New Review: Rome, Inc.

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

It was not too long ago that a series of multi-national corporations were exposed for a series of unethical practices, and then promptly went bankrupt. Enron was one of the biggest ones and probably the most noteworthy of the bunch, but they were certainly not alone. The mainstream press covered the rise and fall of several multi-national corporations, as if their demise were equal to a serial killer's crime wave.

This disastrous episode in American history is not an anomaly. In fact, as business author and corporate cog Stanley Bing points out in his new book, “Rome, Inc.: The Rise and Fall of the First Multinational Corporation,” Rome may have been the first Enron. “Rome, Inc.” is a comical and amusing way of studying how and why the Roman Empire came to be and then crumbled into the dust of history. Bing looks at the history of Rome through the prism of corporatism. Romulus and Caesar aren’t just rulers, they become CEOs. Each conquest and subjugation of territory transforms into acquisitions and mergers. Even the occasional backstabbing finds its counterpart in today’s corporate climate.

When examined as if it was a corporation, the history of Rome makes a lot more sense and comes alive so that the modern student can fully understand the nuts and bolts of how its demise came to be. The players from across the hemisphere of Roman history become more humanized and the reader starts to understand what exactly possesses somebody to make the decisions that a Caesar or a Nero might make.

Bing zeros in on the fundamental element that made Rome successful, in antiquity as an empire and by today’s standards as a corporation. Unlike many empires in the past, when a territory was sacked, the conquered people instead of being enslaved were offered Roman citizenship. Even at the dawn of the Roman empire, citizenship was often better than the paltry existence of living as a member of a different entity. Bing notes that opportunism is a timeless virtue. Continued

UNSC urges Iran to suspend uranium enrichment activities within 30 days

It's hard to say whether or not this means anything but at least the UN Security Council is trying to do something. We shall see.

After three weeks of intense negotiations, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a presidential statement Wednesday afternoon calling on Iran to resume suspension of all uranium enrichment-related activities within 30 days.

The statement was passed after the five permanent council members -- the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia -- reached agreement on the text earlier in the day ending three weeks of haggling over its contents.

In the statement, cosponsored by the EU trio -- Britain, France and Germany, the council noted "with serious concern" that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) "is unable to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran."

The council called upon Iran to take steps required by the IAEA to build confidence in the exclusively peaceful purpose of its nuclear program and to resolve outstanding questions.

It also "underlines ... the particular importance of re-establishing full and sustained suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA."

The council requests IAEA Director-General Mohamed Elbaradei to deliver in 30 days a new report to the IAEA board of governors and the Security Council on Iran's compliance with IAEA demands, including the suspension of its enrichment activities.

The EU troika originally set a fortnight timeframe for Iran to comply with IAEA requirements, but it had to be extended due to strong opposition from Russia.

Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya told Xinhua after the adoption that the statement supports diplomatic efforts to solve the Iranian nuclear issue.

"The statement sends a strong message to support the authority of the IAEA and to support all diplomatic efforts that will lead to a diplomatic solution," he stressed.

He called upon all sides concerned, including the EU troika and Russia, to further accelerate steps of diplomatic efforts outside the Security Council.

Wang's Russian counterpart Andrei Denisov echoed his position, saying the IAEA must continue to play "a central role in verifying all the evidence on the purpose and nature of the Iranian nuclear program."

He stressed that there was no evidence that Tehran was intent on building nuclear weapons, adding that "for the time being, we have strong suspicions about intentions, but only suspicions."

However, diplomats from western countries advocated that the unanimous approval send a strong message that Iran has to comply with the requests made by the IAEA.

"The ball is now back in Iran's court," French Ambassador to the UN Jean-Marc de la Sabliere told reporters after the council approved the statement.

"Iran has 30 days. We hope that Iran will comply," he noted. "If Iran doesn't comply, then the Security Council will have to take its responsibilities."

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday that the adoption of the statement demonstrated that "the international community is united in its concern over Iran's nuclear program."

"The Security Council's Presidential Statement sends an unmistakable message to Iran that its efforts to conceal its nuclear program and evade its international obligations are unacceptable," she said in a statement.

After the text was adopted, Iran's UN envoy Javad Zarif told reporters that he had been prevented from addressing the Council to make his case.

"We have been told this was a matter of procedure but I believe it was more than that," he said. "Iran will have to consider the statement in Tehran and will respond accordingly."

During Wednesday's negotiations, they also agreed to drop the language which would have vaguely linked Iran's nuclear program with a threat to international peace and security, in a bid to get Russia on board.

The five key council members have been wrangling over how to respond to the crisis over Iran's nuclear plan after the IAEA reported the matter to the council in early March.

The United States claims that Iran's program is designed to develop nuclear weapons. But Teheran insists that its nuclear program is aimed at generating electricity and it is entitled to developing peaceful nuclear technology under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

On Thursday, foreign ministers of the five permanent council members and their German colleague are due to meet in Berlin to discuss the international community's future strategy toward Iran's nuclear issue.

A presidential statement needs consensus among the 15 council members while a resolution requires a minimum of nine votes and no veto from any of the five permanent members.

More on the Russian Spy Story

This is just a quick follow-up to the on-going story of how the Russians allegedly spied on the US on behalf of the Iraqis and possibly aided them against us at the onset of the war.

As per usual, the Russians are denying they did any such thing. That means nothing as the Russian government has a penchant for lying through its vodka soaked teeth whenever the mood strikes. If you don't believe me, just ask any Russian. Blatant lying is a Russian art form.

From Xinhua:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Monday rejected the U.S. charge of providing intelligence to Iraq at the start of the 2003 U.S.-led war against Saddam Hussein, and said the Pentagon report was politically motivated.

The release of the Pentagon report suggested that it "has hidden political motives", Lavrov told media.

He said this move might be connected with the situation in Iraq.

Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service had also voiced its disapproval of the Pentagon's charge earlier in the weekend.

The Pentagon report claimed that Russia had delivered military intelligence obtained from sources in Qatar, where the U.S. "Central Command" was situated, to Saddam Hussein.

Just one day before the Russian foreign minister made his comments, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the U.S. government would talk with Russian authorities about the report.

"Definitely we will raise it with the Russian government," she said, adding that she hoped they would take it seriously.

According to U.S. State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack, Rice might raise the issue with her Russian counterpart at a meeting of foreign ministers in Berlin on Thursday.

Of course it really doesn't matter what the Russians say as the Pentagon isn't planning on investigating this issue any further, cowards that they are these days.

From Mosnews.com:

The United States has not opened an investigation into Iraqi documents that said Russia passed information to Baghdad on U.S. military movements during the 2003 invasion, a Pentagon spokesman quoted by AFP said today.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman would not say whether the documents, one of which indicated that Russia had a spy in the U.S. military command in Qatar, had been previously investigated.

But he cautioned reporters not to “drill down into one particular document and make it more than what it is.”

“At various levels throughout the United States government these documents have been made available for people to examine and to learn lessons from,” he told reporters.

“I’m not aware at this point of any particular review, investigation, whatever you want to call it, at this particular juncture,” he said.

The existence of the captured documents was revealed in a military after-action study of the war that looked at the invasion from the Iraqi perspective.

Russia denied it had passed U.S. military information to the Iraqis, and said the accusation had never been made by U.S. officials before.

U.S. to ask Russia about Iraq report

On Meet the Press yesterday Condoleezza Rice must have told Tim Russert at least 20 times that we would be talking to the Russian government about their alleged espionage against the US at the onset of the Iraq war but until that time the accusations fell into the category of, "wait and see." I think the US regards Russia now in the same way we regard China; they are too big to take down militarily and with their markets opening to US goods, we cannot afford to alienate them. Instead our lot is to put up with a lot of crap and occasionally end up with egg on our face. When this story is all said and done I suspect that once again GW will be made to look like he hasn't the faintest clue what he is talking about when he calls Vladimir Putin a "good friend."

As far as what the report is actually saying, my instincts tell it's all more than likely true. After reading Yosseff Bodansky's "Secret History of the Iraq War," and reading how much the Russians did in fact help the Hussein regime, plus the allegations that they helped move WMD's out of Iraq before any of our boots hit the ground, to me, this is just more evidence against the Russia government.

Given the kind of business Hussein and Russia were in together (along with France) it's not like it would be out of character for the Russians to have helped the Iraq's in the first place. But like Madam Secretary said, we'll just have to talk to the Russians and see what happens. I suspect they'll be a lot of white washing and hopes that this story dies in the press seeing as if the Russians did spy, there's not a whole we can do these days to punish Russia. Hell, we can't do much to change Iran or N. Korea never mind our former Cold War adversary.

The Bush administration will ask Russia about a report that Moscow turned over information on American troop movements and other military plans to Saddam Hussein during the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday.

''Any implication that there were those from a foreign government who may have been passing information to the Iraqis prior to the invasion would be, of course, very worrying,'' Rice said on CNN's ''Late Edition.''

''I would think the Russians would want to take that very seriously as well,'' she said.

A G-8 boycott?

A leading Senate Democrat said if the report is found to be true, the administration should reassess its relationship with Russia and reconsider President Bush's participation in a July summit meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, of the world's economic powers.

Rice declined to speculate on whether Russia's actions, as detailed in a Pentagon report based on captured Iraqi documents, resulted in casualties among U.S. troops or what Russian President Vladimir Putin knew about any possible Russian involvement.

''We want to take a real hard look at the documents and then raise it with the Russian government,'' Rice said on NBC's ''Meet the Press.''

The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service has dismissed the allegation that Moscow provided information to Saddam, whose government was toppled in the invasion.

'Discouraging . . . disgusting'

''I think we need an entirely new assessment of our relationships with Russia, should this be true,'' Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) told CBS' ''Face the Nation.'' He questioned whether Bush should attend the G-8 meeting in summer.

The top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, said if the report proved true, ''it would be obviously plenty discouraging as well as disgusting'' and the United States should find ways to let the Russians know ''that kind of conduct is not going to be acceptable.''

A Pentagon report last week said two captured Iraqi documents indicate that Russia obtained information from sources ''inside the American Central Command'' in Qatar. Russia passed battlefield intelligence to Saddam through the former Russian ambassador in Baghdad, Vladimir Titorenko, the report said.

Calls to the Russian Foreign Minister on Sunday went unanswered.

New Review: The Truth About Hillary

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

Hillary Rodham Clinton once received a black eye after being trampled by a dozen wild elephants and one baby zebra on the Fourth of July during a hailstorm, according to an anonymous source. Another anonymous source stated in an interview for this review that she is the last of the Red Hot Table Top Cloggers. Finally, an anonymous source reported that Hillary Clinton was recently seen rolling down the street smoking indo, sipping on gin and juice, laid back with her mind on her money and her money on her mind.

Does this sound silly to you? Well how about if I told you that I heard from an anonymous source that Hillary Clinton is a Communist and anti-American agent, and that Bill Clinton is a serial rapist? Now, I have both of these allegations on good authority, but those that have this knowledge won’t identify themselves out of fear of reprisals by the Clintonistas. That too, would be absurd wouldn’t it? Surely one cannot openly make such brazen claims with only “anonymous sources” to back them up and the most nonsensical alibi to make sure these people cannot be identified and verified.

That in a nutshell is what makes “The Truth About Hillary” by Edward Klein a relatively useless book. For the most part, it consists solely of the same material covered in other anti-Hillary tomes. Klein talks about her days as an overachieving youngster, then as a left-wing radical college student, her years in Washington DC pre-Arkansas, the Arkansas years, and finally the Presidential and Senatorial years. Also like many books about Hillary these days, Klein warns us that everything Hillary is doing is for the sole purpose of running for President of the United States in 2008.

Yawn. Continued

Black White Nonsense

I don’t watch much TV these days. Some wrestling here and there, the occasional cop drama (The Shield, The Wire, etc.) and that’s really it. When I can watch TV I usually just watch the news and typically I settle for the most entertaining of the bunch, Fox News.

Wait; come back, my story gets better!

However, last week I had to travel to NY for some personal business and by late Saturday night, I was so worn out that I ended up watching the first show that even looked remotely interesting. That show happened to be FX’s new reality show “Black White” which is produced by rapper turned actor extraordinaire Ice Cube.

The premise of the show is that we have two families, one black and one white, whom will live together in a house for a certain period of time and will be made to look like the opposite of their race; the black family will be turned white and the white family turned black, through the magic of Hollywood makeup. Then, once each family member has been altered, they are to go out and experience the world as a new race and report back to the producers, hilarity ensues.

Just from the previews, I thought this show looked ridiculous but you’d be surprised what you’ll watch when you are dog-tired and TNA Impact isn’t on for another hour. As I watched the plot for this episode unfold I had an epiphany based on the behavior of the players in this reality drama. When it comes to race relations, black people in general have the personality of a victim borderline personality disorder.

That’s right, I said it, black people in general, when the issue of race comes seem to act like they have borderline personality disorder.

Now just what the heck is borderline personality disorder, you are asking?

A person with a borderline personality disorder often experiences a repetitive pattern of disorganization and instability in self-image, mood, behavior and close personal relationships. This can cause significant distress or impairment in friendships and work. A person with this disorder can often be bright and intelligent, and appear warm, friendly and competent. They sometimes can maintain this appearance for a number of years until their defense structure crumbles, usually around a stressful situation like the breakup of a romantic relationship or the death of a parent.

Relationships with others are intense but stormy and unstable with marked shifts of feelings and difficulties in maintaining intimate, close connections. The person may manipulate others and often has difficulty with trusting others. There is also emotional instability with marked and frequent shifts to an empty lonely depression or to irritability and anxiety. There may be unpredictable and impulsive behavior which might include excessive spending, promiscuity, gambling, drug or alcohol abuse, shoplifting, overeating or physically self-damaging actions such as suicide gestures. The person may show inappropriate and intense anger or rage with temper tantrums, constant brooding and resentment, feelings of deprivation, and a loss of control or fear of loss of control over angry feelings. There are also identity disturbances with confusion and uncertainty about self-identity, sexuality, life goals and values, career choices, friendships. There is a deep-seated feeling that one is flawed, defective, damaged or bad in some way, with a tendency to go to extremes in thinking, feeling or behavior. Under extreme stress or in severe cases there can be brief psychotic episodes with loss of contact with reality or bizarre behavior or symptoms. Even in less severe instances, there is often significant disruption of relationships and work performance. The depression which accompanies this disorder can cause much suffering and can lead to serious suicide attempts.

One of the main elements of recognizing someone with BPD is projection of feelings onto others. What the BPD person will typically do, and what I saw the black folks in this show do is ascribe particularly intense and negative emotions to their white counterparts, when they themselves were the ones feeling those emotions. In other words, the black family kept insinuating that the white family was racist or that everything they did was a subtle knock on the black race when in fact it was the black family that continually displayed intolerance.

The first example started right at the beginning of the show. The two moms are sitting with their dialect coach to learn how to speak with the inflection of the race they are playing. On the practice sheet in front of them are a list of words, one of which is “bitch.” The white mom then says in what was obviously a playful manner, “Yo bitch!” Now I’m not saying the white woman made the best choice there but haven’t we all made a wet-fart-in-church type joke that we thought was in the spirit of the moment and it turned out not to be so funny. You can accuse her of being a dork and little on the stupid side but she wasn’t being a racist by any stretch of the imagination.

However, the black mother of course goes right off the deep end. At that moment and for the majority of the episode, the black mother goes on and on and on and on and on and on about this woman is a racist and nobody calls a black a bitch and blah blah blah. The white practically begs for forgiveness and explains quite clearly that it was an innocent remark bred in naïve stupidity. Not having says the black mother, clearly the white woman is racist in the mind of the black woman.

But that’s not all that happened.

Now the white woman is in her black person makeup and the two women are shopping the black part of town at a street market. Mind you, the whole purpose of being there is to shop where black people, for what black people might buy. They walk into a clothing store and one of the wares being sold is a dashiki. Granted you don’t see too many average black people donning the dashiki at the mall but at least some do wear them or the shopkeeper wouldn’t be selling them. The white woman sees one she likes and buys it. Of course the black woman sees this yet again as example of racism and that the white has gone “too far.”

There were a few more examples where the same thing happens. The white folks try in earnest to experience life as black people and the blacks folks in turn call them racist. That is when it hit me, it isn’t that the while folks on the show hate blacks at all; the black folks hate white people and apparently are uncomfortable saying so out loud. So, like a client with BPD, they project their own feelings of hate and anger on to white people, crying racism at every turn.

It isn’t just on “Black White” that I’ve noticed this pattern. I’ve worked with black families, from all different strata’s of life and this pattern has repeated itself . Any challenge or feeling of unease that a black person is made to endure, that would be typical among any other combination of races seems to be met with cries of racism. It is obvious to me that the reason is, deep down, on some level, their exists to this day, a seething hatred of the white race in black people that no matter what happens, will always show itself in times of stress. And as evidenced by the characters on “Black White” this hatred will typically be projected on whites that have long ago learned to accept black people as their brothers and sisters.

To paraphrase Dennis Miller, but that’s just my opinion, I could be a racist myself.

Majority of Palestinians support Hamas-Israel talks: poll

When you see something like this, you have to hope it's more than just wishful thinking. You would think that despite its rhetoric of wanting to destroy Israel, which is written in Hamas' charter, that they would still not blow this historic chance at lasting peace in the Middle East. With the majority of Palestinians supporting peace with their geographically close neighbor, there might be a sliver of hope that that the "Roadmap" will actually continue to be pursued and acted upon.

A quick not on violent rhetoric; Iran, Venezuela and North Korea all have a penchant for running on at the mouth, despite any real intentions to ever actually carry out their threats. Either that or their threats are mired in circumstances that would have kept them subdued anyway. My point is, much ado was made of Hamas' charter regarding Israel and in a perfect world I would want them to change it too, but blathering violently seems to be a cultural thing for countries without real international muscle. I think Israel and Co. have to be the bigger people and interact with these countries despite their nonsensical remarks about destruction and violence...at least until the rest of world grows up.

An opinion poll showed on Tuesday that 75 percent of the Palestinians support peace negotiations between the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and Israel.

The poll, conducted by the Palestinian Center for Researches and Survey in the West Bank, said that 64 percent of those inquired agree to push forward the peace process, while 14 percent reject it.

Fifty-three percent of the inquired expressed hope that a new cabinet led by Ismail Haneya from Hamas would be able to implement the roadmap peace plan, while 40 percent reject it.

Asked about the prospect of the Hamas-led cabinet, 70 percent said that the cabinet would succeed, while 22 percent envisaged failure of the government.

Meanwhile, 68 percent believe that the Palestinian National Authority can not manage without international aid, and 50 percent said that the aid would come to an end after Hamas assumes office.

French students, police clash in labor protests

The following was paid for by John Brodigan for a Better America

This story really does just blog itself. All I have to add is "Viva La Resistance!"

So to quote a close, personal friend of mine (who returns to active duty tomorrow, and you won't believe what's grinding his gears this week), here's the story:

PARIS - Students clashed with police and activists rampaged through a McDonald’s restaurant and torched the entrance to a Gap store in the capital Saturday as demonstrations against a government plan to loosen job protections spread in a widening arc across France.

The protests against the law, which drew some 500,000 people in cities across the country, were the biggest show yet of escalating anger that is testing the strength of the conservative government before elections next year.

The rallies and marches were largely peaceful, but police fired tear gas during confrontations with stone-throwing youths in Paris. Four officers and 12 protesters were injured, and police arrested at least 59 people, Paris officials said.

Click here for more...

New Review: My Year In Iraq

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

Iraq is the great mess of the modern era. By mentioning the country’s name in a passing conversation, you’ll invite a plethora of opinions that will make your head spin: we’re there because Saddam Hussein attacked us on 9/11, we’re there for oil, Hussein had WMDs and would have given them to Osama bin Laden, Hussein had no WMDs because we’ve been bombing him in the north and south for 10 years, the WMDs he had were moved to Syria, we’re there to promote freedom, we’re there because Hussein tried to kill Dubya’s daddy, we need to stay until the job is done, we never should have went in the first place, etc etc.

As mired in controversy as Iraq has been, one of the most consistent points that have been made (and probably the most believable) is that a Westernized Democratic Iraq will be the greatest resource in the global fight against fanatical Muslim terrorism. It is not beyond the realm of possibilities to believe that democracy in Iraq could spread across the Middle East, thus eliminating the abject poverty and anger that fuels pro-radical Islamist terrorism and anti-Americanism. Now if you agree with this premise, you must also realize that saying that we’re going to have democracy in Iraq is much easier said than done.

Enter Ambassador L. Paul Bremer III, whom President George W. Bush appointed presidential envoy to Iraq and administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). This was the man who actually volunteered for a one-year tour of duty in probably the hottest zone in the world outside of Central and East Africa. He had the relatively thankless job of holding Iraq together while it tried to rebuild itself not just after a brief war, but after decades of maltreatment by one of the world's most sadistic and brutal dictators, Saddam Hussein.

Ambassador Bremer has written a memoir of his time spent in Iraq titled, “My Year in Iraq: The Struggle to Build a Future of Hope,” and it is probably the best resource for understanding just how difficult the rebuilding and rehabilitation process has been for Iraq. Bremer covers in intimate detail everything from why he volunteered for this job and his reservations therein, to his battles and near undoing by the Pentagon, to his rather close relationship with President Bush and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice. Continued

Agatha Radulich (1917-2006)

"Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning. " -Psalm 30:5-

Mark just sent word that his other grandmother, Agatha, passed away at 11:00 this morning. If you could please keep him and his family in your thoughts and prayers, this has been a very difficult month for them.

God Bless.

-John Brodigan

Queer Eye for Leiberman?

The following was paid for by John Brodigan for a Better America

Time Magazine has an article this week on different advertising techniques the candidates are planning on using in 2008. Internet, text messages...you won't be able to turn around without seeing a candidates name somewhere, and that's fine. Everyone is advertising everything everywhere anyway, so why not the Presidential candidates trying to convince you that they suck less than the other guy?

So I'm reading the article, and I came across this paragraph. If it's true, things have done gone to far. If this is really where our Presidential campaigns are headed, dust off the chesterfield because I'm moving to Ontario...

Keeping supporters passionate is important, but to win elections you have to sway the undecideds. If they won't watch ads, at least one possible candidate thinks they might watch the campaign. "We've discussed the possibility of doing a reality show," says a Senate aide whose boss is contemplating a long-shot White House bid in '08. "The obvious danger is that it would have to be warts and all to be credible, and you'd have to give up some control. The upside is people get emotionally invested in the candidate." The aide emphasizes that no offers exist yet. "But," he adds, "it's inevitable that somebody's going to do it, so why not us?"

I can't even find the words.

Stock Tips are like Assholes

(EDITORS NOTE: I'm not Mark. I'm John. Sadly they're taking Mark's other grandmother off of the respirator this week, so he asked me to fill in for him while he's with his family. This is a post I had originally written for my blog. I'll have something more up Mark's political alley later in the week.

You can send your prayers and well wishes to Mark and his family here.)


I've been playing the market as of late. This is the first time in a few years that I have a steady job and am making a few sheckles, plus in order for me to fully embrace conservatism I really should have a stock portfolio.

It's also something I've wanted to do for a while. One of my regrets was that I didn't invest in my old company when it was at $.12 a share. I could have gotten 1,000 for $120. If they went bankrupt, BFD? It's only $120, and I would be more concerned trying to find a new job (which I wound up being anyway). If it hit, I could make some decent money. But I got scared since my few of the market is people jumping off of buildings when they lose. The company, when it was taken off the market, was at $9.76 a share. Do the math.

So for the past few months I've been garnishing some of my weekly wages, putting them in an investment account, and set forth to make my fortune. My first fiscal quarter is almost over, and I am happy to announce that I'm up 4.4%! Go me. A few of my friends have been asking me about it, so I thought I'd share a little of what I did and learned thus far.

FORWARD LEANING STATEMENTS
I'm not an expert. I don't even play one on TV. And as a matter of full disclosure, my holdings are Marvel Entertainment (MVL), Lion's Gate Films (LGF), World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), Nokia (NOK), Hasbro (HAS), and Activision (ATVI). Apparently when you write about stocks you're supposed to disclose your holdings, so I thought I'd do it all at once.

MONEY
I take 10% of my monthly salary and invest it. It's just like putting the money in a savings account, only with a risk. Plus on an average, stocks yield 11% in interest, so it's a good risk. I chose Schwab.com to open my account. I saw a bunch of commercials for different sites, but Schwab was the easiest for me to figure out plus the others usually had an minimum account balance you needed to keep.

I also take another 10% and opened an ING Direct account, just because having a cash account makes sense too. Things might be a little tight this year, but after living paycheck to paycheck since...well, since I ever started working in the first place, another year won't kill me to make sure I never have to do that again.

READ AND WATCH TV
There are two websites I go to. One is Finance@yahoo.com, and the other is TheStreet.com. Both are free, and both have invaluable advice. The Street (owned by CNBC's Jim Cramer) sends me a newsletter everyday that collects the different articles on the site. The finance page at yahoo lets you create your own watch list, and collects relevant articles from all over cyberspace.

Bookwise, I started with "Make More Money Now" by John Bradshaw Layfield. Yes, THAT John Bradshaw Layfield. My thinking was that it'd be a good read for someone like me, without having to grab one of them "Dummies" or "Complete Idiot's" books. I've also just started reading Cramer's "Sane Investing in an Insane World."

Then you have television. CNBC is great, particularly Jim Cramer's "Mad Money." He's insane, and he makes investing seem fun. You also have the Saturday morning finance shows on Fox News. Yes, we all know Fox News is evil and totally biased towards conservatives. I mean, when all other networks have the President's approval rating at 33%, Fox has it at 39%! Totally scandalous! But seriously folks, I'm not endorsing drilling in Alaska or cutting Justice David Souter's brakes. These (the analysts on Fox) are simply people who have been very successful making a lot of money in the stock market, and they bring up interesting points. One of them is even Wayne Rogers from M*A*S*H. How can you not trust Trapper John McIntyre?

You'll be surprised what some of the research might uncover. I was avoiding WWE, mainly because as a wrestling fan, the product bores the hell out of me and I don't see it reaching another high peak like it did a few years ago. Yet, it was always a highly rated stock and I couldn't find out why. Once I read how hot digital media is going to be in the future (they have their own channel), and reminding myself how well their international business does, I decided to go for it. My stock is up 11% since investing.

TWO THINGS I'VE LEARNED
1. Oil prices go up, stock prices go down. I don't know why.

2. When a company announces it's earning before trading starts, that's generally good news. When they announce them and the end of the day, that's generally bad news.

KNOW WHAT YOU'RE INVESTING IN
My mom keeps telling me about how she and my dad invested when they were told it was a good time to do so, and lost all the money they invested. Here's the thing. She doesn't even remember what they invested in. That's the wrong way to do it, plus there's no excuse these days when you have a wealth of information and research at your fingertips.

I chose Marvel because I know Marvel. They were the fastest growing New York Company in 2005. They just signed a licensing deal with Hasbro, and starting in 2007 will license their characters for new action figure, video games, and anything else Hasbro wants to do with them. They've got three movies coming out in '07 (Ghost Rider, Spider Man 2, and Fantastic Four 2) plus a little movie coming out in May called X-Men. This was a no brainer for me, and my stock is up 14%.

Conversely, I had invested in a company called JDS Uniphase (JDSU). I know nothing aboot fiber optics, but Cramer highly suggested it and I got in when it was $3.07 a share. Their most recent earnings weren't as high as expected, I had read a number of experts start to sour on tech. I didn't know what that meant and realized that I know nothing about fiber optics, so I got scared and got out when shares dipped to $2.94.

They closed Friday at $3.70. Do the math there.

That's been my journey thus far. I started with a $150 and it's basically just been a lot of reading and a lot of checking Yahoo Finance ever five minutes to make sure that the market hasn't crashed. It hasn't so far. :-)

Book Review: The Search

Welcome to the Information Age!

In today’s global community, each and every citizen of the world is connected by bandwidth and a simple personal computer. At any given time I can access information on nearly an infinite amount of subjects ranging from the complex to the absurd. I can communicate instantaneously with 1 or 1000 people at once, from as near as the next room to as far as Beijing. This is the new frontier: complete access to the world and everything in it from the easy chair in my den…in my pajamas.

However, navigating this massive index of information is the tricky part. You have to know what exactly it is you are searching for and how to manipulate the tools that will extract the information for you. The computer is an exacting mistress and we mere mortals tend to be a rather vague bunch. For those of you who have ever said or heard someone else say, “You know that thing, that thing with the guy who was like, you know, tall…” then you know what I’m talking about. It can be a frustrating experience trying to translate obtuse human thought into acute computer language.

Click here for more...

High property taxes driving a new revolt

Owning property is part of the American dream. It falls under the "pursuit of happiness" category that we bandy about when speaking of the American Dream. At least since the end of World War II and the advent of GI loans, men and women have raced to open fields to buy a plot of their own. This would be there nest egg to live in and raise a family. Owning a house was an accomplishment and couples lived for the day when then could have a mortgage burning party, a day that signified freedom from economic burden.

