I had been too afraid or upset to talk about some issues I was having at work. I think a part of me was still frustrated with how things were dealt with as well as the fact that I was really getting no recognition for the work I had been doing. A couple of my supervisors apologized for the former. Basically, I wasn’t chosen for a higher position I was vying for earlier in the year. It didn’t really upset me that I wasn’t picked. What really upset me was the way in which the process was handled since ultimately the person for the position (assuming it’s not me) would be my superior and I had been closed out from the whole process. I understood the conflict of interest in picking the person but I didn’t fully understand the need to be so secretive and inconspicuous about the process.

Anyway, the fact was that I was not chosen – for better or for worse. I was told on a Friday which meant I spent the weekend in my cocoon, letting the anger build-up inside me. On Monday, I returned to work very bitter. A part of me wanted to get “even.” But what did that mean? Not do work and screw myself over even more? I came home at night and realized how petty I was being. Typically when a person doesn’t get a fair shake, they want retribution – and fast. It’s the easy way out. But you just feel worse since you’re not dealing with the root of the issue. I realized I couldn’t and shouldn’t allow this to get me down. I came to terms with what happened (and I believe that all things happen for a reason). In fact, instead of it being a dampening experience I’m using it as fuel to take me further and work harder to do what I’m good at.

I’d like to see the IRS do something like this. It’d be interesting to see who the biggest federal tax cheats are.

Instead we get coverage of extremist/fringe groups (i.e. Tea Party) who are “mad as hell, and…not going to take it anymore!” but really have no idea what they’re angry about. The US needs more people who are altruistic and giving instead of those who want to complain and criticize everything going wrong with the country. The Bush tax cuts need to run its course and end otherwise this country is really in trouble. And it’s nice to see that the top of the income ladder is complaining about the already low taxes they pay.

This is not a good sign for the future of the internet.

In California, an ardent anti-gay politician, State Senator Roy Ashburn, admitted to being gay after his high-profile DUI arrest last week. Senator Ashburn, who has voted against numerous gay rights issues, will continue to vote according to the majority beliefs in his district. It’s funny because once he’s out of office (he doesn’t plan to run again after his term is up), he’ll be discriminated against for being the man he is now. But I guess what happens will happen. Ashburn said he’ll continue to “drawing on his Christian faith, and he asked people to pray for him.” Ha.

It seems, as of late, that Mr. Volcker’s suggestions have been ignored by the administration that called on him to save the country from the closest we have been to economic wreckage since the Great Depression. Why, you may ask, are they ignoring a prominent economist and knowledegable expert? Volcker has been suggesting bringing back a modern form of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act that was passed during the Great Depression. Its provisions included the prohibition of bank holding companies from owning financial companies, presumably those involved with stocks and other derivatives. The Glass-Steagall Act was effectively repealed in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, allowing banks and brokerages to combine and reap tremendous profits at the expense of the average citizen. Of course, most big banks are completely against such an action (how can they make those fat profits they’re starting to make again?). The banking lobby is calling it an antiquated law that would be ineffective in today’s climate and consequently make America much less competitive on a global scale. Volcker, understanding these criticisms, retorted:

“People say I’m old-fashioned and banks can no longer be separated from nonbank activity…That argument,” he added ruefully, “brought us to where we are today.”

Economist and Nobel laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz has echoed the same sentiments as Volcker but fully cognizant that the former Fed Chairman is “embarked on a quixotic journey.” Former Citigroup CEO John S. Reed has joined the small chorus of Glass-Steagall-ites and has endorsed the same proposal saying it would “go a long way toward building a more robust financial sector.”

I agree with these men in saying that banking activities should be completely separate from other financial activities. Unless President Obama’s new proposal has better guidelines for these banks, what’s to stop them from repeating their actions with a resulting taxpayer-funded bailout? Limiting executive pay? That’s almost a laughable offense if they weren’t serious. Maybe the new “Too Big to Fail” bill will reveal the insights to which way the administration and Congress are planning to deal with the current crisis.

Recently, a California law requiring the disclosure of nutritional information at certain restaurants came into effect. You’d be amazed at how much people would deter towards eating certain foods when shown the nutritional information. Especially considering how many calories there are in many restaurant items. Coincidentally, an experiment done on monkeys showed that restricting your caloric intake could lead to a longer and healthier life.

It’s great that these necessary steps are being done to make consumers aware of what goes into their body. We often trust what is served to us on a plate just because there’s a sign in the front marked ‘A’ (the restaurant sanitation grade). Too much money is wasted on preventable diseases (read: obesity and diabetes). Information is a huge part of the reason why all of these things happen. Overall, they are great steps towards creating a healthier future. These new movements along with some type of universal health care are what will improve this country.

There is no legitimate use whatsoever for marijuana. This is not medicine. This is bogus witchcraft. It has no place in medicine, no place in pain relief…

But now the Libertarian, who is increasingly viewed by many Republicans as to what Nader is to the Democrats, has reversed his position on marijuana and the War on Drugs. I’m glad that he can finally admit to his failures and move on from there. Whereas some politicians hide behind statements or subtly make changes to fit the political arena, I think Barr made a wise decision by admitting outright that he was wrong and his policy was a complete failure.

…when government attempts to solve our societal problems, it tends to create even more of them, often increasing the size and depth of the original problem. A perfect example of this is the federal War on Drugs.

Good job, Barr. Although I don’t support you, I do greatly respect you and your (new) views.

Her speech was meant to unify the badly bruised and seemingly divided Democratic party. Some supporters immediately backed Obama, others did so reluctantly. But a few others decided that instead of not voting at all, they would back John McCain. The same McCain that promotes policies counter to those of Clinton (and Obama, since they nearly have the same policies sans healthcare). The same McCain who, at least in this Senate, has one of the most conservative voting records. To me that makes absolute zero sense. That tells me that those ardent Clinton supporters were not really supporting her for her policies. It’s fine that they won’t vote for Obama but when you go a complete 180 and support someone who is the complete opposite, that is just ludicrous.

The Co-Chairs of University of Iowa Students for Hillary also released a memo today indicating that they would vote for McCain. They advocated the rest of the group’s members to do the same:

We do not agree with him [McCain] on everything, and this is why we urge you to strongly support Democrats up for re-election to congress. He served our country, he is right on immigration, right on global warming, and he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would have banned Marriage Equality.

I guess since they agree on these three issues, that makes him a good alternative to Hillary. Interesting deduction, people.