it's been a while

yes, i realize it's been close to two months since i updated this thing. i figured i'd better get started on the updates again though, since i'll be heading overseas for 8 weeks soon. and what better way to pretend to care than to read my updates, right? of course right!

okay- so i guess the biggest topics of the day are north korea, sotomayor, and something else i'm sure. i'll get to those all in due time. for now- quick update on personal life stuff. 

um- finished first year of the program. awesome. now i can take classes i actually want to take. no more classes hiding behind names like "international business environment" which is code word for macroecon. thankfully. now i get to take classes like mergers & acquisitions, global logistics, private equity and venture capital, etc. oh- and law for managers and white collar crime. i need one or two easy ones- don't judge! as i just alluded to two paragraphs ago, i'm headed overseas on july 1. i'm going to be at oxford university (yes, the stuffy english one) to participate in a 7 week specialized study program. i figure it looks good on the old resume. the summer "internship" at the smithsonian has gone well. lots of work and lots to do, but i mostly finished what i needed to. nice 73 page document. most i've ever written so far. good stuff, let me tell ya. 

other than that, i've been focusing on my biking and running in an effort to pull off some sort of triathlon event in the fall. oh wait- i haven't even added the swimming portion yet. that'll come when i'm over in oxford without my bike. i think. speaking of bikes- i got tackled/pulled off my bike last week by a pedestrian. have no clue why this man did it, and there's a lot more to the story than that- but that's the shortened version. i was going through a light at about 20mph and the next thing i know i'm being taken down. i will have some pretty rad scarring on my leg at least from the serious road rash. my rear end has finally decided to let me sit down it, so that's nice too. 

okay- what are my thoughts on sotomayor? honestly, i'm sick of both sides posturing about how she's either racist or she's "empathetic." if you know me, you know i could give to shits about how someone "feels" about the law. the law is the law- if you break it, you're deserving of punishment. none of this bullshit about "well let's look at their background" or "i will look at it from the perspective of how i grew up" etc. that's such horseshit and it's one of the reasons other countries think of our law and order system as a joke. 

north korea? bomb em. i'm sorry- i can't read another article about "well, they've built these missles, they're aiming them at us, but we just don't know what their intentions are." are you kidding me? what the hell?!? that's pretty much the same as being held at gunpoint with a man talking about maybe taking your money and you trying to reason with your wife (also being held at gunpoint) "well honey, let's not be too rash, we don't know what his intentions are." yes you do- if his intention wasn't to rob you, he wouldn't be holding a gun to your head. damnit people! wake the hell up!!

and another thing. since when has a sitting president ever gone on a world tour and apologized for our actions. i hate this man. it's not a matter of dislike. it's way past that. i tried, for about 1 minute, to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. but i can't. i wonder if he thought of that apology when he was at his broadway show with his wife. 

sigh. is it time for oxford yet?

this legitimately scares me

how anyone can not be ashamed to read this is beyond me. but, cheer up liberals- now i'm part of a hate group and you should watch out for me. oh- and obama- bring it on! 

okay sometimes i get angry

about certain things that probably don't deserve the level of "anger" i'm experiencing....but here's something that, while hilarious in some respects, makes me angry on others....

okay- so can we all admit now that the only reason barry is a good "speaker" is because he's reading the crap other people wrote for him to say? and can we admit that it's embarrassing to have our leader rely on a teleprompter for something like that?

okay- now for the anger part...you cannot tell me that if this had happened to president bush, the media would have let this go. no- we all know, even you hard core liberals who somehow managed to stick with me so far (you know, with me using logic and all i hope you haven't gotten confused)- know that front page of the new york times would have been some comment about how stupid president bush was because of this type of gaffe. don't believe me? how many times have we been subjected to listening to any of president bush's "flubs" while libs laugh and knee slap and say "see look- he's a retard"...but yet, the only people talking about dear leader's flub is the foreign press. interesting...

i think i need to stop reading the news for a while and focus on class....

wow!

so the talk today is all about the fed's trillion dollar stimulus. i have to laugh at this, not because it's funny, but because i see this as a huge opportunity for republicans, which they will no doubt squander. wake up! we just passed an $800B stimulus last month and now this is another trillion dollar one. um, so does that mean we can just go right ahead and say the $800B one is a failure already? or that it had nothing to do with stimulus, as we suspected all along, but more about getting pork projects funded so b.o. could say he tried to create jobs and stuff? sigh- this is beginning to get more and more ridiculous. so, in the first 100 days, we're going to have a president who has spent more money (on credit no less) than any other in history in their entire term(s)? is that what we elected? sounds about right. 

another interesting thing to note: as barry was preaching to us about how he felt the pain of the american people and the poor, he signed a $500,000 children's book deal! what the F?! what in god's name is he going to write to children about? 

"dear children. this is the story of how i screwed an entire country out of their existence by somehow imagining that throwing money at a problem would make it go away. i can't be held responsible because i only did what i was told and what i thought would be in the best interest of the people. sorry it didn't work out- but don't feel sorry for me- i got paid a shit-ton of money to write this to you."

now this is what makes me mad

see- i make an entry to my blog (see below entry) and within 2 hours i have more to talk about.

this is the sort of thing i'm talking about.  look who's feigning the outrage over aig the most and then look here and see who benefitted the most from aig contributions.  

am i the only person left if this world who sees this kind of stuff?

not sure about this

hmmm. where to start on this lovely morning? should i be outraged at aig like the rest of the world? or should i point out that our dear leader and his cronies have received pay raises this year without any hint of hesitation on their part. hell- not only did they not hesitate, but the esteemed speaker of the house (herein after referred to as skeletor) refused to even hear a petition by other members of congress to perhaps not give themselves a raise.  it was a "nope- we're getting our money regardless" moment if i've ever seen one.  so, once again, it's do as i say, not as i do for these people.  how can members of congress feign such outrage over executive pay and boni (i like that better than bonuses) when they themselves have decided to keep on receiving automatic pay raises.  correct me if i'm wrong, but these members of congress each earn more than $100,000 per year. i remember the average income of an american citizen to somewhere around $55,000 per year. hmm- so congress gets paid more and doesn't have to do anything- hell, i knew there was a reason i wanted that job.

back to aig for a moment. i could care less that they received boni. what i care about is how we're going to move forward and keep stupid investments from becoming the status quo for corporations.  aig didn't do anything immoral or unethical in their investment decisions- they just made bad decisions.  do i think stupidity should be rewarded? of course not. but do i think we have a real issue on our hands when elected officials are pointing fingers at other people instead of themselves? of course. 

yes, i know "my tax dollars went to paying these boni." um- people, our tax dollars go to a lot worse than executive pay. am i happy that people made $1M + after receiving "bailout money" from the government? no, i'm not happy about it. do i think it's morally wrong or unethical? no i don't. so to sit here and read congressmen (who take bribes and stash money in freezers) pontificate about the morality of this situation really gets me miffed. 

sigh. another day in paradise i suppose.

ignorance or arrogance

i've been home in nc for a few days now (whoo- spring break!) and during that time, my family and i have been discussing whether or not dear leader's slight of the british pm amounts to sheer ignorance or intentional arrogance. i say it's arrogance.

oh- you don't know what i'm talking about? no surprise there, since it's only being reported by a few people. here's the long and short of it- when british pm gordon brown came to the u.s. to visit, he was denied an official state dinner and a joint press conference with dear leader, and the white house also denied any british flags from flying or being posted during any television appearances. when asked about why this occurred, an official in the b.o. whitehouse exclaimed "the uk is no more important than any of the other 192 countries of the united nations." wow- so we're turning our back on our staunchest ally. smart move asshole.

oh wait- it gets better. mr. brown brought three priceless gifts to the white house for the american people. one was a pen holder carved from the same wood that the oval office desk was made from (this in itself is quite an exquisite present- look up the details to find out more). another gift was the signed register (commissioning papers) of the same ship and the third gift was a first edition of winston churchill's biography.

what did b.o. get mr. brown? a set of 25 american dvds. seriously. that's the respect he shows. 25 dvds, including the wizard of oz and et. what the f*ck?!!! i wonder if he even gave them region 2 dvds. (if you know about this, great. if not- the easiest was to say it is that dvds only play in certain regions. i can't buy a dvd at best buy here in the u.s. and send it to myself to watch this summer in oxford unless i have that region's dvd player (or my own that i bring with me)). anyway- going on. mrs. brown even brought fashionable/designer english clothing for the girls. you know what skeletor gave her counterpart? some model air force one planes and marine one helicopters. you can buy those in the damn airport!

the real kick in the pants though, and this is where i completely lose it, is this: the day after 9/11, the uk sent the u.s. a bust of winston churchill in a sign of solidarity- to show that they were in this with us. hussein tries to give it back! if that's not bad enough, mr. brown insists that we keep it, or at least put it in a museum. but no- b.o. packed it up and made him take it back!

wow- people- do you even think about this? do you see what you have elected for our leadership? i'm planning on writing mr. brown and the english people (who i'm supposed to hate, since i'm a scot and all) and apologizing for my country. additionally, i'm going to tell him i work for the smithsonian and i'll gladly place the bust in the museum. and i'll beg and plead with him to send the dvds to me (i'll take 25 dvds to fill my collection) and i'll organize a gift drive here in the u.s. that will embarrass and shame the new administration.

so- as the family has been discussing, and as my dad so eloquently put it last night- "any uneducated redneck good old boy could come up with a better gift to give a visiting dignitary than our shameful president." i couldn't agree more, dad.

the sheer arrogance of this administration is appalling. when asked about this, the president's voices responded by saying "there's been a glitch in the teleprompter. whenever we get that fixed, we're sure mr. hussein will say something more." oh wait- no, that's not what they said. nevermind. their reply was that the president was exhuasted. from what? throwing parties on wednesday nights in the white house where they dine on wagyu beef? jetting around the country to spread his doom and gloom scenarios, but then spending a weekend with his wife in chicago for valentine's day? what else might make him tired? because i know it's not the job he's been elected to do- he hasn't done anything yet except piss off our best friend in the world. what a moron.

here we go again

okay, as i was sitting in saxbys this morning reviewing my slides for my presentation (i need coffee today as i was too amped up last night to sleep), i caught a glimpse on the television of hillary clinton claiming that iran is a serious threat. after getting a mop out of the closet to clean up my mess from dropping coffee all over myself, i still am in awe of the audacity of this move. 

president bush addressed his growing concerns for the possibility of iran (working together with russia perhaps) to become a more hostile nation, and perhaps a future "target" of military force. i remember thinking that bush was going to get slammed for that, and sure enough he did. i also remember that one of the things i found most interesting about clinton's campaign was that she also believed that force might be necessary in iran, and she too, was slammed. however, i hear nothing out of the mouths of the current administration, which previously believed thusly.

so, i wonder what b.o.'s response will be. we just had the secretary of state publicly claim that iran may be a serious threat and may warrant our response. of course, she probably means sanctions and wrist slaps (the typical liberal response of course), but then again, this could set the stage for a showdown between the department of state and the white house. i for one would welcome it, because maybe (okay- i know i'm stretching this way too much, because we all know it would never happen)- but just maybe, some actual journalism will occur and people will stop giving b.o. a free pass on everything he does. maybe someone will actually do something with their paycheck (hey- if you don't want it, i'll take it!) and report the facts and not some imaginary version of what's really going on.

i think i lost it a bit there at the end. eh- screw it. i'm working on my slides now.

joy

after god knows how many resume edits, sleepless nights spent searching "mba-internship-finance-"insert city here", and countless informational interviews- i finally got some long needed news. after a 10 minute interview at the smithsonian, they offered me the position of high potentate. oh wait- i mean, unpaid intern. that's right people- i'm now working for free. oops- i guess that's everyone these days in his highness' realm. but, i won't actually see a paycheck. drat- foiled again- neither will most people i know. 

okay- honestly, let's just say i am strangely relieved. of course i'm still freaking out about the normal things one usually needs money for- bike equipment, $400 gucci loafers. oh- i mean- food, water, and shelter. without an actual income, i'm considering thumbing my nose at the man and either a) going on unemployment for the summer or b) asking for food stamps and federal housing assistance. wouldn't that just take the cake? wait- who said cake? i'm hungry.

but, again- i am happy that all my work has come to something tangible. as it stands now, i will be performing financial models and revenue forecasting for the smithsonian. if all goes well, let's hope i impress enough people to land some interviews or something for next year. i decided to take the offer (as i knew i would anyway) based on the opportunities that might arise from this chance. while only god knows how long we'll continue to flounder around in this financial mess- i cannot in good faith turn something like this down. if all that happens from this is i complete my task and get a firm handshake- the fact that i'll be contributing to something far more important than myself will make me happy. 

while having a discussion with a friend the other night, i was asked what i'm passionate about. my response bordered on the typical guy things- "cars, outdoor activities, etc." but the more i thought about it, the more i realized there are two things i really enjoy in this life- one is making other people laugh (often times at my own expense- but hey, who cares). and the second, as cheesy as it sounds, is to know that i made a difference (albeit even a small one) in someone else's life- particularly young kids. wait a minute, you ask- what does this job offer have to do with any of that? well- i knew going into this interview that the smithsonian funds all kinds of science projects (and all sorts of other things) for disadvantaged children throughout the country. these things aren't cheap, and they require donor funding to keep going. (wait- does this sound like the commercials between sesame street yet?) but in any event, if my contribution to this organization is that i help them realize future revenue growth which in turn can help fund these programs or provide more exhibits for learning, then i'm all for that.

now that my parents have probably fallen over dead for thinking i have turned into some liberal wacko talking about "what about the children" - i think it's time i'll explain some things. do i agree with every exhibit the smithsonian puts up? hell no. do i think there needs to be a museum dedicated to the creationist viewpoint since we have the evolutionary standard everywhere else? well- it would be fantastic, but i doubt it will ever happen. do i believe the earth is warming rapidly and we're the cause? abso-freakin-lutely not!  so then, one might ask, why would i work for an organization that promotes these cause?

i remember a long time ago, when i was home schooled, my parents took us to the discovery place in charlotte nc. i remember it vividly, if only because it instilled this incredible respect i had, and still have, for science and math. (yeah- we all know- i'm weird. deal with it).  in all honesty, i can't remember if there were exhibits talking about evolution or creation or whether or not global warming was being preached.  it was the fascination i had with all these different worlds around me that was imprinted on my young (and quite possibly, much smarter) brain. and therefore, if i can help, just that one tiny bit- and some future generation benefits because of it (in some miniscule way even)- then i'll feel repaid more than if i was killing myself at an i-bank all summer. 

wow!

okay- i swear i hadn't seen this before this morning--- i wrote my piece yesterday early in the morning, and this morning discovered this one... interesting.

job on the horizon?

as i was sitting in my "team room" yesterday (aka the fish bowl), i received a call from the smithsonian institute asking if i would still be interested in working for them this summer on a financial modeling project. 

let's be honest- i was stunned. i've gone this entire year reaching out over and over to countless firms, banks, pe shops, etc. and have grown extremely tired of hearing "well- we like what you bring to the table...but". that damn "but" gets me every time.  so needless to say, the fact that someone called and asked if i was still interested was a huge boost to the old ego. however, there was a "but" attached to this prospect as well. the huge "but" being that the internship is unpaid. 

excuse me while i collect my visions of getting an MBA and perhaps landing a job with an i-bank or a vc/pe firm afterwards off the floor. don't get me wrong- i have no problem working for the smithsonian and possibly opening more doors to my future. i have a formal interview with them this afternoon at 1600 in fact. however, the stark contrast in what i thought i was getting into when i started school and what i'm getting now towards the end of the first year couldn't be more different. 

at this point i have almost entirely committed myself to going to oxford for the summer. i say almost entirely because, well, let's face it- i don't have the extra 13 grand or so it's going to cost me laying around my tiny apartment. not even close. with the current loan market being overextended, i don't expect (and in fact have already been turned down) for private loans to cover the costs. (those costs being the tuition for oxford, the rent on my apartment in dc for june-august, the flight over to the uk, etc...) so- the first thought i had with the smithsonian idea was that i might work my tail off (like i usually do i suppose) and make as much money as i could for the project. but then, that fell through with the "unpaid" part. 

