Author Archive: Brynn Jacobs
is a full-time wage slave and part-time philosopher, writing and living just outside Omaha with his lovely wife and two feline roommates.
I have tried to point out the disparity between the policies that “Hope & Change”® Candidate Obama advocated and those pursued by “Look Forward, Not Back”® President Obama.
Now, a new video by Reddit’s “Restore the Fourth” movement highlights those differences. Watch and marvel as Candidate Obama debates President Obama on the proper role of civil liberties in our fight against terrorism:
“My job this morning is to be so persuasive…that a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Barack,” he told a crowd of about 300 Ivy Leaguers–and, by the looks of it, a handful of locals who managed to gain access to what was supposed to be a students-only event.
“Requires labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways. Prohibits labeling or advertising such food as “natural.” Exempts foods that are: certified organic; unintentionally produced with genetically engineered material; made from animals fed or injected with genetically engineered material but not genetically engineered themselves; processed with or containing only small amounts of genetically engineered ingredients; administered for treatment of medical conditions; sold for immediate consumption such as in a restaurant; or alcoholic beverages.”
Essentially, it requires a label on foods that are genetically modified. That’s it. A label indicating whether or not the food one is considering buying has been tampered with at the genetic level. It doesn’t ban or tax such products, it just offers you, the consumer, the chance to know what is in the food you are purchasing.
Here is a list of the companies opposed to this Proposition, and the amount they have spent just this week to defeat it:
Businessweek is reporting that JP Morgan is considering moving to “clawback” bonuses which had been awarded to executives and others responsible for Morgan’s recent $2 BILLION dollar loss.:
The lender can cancel stock awards or demand they be repaid if an employee “engages in conduct that causes material financial or reputational harm,” JPMorgan said in its annual proxy statement. The company will claw back pay if it’s appropriate, said one of the executives, who asked not to be identified because no decisions have been made.
But wait! These big Wall Street firms told us that bonuses were untouchable after they blew up the economy in 2008. Am I the only one that remembers that? There was all sorts of bullshit about how these employees were simply too valuable, that if they didn’t get their massive bonuses they would leave to seek other employment, that contracts and bonus structures were sacrosanct and untouchable (untouchability does not extend to unions and teachers, by the way). Oh, but I guess that was when taxpayers were paying the bonuses. Now that JP Morgan took a big hit in their own shorts, they want their money back. Funny how things change.
One can be forgiven for not understanding the state of our world today in terms of oil and its availability. A new article in Forbes assures us that peak oil is off, that the world is awash in oil. Meanwhile, an article from the current issue of The Economist claims the opposite: that oil supply is insufficient to keep up with demand. Meanwhile, the president is blaming high prices on those nasty speculators. So which of these competing claims is a person to believe?
For the uninitiated, peak oil is the point in time when maximum extraction of the world’s oil endowment is reached. Since oil is a finite resource, we can exploit it in increasing amounts until we can’t any longer, and flows begin to decline.
Attorney General Eric Holder gave a speech this week, a speech which is the only known public justification for the administration’s policy of assassinations of American citizens. The speech may be read in its entirety here. The real justifications are too secret to tell you about, so Holder had to summarize the complex legal arguments and distill them down to their legal essence.
For those of you who don’t have the time to read the whole speech, allow me to distill the arguments further. Holder’s weighty legal analysis boils down to this: “we can do whatever we want, and nobody can tell us otherwise.”
[More . . . ]
I was excited to see the new Tea Party’s birth. Watching the corruption of our government become more and more brazen, it was only a matter of time before counter-movements began to spread. Both the Tea Party and the #Occupy movements were born of this impulse. The original patriots of the Tea Party movement formed in opposition to the bank bailouts. I think it became apparent rather quickly, however, that their admirable movement had been co-opted into another arm of the Republican machine. I don’t say this to cast aspersions though, as I do want to keep this post exploring our common ground rather than emphasizing our differences. The #Occupy/99% movement is actively resisting attempts to co-opt its message by the Democratic party and other left-leaning organizations, so let’s keep exploring our similarities.
Here then, is the 15-point “non-negotiable core beliefs” which I found on teaparty.org: