So, the first thing I hear about this morning is a plan to provide additional billions to AIG's $85 billion bailout, after I read a story on ABCNews that shared the following:

"Less than a week after the federal government
committed $85 billion to bail out AIG, executives of the giant AIG
insurance company headed for a week-long retreat at a luxury resort
and spa, the St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach, California,
Congressional investigators revealed today.

"Rooms at this resort can cost over $1,000 a night," Congressman Henry
Waxman (D-CA) said this morning as his committee continued its
investigation of Wall Street and its CEOs.

AIG documents obtained by Waxman's investigators show the company paid
more than $440,000 for the retreat, including nearly $200,000 for
rooms, $150,000 for meals and $23,000 in spa charges."

Wow. Are you kidding me? The country GLOBE is on the verge of a financial meltdown and one of the biggest culprits are soaking up the sun and getting manicures and pedicures? Ok, so maybe they planned a retreat to hold meetings to create a plan to save their faltering company, but was it really necessary to stay in a $1,000 a night resort? Perhaps they would have benefitted from a stay at a Holiday Inn Express, it's much cheaper, and it supposedly makes you smarter. Did they need $23,000 worth of spa treatments? Well maybe their poor decision making was because they were too tense, and their fingernails were dirty...or maybe their finger nails were dirty from counting all of their filthy money....maybe their back was sore from screwing our economy, who knows?

What I do know is that it is absolutely preposterous that the Fed has been allowed to dump money (Does anyone else feel like their paying out in Monopoly money by now?) on these irresponsible fools. What I do know is that they spent more money on their retreat vacation than my entire apartment complex makes annually, combined. What I imagine to be true is that there are plenty of meeting rooms on and around the Wall Street area. So SOMEONE PLEASE explain to me how, this can be addressed so lackadaisically by the government, and furthermore, how they can justify dumping another $38 billion precious USDs on them without AT LEAST terminating the self-centered pricks who put this thing together?

The proposed increase by the Fed will bring the loan amount to approximately $123 billion. My question is...can a brotha get a lowly mill? How about half of one? My corns are flaring up, and I bite my nails. In all seriousness though, why is it necessary to give ONE COMPANY an amount that equals nearly 20% of the amount allocated to save an entire country's economy? Maybe this is not really happening...maybe this is a long drawn out joke that will end April 1, 2009. Maybe Hilary Clinton will pop up on CNN and say 'April Fools, I'm the real President, and we're RICH!' Or...maybe we just ought to speak out, educate ourselves, and not allow the government to talk out the sides of their mouths anymore...maybe it's time to challenge this debauchery they call our government and call for the restoration of the Democracy that it is supposed to be. The blatant corruption is sickening, am I alone on this?

       Alright, let's get one thing straight off the bat, I do not consider myself as affiliated with either party--in fact, let me preface by sharing my overall view on today's version of politics. I think party classification is outdated and restricting to our great nation. While on Capitol Hill it may be an important factor in driving legislation and overall balance of philosophy, in society it has created a massive trend of blindly following. You see, people are born and raised Republicans or Democrats, and consequently their views are almost predetermined...they feel OBLIGATED to take up certain causes and points of view based on the opinions of their predecessors.

       Free, logical thinking seems to be dwindling in the arena of politics. This is a dangerous trend because people are allowing their thoughts to be directly influenced by the leaders of their respective party rather than reality. Forgive me but it seems like every news outlet has its agenda and feeds us propaganda accordingly. We form our opinions based on 'heart-warming stories' and manipulated versions of the occurences abroad. We take hyperbolic, empty statements from politicians to heart; we neglect the basic reality of things and go with what sounds good (specific examples to follow).

       Basically, my belief is that we need to educate ourselves on the issues and form our own thoughts, independent of what side of the party fence it may fall--Liberals, it's quite ok to go along with a 'conservative' idea, and hey, there is a reason why people fear superfluous governmental regulation, buy books on Communism and Socialism, learn to toe the line responsibly; Conservatives, hire a masseur (you know you have the money) loosen up, and most of all research compassion and psychology maybe even go 'slummin' once in a while (perhaps read a book on each subject while you get a nice massage). It is so obvious that neither party has fully improved the state of our nation, unless of course our backs have been against the wall. Why is that? Because when the integrity and safety of our nation is at stake people suddenly feel compelled to find common ground...hmm. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE! This is a critical election, and so my only wish is that everyone sort through the propaganda and figure out what our best option is as a nation, forget party affiliation.

