Blind Sided

Following her first Academy Award, Sandra Bullock, star of the feel-good football blockbuster The Blind Side, has come under attack from over-zealous fans of the movie...literally. Bullock, who in the movie rescues future NFL offensive lineman Michael Oher from a life on the streets, has had to hire her own offense line (i.e. body guards) to protect her from kids trying to prove to her their football prowess.

Her agent recently explained the situation to the press. "Sandra would like to tell all those children who may be down on their luck, and who may also have football talent, that although this movie was based on a real story, she had nothing to do with getting anyone into the NFL. Furthermore, she will never in the future have anything to do with anyone getting into the NFL. She would also request that children stop tackling her, throwing balls at her, yelling "Hey catch!", and knocking her friends to the ground. This is not appropriate behavior, and will not result in Sandra paying for your education or getting you drafted by the NFL."

Although the message has reached some aspiring football players, it has not reached them all. Jeremiah Livingston is one of Bullock's fans, and plans on showing her what he can do. "I hear what she be sayin', but see I ain't feelin' it. She gots to tell people that she ain't got nothin' to do wit it so dat only people who are for real serious will be left to show her what they gots." Jeremiah, who also goes by the name Lites-Out, will try to join his local high school team as a 22 year old 350 pound walk-on freshman after missing grades 6-8 while serving 3-5 in the state penitentiary on a drug charge.

Lites-Out is not alone. Private schools have reported record numbers of applications coming from atypical backgrounds and expressing interest in joining the football ranks of the over-privileged and under-skilled. Coaches nationwide have been split on whether to push school administrators into accepting these new students.

Regardless of how the prep-schools resolve the issue, Bullock clearly wants nothing to do with it. At an Oscar after-party on Sunday night, Bullock recounted how she was hit from behind and thrown violently to the ground after buying a ball in a department store for her nephew's birthday. Her attacker explained to police that he was just trying to show her, "what he had" which by the end of the encounter was a police mugshot. Bullock made a statement shortly before leaving the Oscar gala, "It's just a movie, let it go!" For some, that is easier said than done.

Cheney Shows Weakness by Having Heart Attack

The debate growing over whether Dick Cheney is actually a human being has apparently reached a conclusion. In a clear sign to enemies of America, Mr. Cheney showed that although his blood is black and his soul is non-existent, he indeed is susceptible to human ailments following a mild heart attack in his nuclear reinforced lair earlier this month. This most recent heart attack, Mr. Cheney's fifth, sent him to the operating room to clear out plaque build-up that had accumulated over the years as the former Vice-President gorged himself on fear mongering and special interest kick-backs.

"Our enemies are weak and Allah will give us the stength to destroy them once and for all," read the headline on Islamic militant website www.ibecameajihadistafteroneofcheneysmisslestrikeseradicatedmyfamilyandnowihavenothingtolive for.org, an Al-Queda linked extremist group. Fears are growing that Mr. Cheney's heart attack may signal that America does indeed have a heart and that more militant groups may look to exploit that humanity as a result.

In response to these fears Mr. Cheney's aid Melvin Sanders issued a statement directly following the operation, "The former Vice-President is in stable condition and has formally announced his intention to declare war on his own body. Al-Queda will not stop until they have infiltrated every red blood cell and each arterial wall of all Americans. If the current President wants to sit on his hands and watch as America's enemies try to attack us biologically, we will take the matter into our own hands. If this body wants war, that is what it will get."

The former Vice-President has already started circulating memos within Congress to send 50,000 troops from National Guard units nationwide into his blood vessels intravenously. An addendum to the memo also requests that nuclear warheads be immediately fired at Iran, Syria, North Korea, and 5 other countries yet to be determined. Asked why Congress should approve of a nuclear strike on 5 unnamed countries, Mr. Cheney responded, "to remind people who is in charge."

President Obama is absolutely opposed to both sending troops to invade the body of the former Vice-President as well as his proposed nuclear holocaust. This opposition has earned the President that label of "Obaby pants" and "Jihad Lover" by Cheney's official fan site www.heartofdarkness.com. Although the President considers these taunts juvenile, some Americans are still worried that inaction sends the wrong message.