so i guess it's back to figuring out what else i can do this summer to make money. i could go back to bartending or bouncing, but really- i went to grad school for that? at this point, i'll take a wal-mart greeters job, so i suppose bouncing/bartending isn't much worse than that. and, i have no issue with that type of work. it's not that i feel that i'm above it in any way shape or form- it's how i got through undergrad, right? but still- a part of me thinks it's a giant step backwards for me. and we all know how large my steps are, right? ha ha- at least i can still find humor in all of this. i suppose that's one good thing to be happy about.

in any event- i'll be leaving my residency a tad early today in an attempt to convince the smithsonian institute that i can perform financial modeling tasks and work independently to produce a project which will be presented to some influential people. and, come to think of it, this opportunity never would have happened without me coming here in the first place. huh- funny how that works. 

wish me luck!

missed it

so, after reading some of the speeches given over the weekend at the cpac conference, i am fairly disappointed i missed it. granted, i had more important things to attend to- but at the same time, i really wonder what it would have been like to get in a large space with people who share some of the same thoughts and ideas i have about the future of this great country. i am planning on attending next year for sure, but need to figure out when i am supposed to be in dubai (i think that's where i'm going to go next year for my residency. not sure yet. maybe south america if it's on the list). 

so, does anyone else find it hilarious that since hussein took office the stock market has had the bottom drop out from under it? honestly, i couldn't help but chuckle when the mainstream decided they'd start blaming this on bush- as anyone who knows me, knows- i called this back in october. i said no matter what happened in the first few months of his excellency's reign, if it was bad news at all- it was bush's fault. sigh- the predictability of these raving lunatics is sheer madness. not that i'm claiming to know what to do about all this. my solutions so far have been to let gm, ford, bofa, etc. fail if that's what it takes. let the regulation cease and please stop throwing more money down the drain. 

on a side note- i had a heated discussion this morning in saxby's about the causes of the financial dilemma. i still trace most of this back to greenspan's relentless policy of cheap money. however- i also believe the sheer lunacy of the creation of freddie mac and fannie mae contributed in ways we still don't understand. (consequently, the second largest recipient of kickbacks (oops- that slipped out- i meant "contributions") from these two organizations was our dear leader. interesting- right?).  but, back to my original assertion- with greenspan keeping interest rates for so long, and the availability of large sums of money to people who had no business receiving them- is it any wonder we still haven't found bottom on this yet? let it never be said that people won't take "free" things. ever been to whole foods or sam's club during sample day? people eat the grossest stuff because it's free- and then pay the consequences later. well, people "ate" the worst thing possible, thinking there would be no repercussions. as i've alluded to before, the sheer ignorance of the people taking this money, and the greediness of those pushing it, had to eventually tip this ship over. it has. and badly. i think the most recent statistic is that the dow is at the lowest point since 1997. so, in other words, we're lower than we were during the stock market explosion due to the dot-com era. interesting. wait- what was so special about the dot-com era again? people had "free money" in that there were secretaries walking around worth millions of "dollars" due to the stock they were receiving in fledgling companies or the explosion in prices of their own stock. (i'm sort of rambling here- but stay with me). so in other words, what we're seeing now is nothing new. i tend to think this is just a final reaction to the largesse of the last decade, where "millionaires" were being created left and right. maybe the system couldn't handle it anymore. in any event- by my recent back of the envelope calculations- any "wealth" created due to the increase in stocks alone has been absolutely destroyed in the last 2 years or so. now, it appears this wealth was a temporary thing. 

so, what can we do about all this?  i'm not entirely sure. nationalization seems to be the sexy answer in the media these days. do these people know what they're suggesting? i think it's worthwhile to take a look at this.

now, can the u.s. pull this off? well- i honestly believe we can pull through the crisis. but, nationalization seems like such a long shot. honestly, sweden and the u.s. aren't exactly on par with each other in terms of sheer economic strength. 

