Fucking Obama....

Fucking Obama.....

I mean, seriously, what the hell happened to hope and change? If you haven't been disenfranchised by now.. and I have to question your logic as to why not, this news story should really push you over the edge. Then again, I've been saying that for a while now. But sure enough, he's starting to sound like Reagan..

Toward a 21st-Century Regulatory System
by Barack Obama

For two centuries, America's free market has not only been the source of dazzling ideas and path-breaking products, it has also been the greatest force for prosperity the world has ever known. That vibrant entrepreneurialism is the key to our continued global leadership and the success of our people.

But throughout our history, one of the reasons the free market has worked is that we have sought the proper balance. We have preserved freedom of commerce while applying those rules and regulations necessary to protect the public against threats to our health and safety and to safeguard people and businesses from abuse.

From child labor laws to the Clean Air Act to our most recent strictures against hidden fees and penalties by credit card companies, we have, from time to time, embraced common sense rules of the road that strengthen our country without unduly interfering with the pursuit of progress and the growth of our economy.

Sometimes, those rules have gotten out of balance, placing unreasonable burdens on business—burdens that have stifled innovation and have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs. At other times, we have failed to meet our basic responsibility to protect the public interest, leading to disastrous consequences. Such was the case in the run-up to the financial crisis from which we are still recovering. There, a lack of proper oversight and transparency nearly led to the collapse of the financial markets and a full-scale Depression.

Over the past two years, the goal of my administration has been to strike the right balance. And today, I am signing an executive order that makes clear that this is the operating principle of our government.

This order requires that federal agencies ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth. And it orders a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. It's a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades.

Where necessary, we won't shy away from addressing obvious gaps: new safety rules for infant formula; procedures to stop preventable infections in hospitals; efforts to target chronic violators of workplace safety laws. But we are also making it our mission to root out regulations that conflict, that are not worth the cost, or that are just plain dumb.

For instance, the FDA has long considered saccharin, the artificial sweetener, safe for people to consume. Yet for years, the EPA made companies treat saccharin like other dangerous chemicals. Well, if it goes in your coffee, it is not hazardous waste. The EPA wisely eliminated this rule last month.

But creating a 21st-century regulatory system is about more than which rules to add and which rules to subtract. As the executive order I am signing makes clear, we are seeking more affordable, less intrusive means to achieve the same ends—giving careful consideration to benefits and costs. This means writing rules with more input from experts, businesses and ordinary citizens. It means using disclosure as a tool to inform consumers of their choices, rather than restricting those choices. And it means making sure the government does more of its work online, just like companies are doing.

We're also getting rid of absurd and unnecessary paperwork requirements that waste time and money. We're looking at the system as a whole to make sure we avoid excessive, inconsistent and redundant regulation. And finally, today I am directing federal agencies to do more to account for—and reduce—the burdens regulations may place on small businesses. Small firms drive growth and create most new jobs in this country. We need to make sure nothing stands in their way.

One important example of this overall approach is the fuel-economy standards for cars and trucks. When I took office, the country faced years of litigation and confusion because of conflicting rules set by Congress, federal regulators and states.

The EPA and the Department of Transportation worked with auto makers, labor unions, states like California, and environmental advocates this past spring to turn a tangle of rules into one aggressive new standard. It was a victory for car companies that wanted regulatory certainty; for consumers who will pay less at the pump; for our security, as we save 1.8 billion barrels of oil; and for the environment as we reduce pollution. Another example: Tomorrow the FDA will lay out a new effort to improve the process for approving medical devices, to keep patients safer while getting innovative and life-saving products to market faster.

Despite a lot of heated rhetoric, our efforts over the past two years to modernize our regulations have led to smarter—and in some cases tougher—rules to protect our health, safety and environment. Yet according to current estimates of their economic impact, the benefits of these regulations exceed their costs by billions of dollars.

This is the lesson of our history: Our economy is not a zero-sum game. Regulations do have costs; often, as a country, we have to make tough decisions about whether those costs are necessary. But what is clear is that we can strike the right balance. We can make our economy stronger and more competitive, while meeting our fundamental responsibilities to one another.

It's really actually perfect in every wrong way possible. The cherry on top was the fact that this was printed on the Wall Street Journal... That just sealed the deal in making this a big FUCK YOU to the nation.



Yup.. that's it. That does it. I mean, I didn't realize that there was any way for Obama to shove more throbbing corporate cock down his throat, but he managed to do so anyway. Maybe I should just start putting a bit of arsenic into my coffee every day. It'll be a much easier way to deal with the impending doom that is our nation.

The real comedy of all this is that one of the very last talking points that Obama defenders had left was that "At least he's stopping decades of republican presidents weakening of regulators" and here he is..