"I feel as though someone needs to be shot, or at least shot at over this," says out of work Blackwater Security Chief Linus Uppinshoot. He is not alone. A recent survey has shown that more Americans see Al-Queda as a bigger risk factor for heart disease now than their high-saturated fat diet and sedentary lifestyles by a margin of 2:1.

These are indeed worrisome times in which we live. There is no clear answer as to whether Cheney's military requests will be carried out, but one fact still remains: America can not afford to look weak. Whether America's strength will be displayed through diplomacy or all-out nuclear war remains to be seen.

Don't Ask, Won't Tell

Shhhhh. There is a secret that the government really doesn't want you to know about. Rest assured that if you don't ask, they certainly won't tell. Testimony on Capitol Hill this week would seem to indicate that the secret has something to do with homosexuals carrying machine guns.

No, this secret does not have anything to do with same sex relations. It also does not have anything to do with camel sex as the picture in this article would seem to suggest. This secret pertains to how the United States government has decided to freeze spending on almost all domestic programs for the next three years, while at the same time ratcheting up spending on national defense.

Hold on, what could possibly be the problem with that? Don't we need national defense? Aren't we in mortal danger every second of the day from anti-American uber jihadist paramilitary forces?

Ssshhhhhh. This is where the secret comes into play. What you aren't supposed to know (although the numbers are publicly available) is how the budget is actually allocated amongst the various national programs. Although certainly not straightforward and laced with caveats, the numbers are plain to see. What is going on with the budget? How about that for every $1 collected in tax revenue, around 50 cents is spent on "national defense". That figure contrasts pretty sharply with the 6 cents we spend on education or the 5 cents we spend on healthcare.

So what? Who doesn't like fighter jets and nuclear bombs? We have to keep America safe from terrorists and rogue states, and to do that we have to spend money on national defense, especially now. So we will spend a bit extra now, and then we can spend money on other things as soon as Al-Queda is a charred spot on the side of a mountain. Right?

Unfortunately, national defense spending has been rising each year for at least the past 10 years. More unfortunately, Al-Queda is still not a charred spot, and more than 50 cents on the dollar is still going to military spending. How much money is that exactly? Said another way, the United States as of 2008 accounted for more than 48% of the world's military spending. Even the much loathed financiers of our national debt, the Chinese, were a distant second at around 8% (despite having a military force over 3x the size of the US). Russia and Iran aren't even blips on that radar. So if the US accounts for half the world's military spending, in a nutshell the US spent as much as everyone else, combined. Here is my question: Why?

Is the rest of the world foolish or does everyone else have it out for us? Theoretically it could be both. However, I tend to think about it in simpler terms. If the rest of the world has foolishly not been investing in military spending for the past few decades, could they ever possibly catch up considering the huge capital costs and the relatively miniscule economies of these countries compared to ours? Take Egypt for example. It has the largest non-oil based GDP in the Middle East. Egypt is not a huge supporter of American politics, and has been the home to terrorists including some of the 9/11 hijackers. Each year the US spends 20x more money on defense spending than the entire Egyptian national budget. That means that it would take Egypt more than 40 years to spend as much money as the US did just this year if they spent 50% of their national income on military spending (which they currently don't).

Let's put the real critical questions on the table because this certainly isn't a matter of us reacting to other countries not liking us.

Question: With the national debt swelling to unsustainable levels, why is there so much importance placed on defense spending? When budgets get cut, don't companies start with the areas that will have the biggest impact on company costs?

Question: How does the money that we pay towards the national defense budget help you as your community struggles with an unemployment rate of over 10%? Sure, most people will enlist if they have no other job opportunities, but shouldn't serving in the military be a choice to serve and not a decision made out of financial necessity?

Question: States are underwater, and city services (including schools, fire departments, and police forces) are being cut drastically. Do you think that national priorities are in line with reality? If the whole goal is to make America safer, why would we be so quick to cut-back on services that are linked directly to crime rates?

