I've added in the sermon that I gave last week. I'm posting it here not because I think its necessarily good, but because I preach to a bunch of strangers (not really strangers but whatever) and my family and friends aren't there. The whole thing seems kinda weird to me. oh well.
The sermons on the first part of Mark 10. We've been going through the whole book of Mark this year. It's actually an extremely political book that is extremely critical of the powers that be in their world. It's critical of Rome, the temple, and anyone with power inside that system. The text is cool and I tried to find that dynamic in Jesus' teaching on divorce.
Well, here it is. I tried to make it interesting. Read it, let me know what you think.
...and i really hope my attempt to convert a word document to a pdf then embed the pdf into blogger will be successful. I'm a nerd so ask me how to do it if you want to know how. you can click on "more" to save it and read it easier or click on "scribd" to read it in full view there. enjoy
A Difficult Question Mark 10
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
First off, congratulations to Steven. You're lucky just to have Jessica talk to you let alone be willing to spend her life with you. Congrats!
Second, I went to an immigration town hall meeting at my church the other day. Congressman Moran (D -VA) was there as well as representatives from a number of immigrant groups, labor groups, and ethnic groups. The church was packed - about 300 or so, much more than we get on a sunday morning. There weren't any anti-immigration reform people there because they live out in castles far away from my church. They wouldn't have gotten the best reception among all the undocumented workers and immigrants in the church anyway.
We made the local news. Here's the link.
You can see me and loren in the far back left when they show the church. we're pretty much the only white people there.
Jim Moran was also the guy at the health care town hall i went to about a month ago. I'm not the biggest fan of everything he does, but I walked out of both town halls genuinely impressed with him.
Second, I went to an immigration town hall meeting at my church the other day. Congressman Moran (D -VA) was there as well as representatives from a number of immigrant groups, labor groups, and ethnic groups. The church was packed - about 300 or so, much more than we get on a sunday morning. There weren't any anti-immigration reform people there because they live out in castles far away from my church. They wouldn't have gotten the best reception among all the undocumented workers and immigrants in the church anyway.
We made the local news. Here's the link.
You can see me and loren in the far back left when they show the church. we're pretty much the only white people there.
Jim Moran was also the guy at the health care town hall i went to about a month ago. I'm not the biggest fan of everything he does, but I walked out of both town halls genuinely impressed with him.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Axis of Awesome
Good for Iran! I see all this coverage (mostly on Sullivan's blog, the one who seems to be best covering it) of the Iranians protesting the election results and it really makes me excited. Their lives are in danger and they still are taking it to the streets. That election was more rigged than Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Lakers and Kings. I knew Ahminajeadhfsidfhad was an asshole, but now he took it to a new level. I hope they run that little man out of town.
It makes me wonder though, would we do that in our country? Would we risk our lives to stand up for liberty and freedom? We have done it in the past (1776 in the orginal 13, 1836 in Texas, and even the misguided 1861 Southern attempt), but would we risk it all again? I don't know if we would. The election of 2000 was a bit dubious, and nobody seemed concerned. Minnesota still doesn't have a senator, but no protestors there. Polls showed that a great majority of Californians supported same sex marriage, but those supporters didn't show up on election day. Not to sound like a TV pundit, but Americans have had liberty and prosperity for so long, we really do take it for granted. This is why it is so inspiring to see people march in the streets in Iran despite beatdowns by riot police, random arrests, and attacks by crazed militias.
It makes me wonder though, would we do that in our country? Would we risk our lives to stand up for liberty and freedom? We have done it in the past (1776 in the orginal 13, 1836 in Texas, and even the misguided 1861 Southern attempt), but would we risk it all again? I don't know if we would. The election of 2000 was a bit dubious, and nobody seemed concerned. Minnesota still doesn't have a senator, but no protestors there. Polls showed that a great majority of Californians supported same sex marriage, but those supporters didn't show up on election day. Not to sound like a TV pundit, but Americans have had liberty and prosperity for so long, we really do take it for granted. This is why it is so inspiring to see people march in the streets in Iran despite beatdowns by riot police, random arrests, and attacks by crazed militias.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Steven, Donald Rumsfeld just called and said that your plan to prosecute was an overreaction and not well thought out - colin powell just confirmed. Your reaction here just made CNN's new director of swine flu research blush. You're acting like a nba ref in lakers/rockets game 4.
Just to preface, I believe that:
You can claim that prosecuting a president is the same thing as prosecuting Lynndie England, but you know better than that. Prosecuting a president who's been out office for four months is not the same thing as prosecuting Lynddie England. Any claim otherwise is dumb. We all know that you know better than that.
There may come a time and a place to prosecute Bush and high level officials, but the outcome would be highly politicized and divisive if you did it now. We're still engaged in places where this occurred. We still have people in office, in the military and in CIA that were there in the last administration (Gates for example). The ultimate result would be that people would believe that prosecuting would occur solely for political reasons. If a former president went to prison and people thought that he went to prison on the basis of his politics, then there would be a massive fallout. You think the political climate is bad now? Go ahead and prosecute a president and high level officials four months out of office, during a war where the tide seems to be turning in one place for the better and another for the worse and see what happens.
It seems like the only logical thing to do when it comes to prosecution is wait. Gather more information, more evidence and present it to the American public. If this is a clear case of torture as you describe it, then the public will make that decision on their own. Only then, much later, will the political fallout not be so incredibly disastrous and the international fallout not be so incredibly devastating. To me, all of that does not seem worth it right now, just because you believe that it will prevent people like Obama from acting like they're above the law. (Do you honestly think that what happened to Nixon didn't influence later president's behavior? Was he prosecuted?)
To be honest, I think it's hilarious that Democrats are acting like we should prosecute Bush because he "wiped his ass with the constitution" and "violated international law" as if this is the first time that this ever happened. We've been violating the constitution for a long time now. We've killed and tortured more people both domestically and abroad for much longer and in a much larger scope than this. The only reason this is getting play is because its politically advantagous. It's not advantagous to question presidents declaring unjust war when they are never given that authority (every war since WWII). It's not advantagous to point out that our protectionist trade policy impoverishes millions. And it's not advantagous to point out that our economic sanctions against the people that we don't like empower their rulers and kill their citizens. If anything is torture - it's that, but we don't talk about that. You want to prosecute for abuse, start with your boy jefferson who enabled millions of African Americans to spend their whole lives with sleep deprivation, stress positions, beatings, rape and perpetual enslavement. Jefferson wouldn't kick Bush in the balls, he would have his slave do it for him. There will be long term ramifications of Bush's torture, but the ramifications of the founders torture is still present.
Nevermind the fact, that there is no good definition for torture anyway. I think water boarding is torture. But prove that it is. Seriously, go ahead. You can't. Torture doesn't have a clear meaning. If we should be calling for anything, it should be to clearly define what is torture and what it isn't. Citing specific actions and laying out clear conditions.
Both of you seem to want serious systemic change in the system. You seem to want a change in drug policy, nanny policies, torture, foreign policy, and social issues. If this is the case, why did you vote for someone who in no way would EVER make any of those changes? Both of you guys studied marketing. How can you not have noticed that he's selling the same crap in a different package?
btw Steven, don't rip off bill Simmons title of "Back at you" in his email with Malcolm Gladwell. you really think i wouldn't notice that? subtle, maybe non-intentional, but simmons is seriously in your head.
Just to preface, I believe that:
- Water boarding is torture
- Stress Positions can be torture
- The totality of what we did to these people is torture
- Torture is morally justifiable in a ticking time bomb scenario
- We have not faced a ticking time bomb scenario, nor will we (real life isn't 24)
- Even if morally justifiable, it is still illegal
You can claim that prosecuting a president is the same thing as prosecuting Lynndie England, but you know better than that. Prosecuting a president who's been out office for four months is not the same thing as prosecuting Lynddie England. Any claim otherwise is dumb. We all know that you know better than that.
There may come a time and a place to prosecute Bush and high level officials, but the outcome would be highly politicized and divisive if you did it now. We're still engaged in places where this occurred. We still have people in office, in the military and in CIA that were there in the last administration (Gates for example). The ultimate result would be that people would believe that prosecuting would occur solely for political reasons. If a former president went to prison and people thought that he went to prison on the basis of his politics, then there would be a massive fallout. You think the political climate is bad now? Go ahead and prosecute a president and high level officials four months out of office, during a war where the tide seems to be turning in one place for the better and another for the worse and see what happens.
It seems like the only logical thing to do when it comes to prosecution is wait. Gather more information, more evidence and present it to the American public. If this is a clear case of torture as you describe it, then the public will make that decision on their own. Only then, much later, will the political fallout not be so incredibly disastrous and the international fallout not be so incredibly devastating. To me, all of that does not seem worth it right now, just because you believe that it will prevent people like Obama from acting like they're above the law. (Do you honestly think that what happened to Nixon didn't influence later president's behavior? Was he prosecuted?)
To be honest, I think it's hilarious that Democrats are acting like we should prosecute Bush because he "wiped his ass with the constitution" and "violated international law" as if this is the first time that this ever happened. We've been violating the constitution for a long time now. We've killed and tortured more people both domestically and abroad for much longer and in a much larger scope than this. The only reason this is getting play is because its politically advantagous. It's not advantagous to question presidents declaring unjust war when they are never given that authority (every war since WWII). It's not advantagous to point out that our protectionist trade policy impoverishes millions. And it's not advantagous to point out that our economic sanctions against the people that we don't like empower their rulers and kill their citizens. If anything is torture - it's that, but we don't talk about that. You want to prosecute for abuse, start with your boy jefferson who enabled millions of African Americans to spend their whole lives with sleep deprivation, stress positions, beatings, rape and perpetual enslavement. Jefferson wouldn't kick Bush in the balls, he would have his slave do it for him. There will be long term ramifications of Bush's torture, but the ramifications of the founders torture is still present.
Nevermind the fact, that there is no good definition for torture anyway. I think water boarding is torture. But prove that it is. Seriously, go ahead. You can't. Torture doesn't have a clear meaning. If we should be calling for anything, it should be to clearly define what is torture and what it isn't. Citing specific actions and laying out clear conditions.
Both of you seem to want serious systemic change in the system. You seem to want a change in drug policy, nanny policies, torture, foreign policy, and social issues. If this is the case, why did you vote for someone who in no way would EVER make any of those changes? Both of you guys studied marketing. How can you not have noticed that he's selling the same crap in a different package?
btw Steven, don't rip off bill Simmons title of "Back at you" in his email with Malcolm Gladwell. you really think i wouldn't notice that? subtle, maybe non-intentional, but simmons is seriously in your head.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Back at you
Adam, I don't understand how prosecuting high level Bush Admin officials would set a bad precedent. I think it would set an excellent precedent. I hope that every time an administration leaves power, the new ones investigate the hell out of them. That way, they will think twice before breaking laws and abusing power. You know what I think is bad precedent? Wiping your ass with the Constitution and getting away with it. What is to stop Obama or future presidents from acting like they are above the law? Nothing.
The logic is pretty simple. Torture is against international law (not to mention the 5th and 8th amendment of the Bill of Rights). The President authorized torture. The President is not above the law. Therefore, the President broke the law. He should be prosecuted for it. Lynndie England went to prison after Abu Ghraib for following orders that came from the top. George Bush relaxes comfortably in Highland Park. Seems pretty unfair to me.
Disclaimer: I like Ellen too. She is an excellent person who works hard in the community to help battered women. I help nobody, drink beer, eat tacos, and blog by myself. I just disagree with legislating morality in principle.
If you don't like basketball or baseball, then too bad! B/c Craig and I will continue blogging about them so we can keep our minds of the daily grind of toiling over ancient religious texts or talking to grease monkeys about air conditioners. I'm with you on hockey though. It is a combination of the two worst sports ever: soccer and figure skating.
The logic is pretty simple. Torture is against international law (not to mention the 5th and 8th amendment of the Bill of Rights). The President authorized torture. The President is not above the law. Therefore, the President broke the law. He should be prosecuted for it. Lynndie England went to prison after Abu Ghraib for following orders that came from the top. George Bush relaxes comfortably in Highland Park. Seems pretty unfair to me.
Disclaimer: I like Ellen too. She is an excellent person who works hard in the community to help battered women. I help nobody, drink beer, eat tacos, and blog by myself. I just disagree with legislating morality in principle.
If you don't like basketball or baseball, then too bad! B/c Craig and I will continue blogging about them so we can keep our minds of the daily grind of toiling over ancient religious texts or talking to grease monkeys about air conditioners. I'm with you on hockey though. It is a combination of the two worst sports ever: soccer and figure skating.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Reactive Thoughts
To respond to my brothers' latest blog entries:
- I don't care about basketball. Or baseball. Or hockey. Just a little bit of football and I'm good for the year in sports.
- We will not win any "war on drugs." Legalize pot.
- Release the torture photos. Don't prosecute anyone for war crimes. It sets a bad precedent and won't accomplish much.
- Legislatures, whether part-time or full-time, will always waste money. Two things can combat this: term limits and the line-item veto.
- I like Ellen Whatshername, but the strip club tax was dumb. And I don't even go to strip clubs.
Supreme Mistake
Republican fundraisers are foaming at the mouth for Obama's nomination to the Supreme Court. No matter who he chooses, their attacks will be swift and loud. Political commentators, lobbyists, blowhards and unknown Senators looking to make a name for themselves will bemoan little known quotes from far and away speeches. They will rip and twist every written opinion covering abortion or gay rights (the two issues that defines today's Republican party). They will do it not because they know they can defeat his candidate, but to raise money making a stink about it. It's sad that this is the Republican's next big opportunity to gain some traction - by tearing someone down, rallying evangelicals and deep South conservatives on divisive issues and by seeing how many times they can say the word "activist judge" in one sentence.
My point, however, is my two cents on Obama's pick. There is some talk that Obama might try to go "outside the box" and pick a non-judge - a politician, an attorney, a political ally. Rumors that Governor Granholm is visiting the White House tomorrow and is on the "short list" are adding fuel to the fire of an out of left field pick. I truly hope he doesn't. Granted, I'm no constitutional expert, but deciding cases that make it to that level is tough. And boring. It takes someone that loves the law, has been deciding these things for years, if not decades. While I may not agree with Scalia's decisions, I don't believe he wants to overturn Roe v. Wade because he's pro-life, but because of he has a specific view of the Constitution. He's intellectually honest and while I may disagree with his reasoning, he is truly trying to interpret the Constitution, not make policy. Appointing politicians will politicize the Court from the inside out and it's the wrong path to go down.
Was college a mistake?
Hernan thinks so. In fact, Hernan says that he would have rather gone to prison than have gone to college. Now those Californians are a little nutty, but he makes a good point.
I recently received my 10 year high school reunion reminder and it made me think. Ten years ago, I didn't have a dime to my name. But, I was debt free. Ten years later, I have six figures in student loan debt, an undisclosed amount on credit cards, one mortgage for a house I don't have my name on, one mortgage for a house I don't live in AND I'm looking to buy a car by the end of the year.
Our parents were great and I came out of undergrad with no debt. But law school? I honestly question every single day whether it was a good decision or not. Do I really want to be an attorney? Not really. It just seemed fun at the time. Sure I love the law and politics and I'm sure it will help me the rest of my life, but an accounting, medical or masseuse degree would have helped me to0. I don't regret going but I'll be making that payment for a very long time. Was it worth it? Probably not. But I won't make that mistake again.
P.S. It's sad that Hernan think that $30,000 is a lot in student loans.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
War on Drugs
Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting the same results. We seem to be doing just that with the war on drugs. I had hoped that Obama would change that approach, but he has not. We continue to crowd prisons, manufacture criminals, subvert foreign governments, and kill people. Why? Because drugs are bad, mkay?
17 miles from my apartment lies Tijuana, a city of 1.4 million people. The place is so close, I can see it from the top of the hill on a clear day. This city is being destroyed by drug cartels. In 2004 there were 355 murders in Tijuana. In 2008 there were 843. And the murder rate is still increasing. By contrast, Houston had 335 homicides in 2008, and Houston is twice as big and has better much better homicide reporting. It is esitmated that 60% of the drug cartels income in Mexico comes from marijuana. So you want to stop the drug cartels from killing people? Then legalize marijuana.
I actually think we should legalize all drugs in some form, but that is an entirely different post for another day. Marijuana is the easiest since it much less harmful than alcohol. Also it can make us tax revenue and not destroy people's lives when they fail a preemployment drug screen or can't get into college because they have a criminal record for smoking a plant. Maybe the next president might do it.
