Critics called nationalization of the banking industry in America as nothing more than rewarding failure, but will it ultimately kill the Protestant work ethic in the long run?
By: Vanessa Uy
President Obama really did scored big during the London G20 summit back in April 2, 2009 for leading the way in allowing the attendant countries to reach a consensus in tackling our on-going global financial crisis. Even though France, Germany and the rest of the EU were very reluctant at first in “throwing money at the problem” via economic stimulus packages – given that this is the very thing that saved Japan from her economic “Lost Decade”.
But back in America, populist anger has been brewing since the start of 2009 over TARP-fund misappropriation through overly extravagant executive bonuses of the likes of AIG and their ilk. Many now see the nationalization of ailing banks and other financial institutions as nothing more than rewarding failure. The question now is will nationalization – which many economic pundits believe mark the death-knell of American capitalism – is now poised to kill off another cherished American value – namely the Protestant work ethic?
Even though the Protestant work ethic had become inexplicably linked to the Reagan-era “greed-driven” economic prosperity of the 1980s, even though the concept already reached full-bloom in 20th Century America where everyone – especially the “Turn of the Century” (1900s) immigrants – stating that anyone who works hard will be rewarded handsomely. But Capitol Hill’s current flirtation with nationalization, where failing financial institutions are unfairly rewarded through the TARP funds, does sound just like a repeat of the dubious concepts of the past. Like the Johnson Administration-era redistribution of wealth of the mid-1960s - a.k.a. “War on Poverty” which usually just resulted in a heavier tax burden and fewer crucial services for the working poor and the middle classes.
Hastily set-up ill conceived government programs like the outgoing Bush Administration’s TARP funds to bail out ailing banks and other financial and corporate institutions became the focus of populist anger. Especially during the first few months of 2009 were economic and financial issues are as politically polarizing as religious extremism – given the ever-increasing number of job losses and home foreclosures.
Poorly executed government programs of “social service” – especially the TARP funds which to me are nothing more than welfare of billionaires who are taking too many risky financial decisions for their own good – do more harm than good. Especially when the American taxpayer are now the underwriters of their ill-conceived high-risk financial adventurism. They tend to undermine the Protestant work ethic that made the post World War II American economy the gold standard of capitalism. Nationalism – especially when it is poorly executed – will ultimately lower productivity. Which only serves to bolster the idea harbored by socialist-leaning anti-capitalists who think that capitalism cannot reform itself. Looks like those Ché Guevara T-shirts will never go out of fashion.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Can Capitalism Really Reform Itself?
It has lately become a target of populist anger due to the policymakers’ inability to rein in on financial executive excesses, but is it possible for capitalism to reform itself?
By: Vanessa Uy
Ever since that AIG executive bonus debacle received round the clock press attention, populist anger in America and across the world has now been directed at the excesses of capitalism. Not to mention the Bernard L. Madoff’s hedge-fund-as-a-pyramid-scheme financial scandal and Sir Allen Stanford’s equally dubious investment scheme. The state of the global economy – as of late – has now turned into an issue as politically polarizing as that of religious extremism. But given that every head-of-state around the world are now pledging to do their part to reform the excesses that plagued capitalism since back in the days when Ronald Reagan ruled the free world, is it really possible to reform capitalism – or create policies to make capitalism reform itself?
The G-20 Summit in London, England has been touted by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown of rising to the challenge to reform capitalism for the better. With the promise to reform the world’s financial system through international regulations and tighter controls of hedge funds and mortgaged backed securities, as it’s main goals. There is literally a lot of money riding on the G-20 Summit in London. Though the warm-up protests last Saturday March 28, 2009 only highlights the concern that now capitalism really is the target of global populist anger. But the question now is whether our “enlightened” world leaders choose quantitative easing at the expense of their citizen’s economic well-being – or will there be a repeat of 1999’s Battle in Seattle?
