An open letter to news organizations (I’m sure none of them will post this)

Are we still on this?  Really?  Michael Jackson died two weeks ago, and this just in, he’s still dead.  I love how many of you sheeple have just followed this “event” as some sort of “death of Christ” story.  The guy was a pedophile – plan and simple.  Remember, being acquitted is not the same as being innocent.  All this guy did was make some good music – big deal.  If your neighbor lived as ....Jackson.... lived, and was accused of what he was accused of, you would do all you could to kick him out of your community.  Just because he had a few hit songs, all the sudden he is the messiah?  What’s wrong with you people?  Grow a brain, and make up your own minds instead of getting swept up in the hype. 

To “news” agencies everywhere: are you kidding?  Michael Jackson had a heart attack, he died, end of story.  At best, this should have been a one day thing.  Instead, you have had so called coverage for the past 2 weeks, starting with reports of his death, to tours of Neverland, to the memorial at the Staples Center, and now, of course, the drug controversy.  Why is this still on?  Thousands of people every year die of heart attacks brought on by prescribed drug mixtures, and no one cares.  CNN and FOX don’t drop everything to cover it.  But hey, Jackson dies, and we parade out expert after expert, including Gil Kerlikowske, chief of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, who is now “concerned” about the prescription drug epidemic.  Really, this is why – one guy with some hit songs dies and now there is reason for concern?  Need I remind all news outlets of the fact that in 2005, you were all ready to crucify ....Jackson.... as a pedophile, and were waiting with bated breath to hear a guilty verdict?  During the coverage, news agencies everywhere went through his life with a fine tooth comb, and really made him into a freak.  Painted/ bleached skin stories, stories about his kids, stories about abuse in his family, allegations of children in his bed, etc.  But now, because he’s dead, he is the greatest man ever to walk the Earth.

There is a war in ..Iraq.. and ..Afghanistan.., ..Iran.. and ..Honduras.. are tearing themselves apart through revolution, ..North Korea.. is threatening missile launches, genocide in ..Africa.., and our economy is falling apart with the unemployment rate teetering at 10 percent.  But, lets forget all that for the two weeks (or more, as the coverage is still going strong) because a singing pedophile died.  Okay, that makes sense.  The hypocrisy is astounding, and I would hope that at some point, content, rather then ratings, will dictate stories in the future.

Sorry automakers – I'm not buying this.  For YEARS you have been warned that foreign automakers were going to overtake you in sales if you did not come out with a better, more competitive product.  You had decades to create "greener", more full efficient, cheaper and better vehicles that could compete in the global market place, and you didn't do it.  Instead, you continued using a crappy business model, while paying exorbitant fees to your CEO's and other top executives, while allowing your product to suffer.  Meanwhile, you use mob tactics for your finance divisions (how many people reading this can relate?) If you are a week late on a payment, the harassing phone calls start.  Now, because you ran your business into the ground, you want us, the consumer, who has bought your shoddy product, dealt with harassing collections calls in our hard times, to turn around and bail you out with our tax dollars, so you can continue turning out more sub-standard vehicles, and continue harassing us while we suffer.  Here is something else to consider: as I have typed this, I have seen 3 GM commercials. How much cash could you save with a less aggressive advertising strategy – my guess is millions.  Try starting there. There is no reason for us, the average citizen, to save your failing companies because of your bad decisions. What the government needs to do is bailout the workers – give those that are laid off the equivalent of one years salary, and help them get re-educated for new jobs in other markets.  It might not be the perfect plan, but it is a lot better then giving billions to greedy CEOs that drove what should be a healthy, strong industry into the ground.

Once again, our government has failed us.  Today, Congress passed an 850 billion dollar bailout package (that's $850,000,000,000).  Here is a recap of what has happened:

-Due to greed and short sightedness, Wall Street over extended itself, and ran the economy into the ground

-The Bush Administration proposed a 3 page, 700 billion dollar bailout

-Congress rejected this bill, and countered with a 110 page document

Let me stop there.  I have to say, I was actually proud of that bill.  It did a few things that were actually good for the American people.  It provided a piecemeal doling out of funds to Wall Street, as opposed to a blank check for 700 billion dollars.  It provided for accountability, oversight and responsibility, had taxpayer protection, homeowner protection, and limited golden parachutes for overpaid CEOs of the companies responsible for this mess.  I was definitely okay with that bill.  It made the best of a crappy situation, and while I will always maintain that the taxpayer should never have been put in this situation in the first place, we have to do what we have to do, and this bill was a decent proposal.  So, what happened?  It was struck down in the house by the Republicans, sighting, among other things, an extremely large amount of money, and that it went against the fundamentals of the GOP, in that government should not interfere with business.  One of the other major reasons that it was struck down was for the fact that it removed the golden parachute option for CEOs – many of whom are friends and supporters of those who voted it down.  That day, the stock market tumbled over 700 points, and we lost over 1 trillion dollars in the process, and it was called the biggest point drop in the history of the United States.