17 miles from my apartment lies Tijuana, a city of 1.4 million people. The place is so close, I can see it from the top of the hill on a clear day. This city is being destroyed by drug cartels. In 2004 there were 355 murders in Tijuana. In 2008 there were 843. And the murder rate is still increasing. By contrast, Houston had 335 homicides in 2008, and Houston is twice as big and has better much better homicide reporting. It is esitmated that 60% of the drug cartels income in Mexico comes from marijuana. So you want to stop the drug cartels from killing people? Then legalize marijuana.
I actually think we should legalize all drugs in some form, but that is an entirely different post for another day. Marijuana is the easiest since it much less harmful than alcohol. Also it can make us tax revenue and not destroy people's lives when they fail a preemployment drug screen or can't get into college because they have a criminal record for smoking a plant. Maybe the next president might do it.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
All we want to do is eat your brains
Eddie was in New Orleans last week and I found myself looking for something to do. Rashee to the rescue! We caught a concert last Wednesday night - Jonathan Coulton. You guys should definitely check him out. Supposedly a computer programmer turned rockstar, his songs range from suicidal vampires to creepy dolls, from outer space to zombies.
Suggested songs:
- Re: your brains
- First of May
- Skullcrusher Mountain
- Code Monkey
- The Future Soon
Awesome!
Friday, May 15, 2009
Beware False Prophets
Or as a former investor of Citigroup, beware of false profits. Craig, I will give you credit to the fact that your wild prediction of Rockets in 7 may in fact come into fruition. I thought they would lose it to 6. As for Dad, he is old and kind of confused. He told me that Battier was a good defender, but there was no way he could keep Jerry West in check. He also told me that James Worthy and Kurt Rambis would give us matchup problems. Anyways, I'm going to fire off a few opinions. Feel free to comment.
Torture - Like Craig and Dad, I read a lot of Andrew Sullivan. Unlike Craig and probably Dad (he is a Republican), I believe top level people in the Bush Administration should be tried for war crimes. This includes the prez himself who signed off on the whole thing. We executed Japanese soldiers for waterboarding Americans after WWII. Stress positions, sleep deprivation (at least the way we did it), and waterboarding are torture. Torture is illegal, inhumane, ineffective, and indefensible. If Jefferson was alive he would kick Cheney in the balls. This is America after all. BTW, Obama needs to grow a pair and stamp this out once and for all. He needs to release the pictures, hold hearings, and go after these guys. Don't look the other way.
NBA Playoffs - LeBron is Jesus. Kobe is Satan. The Rockets are amazing. I have watched the Rockets for as long as I can remember, and I have never seen a team with as much heart as this one. And Shane Battier is a man and a half. Kobe keeps talking trash to him for some reason, and Shane says nothing. Blank face. And Therapist goes 11-27 in game 6. Doin' work I guess.
California - The state government of California spends money like Adam Moore with his Visa at Nordstrom's Rack. My solution: Switch to a system like Texas. Instead of a full time legislature we should have our representatives meet 6 months every 2 years. This gives our representatives less time to pass bills with pet projects. With a full time system, we end up spending $500 million on health insurance for whales because Hippie Q. McFreakington from Eureka feels like he needs to do something. Texas still has pork projects passed that anger libertarians (paging Ellen whatshername from Houston and the strip club tax), but there are less time to get them through. Also, we have an action movie star as a governor. I still think he is better than Perry though.
Enough for today. Maybe I will complete this tomorrow. Or in two months.
Torture - Like Craig and Dad, I read a lot of Andrew Sullivan. Unlike Craig and probably Dad (he is a Republican), I believe top level people in the Bush Administration should be tried for war crimes. This includes the prez himself who signed off on the whole thing. We executed Japanese soldiers for waterboarding Americans after WWII. Stress positions, sleep deprivation (at least the way we did it), and waterboarding are torture. Torture is illegal, inhumane, ineffective, and indefensible. If Jefferson was alive he would kick Cheney in the balls. This is America after all. BTW, Obama needs to grow a pair and stamp this out once and for all. He needs to release the pictures, hold hearings, and go after these guys. Don't look the other way.