The problem with our existing capitalist framework of our global economy is that it is very dependent on the existence of financial disparity between populations – i.e. it only works if there are poor people working for the rich people. And this is the very reason why the world’s “significant” population of multi-millionaires and billionaires are extremely reluctant to commit to “Going Galt” – i.e. mimicking John Galt of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged where über-rich people formed their own commune in a secluded island. Imagine billionaires employing multi-millionaires as gardeners and landscapers. Or how about multi-millionaires peddling 5-dollar MSRP (manufacturer’s suggested retail price) devilled eggs and selling them to their billionaire customers at 30 thousand dollars for starters. Maybe Karl Marx and W.E.B. DuBois were right in stating that capitalism cannot reform itself. Or as I see it – capitalism is extremely reluctant in reforming itself. Even if it means it’s very survival is at stake.
By: Vanessa Uy
Ever since that AIG executive bonus debacle received round the clock press attention, populist anger in America and across the world has now been directed at the excesses of capitalism. Not to mention the Bernard L. Madoff’s hedge-fund-as-a-pyramid-scheme financial scandal and Sir Allen Stanford’s equally dubious investment scheme. The state of the global economy – as of late – has now turned into an issue as politically polarizing as that of religious extremism. But given that every head-of-state around the world are now pledging to do their part to reform the excesses that plagued capitalism since back in the days when Ronald Reagan ruled the free world, is it really possible to reform capitalism – or create policies to make capitalism reform itself?
The G-20 Summit in London, England has been touted by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown of rising to the challenge to reform capitalism for the better. With the promise to reform the world’s financial system through international regulations and tighter controls of hedge funds and mortgaged backed securities, as it’s main goals. There is literally a lot of money riding on the G-20 Summit in London. Though the warm-up protests last Saturday March 28, 2009 only highlights the concern that now capitalism really is the target of global populist anger. But the question now is whether our “enlightened” world leaders choose quantitative easing at the expense of their citizen’s economic well-being – or will there be a repeat of 1999’s Battle in Seattle?
The problem with our existing capitalist framework of our global economy is that it is very dependent on the existence of financial disparity between populations – i.e. it only works if there are poor people working for the rich people. And this is the very reason why the world’s “significant” population of multi-millionaires and billionaires are extremely reluctant to commit to “Going Galt” – i.e. mimicking John Galt of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged where über-rich people formed their own commune in a secluded island. Imagine billionaires employing multi-millionaires as gardeners and landscapers. Or how about multi-millionaires peddling 5-dollar MSRP (manufacturer’s suggested retail price) devilled eggs and selling them to their billionaire customers at 30 thousand dollars for starters. Maybe Karl Marx and W.E.B. DuBois were right in stating that capitalism cannot reform itself. Or as I see it – capitalism is extremely reluctant in reforming itself. Even if it means it’s very survival is at stake.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Was Abraham Lincoln a Racist?
As the only “White Guy” with enough clout to deserve mention during Black History Month, do most Americans harbor an overly rosy view of the 16th president of the United States?
By: Vanessa Uy
As the closest thing to America having her own Jesus, is the book written by Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. titled Lincoln on Race and Slavery serve as a polemic as damning as the Nag Hammadi Documents? Given that an overwhelming number of Americans have an overly rosy view of America’s 16th president, it might as well be.
As the Director of the W.E.B. DuBois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard University Professor Gates has the unique position of having access to very important - and the not so pertinent – knowledge. On how then-President Lincoln’s policy on the emancipation and drafting of former African-American slaves to fight for the Union Army during the civil War. In his book, Professor Gates managed to use the not so flattering aspects of then-President Lincoln’s policies with great effect in his warts-and-all biography of Abraham Lincoln.
Compared to recent biographies about Abraham Lincoln, Professor Gates’ view on America’s 16th President is a stark contrast compared to the overly rosy view harbored by Adam Gopnik’s book titled Angels and Ages: A Short Book About Darwin, Lincoln, and Modern Life. While Adam Gopnik praises Lincoln’s “Liberty for All” idealism even to the black African slaves, Professor Gates paints a somewhat more somber view on Lincoln. Especially on his not so popular policies instituted during his presidency, not to mention Lincoln’s well-documented racism against black slaves.
While Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin is probably the “book-of-the-moment” when it comes to biographies about Abraham Lincoln. Not only because it influenced President Barack Obama about Lincoln’s “emotional temperament” of living through and resolving crises, but also because Goodwin’s book concentrates more on the aspects of Abraham Lincoln that most Americans hold dear.
In recent years, books and movies that portray the less flattering aspects of Abraham Lincoln – no matter how historically accurate – never seems to attain mainstream success. Even the relatively popular movie titled Cold Mountain. Which is about then President Lincoln’s questionable policies during the Civil War was remembered more for Renée Zellweger’s overuse of BOTOX – rather than the movie’s historical merits. Though the movie did inspire a few Americans to voice out that Abraham Lincoln should be tried posthumously for war crimes under the rules of the Nuremberg Convention.
Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is no less flattering when it comes to Abraham Lincoln’s “human frailties”. Historical documents did cite Lincoln’s racism. Not only on Lincoln’s vehement opposition of interracial marriage, but he also harbored grave doubts about the intellectual capacity of African Americans, publicly used the “N-word” until at least 1862, enjoyed “darky” jokes and black-faced minstrel shows. All of which a middle-school civics teacher in the United States would rather wish their students never learn about Abraham Lincoln.
Even though Lincoln finally freed the slaves and drafted them to fight for the Union Army. But whether this was all in the name of political expediency or a genuine concern for African American welfare at the time is anybody’s guess. Professor Gates was leaning towards the political expediency angle. Nevertheless, the Civil War redeemed then President Lincoln - which was nevertheless a miracle in itself.
By: Vanessa Uy
As the closest thing to America having her own Jesus, is the book written by Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. titled Lincoln on Race and Slavery serve as a polemic as damning as the Nag Hammadi Documents? Given that an overwhelming number of Americans have an overly rosy view of America’s 16th president, it might as well be.
As the Director of the W.E.B. DuBois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard University Professor Gates has the unique position of having access to very important - and the not so pertinent – knowledge. On how then-President Lincoln’s policy on the emancipation and drafting of former African-American slaves to fight for the Union Army during the civil War. In his book, Professor Gates managed to use the not so flattering aspects of then-President Lincoln’s policies with great effect in his warts-and-all biography of Abraham Lincoln.
Compared to recent biographies about Abraham Lincoln, Professor Gates’ view on America’s 16th President is a stark contrast compared to the overly rosy view harbored by Adam Gopnik’s book titled Angels and Ages: A Short Book About Darwin, Lincoln, and Modern Life. While Adam Gopnik praises Lincoln’s “Liberty for All” idealism even to the black African slaves, Professor Gates paints a somewhat more somber view on Lincoln. Especially on his not so popular policies instituted during his presidency, not to mention Lincoln’s well-documented racism against black slaves.
While Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin is probably the “book-of-the-moment” when it comes to biographies about Abraham Lincoln. Not only because it influenced President Barack Obama about Lincoln’s “emotional temperament” of living through and resolving crises, but also because Goodwin’s book concentrates more on the aspects of Abraham Lincoln that most Americans hold dear.
In recent years, books and movies that portray the less flattering aspects of Abraham Lincoln – no matter how historically accurate – never seems to attain mainstream success. Even the relatively popular movie titled Cold Mountain. Which is about then President Lincoln’s questionable policies during the Civil War was remembered more for Renée Zellweger’s overuse of BOTOX – rather than the movie’s historical merits. Though the movie did inspire a few Americans to voice out that Abraham Lincoln should be tried posthumously for war crimes under the rules of the Nuremberg Convention.
Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is no less flattering when it comes to Abraham Lincoln’s “human frailties”. Historical documents did cite Lincoln’s racism. Not only on Lincoln’s vehement opposition of interracial marriage, but he also harbored grave doubts about the intellectual capacity of African Americans, publicly used the “N-word” until at least 1862, enjoyed “darky” jokes and black-faced minstrel shows. All of which a middle-school civics teacher in the United States would rather wish their students never learn about Abraham Lincoln.
Even though Lincoln finally freed the slaves and drafted them to fight for the Union Army. But whether this was all in the name of political expediency or a genuine concern for African American welfare at the time is anybody’s guess. Professor Gates was leaning towards the political expediency angle. Nevertheless, the Civil War redeemed then President Lincoln - which was nevertheless a miracle in itself.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
George W. Bush: Worst US President Ever?
From his ill-advised prosecution of America’s War on Terror to the Hurricane Katrina relief fiasco just to name a few of his major blunders. Is George W. Bush really the worst US president?
By: Vanessa Uy
When then US President George W. Bush managed to create his own link bomb on cyberspace back around 2005 – i.e. the “miserable failure” link bomb – via his own incompetence. Many around the world wondered if the “insightfully challenged” US president can claim the title as the worst elected US president of all time. And yet, actions proving his utter disregard to what makes an enlightened world leader continued unabated.
The shoe-throwing incident by concerned Iraqi journalist Muntazer al-Zaidi back in December 2008 – a sign of expressing one’s contempt to another person in the Arab world – only serve to highlight the Islamic world’s disdain on the actions and policies underwritten by then US President George W. Bush. Worse still, President Bush then feigned ignorance when interviewed by reporters moments after the incident. But what does make George W. Bush the worst US president ever? Was it the lack of insight or just plain “sins of commission”?
Remember the few weeks after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks when the whole world was very sympathetic to America? Back then, most – if not all – of us would be ready to “conveniently overlook” every Human Rights, Civil Liberties and Geneva Convention violations committed by the Bush Administration in order to bring those responsible of the 9 / 11 attacks to justice.
But sadly, it all went downhill from there when the Western World’s waning and dying Islamophobic sentiments were enthusiastically revived by the Bush Administration Neo-Conservatives in order to be used as a “valuable tool” on the War on Terror. From the unlawful violation of Iraqi sovereignty back in March of 2003 in order to search for non-existent weapons of mass destruction to the Abu Ghraib prison scandal were only the minor players were ever brought to justice. The then US President George W. Bush was indeed on a fast track to infamy. Sadly, all of which were never hindrances for his reelection back in 2004. Which then made everyone wonder if then Vice President Dick Cheney ever performed a “Virgin Sacrifice” in order to delay Hurricane Katrina’s arrival for a year. All of which eventually became fodder for that Internet “miserable failure” link bomb of then US President George W. Bush back in 2005.
The newly elected US President Barack Obama may have inherited a monumental mess left over by the outgoing Bush Administration. Though in spite of this, the American people – and the rest of the world – can now wake up from the 8-year nightmare that is the Bush Administration. By promising to put science back to it’s rightful place, President Obama now makes it easier for scientists and policy-makers to start tackling the problem of global warming. Which during the Bush Administration was made very difficult by mobilizing resources to promote bad science – i.e. the NAZI-leaning science of Creationism and Intelligent Design. If President Obama manages to fix what former President George W. Bush did to the perception of science in America within the first 100 days of his presidency. Then President Barack Obama could easily earn my vote as one of the best – if not the best – elected US president of all time.
By: Vanessa Uy
When then US President George W. Bush managed to create his own link bomb on cyberspace back around 2005 – i.e. the “miserable failure” link bomb – via his own incompetence. Many around the world wondered if the “insightfully challenged” US president can claim the title as the worst elected US president of all time. And yet, actions proving his utter disregard to what makes an enlightened world leader continued unabated.
The shoe-throwing incident by concerned Iraqi journalist Muntazer al-Zaidi back in December 2008 – a sign of expressing one’s contempt to another person in the Arab world – only serve to highlight the Islamic world’s disdain on the actions and policies underwritten by then US President George W. Bush. Worse still, President Bush then feigned ignorance when interviewed by reporters moments after the incident. But what does make George W. Bush the worst US president ever? Was it the lack of insight or just plain “sins of commission”?
Remember the few weeks after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks when the whole world was very sympathetic to America? Back then, most – if not all – of us would be ready to “conveniently overlook” every Human Rights, Civil Liberties and Geneva Convention violations committed by the Bush Administration in order to bring those responsible of the 9 / 11 attacks to justice.
But sadly, it all went downhill from there when the Western World’s waning and dying Islamophobic sentiments were enthusiastically revived by the Bush Administration Neo-Conservatives in order to be used as a “valuable tool” on the War on Terror. From the unlawful violation of Iraqi sovereignty back in March of 2003 in order to search for non-existent weapons of mass destruction to the Abu Ghraib prison scandal were only the minor players were ever brought to justice. The then US President George W. Bush was indeed on a fast track to infamy. Sadly, all of which were never hindrances for his reelection back in 2004. Which then made everyone wonder if then Vice President Dick Cheney ever performed a “Virgin Sacrifice” in order to delay Hurricane Katrina’s arrival for a year. All of which eventually became fodder for that Internet “miserable failure” link bomb of then US President George W. Bush back in 2005.
The newly elected US President Barack Obama may have inherited a monumental mess left over by the outgoing Bush Administration. Though in spite of this, the American people – and the rest of the world – can now wake up from the 8-year nightmare that is the Bush Administration. By promising to put science back to it’s rightful place, President Obama now makes it easier for scientists and policy-makers to start tackling the problem of global warming. Which during the Bush Administration was made very difficult by mobilizing resources to promote bad science – i.e. the NAZI-leaning science of Creationism and Intelligent Design. If President Obama manages to fix what former President George W. Bush did to the perception of science in America within the first 100 days of his presidency. Then President Barack Obama could easily earn my vote as one of the best – if not the best – elected US president of all time.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Dioxin Contaminated Irish Pork: An Al-Qaeda Attack?
No terrorist organization had claimed responsibility yet, but pork products seem like a very inviting “soft” target for a terrorist attack. Will there be a “Happy Christmas” for this year?
By: Vanessa Uy
If – hypothetically speaking – I was an al-Qaeda operative, attacking one of the most “holy” symbols of Christendom and Christmas, like pork and pork products, could probably produce the most “psychologically paralyzing” damage to the West. Though the current dioxin-contaminated Irish pork is yet to be linked to an attack by an established terrorist group, the incident is by no means still “relegateable” to every major newspaper’s “page 23” spot. Especially when / if the “alleged” attack happens this time of year.
Back in the days when “Ike” was still the President of the United States, Santa Claus was often portrayed unabashedly feasting on a piece of ham intended for a dozen people by himself. Often with strips of bacon on the side, a symbol often hijacked by meat / pork producers portraying Santa’s “corpulence” as being healthy, often to usher in the Christmas / Holiday Season. So, other than the Nativity Scene, Santa Claus, and the Christmas Tree, ham and other pork products are not only post WWII symbols of the Christmas Season, but also – if you will – of post 9 / 11 Christendom.
Dioxin is a carcinogenic and a teratogenic (can affect developing human fetuses) chemical that can be created in our contemporary urban lifestyle via burning unsorted garbage, especially if those garbage / municipal waste is a heterogeneous mix of paper and an organic halide-based plastic like polyvinyl chloride. This method of “making” dioxin is the number one reason of how groundwater tables near major metropolitan areas are contaminated by dioxin via mismanaged municipal waste landfills.
The other one where dioxin can be “accidentally” produced is by faulty and hasty industrial processing of crude oil sourced products. Like the Agent Orange defoliants used in Operation Ranch Hand during the Vietnam War. Or in today’s Irish pork scare, the dioxin-contaminated lubricant used in the machinery that grinds up swine feed. Even some pork samples produced in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland test positive for PCB s.
The dioxin levels found on suspect Irish pork products contain on average 80 to 200 times above the minimum safe limit established by the US Environmental Protection Agency and its EU counterparts. Given that when it comes to the risk assessment of absolute minimum levels of dioxin in food products deemed fit for human consumption can readily become a “political” issue since there are still no binding limits set on “absolutely” save dioxin levels. But everyone of us alredy knows by now that threat assessment / risk assessment studies have already become a political issue in our post 9 / 11 world.
Given that the coming Holiday Season is very dependent on pork and pork products. The worldwide supermarket recall of Irish pork products manufactured during the month of September this year and onwards spells disaster. Not only for pork aficionados, but also for Irish pig farmers as well. Vegetarianism or being vegan might be good for one’s body and for planet Earth’s environment. But an overwhelmingly large number of us won’t be having a joyous Christmas Season without pork.
By: Vanessa Uy
If – hypothetically speaking – I was an al-Qaeda operative, attacking one of the most “holy” symbols of Christendom and Christmas, like pork and pork products, could probably produce the most “psychologically paralyzing” damage to the West. Though the current dioxin-contaminated Irish pork is yet to be linked to an attack by an established terrorist group, the incident is by no means still “relegateable” to every major newspaper’s “page 23” spot. Especially when / if the “alleged” attack happens this time of year.
Back in the days when “Ike” was still the President of the United States, Santa Claus was often portrayed unabashedly feasting on a piece of ham intended for a dozen people by himself. Often with strips of bacon on the side, a symbol often hijacked by meat / pork producers portraying Santa’s “corpulence” as being healthy, often to usher in the Christmas / Holiday Season. So, other than the Nativity Scene, Santa Claus, and the Christmas Tree, ham and other pork products are not only post WWII symbols of the Christmas Season, but also – if you will – of post 9 / 11 Christendom.
Dioxin is a carcinogenic and a teratogenic (can affect developing human fetuses) chemical that can be created in our contemporary urban lifestyle via burning unsorted garbage, especially if those garbage / municipal waste is a heterogeneous mix of paper and an organic halide-based plastic like polyvinyl chloride. This method of “making” dioxin is the number one reason of how groundwater tables near major metropolitan areas are contaminated by dioxin via mismanaged municipal waste landfills.
The other one where dioxin can be “accidentally” produced is by faulty and hasty industrial processing of crude oil sourced products. Like the Agent Orange defoliants used in Operation Ranch Hand during the Vietnam War. Or in today’s Irish pork scare, the dioxin-contaminated lubricant used in the machinery that grinds up swine feed. Even some pork samples produced in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland test positive for PCB s.
The dioxin levels found on suspect Irish pork products contain on average 80 to 200 times above the minimum safe limit established by the US Environmental Protection Agency and its EU counterparts. Given that when it comes to the risk assessment of absolute minimum levels of dioxin in food products deemed fit for human consumption can readily become a “political” issue since there are still no binding limits set on “absolutely” save dioxin levels. But everyone of us alredy knows by now that threat assessment / risk assessment studies have already become a political issue in our post 9 / 11 world.
Given that the coming Holiday Season is very dependent on pork and pork products. The worldwide supermarket recall of Irish pork products manufactured during the month of September this year and onwards spells disaster. Not only for pork aficionados, but also for Irish pig farmers as well. Vegetarianism or being vegan might be good for one’s body and for planet Earth’s environment. But an overwhelmingly large number of us won’t be having a joyous Christmas Season without pork.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
USS Barack Obama
Though many believed that he’s destined for greatness by winning the US Presidency through his promise of hope. Would a US Navy aircraft carrier someday be named after President Barack Obama?
By: Vanessa Uy
Even though it is still quite presumptive given that the 20th of January 2009 inauguration day is still a couple of months away. The thought did came across our minds after receiving free brochures about how to reserve for guided tours on board one of the US Navy’s most advanced aircraft carriers, the Nimitz-class USS Ronald Reagan super-carrier. After all, if the former President Reagan’s doctrine of “Peace Through Strength” brought to us the glorification of the Military-Industrial complex by Hollywood. Remember the naval aviation movie Top Gun, it heavily draws inspiration from then President Reagan’s “Cowboy Diplomacy” and managed to make Hollywood action heroes like Sylvester Stallone, Chuck Norris, and Arnold Schwarzenegger gain an air of “sensibility”, then the Obama presidency could be comparable in greatness; Right?
It was just recently announced that a new Nimitz-class super-carrier named after the former president George H.W. Bush – outgoing President George W. Bush’s dad - or “President Bush, Senior” as he is more affectionately called has just been completed and ready for sea trials. Plus a new series of Ford-class aircraft carriers / supercarriers named after former US president Gerald R. Ford are already on the planning and pre-production stage. The “Howls of Protest” can now be heard of some Americans old enough to have lived through and remembered the Ford Administration. Given that President Ford was never elected and worst of all he pardoned then President Nixon over the Watergate debacle raised questions whether to name a series of the US Navy’s next generation of aircraft carriers after President Ford.
Given that someone like President Ford whose somewhat “marginal” – even controversial - influence of the history of the US Presidency gets an aircraft carrier – even a series of them - named after him, then surely the “expected” greatness of President Obama deserve some speculative prognostication. But since there won’t be an aircraft carrier named after President-elect Obama anytime soon, then it’s safe to assume that the vessel will be radically more advanced than existing ones.
Probably it’s safe to assume that the plane-launching system on the USS Barack Obama might use superconducting electromagnet or rail-gun technology as opposed to existing systems that uses a system of steam-driven piston and pulleys to accelerate high-performance jets to take-off speeds. The ship’s propulsion system might work using nuclear fusion, thus ending the problem of long-lasting radioactive wastes. Or it might employ a yet undiscovered technology that works on the principle of entropy-manipulation through a cyclical time-loop. This could give the term “ Groundhog Day” a whole new meaning if an unforeseen accident ever happens. Or what about a really exotic but might be feasible top-secret propulsion technology based on the workings of Sam Cohen’s “enhanced radiation weapons system”. Like the ballotechnic “red mercury” superfluid that mimics that of the “primordial superfluid” that originally permeates throughout the early Universe a few moments after the Big Bang. A newfangled “steam ship” if you will, only this time the working “steam” might be our exotic “ballotechnic superfluid” with a working temperature of trillions of degrees centigrade.
Also, if the now President-elect Obama’s kids choose to have naval careers, they might gain a command posting on a ship with their father’s namesake sometime in the future. Given that our hypothetical super-carrier USS Barack Obama won’t be underway any time soon. But still, given the proposed technology, this vessel might be a proof of concept that might be used as a basis for large volume space travel in the foreseeable future.
By: Vanessa Uy
Even though it is still quite presumptive given that the 20th of January 2009 inauguration day is still a couple of months away. The thought did came across our minds after receiving free brochures about how to reserve for guided tours on board one of the US Navy’s most advanced aircraft carriers, the Nimitz-class USS Ronald Reagan super-carrier. After all, if the former President Reagan’s doctrine of “Peace Through Strength” brought to us the glorification of the Military-Industrial complex by Hollywood. Remember the naval aviation movie Top Gun, it heavily draws inspiration from then President Reagan’s “Cowboy Diplomacy” and managed to make Hollywood action heroes like Sylvester Stallone, Chuck Norris, and Arnold Schwarzenegger gain an air of “sensibility”, then the Obama presidency could be comparable in greatness; Right?
It was just recently announced that a new Nimitz-class super-carrier named after the former president George H.W. Bush – outgoing President George W. Bush’s dad - or “President Bush, Senior” as he is more affectionately called has just been completed and ready for sea trials. Plus a new series of Ford-class aircraft carriers / supercarriers named after former US president Gerald R. Ford are already on the planning and pre-production stage. The “Howls of Protest” can now be heard of some Americans old enough to have lived through and remembered the Ford Administration. Given that President Ford was never elected and worst of all he pardoned then President Nixon over the Watergate debacle raised questions whether to name a series of the US Navy’s next generation of aircraft carriers after President Ford.
Given that someone like President Ford whose somewhat “marginal” – even controversial - influence of the history of the US Presidency gets an aircraft carrier – even a series of them - named after him, then surely the “expected” greatness of President Obama deserve some speculative prognostication. But since there won’t be an aircraft carrier named after President-elect Obama anytime soon, then it’s safe to assume that the vessel will be radically more advanced than existing ones.
Probably it’s safe to assume that the plane-launching system on the USS Barack Obama might use superconducting electromagnet or rail-gun technology as opposed to existing systems that uses a system of steam-driven piston and pulleys to accelerate high-performance jets to take-off speeds. The ship’s propulsion system might work using nuclear fusion, thus ending the problem of long-lasting radioactive wastes. Or it might employ a yet undiscovered technology that works on the principle of entropy-manipulation through a cyclical time-loop. This could give the term “ Groundhog Day” a whole new meaning if an unforeseen accident ever happens. Or what about a really exotic but might be feasible top-secret propulsion technology based on the workings of Sam Cohen’s “enhanced radiation weapons system”. Like the ballotechnic “red mercury” superfluid that mimics that of the “primordial superfluid” that originally permeates throughout the early Universe a few moments after the Big Bang. A newfangled “steam ship” if you will, only this time the working “steam” might be our exotic “ballotechnic superfluid” with a working temperature of trillions of degrees centigrade.
Also, if the now President-elect Obama’s kids choose to have naval careers, they might gain a command posting on a ship with their father’s namesake sometime in the future. Given that our hypothetical super-carrier USS Barack Obama won’t be underway any time soon. But still, given the proposed technology, this vessel might be a proof of concept that might be used as a basis for large volume space travel in the foreseeable future.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Republican Party Failures: Lack of African-American Appeal?
As an American political party that grew out of the slavery question, is the Republican Party ignoring its African-American constituency at its own peril?
By: Vanessa Uy
Often referred to as the political party spearheaded by Abraham Lincoln that lead to the emancipation of the slaves who are of Black African descent and thought them the value of free enterprise. Though conceptually it viewed slavery and polygamy as morally reprehensible barbarism, the Republican Party has since then – and still is - played a major part in shaping the United States into the most powerful country in the world. Even though Honest Abe would find that in its current incarnation, the Republican Party is a wholly different animal from the one he founded over a hundred years ago.
The Republican Party does have African-Americans that had done their part in preparing the United States for the 21st Century. It would we inconceivable to imagine America’s victory in the first Gulf War without Colin Powell, or Condoleeza Rice keeping Bush Administration’s Neo-Conservative’s and their “excesses” in check. But the question now is, what the Republican Party must do to in order to distance itself from the women-as-God-fearing-male-subordinate ideologue of Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin during her ill-conceived vice presidential candidacy?
Well, not much if you think that the party is already very much corrupted – and co-opted - by extreme right-wing Christianity during the Reagan years. But I do believe that there’s still plenty of life left in the Republican Party. If only they’ll take the steps in reexamining the ideals exemplified by Abraham Lincoln. Which is kind of hard given that the news footage being aired of the recent McCain-Palin rallies consists mainly of the “older White demographic” who might be old enough to remember the days when gasoline was still being sold at 10 or 25 US cents per gallon.
Believe it or not, some political pundits even think that Barack Obama being elected into the US Presidency could be a good thing for the Republican Party. Is it maybe that because Abraham Lincoln’s vision of equality of all men is now one step closer, only at the cost of the victory of a rival party candidate? But hey, as it was noted throughout history, reforms aren’t always painless as their authors and planners might suggest.
By: Vanessa Uy
Often referred to as the political party spearheaded by Abraham Lincoln that lead to the emancipation of the slaves who are of Black African descent and thought them the value of free enterprise. Though conceptually it viewed slavery and polygamy as morally reprehensible barbarism, the Republican Party has since then – and still is - played a major part in shaping the United States into the most powerful country in the world. Even though Honest Abe would find that in its current incarnation, the Republican Party is a wholly different animal from the one he founded over a hundred years ago.
The Republican Party does have African-Americans that had done their part in preparing the United States for the 21st Century. It would we inconceivable to imagine America’s victory in the first Gulf War without Colin Powell, or Condoleeza Rice keeping Bush Administration’s Neo-Conservative’s and their “excesses” in check. But the question now is, what the Republican Party must do to in order to distance itself from the women-as-God-fearing-male-subordinate ideologue of Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin during her ill-conceived vice presidential candidacy?
Well, not much if you think that the party is already very much corrupted – and co-opted - by extreme right-wing Christianity during the Reagan years. But I do believe that there’s still plenty of life left in the Republican Party. If only they’ll take the steps in reexamining the ideals exemplified by Abraham Lincoln. Which is kind of hard given that the news footage being aired of the recent McCain-Palin rallies consists mainly of the “older White demographic” who might be old enough to remember the days when gasoline was still being sold at 10 or 25 US cents per gallon.
Believe it or not, some political pundits even think that Barack Obama being elected into the US Presidency could be a good thing for the Republican Party. Is it maybe that because Abraham Lincoln’s vision of equality of all men is now one step closer, only at the cost of the victory of a rival party candidate? But hey, as it was noted throughout history, reforms aren’t always painless as their authors and planners might suggest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