okay- you know what? i've been going on and on today. i think i need to save room for more at a later time. we'll see when that may be. i am in the middle of trying to value an energy acquisition. yipee!

utter exhaustion

have you ever had one of those weeks where at the end of it, you were so exhausted you wanted to sit in a dark corner and zone out to the world? you're too exhausted to sleep, even though you crave it? coming from me, the zombie king- this means that i really need the sleep- but it won't come? i feel like this week has drained me of almost every thing i've ever brought to business school (granted- this probably isn't saying much coming from me). 

wow- the 4 day marathon of tests and library sit-ins has ended. strangely, i went for a run today and felt the most energized i've been in ages. and for some god awful reason, i miss the library. will my spot still be there next week if i need to go to study? 

see- i start thinking delirious things when i get tired.

no time to think. more stuff to do. like find a job. 

why?

why are people so adamant that the government can handle our problems? let's see- in the last week i've heard people excited about the prospect of healthcare reform and how everyone will finally be able to afford it in this country if only the republicans would shut up and sit down and let the democrats steamroll their way to the top.  why on god's green earth would people assume the government can handle healthcare? we're talking about the same government that can't manage veteran's healthcare, and we should expect nothing less than the best for this, correct? i'm not sure i follow people's logic here. the government can't run a budget to save its life, maintains high deficits, has trouble implementing policies- but somehow they're magically going to get healthcare right? i just don't see it.

i didn't get a chance to watch the overseer's speech last night- but from what i've read in the recaps- it's another attempt at making things seem much worse than they really are so that people are so scared they believe government is the only solution. since when has more government ever helped anyone? 

okay- back to operations and finance studying. 2 more to go and i get a break. it can't come soon enough. 

ugh

after one hell of an exam today, i'm back at it studying for tomorrow's nightmare. it's amazing how i can spend so much time studying and then studying some more, but can still manage to feel like i don't know anything when it comes around to the actual exam.  i was, for lack of a better word, disheartened in my performance today- until i learned that everyone i talked to felt the same way or worse. i'm not sure what that says about us or the test. but in any event- it's still a letdown to know that something you thought you understood was further from your grasp than you truly realized.

on a lighter note- i may attend the washington dc tea party on friday as a reward to myself for finishing exams. if you don't know what i'm talking- i suggest you look it up. i think it might be good to go out and find more people who don't fall for the government's crap- hook, line, and sinker.  

sigh. back to the books.

a break

i can't wait until thursday at 1500. by then, my last final of this module will be complete and i will be able to take a long needed break.  this has been, by far, the worst of the modules and quite possibly the hardest for me in terms of staying focused and on track. the crappy job market, coupled with the classes i took combined to make mountains of work i never expected and frustration i never wanted. but- the end is in sight and i'm pressing towards finishing strong. unless of course my professors decide they haven't tortured us enough and make these finals ridiculously difficult (which would not surprise me in the least).

needless to say- this week's postings may or may not occur. and if they do, they may be filled with nonsensical drivel as i attempt to move from one exam to the next in rapid succession. there's something seemingly impossible about taking an operations exam and then having less than 24 hours turnover to study for, and then take, a finance exam. there's no way one can wait until ops is finished to study for finance, but then if you study for finance ahead of time you feel like you're neglecting ops. or another class. 

can thursday come quickly, but not too quickly? i need a time machine. 

seriously?

okay- so someone told me that they thought the banks were predatory lenders. interesting. if they were predatory lenders, why won't they lend me any more money for school? 

here's where their logic falls apart. their story goes like this. "my mortgage went up $200 dollars a month and now i can't afford it. well, that has to be because of predatory lending.  they didn't fully explain to me what was going on when i signed my mortgage"

my response-- you signed a contract. it's not the responsibility of the bank or the mortgage lender to explain it to you. i know i'm being radical with this because people will complain that mortgage loans are hard to understand and full of technical jargon. WRONG! there is this wonderful thing called a dictionary in which you can look up the meanings of words. mortgage lenders provide you with a lending schedule showing you how much you'll have to pay per month. for instance- i know that for the next 15 years, i will have to pay close to $2000 per month on student loans (assuming current interest rates and my current lending budget. also- this is assuming i don't consolidate and refi to 30 years or something)...

