-related event in the nation's history. This was already a testament to Obama's success in advancing his vision.
Barack Obama is the head of a party whose leaders have accused the outgoing president and his Republican Party of betraying their own country by waging an illegal, aggressive, and unnecessary war and in the process destroying its Constitution and the liberties it guarantees. By contrast, in his victory speech in November, Barack Obama repeated his pledge to be president of all Americans, liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, and thanked the American troops whom a Republican president had sent to Afghanistan and Iraq in these words: “Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us.”
In the speech announcing his economic stimulus package, Obama deliberately passed up the golden opportunity it presented to blame the biggest financial disaster in the nation's history on Republicans, as Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders would inevitably have done.
At the "We Are One" celebration, orchestrated by his team, the script that was given to liberal actress Marisa Tomei included a passage from Ronald Reagan’s inaugural, a gesture that paid tribute to him as a leader who preached tolerance and compassion and a united nation. Another actor read similar sentiments from Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address without so much as mentioning its famous admonitions about the "military-industrial complex," as a Democrat invariably would. Liberal actor Jack Black then paid tribute to another Republican hero, Teddy Roosevelt, as America's pioneer environmentalist, and Tiger Woods presented himself as the proud scion of a military family, praising his family's service and paying tribute to America's armed forces. Even the music was inclusive, with country singer Garth Brooks playing an extended set.
In his appointments, Obama has also pursued the national unity theme, ceding to Republicans vital positions as heads of his National Security team, and to conservatives and centrists the key positions on his economic team. As his Secretary of State and his chief of staff, he has appointed two Democrats prominently identified with support for the Iraq war, the most divisive national issue since Vietnam, and one over which much of the leadership of the Democratic Party, including its standard bearers in the last two presidential elections, played disgraceful roles.
These appointments are not merely symbolic gestures but solid commitments to policies that are at least centrist and do not take America’s world leadership lightly. Naturally, Obama has made appointments -- and policy commitments -- to the left as well. Conservatives should and will be watching these, opposing those which are destructive to the national interest. Conservatives will also recognize that having lost the election, these battles will not be easily won.
But on this Inauguration Day, before the onset of these political battles, it is important for conservatives to focus on what has already been gained in political terms by symbolism of Obama's election and the decisions he has made.
It is conservatives who should be especially appreciative of the dual nature of the American presidency, as conceived by the Founders, which differs from parliamentary systems, where the Prime Minister is the political head of his party and the political ruler of nation. In parliamentary systems such as England’s, it is the Crown which is the nation embodied, and whose wearer is the figure around whom its citizens rally, and whom they serve in time of war.
It is the Crown function of the American presidency which the Inauguration Ceremony celebrates. Only time will tell how successfully Obama manages to unite the nation in the face of the crises and enemies which confront it. But right now with 78 percent approval ratings -- and thus even the majority support of conservatives and Republicans -- he has made an important start. Symbolically, America is united around his ascension to the White House. This ascension has political implications, whose implications -- for the moment at least -- are quite large.
All over the country Americans have invested their hopes in Obama's ability to pull his country together to face its challenges. Among these Americans are millions -- most likely tens of millions -- who have never identified with their government before, who felt "outside" the system they regarded as run by elites, who ascribed its economic troubles to the greedy rich, who bought the Jackson-Sharpton canard that America was a racist society and they were locked out, who would have scorned the term "patriot" as a compromise with such evils, and who turned their backs on America's wars.
But today celebrating their new president are millions of Americans who never would have dreamed of celebrating their president before. Millions of Americans -- visible in all their racial and ethnic variety at the Lincoln Memorial on Sunday -- have begun to feel a patriotic stirring because they see in this First Family a reflection of themselves.
The change is still symbolic and may not last. A lot depends on what President Obama will do, which is not a small question given how little is still known about this man and how little tested he remains. Some of this patriotism may be of the sunshine variety -- in for a day or a season, when the costs are not great. Or more cynically: in to show that their hatred for America is really just another form of political “dissent.” Yet whatever the nature of these changes they cannot for now be discounted. Consider: When President Obama commits this nation to war against the Islamic terrorists, as he already has in Afghanistan, he will take millions of previously alienated and disaffected Americans with him, and they will support our troops in a way that most of his party has refused to support them until now. When another liberal, Bill Clinton went to war from the air, there was no anti-war movement in the streets or in his party’s ranks to oppose him. That is an encouraging fact for us in the dangerous world we confront.
If it seems unfair that Barack Obama should be the source of a new patriotism -- albeit of untested mettle -- life is unfair. If the Obama future is uncertain and fraught with unseen perils, conservatives can deal with those perils as they come. What matters today is that many Americans have begun to join their country's cause, and conservatives should celebrate that fact and encourage it. What matters now is that the American dream with its enormous power to inspire at home and abroad is back in business. What it means is that the race card has been played out and America can once again see itself -- and be seen -- for what it is: a land of incomparable opportunity, incomparable tolerance, and justice for all. Conservative values -- individual responsibility, equal opportunity, racial and ethnic pluralism, and family -- are now symbolically embedded in the American White House. As a result, a great dimension of American power has been restored. Will these values be supported, strengthened, put into practice? It is up to us to see that they are.
Detroit Bets Its Future On Washington
This title is the title of an article in the Wall Street Journal in the weekend edition (Jan 24-25, 2009). Here we go again. As if I already couldn't stand GM and its attitude, here comes another article that just disgusts me. The article refers to the close of the International Auto Show in Detroit. The author, Shikha Dalmia and Henry Payne, suggest that this might be a "watershed year" in Detroit because the auto industry is going to have to craft its central plan in a way to serve the governmental agenda instead of their own agenda, the agenda of ordinary car buyers, and, of course, the unions.
