GOP Plays Obstructionist Roles

My prediction and I hope the 2010 mid-term election, the Republican would get another whipping and become a party-of-irrelevant. What the Republicans have done in debate and aftermath of the stimulus debate. If you pay attention to the detail of their argument, they have no objection to the needs of the stimulus and no objection to the most of the content of the stimulus. Yes, I understand that philosophically preferred tax-cut over spending. I can respect that. But the fact of the matter is the bill was passed and it is time to fix the problem. Yet, the Republicans, especially those Governors, like Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, and Rick Perry of Texas. They would actually turn down money that are intended to help citizens of their states. They would block and be obstructionists to the country's economic recovery. Go ahead and do it. I hope citizens of their states should kick of them out of office as quickly as possible.

Top-10 Bad Reasons for choosing a President

As we celebrate the end of the worst Presidency of the country’s history, let me leave a few words of advice for the future generations with my Top-10 BAD Reasons for choosing a President

1. Should know him more than having a similar name to a former-President
2. Should be better than a C student
3. t least, his parents should think he is a smart kids in the family
4. But then, running for President shouldn’t be just to prove to your Dad that you are smart.
5. Someone who actually have some “real” accomplishments before age 42.
6. Because people like to have a beer with him should not be a qualification
7. Neither is because he is more likely to stop and help me change my flat tire
8. An AWOL solder is likely to grow-up to be an AWOL President
9. As the President of the United States, at least, he should be able to speak proper American English
10. What do you tell your kids? Being dumb, lazy, stupid, C-student, a drunk, AWOL, jobless, and did nothing good until middle-age will grow-up to be the President one day?

Uganda President Museveni

Recently, I caught an episode on HD Theater called " Uganda: The Presidential Tour." It is basically an hour with Forrest Sawyer touring Uganda with President Yoweri Museveni serving as his tour guide.

First of all, I was impressed by Uganda's beauty: its vast area covered by Lake Victoria and many lakes that connect to the Nile. The white water rafting shown in the episode was amazing. Second, its wild life of elephants, lions, monkeys, and others, are as spectacular as many other African nations.

But what impressed me the most is President Museveni himself, who seems so casual and so normal like any ordinary men. They way he dressed, what he wear, he would accompany Mr. Sawyer to certain places, while not in others. It seems quite genuine to me.

I am sure some people would say these are just an act and all staged, especially those with its people. Well, there are probably some truth to that. Probably plenty of corruption in Uganda still and some economic and political achievements are exaggerated. That are probably true also.

But you have to be impressed that the President would take the time for a reporter, even for a marketing campaign, to showcase his country. You got to give credit when it is due. Even if half of what is shown is true, I am still impressed.

Russian professor predicted US divided in six parts, but something worth celebrating

Russian professor, Igor Panarin, predicted that the current financial crisis will lead to the collapse of the United States. That prediction isn't new or surprising. But the most interesting part of his prediction is the U.S. will be divided into six parts: the Pacific coast, the South, Texas, the Atlantic coast, central states, and the northern states. The Chinese would have strong influence in the Pacific coast states; Texas will go to Mexico; Atlantic coast states will join the European Union, Canada will claim the northern states; Japan will take Hawaii; and Alaska goes back to Russia.

Wow, this sounds bad if it ever happens. Despite all the devastating consequences if it does, at least, there are two things that we can look forward to.

One, Sarah Palin no longer needs to see Russia from her house. Because her house is already in Russia.

Two, George W. Bush would have left the United States for good. Señor Bush would be a Mexican.

Tell me. Are these two developments alone would worth a celebration?

Links to story,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/12/the-united-stat.html

What to do with the automaker bailout

Whether to bailout the big-3 automakers, that is the big question facing Congress and in a way, the President-Elected. There are difficult, philosophical, and conflicting views that in a capitalist market, companies are to die or survive base on their abilities to compete, and not on the government handout. Let's not forget UAW contracts and pension obligations are heavily burden on these companies also. They made the automakers uncompetitive. But the managements are not blameless either. They made terrible and unreliable products. Invested on the wrong line of business in SUV rather than high-mileage cars. Their marketing, branding, and distributions are so diluted that are inefficient and wasteful.

A bankruptcy and maybe new management would allow them a clean restart. But it could also wipe out the entire auto industry in the U.S. and lose millions of jobs. Frankly, I don't think it will be as bad as it might seem. Toyota, Honda, and others will simply come in and fill the void by hiring the same worker, making a different brand of cars, and selling to the same American people. Oh yes, the workers would have less perks than today.

The Congress did ask for detail plans from the big-3 executives on what they will do with the bailout. Here is what I suggest the Congress should do.

1. There is no rule that say the government has to rescue all-3 or none of the automakers. What about rescuing 1 or at most 2 automakers. So, that would create a competition for the best plan. The best plan will survive. The worst plan will mean bankruptcy and possible acquire by the surviving automakers.

2. Bailout money should only go to do research and manufacture of high-mileage and green vehicles only. Yes, they can funnel existing high-mileage budget to save other line of businesses, but it should be clear on what the government's priorities are.

3. There should be no more mileage exception for trucks. Trucks and SUVs are under the same mileage standard as cars.

4. The 35 mph mileage standard to be effective in 2020 needs to move to 2010.

5. Last but not least, UAW needs to make some concessions also. No more perks, just an ordinary salary and 401k, like the rest of us. And at the comparable pay as those work at the Toyota plans in the U.S.

I am sure they don't like any of these proposal. Who would. But they do beat the alternative of going bankrupt and losing their jobs.

Congratulations to President-Elected Barack Obama

... in an historic night that marks the end an historic campaign. Congratulations!

The War Within - The Gulf States Pushed for the Surge

On page 257 to 259 of Bob Woodward's The War Within, it talked about Secretary Rice went to the Gulf Cooperation Council to meet with foreign ministers of the Gulf states. In that meeting, many of the foreign ministers were convinced the U.S. would pull out of Iraq. One was quoted of saying "You don't need to be thinking about pull your forces down. You need to think about doubling your forces."

When Rice returned to brief Bush, she was quoted, "I came out of that meeting convinced that not only did they believe that we were about to fold in Iraq, but that that was going to be the end of American power in the Middle East." She went on to say, "The very act of increasing American forces would have a salutary effect, whether or not it achieved population security. The fact that the president of the United States, against all odds, against all voices, would in effect double down, would have a hugely important effect on the region."

Taken these quotes together, you can see a sub-plot that the "surge" strategy is not just the President's strategy, not McCain's strategy, or General Petraeus' strategy. In fact, the "double down" strategy is, in some way, forced on the President by the Middle East states. It was done with "a salutary effect" and "whether or not it achieved population security." It was more a show of power than security.

Despite all the hoopla about the debate of the strategy, who is for and against it. It turned out the oil rich gulf states did have a say in this matter and they were for it. The "oil man" Bush did not want to lose influence at the Middle East and probably became one of many reason they went along with me. Again, let's face it, this war is not about freedom, or democracy, or WMD. It is about oil.

One last point. I admit that I was never impressed by Condi Rice. But as the Secretary of State and the country's chief diplomat, if someone is to ask her to double our force, at minimum, I would expect her to say, "So, how many of those extra troops would your country willing to commit?"

I know that I would that and I am not even a diplomat. And I bet you and no one would ever able to pull that off with former Secretary of State, James Baker.