But there were always taxes. Usually the taxes in each community were fair and equitable. The proceeds were spent in the community you lived in and the results were usually very obvious. Taxes were spent on new roads, traffic signals, parks, preserves, more police, more resources for the local schools and a whole host of other items. This is why most people didn't mind paying their taxes. It may have taken money out of ones pocket but it went to worthy causes that improved the neighborhood.

However, if your locally elected politicians raised taxes like a gambling addict in a high-stakes poker game, you could always vote the bum out, as they say.

The problem as of late is tied to the housing boom. Not only are property values skyrocketing, but also now so are taxes as the two are indelibly tied to one another. Property taxes are going through the roof in many places making it unaffordable for the average Joe to make a life for himself and his family. As somebody whom is now a homeowner, I can feel his pain. You invest your life into something that's supposed to make it better and then after the bills are paid you are lucky if you have enough gas to get to work.

The other option would be to move to a less expensive neighborhood but even that has its problems. For one, less expensive is a relative term these days as even the crappiest ghettos are getting facelifts. It was not that long when I worked in New York City and the residents of Harlem were getting upset over a luxury condo being built in the vicinity of their 3-family Brownstones. Gentrification, that's what they were afraid of. They'd lived in Harlem for most of their lives and they didn't want to be driven from THEIR neighborhood that through think and thin, they'd survived in by Mr. Whitefolks and his newfound courage to move back to the big bad city. Who can hardly blame them?

But this exactly what is happening in areas outside of Harlem as far away as Idaho. However, if there's one thing that gets the dander up of the average unread American is unfair taxation, thus a tax revolt is in full swing.

ABC News reports that, "In Orford, N.H., a tin-roofed hunting cabin worth $10,000 was recently assessed at $200,000, just for its mountain view. Taxes on the cabin and its outhouse skyrocketed.

Around Lake Tahoe, along the California-Nevada border, property taxes have shot up 135 percent in the past four years.

Residents of Beaufort, S.C., pay $17 million more in property taxes today than in 2000.

Welcome to the flip side of the real estate boom. Years of rising home values have boosted property taxes steadily. Now, homeowners across the United States are fighting back.

"Real estate growth and real estate boom seem to be happening all over the country and [property-tax revolt] is an inevitable consequence," says Roger Sherman, a property tax expert in Boise, Idaho.

This year, legislative proposals, citizen initiatives, and lawsuits are on the agenda in at least 20 states. These new efforts reflect both residents' distrust of how their property tax dollars are being spent and concerns that rising assessments are driving working-class people out of popular towns and cities."

The article cites some specific areas where the tax revolt is happening:

" Idaho: Lawmakers are mulling over eight bills limiting property taxes. One would revise the "homestead exemption," which now keeps the first $50,000 of a home's value off the tax rolls. The bill boosts that to $100,000.

" South Carolina: Having capped the rise in property tax assessments at 3 percent per year until a home is sold or improved, the legislature is now considering a rollback of property taxes, replacing them with a hike in the sales tax.

" Georgia: Many lawmakers are backing legislation that would put a similar 3 percent cap into the state constitution.

" Nevada: Protesters are gathering signatures for a citizen initiative that would require the state to refund taxpayers if state revenues rise faster than inflation. They also want to cap the growth in property tax bills at 1 percent per year.

" Connecticut: After an uproar over massive assessment hikes for lakefront properties around the state, state officials have ordered cities and towns that have seen property tax spikes to calibrate disputed assessments to "comparable" properties, based on records of recent sales.

Ultimately our governments cannot tax their voters into bankruptcy and abject poverty. As I've said before this housing bubble has to burst and when it does, taxes will have to fall. It is only a matter time.

Hypocrisy and Friendship: The New Cold War

Nearly everyday the question regarding our involvement in Iraq is asked, “Why are we there?” The answer our president has given is, “We are there to bring democracy to a place where there was once tyranny.” I’ll grant you that he came up with this well after the original reason, to disarm former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein of his weapons of mass destruction, turned to ashes in his mouth. However, even if it was our third or fourth reason to justify invasion, the theory I believe is sound. A viable democracy in the Middle East could start a cascade effect, spreading outward from Iraq and Afghanistan and summarily ridding terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda a place to organize.

It’s really not that bizarre of an idea.

The problem is, as with all things concerning the Bush Administration, is a matter of consistency. We’re standing firm with this noble idea that it is good to depose tyrants in the world and allow all people to be free in the hopes that free people will maximize the potential for relative peace around the globe. However, as Eddie Izzard once said, “If we’re going to just take it upon ourselves to get rid of tyrants, well then let’s get rid of all tyrants then, not just the one we don’t like….are we going in alphabetical order starting with ‘S’?”

Bush and company talk a fairly good game when it comes to certain dictatorships they don’t like. They brought down their old buddy Saddam because he was a loose end as well as a loose cannon and probably felt like it was only a matter of time before the piece of Cold War strategery came back to haunt them. Of course they don’t like Iran because of that whole “death to America” business not to mention hard feelings from the overthrow of the Shah. And if it weren’t for either China or Russia, North Korea would be a steaming pile of ash by now, as they present no real strategic or economic value to the world. These are easy totalitarian countries to pick on.

But when Bush talks about Russia all of a sudden that very same lack of democracy is overlooked and Moscow is regarded as a, “good friend.” Bush has practically gushed over Putin, who by all accounts has become as close to a Stalinist as one could be without killing millions of your own people (for more on this read Kremlin Rising).

Despite what is apparently Bush’s wishful thinking regarding our friends to the East, the Council on Foreign Relations has presented a more accurate portrayal of where Russia is headed and what that means to us.

Almost 15 years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, ties between Russia and the United States are "headed in the wrong direction", suggests a new report released here this week by the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

In addition to disagreements over an increasing number of foreign-policy issues - most recently, Moscow's hosting of top officials of the Palestinian Hamas party - the US is concerned about internal developments in Russia, particularly what it regards as the growing concentration of power in the Kremlin under President Vladimir Putin.

"At a time when the president of the United States has made democracy a goal of American foreign policy, Russia's political system is becoming steadily more authoritarian," according to "Russia's Wrong Direction: What the United States Can and Should Do", the 98-page product of a CFR task force that included many top US experts and former policymakers who have specialized in Russian affairs.

"Russia is a less open and less democratic society than just a few years ago, and the rollback of pluralism and centralization of power may not have run their course," says the report, which is likely to strengthen those in the administration of US President George W Bush and Congress who have called for a tougher line with Moscow. Google Source

Russia has been sliding back toward totalitarianism for some time now. Even as Bush was inviting Putin to the ranch and calling him a good friend to America, Putin was very visibly imprisoning those who threatened his power, taking over media stations and committing near genocide in Chechnya. You’ll notice that there’s very little mention of this in the mainstream news except for the one time Bill Maher alluded to it on his late night cable show.

Even today the tone regarding Russia is so much softer than the one we reserve for Iran or North Korea. This stark hypocrisy and unwillingness to face reality has pretty much given Moscow the opportunity to go hog wild in reconstituting itself as a superpower that will stand directly opposite of the US.

For example, where we try to send a message to the terrorist groups Hamas that anti-Semitism and threats of violence are not acceptable in any governmental body, Moscow practically falls over itself to extend an olive branch.

Hamas' leader hailed his Moscow talks as an end to the militant Palestinian group's international isolation and said Russia's position in negotiations differed from that of the United States and other Western nations, according to an interview published Monday.

Hamas political chief Khaled Mashaal, whose three-day visit ended Sunday, told the daily Vremya Novostei that "Moscow became the place where we opened the door to the entire global community."

"It broke the blockade which Israel and the United States have been trying to impose on us," Mashaal said.

He also said that "Russia's position is completely unlike that of the West," and praised Russian officials for understanding Hamas' stance.

Many Russian media and observers hailed the Kremlin invitation to Hamas as helping boost the Russian role in Middle East peacemaking. Geidar Dzhemal, a Moscow-based Islamic affairs analyst, said talks with Hamas also helped the Kremlin win stronger sympathy from the estimated 20 million Muslims who make up nearly 14 percent of Russia's population. "That was a very successful spin by Putin," Dzhemal told reporters Monday.

But Alexei Malashenko, an analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center, said Russia's hosting of Hamas was unnecessarily warm. "Hamas should have been given a pat on the shoulder, but they had a passionate tango instead," Malashenko told Gazeta. Source

Russia not only opposes sanctions against their buddies in Tehran, but now they also oppose sanctions against North Korea. Russia opposes any kind of sanctions against what the United States calls rogue states such as Iran and North Korea, Glev Ivashentsov, Moscow's top diplomat to Seoul, said on Tuesday.

His remarks came as U.S. and North Korean officials were to hold a meeting in New York later in the day amid Washington's financial sanctions against Pyongyang for the communist state's alleged counterfeiting of U.S. dollars.

``In principle, we are against any economic sanctions because they do not work,'' Ivashentsov told The Korea Times after a forum hosted by the Korea News Editors' Association in Seoul.

``There should be dialogue, there should be consultation, but sanctions do not work neither against North Korea, nor against Iran, nor against any other country,'' he said. Source

To quote from the movie Aliens, “What exactly are we suppose to use, harsh language?”

Apparently that’s exactly what Russia would like our global reach to be cut down to. At the end of the day, what Russia, China, the Middle East and to a lesser extent the European Union really want is for the US to be disarmed of its military and economic strength. It’s the rest of the world that wants set tones and pace. That’s probably been the single biggest problem with Iraq. We’ve invested so much time, energy and resources into this one affair that we’ve compromised our ability to deal effectively with the rest of the world and now places like Russia are jumping at the window of opportunity to assert themselves and dominant powers.

Meanwhile, we’re still harping about spreading democracy in a world that spits on it.