They got him...

He wasn't even smooth about it or even tried to make a compelling argument about why we should push for more deregulation. He basically summed it down to

"FUCK these regulations are dumb and expensive WHY THE FUCK do we even do these things?" - Barry O

What happened to the president we elected. You know, that one guy who said things like

"We're not going to use signing statements to do an end run around Congress"
- Barack Obama, 2008

It's as if he's that kid who gets bullied and then starts acting like the bullies in hopes that they'll stop bullying him... and then they still don't. Just because you don't want them to call you a socialist anymore doesn't mean that you need to adopt Reagan style president tactics.

Just face it, you'll never be conservative enough for them. You might as well stick with keeping those election promises that you made to the people. Then again, I'm mistaken to think that he was bullied into any of this. It's probably him just working for political clout so he can get re-elected in 2012 as the corporate lap dog.



It wouldn't surprise me if he allows his universal health care to just get voted out of existence by the republicans. Maybe he'll just deregulate health insurance and repeal every aspect of the reform except the purchase mandate.

Maybe in 2012 we will see the introduction of a new "citizenship licenses" which everyone making less than 250k a year will be required to buy that are on a sliding scale pegged at 60% of income. This will be in addition to taxes, and will provide nothing. You won't even get a piece of paper with your name on it.

Maybe he's just trying to improve his approval rating. I know a pretty good way to do that. He should announce his support for the republican effort to repeal that insidious communist health care shit. Once that happens then the approval rating will reach those inauguration levels.

America is really becoming a corporation and Obama is acting more in favor of this than any CEO could dream of. The only thing that needs to happen is Obama need to announce plans to decrease tax rates on top bracket to zero and make it so that all of the burden is shifted to welfare recipients.

Oh.. what am I talking about, Welfare is going to get done away with over the next year or so, but hey, we'll have a Woolly Mammoth walking around again.



I can see Obama just say fuck it with any sort of act and go full on with something like this:

"For two centuries, America's free market has not only been the source of dazzling ideas and path-breaking products, it has also been the greatest force for prosperity the world has ever known."
-Barack "Hussein" Obama, the Socialest

Just you wait, it's going to to get far worse. Look at how the FDA bowed to corporate needs. For as long as we known, the FDA considered saccharin, the artificial sweetener, safe for people to consume. Yet for years, the EPA made companies treat saccharin like other dangerous chemicals. Well, if it goes in your coffee, it's not hazardous waste. The EPA wisely eliminated this rule last month. I wonder how much was used to grease those pockets.

But hey, I'm pretty sure we could refuce everything to a single regulation.....

State ownership.

I Want To Laugh But I Just Can't - US Spending

I Want To Laugh But I Just Can't - US Spending

Just what you were waiting for, the new US spending measures were announced the other day. So let's see how we're cutting cost and decreasing that deficit...

U.S. spending on weapons through 2016 likely will grow faster than the overall defense budget, which will have annual increases of only about 1 percent above inflation, according to Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale.

“Our goal would be to get forces and modernization to grow by 2 or 3 percent,” Hale said in an interview, while saying that “it’s not a given.”

An increase in weapons spending will include greater purchases of Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F- 35 fighter, new ground vehicles, ship construction, satellite systems and unmanned drones, according to the Pentagon’s long- range plan. Northrop Grumman Corp., of Los Angeles, and Chicago- based Boeing Co. also stand to benefit.

Some money may be shifted into equipment and personnel accounts from an effort to cut $100 billion of overhead costs over five years, announced by Defense Secretary Robert Gates on June 28, Hale said.

“Procurement and research are in the ‘gaining’ portion of the budget,” Hale said. “The goal would be to move money from support-type activities -- operations and maintenance, military construction -- into acquisition.”

Hale’s remarks are good news for defense contractors, said Todd Harrison, a defense analyst with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

“It sounds like they are trying to do everything they can now to avoid major program cuts in the next few years,” Harrison said. Yet, if the Pentagon goal of cutting overhead and support costs isn’t achieved, “they will have no choice but to cut” programs, he said.

‘Gusher’ Turned Off

Gates has announced plans to revamp Pentagon spending, saying in a May 8 speech that future budgets will see little real growth because a defense-spending “gusher” that opened after the Sept. 11 attacks “has been turned off and will stay off for a good period of time.”

In April 2009, Gates proposed to cut and truncate programs worth as much as $330 billion over their service lives.

The Pentagon’s $549 billion base budget request for fiscal 2011 represents an increase of about 1.8 percent over fiscal 2010, when defense spending rose 2.1 percent. Those budgets follow eight years of 4 percent average annual growth.

Hale said there still may be more cuts in store for some weapons programs after a Pentagon review later this year for the fiscal 2012 budget.