Question: Do you think that the announcement this week that Al-Queda is guaranteed to strike the US in the next six months is a clever way for special interest groups to avoid inclusion in the 3 year government budget freeze? Terrorists will always try to hurt citizens of this country. That does not mean that all the money in the defense budget is going towards stopping them. Defense spending might be better deployed if it addressed the real source of terrorism (poverty, lack of education, foreign propoganda) instead of always focusing on stopping the by-product of terrorist theology.

The bottom line is that a whole lot of money is being spent on goods and services that America truly doesn't need. These resources could be reallocated in literally thousands of ways that actually could make this country safer, and have a more tangible and immediate impact. It is a sad day when government spending for domestic programs meant to assist struggling families is frozen in favor of the construction of a few more missiles that will never be used, arms that will be sold to a foreign power, and technology that will sit on a shelf.

This article is certainly not advocating that America cross its fingers and hope people will leave us alone. It certainly is not advocating that money be diverted from military benefits, veteran care, and ongoing supplies for troops in harm's way. Hell, it is all for spending on strategic national defense initiatives. The classic fear mongering tactics associated with defense spending cuts cloud the simple fact that conventional warfare is all but over. China's hacking of Google, and the guerrilla fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan point to that exact conclusion. So why doesn't our planning and budget process evolve alongside our tactics to reflect that reality. Tactical deployment of our financial capital is just as important as a cohesive national defense strategy. If this country wants to truly be involved in nation building, why not do more building and less fighting. For more truly mind boggling stats: Wow, click here for an eye-opener.

It's OK! They have flag pins. Whew.

In case you were feeling hopelessly unpatriotic, get that chin up. The national political body in this country actually has a remedy for you: an American flag pin.

While watching highlights of the 2010 State of the Union address, I was pleasantly surprised that my feelings of dread for our society were gently replaced with a blinding sense of patriotism. I spent the better part of 10 minutes zoning out trying to ascertain why the sweet emotion of national pride was swelling in my heart. Unfortunately during those 10 minutes of self-discovery I missed the discussion on health care reform and other such nuances.

Just as I was about to concede my emotional Afghanistan to the Taliban of of Laziness, I figured it out. The pin. More specifically, the pins! The exact moment of epiphany arrived as I stared at morose Republicans sitting through wave after wave of applause. Then it hit me. What could possibly bridge a divide that has only been widening for the last 8 years to the point of non-reconciliation? Is there some common ground that could serve as a jumping off point for future political progress? Is there one thing that our politicians can agree on? There is! American flag pins.

I don't know why I didn't think of it before. How could I have been so blind? I should have picked up on this years ago during the Presidential primary season when controversy exploded over then Senator Obama's decision to not wear the holy pin (click me) on the campaign trail. Of course, that mistake was corrected last night. He had his pin! And here I thought that the country was lost to a liberal backing, muslim loving, Al-Queda supporting, elderly slaying, deficit spending, anti-white pot smoker. Thankfully all of those irrational thoughts have been dispelled nationwide since he started wearing a little American pride on his lapel. It is amazing how much of America's political ill will simply disappears when the national flag is proudly displayed.

The pin is really just a message, and that message uniformly says, "Hey friend, we may disagree, but guess what? We are both Americans. Just in case you weren't sure. You know, because although I live here, in the United States that is, I wasn't wearing my pin before. So there should be no doubt that I love my country now. Because I am wearing this pin. It's an American flag. We are both Americans. I can tell that because you also have a pin." One message. One people.

It is this kind of even ground from which the next era of American success will spring. Unemployment, resolved. Healthcare reform, passed. War, over. These problems somehow seem insignificant now. The pin shows us that we are all American. Deep down we still don't share the same values, but the pin makes us think we do. That is the true power of the pin. That pin is the passport into Americana, and non-Americans are on the no-buy list. Of course, the power of the pin has been used before by people who were brainwashed and blinded by their own social idealology. This kind of thing obviously could never happen in America, but it certainly was a troubling time for lapel pins. Pins were forced underground, their name dragged through the mud. Unfortunately for politicians, their power was almost lost forever.

Cue 2001. A couple of terrorist attacks had just torn the country apart, and the people were scared. They needed something to let them know that their neighbor was not going to detonate C4 on their porch. They needed more than just an emblem, they needed a shield. They needed something that said, "Terrorize this!" They needed the pin. And pin is what they got.