NBA Playoffs - LeBron is Jesus. Kobe is Satan. The Rockets are amazing. I have watched the Rockets for as long as I can remember, and I have never seen a team with as much heart as this one. And Shane Battier is a man and a half. Kobe keeps talking trash to him for some reason, and Shane says nothing. Blank face. And Therapist goes 11-27 in game 6. Doin' work I guess.
California - The state government of California spends money like Adam Moore with his Visa at Nordstrom's Rack. My solution: Switch to a system like Texas. Instead of a full time legislature we should have our representatives meet 6 months every 2 years. This gives our representatives less time to pass bills with pet projects. With a full time system, we end up spending $500 million on health insurance for whales because Hippie Q. McFreakington from Eureka feels like he needs to do something. Texas still has pork projects passed that anger libertarians (paging Ellen whatshername from Houston and the strip club tax), but there are less time to get them through. Also, we have an action movie star as a governor. I still think he is better than Perry though.
Enough for today. Maybe I will complete this tomorrow. Or in two months.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
the prophet
Who was right?
That's right... that guy
Woe to you who thought that we couldn't beat the Lakers. The great Larry Moore predicted a sweep of the Rockets. The Great Steven (who is apparently not back) has predicted a the Lakers in 5.
The mighty prophet Craig boldly predicts the Rockets in 7 (but secretly guessed the lakers in 6). The might prophet Craig predicted the Rockets would win Game 1
Craig shows his amazing sports knowledge and foresight yet again and the false prophets are silenced. Craig "Isaiah/Jeremiah" Moore is victorious again
anyone think we got a shot?
That's right... that guy
Woe to you who thought that we couldn't beat the Lakers. The great Larry Moore predicted a sweep of the Rockets. The Great Steven (who is apparently not back) has predicted a the Lakers in 5.
The mighty prophet Craig boldly predicts the Rockets in 7 (but secretly guessed the lakers in 6). The might prophet Craig predicted the Rockets would win Game 1
Craig shows his amazing sports knowledge and foresight yet again and the false prophets are silenced. Craig "Isaiah/Jeremiah" Moore is victorious again
anyone think we got a shot?
Sunday, March 22, 2009
The Great Steven is Back!!!!
Some people still read this blog. And for the record I have the following assets:
- Xbox 360
- Gizmo (pictured)
- Cheesehat (pictured, gift from Jessica's mom)
- Snuggie (www.getsnuggie.com)
Quick thoughts by me.....
1) Fareed Zakaria's Sunday morning show is awesome
Today they had Eliot Spitzer on, the most effective prosecutor of financial corruption that ever lived. Spitzer's contention is that we don't neccessarily need more laws on the books to regulate Wall Street, its just that the regulators need more creativity/gumption/balls. Can't we get this guy some sort of job in the Obama administration? Who cares if he likes the hookers? I was excited when the Rockets traded for Ron Artest even though he physically assualted an innocent fan. The reason: he makes the Rockets win more games. And assault is WAY worse than picking up a hooker.
2) By paying the retention bonuses, AIG made thing much worse for them/us in the long run
AIG did not act in their best interests by paying those bonuses. It is politically impossible for lawmakes to let this stand. So they passed a clawback bill that will have a bunch of terrible unintended consequences. And retention bonuses? Who cares if AIG retains the decision makers who laid out AIGs business plan of insuring corporate debt like it was a car or a house. Let them find a better job if they want to skip. I'm sure having AIG Vice President on your resume opens a lot of doors for you. Giving these guys a retention bonus is akin to resigning Tracy McGrady to a 5 year contract, or voting for George W. Bush a 2nd time (sorry Dad).
3) The Astros will be awesome
Mike Hampton? Aaron Boone? Pudge Rodriguez? LaTroy Hawkins? I think the Astros will be great. Of course I just woke up from a coma I have been in since 1999.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Shane Battier is the best player of all time
...okay, maybe not.
I loved Moneyball by Michael Lewis. He just wrote an article for New York Magazine on Daryl Morey the Rockets general manager and apparently the next coming of Billy Beane (but still yet to win a playoff game).
His analysis, which he won't share, indicate that Shane Battier, despite his inability to score points, get rebounds, blocks, steals, assists or any other stat that we would find important, is still an unbelievable player. No one knows why, except for the Rockets office.
The article is long, but was easily the best article of any kind that I have read in a long, long time. And since I'm in grad school and sit in class for 3 hours at a time, I read lots of articles. Check it out.
check out the article here
Also, Morey was on Bill Simmons podcast. check it out here (hour long).
no one reads this blog anymore. so here goes:
The Rockets will win a playoff series
The Texans will make the playoffs next year
The Colts will not (the jags will as well - with MJD being the best rb in the AFC)
The Astros will suck
As the Dow Jones numbers return to 1997 numbers, so will Mike Hamptons stats.
A&M will lose in the first round of the tournament - so will Texas
Obama has done a poor job so far.
He's also done exactly what he promised (despite promising contradictory things)
The Republican response has been even worse.
Rush will run for President in 2012.
The same state that voted for Huckabee, will vote for Rush - so will brazos county
The libertarians will elect an insanely libertarian candidate that appeals to no one but ayn rand and anarchists
Craig will vote for that person.
Steven will fall in love with a new financial guru who is somehow more incorrect about the market than Jim Cramer
Steven will lose all of his air conditioning cash.
Adam will foreclose on Steven's assets.
Steven has no assets
Adam will lose his job
lets start this thing up again.
Friday, January 30, 2009
(Buy) America! F*** Yeah!
Before the election, I had a number of arguments about Obama's economic policy. I was largely concerned that he would advance protectionist policies that while expanding some blue collar US jobs, would ultimately increase costs, reduce jobs in other sectors, and further impoverish other countries where cheap labor jobs are bringing about change to systemic poverty (hint: China)
During the general election, Obama's anti-free trade and protectionist rhetoric disappeared and seemed to approach a sense of rationality that has evaded most politicians in my memory. I still disagreed with much of what he said, but he didn't sound like an idiot while saying so. I became less concerned as his advisers seemed to be free traders as often happens from Chicago-school economists. I worried even less when I heard that his economic advisers told Canadian leaders that his anti-NAFTA talk was just election rhetoric and would not actually represent policy changes. (I worried more about his honesty, but that's a different matter).
But now, push comes to shove and with the soon to come stimulus bill, key lobbies and politicians are pushing their own agendas and many are adding patently stupid failed policies that have been tried in the past and have been met with failure. Policies that any respectable academic economist would tell you is a ticket for higher costs, fewer jobs, and disaster abroad. (Why is it that the left in this country loves to be the party of science in reference to evolution, religion & personhood, but with economics, they would rather listen to "Joe the Auto-worker" than nobel prize winners?)
The timesonline.uk reports... Link here
During the general election, Obama's anti-free trade and protectionist rhetoric disappeared and seemed to approach a sense of rationality that has evaded most politicians in my memory. I still disagreed with much of what he said, but he didn't sound like an idiot while saying so. I became less concerned as his advisers seemed to be free traders as often happens from Chicago-school economists. I worried even less when I heard that his economic advisers told Canadian leaders that his anti-NAFTA talk was just election rhetoric and would not actually represent policy changes. (I worried more about his honesty, but that's a different matter).
But now, push comes to shove and with the soon to come stimulus bill, key lobbies and politicians are pushing their own agendas and many are adding patently stupid failed policies that have been tried in the past and have been met with failure. Policies that any respectable academic economist would tell you is a ticket for higher costs, fewer jobs, and disaster abroad. (Why is it that the left in this country loves to be the party of science in reference to evolution, religion & personhood, but with economics, they would rather listen to "Joe the Auto-worker" than nobel prize winners?)
The timesonline.uk reports... Link here
Now, prodded by America's mighty steel lobby, a key congressional committee has voted, 55-0, to attach a still more rigorous “Buy America” clause to President Obama's stimulus package. It bars federal funding of any public projects “unless all of the iron and steel used is produced in the United States”. The clause could be extended to asphalt, cement, heavy machinery, you name it. US dollars, the committee intones, must be used to create “American jobs in America, not Chinese jobs in China”.I believe that it is time for our president to live up to his general election promises (and break his primary promises) about supporting free trade and avoiding protectionist policies. It is in the midst of economic hardship that we will see what he truly believes about economic policy. I fear that the "Buy America" (and therefore "screw everybody else") policy is what he truly believes and past mistakes will be repeated.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)