The article states now that GM is taking government welfare that it must redo its business plans to include the "environmental and industrial policies priority" of the federal government. One funny part of this is that GM was recently protesting the green mandates from the federal government and "Vice Chairman Bob Lutz (GM) called global warming a 'total crock' and declared that hybrids make 'no economic sense.'" Wow--what a change of heart all in order to remain viable. I guess it is easier to accept welfare than it is to fight unions, go into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, or get rid of dealerships.
When I hear of situations like this I just want to throw up. GM can't or won't help themselves, so the taxpayer is going to foot the bill. Damn!
The article states now that GM is taking government welfare that it must redo its business plans to include the "environmental and industrial policies priority" of the federal government. One funny part of this is that GM was recently protesting the green mandates from the federal government and "Vice Chairman Bob Lutz (GM) called global warming a 'total crock' and declared that hybrids make 'no economic sense.'" Wow--what a change of heart all in order to remain viable. I guess it is easier to accept welfare than it is to fight unions, go into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, or get rid of dealerships.
When I hear of situations like this I just want to throw up. GM can't or won't help themselves, so the taxpayer is going to foot the bill. Damn!
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Hopes For The Obama Presidency
The Wall Street Journal ran an opinion page the day after the inauguration in which they published commentary from various contributors. One of the articles was written by Katrina vanden Heuvel who is the editor and publisher of The Nation. In the article she encourages President Obama to "act swiftly and invest political capital... in a sustained recovery program." She explains that if we only give a partial effort that the groundwork will not be laid "for a new economy that is more just and fair."
In the first place, I have a problem with money being indiscriminately used to help our economy. A large part of the problem is that the American people have no say over if the money should be used much less how and where it should be used. And about the if part - we have no guarantee that throwing money at various entities will have the desired effect, and the last time I checked, the United States is in a crap load of debt. Indeed, wasn't it Mr. Obama himself who was decrying the amount of debt this country was in because of the war in Iraq?
In the second place, I have a huge problem with "a new economy that is more just and fair." I agree that financial institutions have preyed on people, but it seems to me that they are now reaping what they sowed. And what do you mean by "just and fair?" If you are referring to the taxes that are paid, I would like to explore that with you, gentle readers. According to the National Taxpayers Union the top 1% of people, with incomes over $364,000, pay 40% of the taxes. The top 5% of people, with incomes over$145,000, pay 60% of the taxes. The top 10% of people, with incomes over $103,000, pay 70% of the taxes. The top 50% of people, with incomes over $30,000, pay 96.93% of taxes!!! The bottom 50% of people pay just 3% of the taxes collected in these United States. May I reiterate that 10% of the population of this country pay for 70% of the taxes collected? So how should we make it more "fair and just?"
I would also like to remind Ms. vanden Heuvel and others who think that we should pay for everyones' health care that this is called socialism. This is the type of health programs that they have in Canada, England, etc. I would like to cite a personal story in regard to this. I have a friend whose daughter resides in Canada. When she needed an MRI concerning her seizure condition, the wait was 4 months.
Ms. vanden Heuval's suggestion that we "cut billions from wasteful defense budgets that empty our treasury without making us more secure," made me wonder if her letter was even serious. (Are you serious??? - thanks SNL) Countries without militaries to protect them quickly become victims of the ambitions of other countries, victims of rebellion, victims of lawlessness... need I go on? Well, I won't tonight. I'm tired. I'll continue my shouting and yelling (jk) another day.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Oh the fun of receiving government money! Can I have some?
Okay, so Detroit got some of what they were looking for. Lucky Dogs. Looks like Obama has decided that increasing taxes isn't viable at this juncture. So now, we too may get "something" in the form of tax cuts, etc. But what brings me to write this particular post is an article I am reading in the Readers Digest. It is in the November 2008 issue and is authored by Michael Crowley. I am beginning to think that some of the biggest winners of government money (money that is paid for by the taxed) are the people who pay meager sums for flood insurance (through the national flood insurance program) while living in places prone to flooding. Yes, this insurance program is paid for by the people for the people--the people who live in flood zones. These people then promptly rebuild on the same spot that they were just flooded out of. The real darling thing about this program isn't just that the program is deeply in debt now what with Katrina, Rita, etc. recently, it isn't the low premiums paid for this program (which regular insurance companies won't touch), but it is probably that some of these people make multiple claims over the years. Yes, multiple floods, multiple claims. One example from the article (and this one is a gem) is of a house owner in Houston whose house has flooded 16 times and has made claims of over $807,000. (The title of this regular feature in Readers Digest?: Outrageous! Pertinent, don't you think?)
And now Obama is going about the country trying to get support for his new $800 billion or so for bailout/relief. What happened to Obama's cry that we are in debt so bad because of the war that we cannot possibly think of spending more money (while at the same time saying that we need to make sure that everyone has access to affordable healthcare). So if we are so badly in debt as a nation, then why would we spend money on subsidizing healthcare and bailing out companies who may not be viable? The federal government was not founded to provide its citizens with money. Now, certainly there are things that need to be done by a federal government such as providing for a military with which to protect our country as a whole. But my point is that the federal government was not meant to be a mommy-type who would wash and bandage our owies and take care of our every need. Even if this was what the federal government was for, this type of action does not lead to the development of responsible, independent, self-confident individuals. It leads to needy individuals who think that they need a handout when they don't have what the responsible individuals have (who "have" because they worked for it).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