Weapons Spending

Congress approved $104.8 billion for weapons buying this year and is considering proposed procurement spending of $111.2 billion for fiscal 2011, which begins Oct. 1. The Pentagon may request $120 billion in 2012, rising to $137 billion in 2015, according to comptroller’s office projections that Hale said are, at this time, only for planning purposes.

Estimates about how much money may become available from the cost-cutting efforts are “going to get squishier” as projections move further into the future, Hale said. “That’s just inevitable.”

The Pentagon plan calls for $7 billion in savings in 2012, increasing to $11 billion in 2013 and $18.9 billion in 2014, according to a Pentagon fact sheet. The largest savings are projected at $37 billion in 2016.

While it will be a “significant challenge” to achieve those goals, Hale said that Gates wants “to push the process a little bit. Let’s see how far we can get.”

Clearly the article restored my hope in solving the budget crisis, restoring America to a peaceful democracy, and eventually bringing about peace for all mankind. Oh wait.. this is the opposite of that.

So what's this feeling? My impotent rage is changing, becoming something new, a sort of dull sadness... I'm finally crossing over! Goodbye my friends, I'll see you on the other side!

The way we're running this country, the US spends more on bullets, and only bullets, than it spends on the entirety of the Peace Corps. We piss away 10.5 billion for C4 systems. We're literally blowing money away. Let's, for a moment, think about all the things we could do with this amount spent on military weapons

-Free health care for every American ever
-We could feed the entire world instead of killing brown people

There's seriously no words to explain my contempt for this country. Just look at the conversation going on between the Pentagon and the senate.

"We don't want this shit" ~ the Pentagon, 2010
"Yes you do" ~ Congress, 2010

I just love the mentality of our government over this. "We can't afford to keep unemployment extensions around, nor can we give a better stimulus to the people who are one paycheck away from being homeless, but shit, let's buy a whole bunch of weapons that even the Pentagon doesn't want."



THE FUCKING PENTAGON DOES NOT WANT THE FUCKING WEAPONS, AND YET WE'RE STILL GOING TO MAKE THEM! FUCK!

Now I can feel safe again as I go to sleep at night. Thank you America.

Actually, the thing we're all forgetting about this is that military spending is the one form of stimulus spending that Obama hasflksjdfljsalfkjalkfjalfj FUCK! This is the only form of stimulus that Obama can get past these mother fuckers in the senate. Disband that shit already.

But.. but... but... now that democrats are in power, we have to find funding for things before we can do them. Oh wait, it is for bombs. And why do we need to keep pumping money into weapons making? Well good thing you asked...

"The defense-industrial sector used its clout to deliver more weapons than the armed services asked for and even to build new weapons systems that the operational military did not want." An "internal arms race" developed in which design bureaus produced a variety of ICBMs with the same missions. When some called for a reduction of missiles, defense industry officials objected, because it would cause unemployment problems. [I: 61-63; II: 92 (Kalashnikov)]

So it's pretty simple to see why we keep pumping money into weapons making. It's because this is like 99% of everything still manufactured in the US anymore. Please stop America.

Wait, I didn't put an apostrophe there. I know. Maybe I'm asking for some foreign country to come in and stop America. Because Jesus fuck, this is just fucking nuts!



I shall call this the "Shadow Stimulus." I'm having a little bit of a hard time understanding the logic here.If government spending on non-defense jobs = Socialism, doesn't government spending on defense jobs necessarily = National Socialism? This is pretty much the case, but it's been going on since the end of WWII, so what are we to do about it?

Even though the Senate isn't completely full of morons. There's some voice of reason in the madness of stupidity that is the Senate floor..

“The Senate has unfortunately failed once again to put the taxpayers’ interests ahead of its own,” Feingold said. “We are now going to spend $2.5 billion on a military aircraft our own Defense Department doesn’t want. Congress should not be wasting taxpayer dollars on lawmakers’ pet projects, especially in the face of record deficits. We need to get our defense spending priorities right so we can adequately address the real world threats we face today, and not waste taxpayer dollars on unnecessary projects.”

The Senate went on to pass the Defense Appropriations bill. Senator Feingold was one of seven senators to vote against it. Earlier this year, Feingold was part of a successful, bipartisan effort to save billions of taxpayer dollars by stopping the purchase of seven additional F-22 Raptor aircraft, a Cold War relic that had never flown a mission in Iraq or Afghanistan and the Department of Defense said it did not want.

Good thing our responsible news media will report on this travesty in the face of our deficit crisis... Oh wait, no. No they won't. CNN just fired their mideast reporter to appease right wingers

On Sunday, Octavia Nasr — CNN’s Senior Editor of Mideast Affairs — acknowledged the death of Lebanon’s Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah by tweeting:

Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah.. One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot..

