Read on-line today that Carly Fiorino is running for the Senate in California. Is this not the same Carly Fiorino who was CEO of HP and was fired for wiretapping her employees phone calls/emails or whatever. 

Does the U.S. need this?

By the way, I am not a U.S. citizen or resident but follow the action very closely.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Congratulations to Ben Bernanke for "volunteering" to accept another four years as Federal Reserve Chairman. 

Does this not, however, beg the question: "Why would he want the job?"

From my rersearch, I understand he earns less than $200,000 per year. It must frost him no end to see so many infinitely less qualified people as him making $millions a year running banks and screwing up the financial sytem. And isn't it his job to act as janitor and clean up these messes?

And it is a no win job because if the economy is strong, the President, Congress and the Senate will take all the credit. If it falters, it was his fiscal policies that made created that failure.

And, by the way, to those rightests out there::: Stop blaming him for the fical mess the U.S. is in and the "possible" ineffectiveness of the bail-out plan Those plans were put in place by George W. and Henry Paulson. And when those plans were announced and Ben was on the sidelines looking on, I felt that he looked like Colin Powell caught in the headlines of the WMD fiasco created by Cheney and Rumsfeld. Powell was the scapegoat then and let's hope Bernanke does not suffer the same fate. Somehow I think he really has the best interests of the "American people" in mind.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Watched the Golden Globes the other night. And another self congratulatory night it was. A big love-in. But, hell. Millions love it.

Two things bugged me no end:

(1) Why couldn't the presenters memorize their little 35 second speeches? After all, they are actors and they are supposed to be able to memorize. Or can they? Don't tell me all movies are lip-synched. Anyway, these professionals looked so phony up there reading the teleprompter. In the old days of the Oscars, e.g., the whole show was "ad-lib" and if you made a mistake, so what. It did not ruin your carrer. Maybe that's the issue here. Carrer ruination.

(2) One of the presenters proudly pronounced that in the 40 or so years of the awards and through those awards, they had raised "OVER $10,000,000 FOR CHARITY". First of all they didn't say what the charity was. I presume the money has been spread around. But second :::::::::::Big deal. $10 million over 40 years. That's $250,000 per year. I am assuming that the Actors contributed to this pot. But therein lies the joke. When I see that one actor made $65,000,000 for one movie - something about Mr. Jones - then the whole thing seems to be very hypocritical.

By the way, the PGA TOUR is a "'make money of you make the cut career'" and they are about to pass $1 BILLION in charitable giving. And the leading earner on there earns $10,000,000 from the playing of the game, Just like the acting of the role

But at the same time, congratualtions to Sandra Bullock and her $1mill. for Haiti.

More posts to come.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

GM thinks it is the gods gift to the auto industry. It decides to buy SAAB. We can make it work. Lots more profit. GM cannot make money on its own operations. Decides to sell SAAB. Aks for and gets billions in bailout money to live another day. Finds a buyer for SAAB. The deal is on; Oops the deal is off. SAAB is taken off the table. Looks as though the week link management at GM can't make a decision. REALLY???

Oh,oh. Three days after Christmas, SAAB is back in play - probably until another offer comes along that does not suit the highly skilled and intelligent Board.of Director's and upper management.

Hey guys! Why not just give the company away and call it a day. GM will be lucky to get out of 2010 anyway. Cut your losses. Why should taxpayers have to put up more money to support of two worthless companies?

Will this shit never end. Who is going to awaken the fumbling mob?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

So all the newspapers and TV shows are talking about the "End of the Decade". Or is December 31st at midnight really the end of the decade?

If you start at year one. i.e. the birth of Christ, shouldn't the year start on December 25th. I do not know how January 1st got into the picture. But that is only one part of the question.

Go back to year one. At the end of year one, we had completed one year. So the end of the first decade would be the end of the year 10, would it not? The next decade would have started at the beginning of year 11 and ended in year 20, and so on.

I am sure I do not have to take my readers through the next 2009 years. I think there is a point.

But what about those who say the end of the decade is 2009? That also makes sense since, if we start on the first day of 2000, 10 years later would be the end of '09.

Maybe somewhere in the passage of time, we either lost a year - or gained for that metter.

NEED HELP. PLEASE EXPLAIN.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Why is it that all the female anchors from CNN have nasal, high pitched squeeky voices and wear too much pancake make-up?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

About 18 months ago the banks in the U.S. were given billions to stave off financial ruin. At the same time, the CEO's and on down were not allowed to give themselves big bonuses. 18 months later, they have enough money to pay back the billions. Hello bonues.

Question is: Where did they get the billions to pay back the Gov't? They don't make that much money in a decade let alone a year. Did they keep the money in the "bank" and not loan it to those who really needed it?

Will we ever know?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »