dickhead

I consider myself and equal opportunity offender. Not that such is my attention (not intention) , but it is rather likely that what ever I write, type or say will offend some one. Politically, this is true for black folks, white folks, gays, republicans and democrats. However, I have never seemed to offend thinking minded folks who are objective and take side with information as opposed to a person (as many of the current Obama supporters do this day).

But like I say I call it as I read it. Didn’t see Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s address to the National Press Club but I did read the transcript. Like wise with respect to the President’s address in Egypt. But the latter is not important, I just want to straighten out some things regarding why I consider politicians as not being honest and trustworthy. True, I think the love America, but at times I cannot tell if they love it equally as more as they enjoy capitalism, avarice or fame.

I can astutely suggest this with respect to Dick Cheney. First it is obvious that he is talking out the side of his neck and unlike me, who attacks the policy positions of all Presidential administrations; he is attacking the man and the party. In his recent address to the National Press club, the former Vice President said that “We had a lot of blind spots after the attacks on our country, things we didn't know about al-Qaida. We didn't know about al-Qaida's plans.”

Blind, more like ill informed and even when they had the information they ignored it. Can say at least the current administration tries to stay informed. He added that “the broad-based strategy set in motion by President Bush obviously had nothing to do with causing the events of 9/11. But the serious way we dealt with terrorists from then on, and all the intelligence we gathered in that time, had everything to do with preventing another 9/11 on our watch.” Cheney even passed the buck saying “You know, Dick Clarke. Dick Clarke, who was the head of the counterrorism program in the run-up to 9/11. He obviously missed it. The fact is that we did what we felt we had to do, and if I had to do it all over again, I would do exactly the same thing.”

Dick Cheney has spoken about Obama relentlessly. But this is the man who said that Sadaam Hussein and Al queida were connected at the hip when we knew, even before the Bush administration took office, that there was no meaningful relationship between Sadaam Hussein and Al queida with respect to 911 at least. I mean the former head of the Counter terrorism program, Richard Clarke begged Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for an” urgently" high-level National Security Council review on al-Qaeda via memo on January 25, 2001. But as we know he was refused and Vice President Cheney states that he does not recall, suggesting to me he as Vice President did not think it was a threat or important to be informed about terrorist – a claim that he currently directs toward Obama.

In addition, Clarke, on September 4, 2001, warned the administration, via memo of information regarding plans of an attack by al-Qaeda in a memo in which he wrote” ''to imagine a day after a terrorist attack, with hundreds of Americans dead at home and abroad, and ask themselves what they could have done better.''

Dick Cheney is one of the problems with politics. They don’t read shit, depend on experts to formulate policy, yet don’t have the time to read what said experts place on their desk. I don’t mind talking about policy, but it is disingenuous for this man to when he slept on the job and got us in the mess. Obama can't help if he better informed and smarter than Cheney, its just a fact. I just want to ask him, in the words of Kate Nash, “why are you such a dickhead?”

Ye old revolving doors

I was some what amazed at the Bernard Madoff scandal, maybe not amazed, but rather amused. Not because a few folks killed themselves, or a lot of rich folks lost all they loot, but rather because this crook, was also once the former chairman of NASDEQ. Now if that aint funny nothing is, not to mention that his investment arm was not even registered with the SEC until September 2006. Add to that, who would not be leery of a man with the name made-off? But that is how Washington and Wall Street insiders act, they used to going through them revolving doors from Washington to Wall Street, and to the SEC in this example. Madoff had a good reputation with folk on Wall Street and for a typical insider that is good enough for them. That’s the problem.

The SEC will never work as an effective watch dog over folk like Madoff. Namely because they are folk. Madoff as others on Wall Street interchange jobs like a connecting flight through Hartsfield/Jackson international Airport. The Madoff scandal is a black eye to the reputation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, who is supposed to police shit like this. However, folks like outgoing SEC Chairman Christopher Cox seem to have no clue or worse, turn a blind eye to their own kind. Cox after all said that Bear Stearns was in good shape three days before this investment house belly-flopped. Not to mention he mad at folks in the SEC (when they had been informed for decades) for not being able to notice the foul stuff being implemented by Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC.

Folks around the world took looses because institutions like the SEC and our Federal government care more about the folks who they know and support them than the implementation of objective critical thought. In the United Kingdom, Kingate Global Fund Ltd, reportedly lost $2.5 billion. Ascot Partners $1.8 billion, Access International Advisors $1.4 billion, Maxam Capital Management LLC $280 million and the banks HSBC and RBS have lost $1 billion and $600 million. The Spanish bank Banco Santander and Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BBV), have reported losses of $3.1 billion and $405 million accordingly.

I do not see these types of acts changing in the near future, and suspect a many more complex hustles in the futures and securities markets to be still in play, even with Obama naming the current head of the Wall Street Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Mary Schapiro, as the new head of the SEC. Why do I say this? Well truth is known is that the folks who work for the big banks and financial institution of Wall Street are the same ones who work in the SEC. They go back and forth like the rubber ball in a game of dodge ball. Take Cox for example, which from 1978 to 1986, who was a venture capital and corporate finance lawyer with the international law firm of Latham & Watkins. He was supposedly over the Corporate Department in Orange County (they went bankrupt a few years back). He also received a MBA and JD from Harvard as well as taught federal income tax courses at the Harvard Business School.

Schapiro is no different. She was appointed by President Clinton in 1994 to be chairperson of the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission – we see where that got us today, although she was supposed to be responsible for regulating the US futures markets. Before that, she served for six years as a Commissioner of the Securities and Exchange Commission being appointed in 1988 by President Reagan and reappointed by President Bush in 1989.

The SEC, regardless of who runs it, will never look out for the common man (folks who don’t work on Wall Street or hold political office). In October of last year, they gave "preferential treatment" to Wall Street executive John Mack during an insider trading investigation because he was about to become CEO of the Morgan Stanley investment banking firm. Now I am only saying that it is impossible for folks to police themselves. I don’t think you would let Crips police Crips in a federal correctional facility, so what is difference here? None, nada, zero is the answer. I don’t know why folks are so protective of the next president of these United States of America; likewise, I do not know why they are hypersensitive of folks who review and evaluate his proposed policies and his cabinet choices. It only makes logical sense to me. I remember doing the same regarding the current Bush – especially with respect to his incessant mentioning of “compassionate Conservatism.” His words, policies and appointments demonstrated neither compassion nor conservatism to me, especially with appointments of folk the likes of Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. No one, in particular black folks didn’t say a word against my evaluative pragmatism then.

Obama is the president and as president it is our job to be critical and free thinking about his office, policy and problem solving capacity – especially with respect to his words and what he said he will do. The only difference outside of his color for me is that his mantra is not “compassionate conservatism” but rather “change.” Show me some change, or better yet, where is the beef. For we will continue to have these problems until we clean house. These same old Washington folks done messed things up enough, don’t you agree? I feel that we can find just as competent folk, if not more competent folks outside the beltway. I’m just glad medicine isn’t like that, or else one would only be able to have an expert physician or Surgeon in Washington, DC.

GG or Jacob the Jeweler

Just as the next individual, I enjoy stacking a little change when I can. This is America, home of greed and avarice. It would only then make sense to me that wealth accumulation should be something we focus on a little more as opposed to buying and spending and shopping. But I am troubled by the spend all and save nothing mentality. This is no more evident than in the entertainment industry. This includes musicians, actors, athletes and don’t forget politicians.

Now there is nothing wrong with flossing’, whether you have it or not. But I think there is a bigger picture we need to conquer. What value should be taught to those we know and love the most from our community? I’m not cheap, but I am frugal, and so I make 6 figures annually, I have been able to save twice that on behalf of my children in their names and not mine.

The issue for me is why does, or how necessary is it for a person to have several watches worth anywhere between 25 to 100 stacks? Regardless if one has the money or not, how much time can one tell?

With $25,000, a person can buy about 6850 shares of Occulogix Inc (RHEO). At 3.65 a share, if it doubles, that will be more than 50,000 and such stocks can double in a few months. Or better yet, $100,000 can get you 1992 shares of Goldcorp Inc New (GG) out of Canada and 1034 shares of ING: Russia; A (LETRX).

Now this is not to down Mr. Jacob the Jeweler. After all, if I had been in a family of Jewelers, I’d use my craft to take advantage of plebeians that desire jewelry that valued more than 100 thousand stacks also. But in this age of multi-millionaires going broke after a few years on the job – especially rappers and athletes, it is my duty to suggest other alternatives than buying a bevy of Sierra Leone diamond laced watches.

I’m just mad that my folks are not taking advantage of the system as others have put in place. Dick Cheney know the deal – become vice President and get your company free welfare I mean military contracts and take your pay check and invest it in stocks, real- estate, and precious metals. So the next time you want to get your child or your wife some jewelry, get her a 1000 shares of Gilead Sciences Inc (GILD) – the only folks that make the bird flu vaccine and watch her smile after 6 months, when she doubles her money, gets that necklace and have some chump change in her pocket too.