This is a photo list of all the Presidents of the United States: click me. Any two stand out? Notice the year? Here I thought that people like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and the other influential Presidents were Americans. Turns out, they weren't. No pin, not American. This has quickly become a depressing exercise for me. Turns out, no one but present day politicians wear pins. Einstein, Edison, MLK, and millions of others were sadly pinless. Were they all un-American too? What about John Edwards? He wore a pin. In fact, he still does. Do I have more in common with him than the legions of pinless people out there? What about our soldiers? They all don't wear pins. They have flags on their sleeves, but don't have flag pins on their uniforms. Do they not even support themselves? Wow, this has gotten really confusing all of a sudden. If some people wear the pin, and some people don't, who are the real Americans?

My advice for figuring out this question: Stop being a moron. Who cares about a piece of metal? Being an American is by definition as simple as being a citizen of the United States. That is a pretty easy qualification for anyone born in this country. What is not so easy, is being a positive force for change for all Americans. Therefore, as we evaluate what we should do to help this country, forget the pin, ignore the typical political rhetoric, and put aside partisan feelings. Instead, look to what things you can do to make America better. That could mean voting for a person based on their actions and not your party line. That could mean listening to another person's point of view. That could mean actually researching issues that are important to you. Actions make people patriotic, not decorations.

Google to Censor China

Call it an act of rebellion. Call it sweet justice. Call it a big F-U to China. Google is poised to dish out a little payback starting January 20th when it censors the words China and Chinese from its search engine. Such extreme action is coming on the heels of what Google insiders have dubbed a sophisticated attack on its search engine by the Chinese government. As a result, after Wednesday no one globally will be able to find China anywhere. It will be as if the country, along with its over 1 billion inhabitants, does not exist.

"I would be perfectly happy if people forgot China was a country," said Google co-founder Larry Page. "We plan on removing China from Google Maps entirely. It just won't be there. I'm serious, not there, not anywhere. I am so shit of their shit. They are not the only ones who can censor stuff!"

This is the first in a series of planned actions against the communist country known for both its inexpensive cuisine as well as its human rights violations (presumably separate issues). A second phase is planned for the early Spring and will see the personal information of all government officials sent to human rights activists. Names and addresses will also be forwarded to the hundreds of thousands who have been geographically displaced over the years by government planned infrastructure projects. Later phases have yet to be announced, but local speculation suggests that Google may flood the cell phones of Chinese officials with up to 200 million fake text messages a day. An insider not authorized to speak with the media has indicated that the following subject lines for the texts are being proposed:

1) America, F-yeah!
2) Is this Mr. Lee's phone?
3) Order #521 for General Tso's Chicken Confirmation

As an extra up-yours to the Chinese government, any users searching for China will be routed to the official tourism pages of Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Tibet. This move is generating some concern from local businesses that traffic to their sites will be impacted. Although a valid concern, Google is taking precautions so that only oppressive Communist regimes will bear the brunt of their cyber tactics. Google also has a fully staffed client reposnse unit ready and waiting to respond to inadvertant situations as they initially arise.

Ultimately, only time will tell if Google's new plan to conquer China will work. It is difficult to imagine China completely disappearing from the global consciousness. However, starting tomorrow Google will do its best to redraw the map.

Aftershock: New 50% Haitian Aid Tax On its Way

Look out Haiti, another storm is brewing. This one is sending shockwaves all the way from Washington. Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn announced today that he would be proposing a bill to tax each Haitian that receives money under the $100MM aid package by the Obama administration. Building off the principles of the Obama bank fee program, and fueled by general support from the outraged public, the new 50% tax on aid money stands a fighting chance to pass through the Senate.

When asked to justify his decision to propose such a controversial bill, the veteran Senator said, "The American taxpayers deserve to get every penny of these relief funds paid back." Going even further the Senator added, "I wouldn't be surprised if this type of legislation is just the tip of the iceberg." These comments certainly appear to hold a lot of water. Already on Capital Hill there is talk about retroavtive taxes on former disaster relief recipients. In fact, several people in the Office for Government Accountability have formed a local Washington DC club named The American in the Red and Crossed.