       Now last night's debate; Obama won, but McCain succeeded in controlling it. Some may not agree but the reason I say so is that McCain succeeded in distracting Obama from the actual questions by creating situations where he had to defend his campaign against borderline defamatory statements. For example, McCain accused Obama of threatening to attack Pakistan...HE NEVER SAID THAT! Basically McCain and Obama agreed on the issue, yet McCain painted Obama as irresponsible and reworded what Obama had said. It was apparent that this got under Obama's skin, provoking him to readdress the issue and defend his stance. You see, right there, every conservative in the U.S. who spent Obama's turn talking about the awesomeness of McCain's previous speech probably accepted what McCain said as truth when in actuality anyone paying attention would recognize it was false.

Worthy of Note

       Notice that when talking about helping other countries in need, Obama referred to Darfur specifically and implied that what is taking place over there is genocide (which it is), while McCain simply referred to places where genocide may be occurring. By recognizing what is happening in Darfur as genocide, it establishes a moral obligation for the world to act, and it is clear that McCain will continue to refuse to acknowledge this fact.

       Both men presented currently unfeasible plans, with no logical explanation of the 'how' factor. For example, McCain's plan for the real estate market, where will the funds originate? With Obama, he spoke about not only intervening abroad but providing financial assistance for them to sustain, where will the funds originate? It bothers me that empty proposals continue to be thrown about with no concrete plan for stabilizing our own economic situation.

Things I Hated

       I hated that they spent so much time attacking each other's voting record and personal character rather than comprehensively addressing the issue that happen to be more pressing than ever right now.

       I hated that McCain flaunted his service shamelessly and superfluously...look, everyone knows, I doubt any new voters will be influenced by it. Besides, what has he done for his brethren? Sure, he has a cushy seat on Capitol Hill, but how about the fact that 33% of the homeless population are veterans who served in a war zone? How about those who served with him? Where are they? Poor? Dead? Personally I am tired of hearing it. Furthermore his 6 year POW experience should be more disconcerting than a platform for campaign; I work in a non-profit mental health facility and a large portion of our clients are veterans. Such a traumatic experience has serious psychological ramifications, and I doubt Senator McCain is exempt.

       I hated that the candidates try so desperately to humanize themselves, that is not what we need. We don't need heart-warming stories...we need facts and resolutions to serious national and international problems. We do not need rehearsed anecdotes, this is not The Hills.

My Take On Each Ticket

       McCain-Palin: First of all, the selection of Palin, while genius in the regard of trying to win the election, was a complete err in judgement. Why? Because McCain's biggest sticking point is experience. Well selecting the GOVERNOR of ALASKA who has even less experience and infinitely less competence than Obama completely nullifies that advantage in my opinion. This woman can be president people! She winked at the camera and gave shout outs during the VP debate, are you serious?

       I stand by my concern for the psychological influences that have and will shape McCain's foreign policy. This ticket clings to the fear that Americans have. The perpetuation of that fear is the biggest reason they remain in contention, they play on it well--but for me it is transparent. I find it humorous that McCain cites a lack of experience in foreign policy on Obama's part, yet the two had very similar thoughts on everything except for Iraq.

       Now on the issue of Iraq, McCain says he will not withdraw, that he will bring the troops home with pride and dignity...In a pine box? Poor? Ok, so fine, you don't want us to look weak in the eyes of other nations, but what do you intend to do for the troops who return? Better yet, how strong do we look when we cannot complete an objective, in a definitive time frame, in a country that is in shambles, with OUR military and weapons? In my opinion, the longer we stay, the higher the body count, the weaker we look.

       Obama-Biden: The selection of Biden, genius as well. Biden has proved to be valuable because he has been on the Senate right alongside McCain throughout huge governmental decisions, and has been able to recollect controversial stands by McCain and bring them to light. Also, it leveled the playing field and gave fringe voters who may have been fearful of Obama's lack of experience some reassurance. Overall this ticket is very knowledgable on the issues, but tends to border on idealistic.

       In addressing the issue of experience, I feel that it matters to some degree, but knowledge and logical reasoning appeals to me more, and nobody can say that Obama lacks in those areas. And judging from his linear logical way of thinking, I trust that when being faced with a problem, he will choose a reasonable course of action. I like that he is willing to sit down with enemies. People cite this as a bad thing, but why? It is not like the man does not know the risks; in fact, I get the feeling that he picked Joe Biden because he knows how perilous it may be.

       Overall I don't think we necessarily need a President with military background--there is no shortage of military minds in and around Capitol Hill. What we need is a guy who will make sound judgements when needed, and personally I trust Obama to do that more than I trust McCain. I also believe Obama will be more successful in diplomacy--he is more articulate and knowledgable, and certainly more averse to confrontation and conflict.

       I know not everyone will agree, and I am quite open to being further educated on any and everything, so please share RESPECTFULLY! Yes I support the Obama ticket, but I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT! So please refrain from resorting to calling me a Communist, etc...