Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Barak Obama: DON'T TELL Me You're Going to Break Another Campaign Promise


"The American people don't want the American military to be used to advance a liberal political agenda," Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) told the Associated Press.


Hey Tea Partiers! Did you know that civil liberties are just one more part of Obama's socialist political agenda?

It infuriates me how little people care about principles in their politics. For many of Washington's elected officials and populists around the nation, ethics and values are deemed insignificant in comparison to self-preservation. Many individuals make their decisions based not on what they believe in, but what is most convenient and beneficial to themselves. Why do you think Californians in their direct legislation through propositions consistently vote for more social programs and less taxation? If one doesn't have a firm set of values or principles that dictate life's most difficult decisions, self-interest becomes the primary manipulator of choice.

Rants aside, Obama looks like he's finally going to put Don't Ask, Don't Tell on the legislative table. For all intensive purposes, both houses of congress should bite on a bill that repeals the dated tradition that allows homosexuals to lose their right to serve in the military if their sexual identity becomes known to other members of the armed forces. This policy discharges soldiers who make their personal life public, but there are instances when military officials have been released because of private emails. The argument supporting this measure supposes that homosexuality could disrupt military cohesion and create barriers between personnel serving our nation despite little evidence backing this claim.

Obama promised during the course of his campaign that he would revoke this draconian discrimination, but after reversing course on other campaign commitments, the GLBT community was worried that this pledge would be forgotten. Realizing the need to stimulate support from his liberal base, the Obama administration knew that there was no time better than the present to pass this reform, especially now that Financial Reform has passed the senate and is in reconciliation.

While it may be a political ploy, I'm just glad this is finally getting addressed. Civil rights passed more than forty years ago, and its absurd to think that discrimination against a protected class is still legal, especially in, what many consider, the primary bureaucracy of our government. If someone is a competent and loyal member of our military willing to sacrifice his or her flesh and blood, how unbelievable cruel of the US to not accept an aspect of his or her identity that does not affect performance. We are taking away the most noble service and display of citizenry on the grounds that their sexual preference might make someone feel icky. Every part of it is utterly unjust and filled with prejudice as individuals are stereotyped into a group as their freedom to be themselves is usurped from them.

Its incredibly disheartening to see that this sort of discrimination is still active in America. I have a dream...

To put a more personal face on the issue, please watch this interview and tell me that you would not want this man serving in the military.



If you still see the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell as just another left-wing agenda, please explain your rationale to me. I, apparently, just don't get how this is America.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Breaking Down the Jargon: Leverage, Derivatives, and Further Proof that America Needs Financial Reform

While I'm going to leave the explanation of the dangers of leverage to Ezra Klein and derivatives to Cenk Uygar, I just wanted to comment on the fact that these convoluted issues are exactly why the Invisible Hand fails. A free-market system is said to regulate itself because consumers will make the best decision and those offering bad deals will either go bankrupt or change their policies to meet consumer demand. Instead of facilitating consumer understand, the financial industry intentionally creates complicated jargon that reads like a foreign language to the average investor or credit card holder. Is this ethical? Of course not, but these groups are just being "socially responsible" to their stock holders by trying to earn as much money as possible. In other words, corporations are claiming to make those rich enough to invest in them wealthier by exploiting the limited financial literacy of the average American. If this sounds like its creating greater fiscal inequality, it's cause it is. And of course, when this fraud works, company executives are obligated to compensate themselves to the tune of multi-million dollar bonuses for successfully deceiving their customers.

Yeah... financial reform is necessary. As long as corporate greed exists, regulation will be needed to protect the consumer.



Let me digress from the issue at hand by saying that in this exchange on financial reform with contract lawyer Elizabeth Warren, Colbert shows why he is 1000x better at interviews than his former master Jon Stewart. He channels his charisma into the interviewee while still provoking stimulating and informative discourse. Even if this point is defended by the fact Colbert creates pseudo-debates because of his satirical conservative persona, its still much better TV.

Alas, enjoy!