Fadlallah was well known for a number of relatively liberal views, such as his support for women’s rights and fatwas against the brutal practices of female circumcision and honor killings. But Nasr’s comment was enough to spark fierce outrage from the various precincts of the neocon blog/twittersphere, who went after Nasr for her egregious failure to reduce Fadlallah to an anti-Israel, anti-American terrorist bogeyman.

Then again, it is pretty standard practice to fire reporters who don't agree with America.

Fuck it. Let's run this ship into the motherfucking ground. That's really the only way to be an optimist, to be perfectly honest. It's only when you truly lost everything that you have everything to gain.



The basic thing you need to know is that this is how we got ourselves out of the depression. It was arms and airplane manufacturing for WWII. Afterward they realized that reducing government spending would cause problems, so the department of war became the Pentagon and the cold war began because we constantly needed to manufacture weapons to keep that money flowing and jobs filled.

Frankly, the Great Depression was the nail in the coffin for Laissez Faire capitalism, it removed any credibility it had left as a functioning economic system. This is readily visible by the fact that every country experimenting with solutions ended up coming up with the same one, massive public spending. In fact if you take a look at all the industrialized countries today, you'll see that they all have a huge state sector.

What is the economic rationale for weapons production? I just don't understand how a non-consumer, non-utility producing product is able to improve our economies problem.

What really happened in WWII was all the fertile farmland in Europe got turned into battlefields and it took the Marshall Plan to rejuvenate the landscape after it was devastated by war. This is basically what has happened in Afghanistan except the climate is harsher and no one is proposing a recovery plan, so it's going to take even longer for the land to become fertile again. Is it any wonder these people don't grow anything but poppy when their farmland is always getting shelled and bombed?

Maybe these words should be taken to heart by a very smart man.



Why not put the money into research and development to help build things that make all of humanity better off as a whole? Oh wait, then we won't get free oil from it, right. But then again, I guess that does make humanity better. By reducing the proportion of undesirable human beings in the population, the lot of humanity as a whole is improved.

It's all some big circle anyway. Military spending secures the supply of oil, which secures our food production. It also secures the supply of other material that secures our financial system. What did we just find in Afghanistan, after all.

It is one of the greatest ironies of the war in Iraq that we ended up losing much of the oil. The infrastructure breakdown that we caused slowed down Iraqi oil drilling to a near halt, and during the first gulf war, Saddam ordered an oil spill that rivals the current BP Deepwater Horizon. It's going to be a run-off as to which one is actually going to be bigger.

It's just a great example of how social conflict, when brought to the level of industrial war, wastes more resources than you can imagine. Not to mention the funny fact that nothing in existence takes more oil to produce, maintain, and transport than tanks, planes, ships and troops.

I guess all I know is that Death is certain.

Global Warming - Fuck It

Global Warming - Fuck It

A name you don't recognize nor probably ever even heard of before is James Lovelock. Who is he? Well, he's the guy that wrote Gaia theory and has been a big face in climate change prevention. So if anything you would think he would be a little concerned about the potential of global warming, right?

Nah, at this point he's saying Fuck it.

Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'
Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate change.

Interviewed by Today presenter John Humphrys, videos of which you can see below, he said that while the earth's future was utterly uncertain, mankind was not aware it had "pulled the trigger" on global warming as it built its civilizations.

What is more, he predicts, the earth's climate will not conveniently comply with the models of modern climate scientists.

As the record winter cold testifies, he says, global temperatures move in "jerks and jumps", and we cannot confidently predict what the future holds.

Prof Lovelock does not pull his punches on the politicians and scientists who are set to gain from the idea that we can predict climate change and save the planet ourselves.

Scientists, he says, have moved from investigating nature as a vocation, to being caught in a career path where it makes sense to "fudge the data".

I can't say I'm all that surprised, really. I've sort of been expecting comments like this for a while now. People moving from "let's try and limit the impact", to "it's too late, fuck it". Especially after the huge failure of copenhagen. There appears to be more and more public skepticism towards Global warming. Especially in the UK after the email leaks from the UEA.



Add in that environmental policy has been totally eclipsed due to the recession. I've not seen any mention of climate change since the email leaks. As the feeling of inevitability catches on, is it correct to assume international cooperation's will also shrink, as nations try to protect their interests regardless of anything else.

"fuck it."

So there you have it. The official response by someone of Al Gore level importance to this movement. Who cares, You'll be dead in 60 or so years if you're of the age that you're reading this blog and nothing will matter. You may think that it's a pretty selfish mind set to have on the matter, but let's be realistic here - It's true.

Besides, most of you will be republicans shortly after you start your careers so you can join the rest who never really gave a shit anyway. We have to face the reality that we never had a chance. I mean, I appreciate that people tried and that's great, but let's be real here. Fuck it.



I mean, it's poor retards that caused it in the first place, they will be the ones dealing with the fact that they can't afford to live in the protection dome. I'll just be investing in AIG and Exxon, getting rich and raising my asshole kids to continue my shit legacy in this new and amazing water world.

You mean that capitalism... can't solve problems?! I'm shocked! I really don't think Loyelock holds much scientific sway, but I think the general shift in sentiment is interesting. Also he has been a trend setter, at least in the UK. According to a recent survey of Climate scientist with at least a PHD, 83.6% now agree with the statement "Duuuuude we are soooo fucked".

If the human race is worth preserving it will preserve itself. If humans actually aren't going to survive wouldn't the next step be attempting to create some sort of permanent record of our existence. You could fit most real important literature onto a decent sized hard drive along with basic pictorial guides to major languages and a bunch of historical records and photographs for whoever comes along next, though I guess they'd have to have some way to interface with it and I have no idea how to preserve such a thing. I think that's called a National Geographic box set.



On second thought, how about we just go out in style. Let the next douchebags figure out shit on their own. Once we start to build domed cities, none of this will matter anyways. There's one dude, Bueno-whatshisname, that has the statistical model that predicts stuff with over 90% accuracy saying we'll definitely fail to solve climate change because of how awful political systems are.

Don't be too sad, check out Life After People on Hulu and take comfort that long after we've stopped existing and destroying the planet, it'll live on and be a better place. The best part is when they press some biologist to predict what will evolve and he's like "Uh.. I don't know, I mean, that's not really a question science can ans--" then they cut to the film and he looks all flustered and he's like "well, I GUESS maybe there'd be uh... flying...cats?" then they cut to a CG sequence of gliding cats flaying between skyscrapers.



There was a pretty bad ass show called "The Future is Wild" that aired a few years ago that had all sorts of speculative future animals, it went pretty far into the future too, like 200 million years. I'm guessing it was by the same FX company and they just had a lot of footage left over.

The best ones was the Squibbon. These are descended from squid, which have successfully invaded the land. They are an arboreal species that live in simple structures built in the treetops, capitalizing on their natural dexterity and acute stereoscopic vision.

Find out more about this creature. Read the key facts>"

"Eats: Forest flish

Eaten by: Megasquid"

Ah yes, I know, The evolutionary consultant was Billy, age 5. I mean, I know 4/20 was a couple of days ago, but you should really get ripped as fuck and watch it. It's fucking hilarious. So yeah, that's Earth Day in a nut shell.

The Ghost OF Capitalism Future - Dubai

The Ghost OF Capitalism Future - Dubai

As much as I'm a strong and powerful American supporter, I do still believe that Capitalism is not the best economic plan for longevity. I've made the example about Monopoly and how at first, you really enjoy buying up all the land you can with all the money you get tossed at you. But as the game goes on and it's clear that someone has the strong hold on a monopoly and starts building like crazy making you pay every time you pass by it, it starts to lose the fun factor.

So when the news came out that Dubai is dead broke... I can't help but be the bearer of bad news and say that this is a preview of tomorrow's Wall Street carnage. Yup, Dubai is pretty much broke as a joke...

Dubai's Request For Debt 'Standstill' Shakes World Markets

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Just a year after the global downturn derailed Dubai's explosive growth, the city is now so swamped in debt that it's asking for a six-month reprieve on paying its bills – causing a drop on world markets Thursday and raising questions about Dubai's reputation as a magnet for international investment.

The fallout came swiftly and was felt globally after Wednesday statement that Dubai's main development engine, Dubai World, would ask creditors for a "standstill" on paying back its $60 billion debt until at least May. The company's real estate arm, Nakheel – whose projects include the palm-shaped island in the Gulf – shoulders the bulk of money due to banks, investment houses and outside development contractors.

In total, the state-backed networks nicknamed Dubai Inc. are $80 billion in the red and the emirate needed a bailout earlier this year from its oil-rich neighbor Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates.

Markets took the news badly – with the Dubai woes and the continued fall of the U.S. dollar giving investors twin worries. Dubai's move raised concerns about debt across the Gulf Region. Prices to insure debt from Abu Dhabi, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain all rose by double-digit percentages Thursday, according to data from CMA DataVision.

In Europe, the FTSE 100, Germany's DAX and the CAC-40 in France opened sharply lower. Earlier in Asia, the Shanghai index sank 119.19 points, or 3.6 percent, in the biggest one-day fall since Aug. 31. Hong Kong's Hang Seng shed 1.8 percent to 22,210.41.

Wall Street was closed for the Thanksgiving holiday and most markets in the Middle East were silent because of a major Islamic feast.

"Dubai's standstill announcement ... was vague and it remains difficult to discern whether the call for a standstill will be voluntary," said a statement from the Eurasia Group, a Washington-based research group that assesses political and financial risk for foreign investors interested in Dubai.

"If it is not, Dubai World will be going into default and that will have more serious negative repercussions for Dubai's sovereign debt, Dubai World and market confidence in the UAE in general," the statement added.

Dubai became the Gulf's biggest credit crunch victim a year ago. But its ruler, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid Al-Maktoum, had continually dismissed concerns over the city-state's liquidity and claims it overreached during the good times.

When asked about the debt, he confidently assured reporters in a rare meeting two months ago that "we are all right" and "we are not worried," leaving details of a recovery plan – if such a plan exists – to everyone's guess.

Then, earlier this month, he told Dubai's critics to "shut up."

After months of denial that the economic downturn even touched the glitzy city-state, the Dubai government earlier this year showed signs of trying to deal with the financial fallout that has halted dozens of projects and touched off an exodus of expatriate workers.

After an expensive adventure in doing things the Western way, it's "going back to basics" for Dubai, Shakeel added.

But if this comes to you as a surprise, I really don't know what to tell you. Dubai has been broke for a while now, they've just been in denial. A couple of weeks back their was a report that more people were leaving the hell out of the place abandoning their Ferrari's in the airport parking lot as they fled from collectors. Their is the ability to have a debtors prison sure scares people. I wonder if you could get a sweet deal on one of those abandoned cars. I always wanted a gold/silver plated exotic car and right now I'm sure you can get a great deal on one.

But there's a difference between abandoned Ferrari's and the whole city/state going belly-up. Although it sure seemed inevitable. I guess the business model of building Jurassic park in real life doesn't seem so sound. I mean, they had an indoor ski resort... And world shaped islands. Wait, let's see how that 'The World' project is coming along. You know, all those islands that were carefully designed off the coast of Dubai so that they would be in the shape of the contine--


Ha! yeah.. needs a little work..

The World project is one of the dumbest things ever attempted by man. You dump rocks and sand in water long enough to build islands.. not only that, but islands that look like the world. It's like that one beer ad where they toss rocks into the ocean so they have an island to party on. I mean, who doesn't want their own island to buck the rules of... drinking in public? Hmm, I'm not sure what laws they would need to make their own exclusive island for.

I'm going to talk about the bigger fish that will fry because of this, but there's just so much ground to cover. I mean, first of all, this is going to suck for those migrant slav-workers, there. It really is just a Slave run Vegas near the ocean with a lot of tall buildings. And tall buildings for nothing.



It really is pretty sad that the only thing that Dubai gets deadlines for is its massive skyscrapers and financial debts. It's not like it's a haven for slavery, corruption, blatant human rights violations, or a massive sex trade or anything. Whenever I say that I would rather visit pretty much anywhere else in the world besides Dubai people never understand why.

Besides screwing over the slave market that has been going on there for the luxuriant rich, Dubai was a place for companies to put their money into hoping for some return. In fact, this is going to kill the shit loads of companies that bailed out Dubai not too long ago by investing in them. We'll finally ge to see which banks are holding all that debt that Dubai World will "pay back when it gets around to it", from what I've heard this weeks lucky winner is HSBC. How about other companies who loaned Dubai money and have zero chance of seeing it back:

The US public will be “outraged” by Citibank’s $8 billion loan to Dubai just six weeks after the bank was bailed out, US House of Representatives domestic policy subcommittee chair-man has said. Dennis Kucinich commented on the Dubai loan and other US banking investments as a congressional panel released a report that strongly questioned Citibank’s actions. The report, shown to 7DAYS, cites the Dubai loan as the largest of the “questionable transactions” by banks after the US government bailed them out. It notes that the loan to Dubai’s public sector came on December 14, just six weeks after the US government gave Citibank a $25 billion bail-out.

The report quotes Win Bischoof, then chairman of Citi, as saying the bank agreed to the Dubai loan because “we continue to place the Gulf region among our globally most significant markets”. The report also questions JP Morgan’s $1 billion investment in India and Bank of America’s $7 billion investment in China. “When the American people find that their tax dollars, which were supposed to be used to get us out of this financial crisis, are instead being used to ship jobs and investments overseas, there will be outrage,” Kucinich said. The report notes the loans were not illegal and that it is not known if they were directly funded by bail-out funds. A Citibank official was quoted at the time as saying the $8 billion came from the bank’s own funds and third party sources. The report was released as the committee prepares to question banking chiefs about their use of bail-out funds.

Keep dreaming, Kucinich. People wont be outraged unless Glenbeck tells them to and Citibank would be more successful if it was run by some sort of dog or maybe a hamster. Even though I wrote an article about a dog stealing a turkey showing how they are untrustworthy tricksters who steal turkeys, they would make better CEO's. They can't steal 40 billion turkey's. If a dog stole a turkey that would completely occupy its attention for at least an hour, so a dog CEO could only realistically steal 5,500 turkeys a year.



I guess the best investment magnets are the ones that have no actual value aside from being investment magnets. Much like the best magnets are really big strong ones that slam together so hard that they turn your fingers into mincemeat. So this turning into a piss poor investment really shouldn't shock anyone.

It really makes you wonder why the hell economists all over the world shocked by this? It was concluded last year when the shit hit the fan that Dubai was going to go even further tits up. At least now you can get an amazing deal on a partially finished 500 story desert igloo tower. I mean, what was even the point of that towering symbol of modern day Babylon? You can see all the waste of money from up here!



This just highlights how stupid it was to build all those super-skyscrapers. There is no density that required it. It's really a work of stupidity. I recall hearing all the Econ majors foaming at the mouth and jerking off to Dubai. I guess it was just a matter of not having enough free market. The market, it needs more freedom! Actually, what it needs are more bootstraps and strawmen. Ten years from now all those abandoned towers are going to make for some really awesome post-apocalyptic locations for movies made by the Chinese, or poor college kids.

It was a bourgeois wonderland. I mean, how could it not be with a full fucking indoor skiing. Why would you want to go skiing in a desert? I do not know. I guess they took the idea of the indoor water park from vegas and ran with it. Really though, it's not needed and it's just over abundance. I guess I can't feel bad for those people because they went to an oppressive, shit hole country hoping to get rich. Goodbye, modern day version of Babylon. I guess the only thing now is I have no place to see disgusting displays of opulence and wealth now.


I am Ozymandias, King of Kings. Look upon my Jurassic Park recreation, and despair.

I haven't even touched on the tip of the ice burg in terms of absurd pictures of wasteful spending. You can check this site out to see the amount of pointless shit they were making in this wonderland where they assumed you could just throw more money at and it'll start working.

You'll have to forgive me. I've reached this far into this piece and I have not shown any concern for Haliburtons new headquarters located in Dubai... What will become of that poor company?! Heaven forbid it now has to spend more money on relocating to somewhere that isn't going to become a ghost town. Karma seems to be a bitch.

Dubai is a nice allegory for everything that is wrong with the world. It's basically Titanic 2.0. You know how in Sim City you make a really dense city as quickly as possible with tons of skyscrapers and you add tons of worthless landmarks and take out a bunch of loans to pay for all of it? That game strategy was really bad and usually never worked out. You didn't have to make a modern day Sim City situation to find that out.

I leave you with a video and these words from an article I found to be amazingly written about this place. Whoever runs this is my new favorite person. But let this be a reminder of what Capitalism holds for America's future.

England is deserted, Australia and New Zealand have merged, and the man who bought Ireland has killed himself.

They were designed to make Dubai the envy of the world: a series of paradise islands inhabited by celebrities and the super-rich reclaimed from the azure waters of the Arabian Gulf and shaped like a map of the Earth. It was called The World.

As millions of tonnes of rock were dumped into the sea for the foundations, timely leaks suggested that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie were to buy Ethiopia, Sir Richard Branson was tipped to occupy England, while Rod Stewart would border him in Scotland.

Instead it has become the world’s most expensive shipping hazard, guarded by private security in fast boats and ringed by warning buoys to keep the curious away. A development that was meant to send Dubai’s star into the firmament of First World cities has been left to the mercy of the waves and the baking winds.

Mile after mile of breakwater built from boulders brought hundreds of miles by ship has been laid, but inside its man-made lagoon, work has completely stopped. The expected map of the world of 300 islands is instead a disjointed and desolate collection of sandy blots — a monumental folly just out of sight of Dubai’s shore.

Those who bought into what was the world’s most ambitious building project were not celebrities. Many were more ordinary investors who put down 70 per cent deposits, some of them Anglo-Indians. John O’Dolan, who fronted a consortium that bought Ireland in 2007 for $38 million (£27 million), committed suicide earlier this year. The others have little prospect of seeing a return. Now The World has stopped they can’t get off.

“The World has been cancelled. It doesn’t even look like the world. Basically there is one island that is maintained that is said to be owned by the Sheikh [Dubai’s ruler] and the rest looks like a pile of muck,” said one local property agent.

It is the starkest example of a financing crunch that faces the emirate but many other projects are also in jeopardy. In the United Arab Emirates (UAE), of which Dubai is a part, about $300 billion of building is on hold after prices began tumbling. Abu Dhabi, Dubai’s oil-rich neighbour, is helping to support it through the crisis, so far to the tune of about $10 billion. Another $10 billion is likely to follow soon, and more may follow.

How Smal Is Your Penis?

How Smal Is Your Penis?

So let's go ahead and ask the big question, How small, exactly, is your penis? The question should be answered by these gents with a simple youtube video;



Thy did it. They finally did it. They built the Canyonero....



Why would you need that sort of driving power? You seriously have to be packing some mighty small penis gear if you need this to carry all your shit around. Imagine the status symbol in all this. The only thing that son-bitch is missing is some truck nutz. Though I'm sure they're already on order.

Fuck the ozone layer, let's get this bitch on the road, am I right? This is more reasons why we should just burn America down. Burn it all down to the ground. From the ashes will arise something... well, something that I would hope would not be like this.

OBEY

OBEY

I hate you Shepard Fairey


Look at that smug mother fucker. Your Obey shit has become old and busted. Please stop. Stop now. What's next? You take your shit to the consumer world for Sak Fifth Ave?







If these were for irony, I would sort of chuckle.







its all appropriation and no irony. and its ugly.

But that's not the worse of it. It seems that he loves to make a living off just altering someone else's image/idea and make it a corporate tool. Destroying much of the impact. Well, at the very least it gets people to know the original, right? Wrong. It usually bastardizes the original to the point that the new generation doesn't care about it.

It's like a shitty remake of a film. Some would say that it at least draws attention to the piece. Not so much as it takes away a lot from the piece and just gives it new meaning and rides its coat tails. Take a look at some of these following pieces.



Left: Down with the Whiteness - Rupert Garcia. Silkscreen print. 1969. In the permanent collection of the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco. Right: Shepard Fairey’s rip-off version of Garcia’s silkscreen. Fairey published his plagiarized version in his book, Supply and Demand. No credit was given to Rupert Garcia.



Left: Black Panther - Pirkle Jones. Photograph. 1968. Portrait of an anonymous Panther at a political rally in Oakland, California. The Panther photos of Ruth-Marion Baruch and Pirkle Jones are internationally famous and have long been available in book form. Right: Fairey’s street poster, which neither credits Pirkle Jones nor makes any mention of the Black Panther Party.



Left: Liberate Puerto Rico Now! - Young Lords Party. Silkscreen poster. 1971. Right: Fairey’s rip-off, "Wage Peace: Obey", which neither credits nor makes any mention of the Young Lords Party.



Left: Fairey's derivative poster, Greetings from Iraq, printed in 2005. Right: Ranger Naturalist Service: Yellowstone National Park - Artist unknown. Silkscreen. Circa late 1930s. Created for the Works Progress Administration (WPA) in order to promote travel to America's national parks



Left: Libertad para Angela Davis (Freedom for Angela Davis) - Félix Beltrán, Cuba, 1971. Original silk-screen print created by Beltrán in solidarity with Angela Davis when she was a political prisoner in the US. Right: Fairey’s plundered version as a street poster, which neither credits Beltrán nor identifies Angela Davis.



Left: Still from director Michael Anderson’s 1956 film adaptation of George Orwell’s cautionary story of a dystopic future, 1984. Right: Fairey unmistakably stole his image from the "Big Brother is Watching You" propaganda posters used in Anderson’s film, without crediting the source.



Left: Meeting - Vladimir Kozlinsky. Linocut. 1919. Kozlinsky’s depiction of workers listening to a revolutionary agitator. Middle top: Fairey’s plagiarized version of Kozlinsky’s linocut. Right: Have You Volunteered? - Dmitry Moor. Famous recruitment poster for the Soviet Red Army. 1920. Middle bottom: Fairey’s plagiarized version of Moor’s Red Army poster.



Left: Political power comes from the barrel of a gun - Artist unknown. 1968. Chinese poster from the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution period. The title of this poster quotes the famous pronouncement made by Mao Tse-Tung. Right: Fairey's plagiarized version titled, Guns and Roses. The Chinese poster's central motif of hands bearing machine guns was plainly digitally scanned without any alteration. Fairey, or his assistants, then applied a modified sun-burst background, placed clip-art roses in the gun barrels, and released the imitation in 2006 as a supposed original work.



Left: Fairey’s plagiarized poster. Right: Original street poster from Czechoslovakia’s, Prague Spring - Artist unknown 1968. The poster depicts a Soviet Red Army soldier in 1945 as a liberator, then as an oppressor in 1968.

Way to go Shepard. Lead those lambs to the slaughter.