ARC President Hugh Phillips was asked why he supported such a controversial cause. "America has to wake up and take a stand against programs that cost taxpayers money without and hope of repayment. Tsunami smumami, you want my money? Try paying it back. A levy breaks and washed away your city? How about we levy taxes against the free money you received? If we tax these people we will pay off the national debt in no time!"

Ernest French is taking things even further. Mr. French is an attorney by day, and a tax advocate by night. French is starting to gather momentum with his idea to apply a 50% tax to all members of the armed forces. His rationale? Simple. The military is the most expensive and drastically unprofitable national program on the books. $1.5 trillion dollars is spent each year on the military. French figures that a 50% tax would repay the national deficit in 10 years. When asked about whether a 50% would drive people away from serving their country, French replied, "If they are rich enough to give people who are deployed free room and board, free flights, free guns, free ammunition, free cars, etc. they can afford to pay tax."

All of these knee-jerk tax proposals seem ridiculous on the outside, but in spirit they mimic the exact thought process currently being weighed against the banking industry. If the government really wanted to create a win win situation on Wall St. they would simply force companies to pay out bonuses as all-stock awards. The banks would win because they could retain talent (not to mention lock them in with vesting schedules), and the government would win since they would still be able to tax people on the stocks when they were sold. In actuality, the government would probably raise more money over the long term since the prices in the markets currently are so low for financial stocks, that by the time the shares are exercised the government will be able to claim taxes on a vastly appreciated asset.

The thought of a 50% bonus tax is a joke. If you want to see the effectiveness of such a tax, simply Google what happened to London when they did the same exact thing last year. Estimates indicate that 40% of the banking industry has left London alone. A good number of those bankers have left the country. That means that not only is the financial system in ruins, but the country is actually collecting less tax revenue. Punitive taxes are not the answer to America's debt problems. Financial accountability and fiscal discipline are.

Tiger Given the Axe

It's a tough time to be a Tiger Woods sponsor these days. Just one week after the world's top golfer became the center of the sex scandal universe, his commercial backers are scurrying to find a way out of the spotlight. Most companies have simply refused to comment, while others have issued the typical dodge and deflect statements. One company however is headed in the other direction. Enter Axe Body Spray.

Axe is claiming full responsibility for the growing list of mistresses coming out of the woodwork. This could be an exciting new development for Tiger. As the number of women claiming to have seen his penis grows, people are clamoring for an answer to the all important question: Why? Axe provides Tiger with an easy-out to his current predicament. Everyone already knows about the all-powerful and mystical properties of Axe's complete line of body sprays. This is exactly the opportunity Tiger needs to drive straight-up the fairway.

To highlight how big an opportunity this is for Tiger, one of his largest sponsors, Accenture, dropped him as a pitch-man today. The big danger here is that Accenture's departure could mark the first in a series of lost endorsements. That could spell financial Armageddon, especially if Nike jumps onto that train.

Tiger needs to reverse this river of negative media coverage. If he embraces Axe as a corporate partner he can actually combat his two biggest challenges. The first is that pesky wife of his. The second is his voracious sex drive. By placing responsibility for his sexual escapades in Axe's hands he not only gives them the street cred that they crave, but he also exonerates himself from any form of responsibility. Tiger can arrange to sue Axe for causing women to be chemically attracted to him, and then quietly withdraw the lawsuit after this whole thing blows over. That would allow Tiger to avoid an expensive divorce, and will also allow his current sponsors to save face. This is truly a win-win situation.

Tiger represents the flagship in Axe's new media strategy. Axe is trying to corner the market on fornication, and is actively harnessing the power of promiscuity to sell its wares. To accomplish this vision the company is offering other big contracts to celebrities who know how to hammer the proverbial nail. Just last week Wilt Chamberlin and Kobe Bryant became the official NBA spokesmen for the company. Charlie Sheen has been booked for a January ad campaign, and Axe is also making waves by buying the official rights to Hugh Hefner's genitals when he passes away. This is just the kind of inside the box thinking that has the company on the verge of greatness.....pun intended.