my point is this. people who had no business buying homes in the first place were doing so and not reading the terms of their loans. and now they're upset that they are getting foreclosed on. i'm not seeing why i should feel sorry for them or why we should be forced (to the tune of $275B) to pay these things off for people.  

hey- maybe in three years i'll get money to pay off my loans. i'll just claim that sallie mae didn't explain it to me well enough. never mind the fact that as a grad student i should know how to read.

i don't know if you read michelle malkin or not...but there's a piece on her website today about ACORN breaking into a foreclosed house and claiming "it's our house now."  this could get ugly. i may break into the apple store for a new computer and claim "it's my computer now."

sigh. what is this country coming to? 

realization

do you remember that in the last 4 or 5 years that all we ever heard about (besides "bush lied kids died"), was the enormous deficit that the bush administration was running up? and how that was horrible for our country? i do. every time i tried to discuss politics with people, their responses were "we're in an immoral war for oil" or "well look at how much spending bush has done" along with the "bush is always on vacation" jab. 

wake up america- why was it so wrong for the bush administration to run up a deficit, but now i hear no whining, complaining, or bitching from the media about the one we've just been granted by the "o-team"? does anyone see the illogic in this besides me? i'm sure the press will say "it had to be done, we were in a recession, blah blah blah." a deficit is a deficit. if you're going to hound one guy for increasing it- why not the next? 

let's think of it in bar tab terms- since as a grad student i find a lot of students think the bar is the best place to be, maybe they'll get this analogy. let's assume i have a gracious bartender who knows me and likes me and is willing to give me a loan every now and then so i can have a favorite brew. now, let's say my jealous friend decries this as wrong and immoral (i'm not sure why, because as my friends know- if they're out drinking with me, they're going to get a drink out of it anyway). now let's assume that i move away and a new guy takes my spot BUT still has my tab essentially. shouldn't that same jealous friend decry the fact that the new guy is running up a tab? of course he should. then why isn't he? well, it's because the new guy is just that- the new guy. let's give him the benefit of the doubt!  (okay- cue the fact that people didn't realize my last sentence was sarcasm in 3...2...1...now). 

maybe that didn't make perfect sense...but it does to me and that's all that matters. 

my new birth

so after growing tired of posting status updates on facebook and the like, i have decided to start a blog dedicated to the hypocrisy i've noticed ever since "our savior" took office.

bear with me as i take a whole 1.5 seconds to gather everything i'm upset about...

right then, i'm back. 

i do not understand why in god's name people believe this massive spending project is going to do anything but further enslave us to the government. didn't we pass a bailout in the fall? what happened with all that money? 

i am not comfortable with the fact that people falsely inflated their earnings in order to buy mcmansions and now they're getting a bailout for it. what about the men and women of this country who have worked their tails off everyday and never get a handout? what about those of us who have to take responsibility for our actions? we're just supposed to say "well, it was the mortgage lenders and the banks that created this problem?" i don't think so america! let's remember without people to sell this crap to, the banks and mortgage lenders would have disappeared long ago. don't get on your soapbox and tell me it's their fault. that's akin to me running up a huge bill at best buy and then asking for a bailout because "the electronics guy was preying on me" 

really gm and chrysler? you're asking for more money? again? did you remember to car pool to dc this time? there's a reason no one buys your products.

the free market needs to be just that. free. i do believe president reagan said it best when he proclaimed the scariest words in the english language to be "i'm from the government and i'm here to help." 

here's another one that gets me all wound up- the press compares this recession to the great depression without any facts to back it up. and what's worse is that it gets repeated time and time again by people who only "heard it on tv so it must be true."  

and finally, for now at least, there's this little thing i like to call hypocrisy that the left jut doesn't realize they are guilty of. on more than one occasion i've heard reference to the amount of time bush took vacations. can anyone tell me where hussein has been for the last two weekends of his coronation? on a retreat and on a personal "love-fest" with his wife to chicago, where he proceeded to act like a celebutante. if everything was so urgent as he requested, why wasn't he here to see it through?