So, round two came up and here is what they did:

-The Senate added 150 billion dollars in pork.  (Pork refers to added provisions in a bill that benefit specific people or groups, aka special interests)

The pork includes: (as reported on CNN.com – the link: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/03/house.bailout/index.htmlcnnSTCOther2 )

1. Wooden Arrows: proposal includes an excise tax exemption for a very specific type of arrow used by child archers.  This cost is an estimated 2 million dollars over 10 years.
2. Cyclists: A measure that would cost taxpayers 10 million dollars would allow employers to provide benefits to employees who commute to work via bicycle.
3. Movies: To keep movie production in the US, production companies would be allowed to the cost of producing films from their taxes, and would cost about 478 million dollars to taxpayers over 10 years.  This was championed by Diane Watson, a  Democrat from California
4. Racetracks: Owners of a motor sports racetrack follow a seven year depreciation schedule and write each year's depreciation off their taxes.  This measure will cost us 100 million dollars
5. Rum: This will provide tax breaks on rum from Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands and cost taxpayers 192 million dollars
6. Wool: This extends provisions for wool manufactures to 2014, and will cost us 148 million dollars
7. Mental Health: This would require health insurance companies to cover mental illness at parity with physical illness (there was no cost breakdown with this line item)
8. Foreign Investor Aid:  This is a story that has appeared elsewhere in the news media, and states that billions of tax dollars will be sent to bailout London, and other foreign markets.

This bill passed this morning. 

Are you fucking kidding me?  This is the problem with government as it currently stands.  The second draft of the bill made sense – it addressed the issues at hand, covered all the bases pretty well.  The third draft, the one that passed, addressed all of the same issues (which is good), but now has all of this other nonsense in it.  Arrows for kids?  Movie production incentives?  Yeah, because that is what is important right now.  There were other provisions too, some were important, like funds for disaster victims.  However, they should not have been on this bill. Those are issues that should have there own legislature, and be introduced for budgeting at another time, not as a back door rider on a bill this important and this big.  What makes me laugh is the fact that the Republicans stand on there high horse, spouting fundamental policy rhetoric, and stating the government cannot interfere with the market place, and spending 700 billion dollars is fiscally irresponsible, but then they pass this shit – with an added 150 billion dollars.  Does no one else see the hypocrisy here?  And, where is the great maverick of the Senate, Mr. John McCain?  Why is he not on TV right now saying he will not vote for this bill, calling out all of the pork, and making the writers of the pork famous?  Why, because he is to busy voting  "yes" for the pork bill.  Awesome.  And what of Obama?  Where is he in all of this?  He has managed to stay in the back round, and basically do nothing through all of this.  Why is he not on TV striking down this bill when one of his platforms has been responsible spending?  He too, was voting "yes" for this bill.  Understand this, it is not the bill that I am upset about (although, as I stated before, it sucks that we were put in this position in the first place).  I am upset at the lies, shadiness, and hypocrisy of the whole thing.  Both presidential candidates voted for a bill that the public does not want, overloaded with wasteful spending.  The House and Senate did the same.  These are supposed to be our elected officials, doing what we want them to do. 

The time has come folks.  The dawn of the revolution is here.  Now, before you all go grabbing your guns, just keep reading.  There are a couple of ways to define a revolution.  The first is within the means of our voting rights.  We all see what is happening in this once great land of ours.  We see everyday people suffering, businesses closing, banks failing, markets failing, and the standing of the United States on the world stage slipping away.  We have one last shot at changing this.  Whether you are for Obama or McCain, you must do one thing:  Vote.  If you are not registered, then get registered.  If you can't make it to the polling places on the November 4^th, then get a mail in ballot.  For to long the American people have sat back and done nothing while over inflated Wall Street markets in conjunction with big government has run this country into the ground.  At this point, it really doesn't matter what administration failed us, or why.  What does matter is fixing it.  Something else has occurred in this country since 9/11 – we got so riled up in bringing down the enemy and fighting terrorism that we gave up many of our rights in the process.  It became taboo to speak against the current administration, because you were then labeled un-patriotic.  Well, no more.  It is un-patriotic to sit back and do nothing.  After the November elections, we will watch what the new administration does.  At this point, it is impossible for either candidate to ignore the will of the people.  If neither candidate steps up the plate as president, then it will be up to us to revolt, and by violent means if necessary.  It is our right, and our responsibility to over throw a government that does not support the best interest of its people:

Our right as it reads in the Declaration of Independence

 We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

This is not something to be taken lightly.  This is a real problem in this country, and the majority of its citizens are suffering in one way or another.  We as a people have become complacent in our charge to oversee the government, and to protect this nation's interests both domestically, and abroad.  The government is not some alien entity like the private board of a large company that is closed off to us, or to complicated to understand; it is something that all citizens should be involved in on a daily basis.  Washington should not be some distant concept that we the people feel intimidated by, the representatives in Washington DC should be intimidated by the people, government as a whole should be afraid of its people, not the other way around.  I am urging the beginning of a national debate, an open letter to the people.  Really contemplate what has been happening in your lives, and in the lives of your neighbors.  Are your elected representatives listening to you?  Do they have the will of the majority first and foremost in their hearts and minds when they speak for you in Washington?  Are you suffering at the hands of those that are supposed to stand up and protect you?  Are your rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness being hindered by the people that are supposed to uphold them?  Has this government brought about a long train of abuses and usurpations to the American people at large?  What will you do if the new administration continues doing much of the same?  These are the questions that you must ask yourselves, and once you have an answer, the course of action to follow will become clear. 

As always, I ask you to comment, share your ideas, and, if you feel so moved, forward this message on to your friends and family.

This is a message that I posted on CNN.com (http://cnnmoneytalkback.blogs.cnnmoney.cnn.com/2008/09/20/the-bailout/)

Please feel free to comment, or pass this along if you agree.

I am a small business owner, and about 2 months ago, my business was in danger of failing.  It was in danger of failing due to a slow economy and that's it – it was not due to a bad product, dissatisfied customers, bad decisions based on greed, or bad marketing.  However, those are the very reasons as to why these Wall Street giants are failing, and now, because of their bad decisions, I, along with the other taxpayers in this country, have to bail them out?  Where was my bailout a couple of months ago? I certainly could have used a "cash infusion" when I was struggling, and I am sure many small business could have used one as well, or may need one now.  This bailout is the worst thing that we could do. It is completely anti-capitalistic, and it cannot be allowed to happen.  When companies fail due to poor decision making, greed, bad products, etc., then they fail, and new institutions rise up to take there place.  They don't get $700,000,000,000 to continue doing what they are doing.  I personally would rather see that money go to heath care, the social-security crisis, national security, or education just to name a few.  If this bailout gets passed, it is up to us, the voters, to see to it that those who approved it are no longer employed by the American people when election time rolls around.  We must say "no" to big government getting bigger, and stop the bailouts of greedy institutions that do nothing but stand on the backs of the public while they count their money.  Since the housing boom began, these institutions have done nothing to contribute to the overall well being of this country or to this country's economy – they have effectively done quite the opposite.  Their greed and careless attention to the world around them has lead to a failing economy, bad housing debts, a credit crisis, hyper inflation, and a crumbling global economy and has basically left this country teetering on the edge of a depression.  I say let them fail, and let this lesson, and warning, go forth to all those that would attempt to swindle the public in the name of making a fast buck: If you make bad decisions, and try to capitalize on greed, then you will fail, and there will be no help from the very public that you tried to take advantage of. To the politicians what would allow for this bailout: Vote yes, and your days in office are numbered.  By bailing out these companies, you are encouraging more destructive behavior on Wall Street that will only lead this country further into ruin. By voting "yes", you are telling corrupt CEOs with poor business models, ethics and practices that it is okay to make decisions based entirely on their own self interest and when those decisions backfire, the feds will come to the rescue on the public's dime, just so you can do it all over again.  It is time for government to get out of the business game and let the markets play out as they must, let the corrupt businesses fail, and let newer, innovative, and more socially conscious and responsible businesses take their place.  Maybe instead of bailing out the companies that are responsible for this mess, we bail out the public, and allow them the opportunity to invest in new companies and banks, and simply let the old institutions fade into history. 

This is an open letter of complaint to the FCC that I sent on Friday, February 15, 2008:

This is a direct quote from Jane Fonda on the "Today Show" as it aired LIVE on Thursday Morning, February 14th, 2008:

On the "Today Show," Fonda explained how she first heard of "Vagina Monologues."

"I was asked to do a monologue called 'Cunt,' and I said, 'I don't think so. I've got enough problems," Fonda said.

It has come to my attention that no fines have been levied, no one has been fired, and all that was required was a simple apology that lasted about three seconds.  My question is this: how is it possible that the FCC will fine the Opie and Anthony Show, Howard Stern or Don Imus for using language far less offensive, but when the word "cunt" is broadcast live to over 6 million viewers on a "G" rated television show, no one at the FCC bats an eye?  Why is that acceptable? Where does the FCC get off instituting this ridiculous double standard?  If the FCC is not going to fine NBC, then it can NEVER fine any radio or television show for foul language, and it must give back the money fined to CBS for the infamous "wardrobe malfunction" by Janet Jackson at the Super Bowl a few years ago.  It is time for the FCC to treat every show, every broadcast fairly and censor equally, or not at all. If you are going to hold certain networks accountable for content, regardless of medium, then ALL networks, shows and broadcasts must be held accountable equally.  I would expect the FCC to do the right thing, and fine NBC and the "Today Show" for letting quite possibly the most reprehensible word in the English language to be broadcast over the airwaves with not even the slightest attempt to prevent it from being said.  Equally more disturbing was the half-hearted apology made the following day, which for the most part, meant nothing as the person who said the word, Jane Fonda, wasn't even present to make the actual apology.  Let's put this in perspective. The FCC fined Clear Channel Communications (at the time, the carrier of the Howard Stern Show) nearly $500,000 in April, 2003 for the word "Sphincterine," and fined another $27,500 in July, 2001 for the word "blumpkin."  Can you tell me what either of those words mean?  Nothing. They are made up, nonsense words broadcast from a goofy radio show that didn't even have one-sixth of the viewers of the "Today Show." In another instance, the FCC fined Opie and Anthony and their parent companies, Viacom Communication and CBS radio for a bit called "guess what's in my pants" several times between November, 2000, and January, 2001 in  the amount of $21,000.  The pinnacle of FCC fines came when the O+A show was fined approximately $358,000, and 13 CBS owned stations were fined $27,500 each for a bit called "Sex for Sam" (Viacom settled for $3.5 million, and fired Opie and Anthony).  I personally remember hearing all of the afore mentioned O+A bits, and the fact is at no time was any offensive language used.  However, because it is a "shock jock" radio show, the FCC goes after them simply because they are an easy target. Jane Fonda says "cunt" live on the air, and nothing?  As a citizen of this country, I am asking you, the FCC, to explain yourselves.  Why is it okay to fine a radio show for made up words, or for describing acts that may or may not actually be happening, but it is equally justifiable to not fine a show for a truly offensive word on what should be a family-oriented show?  When people listen to Opie and Anthony or Howard Stern, or any other show that falls into the antiquated and mislabeled "shock jock" category, they know what to expect - crude humor, possibly offensive language, etc.  When people tune into the "Today Show," they are expecting a Mickey Mouse, "Disneyfied" type of show - no foul content, no inappropriate language.  While a show like the "Today Show" is on, moms and dads are getting ready for work, and kids are getting ready for school. People leave a show like that on for local weather, or perhaps to watch an interesting story.  The last thing anyone in that demographic is expecting is for someone on that show, be it a guest or host, to say the word "cunt," or any other offensive word. Yet somehow, it is okay for the FCC to not stand up for the unsuspecting viewer, and allows language like that to blindside them without recourse, however, a show like Stern or O+A, shows that people know is going to contain adult content, slips up, and you go to war against that show, its carrier and its parent company, citing abuse of the airwaves and indecent content.  What is the difference between them?  Why is it okay to fine one and not the other?  Better yet, why is it okay to let the family-oriented show get away with it, but a show that is known for its crude humor is scrutinized and fined mercilessly for every little off-color joke?  The fact is this:  I am not a Howard Stern fan, I am not a "Today Show" fan, but I am tired of watching government agencies pick and chose to whom the rules apply. The time for change has to start somewhere, and I am picking this moment, this decision as that place to start.  You, the FCC, must be, and will be held accountable for poor decision making, for your favoritism, and for your inconsistencies when doling out "justice."  This is the digital age, and I will post this grievance letter on every message board, every opinions page and every corner of the Internet until you do what is right and mete out fair rulings regardless of what show is in question.

If you agree with this, then please follow the link below to file a complaint with the FCC

The Link: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgb/fcc475B.cfm