While oil -- with Brent currently at $45.75 per barrel -- seems to have a high volatility and heading upward, another commodity is currently having an upward tread. Instead of black gold, this commodity is known just as gold.
Gold is currently priced at $457 per ounce, a 16-year high. One of the factors that contribute to this record price is the environmental issue concerning the Newmont Mining Corp. Newmont is the world�s largest gold harvesting firm. It is based in Denver, Colorado.
Newmont earlier in spring this year has been charged by the locals of Sulawesi, Indonesia for polluting the Buyat Bay with arsenic and mercury based compound. The locals claim that Newmont�s activities are affecting their lives - cases of health problems and apparent decline in the fish stock have occurred there. The mining corporation however has flatly denied this by citing its own studies on the matter.
As the episode developed, five high ranking officers from Newmont were arrested by the Indonesian police under the charge of polluting. This action however has been criticized by the firm and the US government as inappropriate. In spite of mounting evidence of against the firm, the arrest is indeed irregular. The Newmont personnel, of who were detained for roughly a month, were later released.
A few weeks after the arrest, an independent report initiated by the Indonesian government confirms that the firm has polluted the environment. As a result, the Indonesian government is filling a lawsuit against the corporation.
Despite report of the level of mercury in the affected area is ten times higher than the allowed in the US, Newmont might be able to get away with this if the mining firm can prove that it has broken no environmental law. Regretfully, this is possible since in most cases, Newmont has not broken any Indonesian law. In fact, the contamination level itself is still within international standard. This shows how Indonesian environmental law is frustratingly weak. Nevertheless, the lawsuit itself is enough to hurt Newmont.
Unfortunately, the litigation is a two-edge knife. If the litigation is successful, there are concerns that foreign investment in Indonesia may decrease. Yet, it is encouraging to see the new Indonesian government is pursuing what is right instead of bending under the pressure of a multinational firm.
Gold is currently priced at $457 per ounce, a 16-year high. One of the factors that contribute to this record price is the environmental issue concerning the Newmont Mining Corp. Newmont is the world�s largest gold harvesting firm. It is based in Denver, Colorado.
Newmont earlier in spring this year has been charged by the locals of Sulawesi, Indonesia for polluting the Buyat Bay with arsenic and mercury based compound. The locals claim that Newmont�s activities are affecting their lives - cases of health problems and apparent decline in the fish stock have occurred there. The mining corporation however has flatly denied this by citing its own studies on the matter.
As the episode developed, five high ranking officers from Newmont were arrested by the Indonesian police under the charge of polluting. This action however has been criticized by the firm and the US government as inappropriate. In spite of mounting evidence of against the firm, the arrest is indeed irregular. The Newmont personnel, of who were detained for roughly a month, were later released.
A few weeks after the arrest, an independent report initiated by the Indonesian government confirms that the firm has polluted the environment. As a result, the Indonesian government is filling a lawsuit against the corporation.
Despite report of the level of mercury in the affected area is ten times higher than the allowed in the US, Newmont might be able to get away with this if the mining firm can prove that it has broken no environmental law. Regretfully, this is possible since in most cases, Newmont has not broken any Indonesian law. In fact, the contamination level itself is still within international standard. This shows how Indonesian environmental law is frustratingly weak. Nevertheless, the lawsuit itself is enough to hurt Newmont.
Unfortunately, the litigation is a two-edge knife. If the litigation is successful, there are concerns that foreign investment in Indonesia may decrease. Yet, it is encouraging to see the new Indonesian government is pursuing what is right instead of bending under the pressure of a multinational firm.
An ASEAN summit will be held this week in Vientiane, Laos. ASEAN, of course is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Prior to the summit, a few issues have already been flying around in the air.One of them is the situation in southern Thailand. A few member countries have expressed concerns on the recent development but the Thai premier has warned that he will consider any enquiry has a sign of intrusion of Thailand's internal problem. It is clear that Thailand is eager to go through the meeting without anyone mentioning the condition in the southern Thai states.
The main agenda of the summit however will be the discussion of free trade deal with Australia and New Zealand. It will be interesting to see how things will work out and how Malaysia will respond to it. Currently, all member countries have agreed to the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (AFTA), though the timetable towards reduced trade barriers varies from country to country. Malaysia in particular is supposed to eliminate the tariffs on foreign automobiles by 2005 but the government still maintains the tariffs on imported vehicles.
At the same time, it is interesting to note that if the free trade is signed, a good will probably go to the US from Australia via Singapore and then back again without being taxed, or at least being minimally taxed. This is because both Australia and Singapore have a free trade agreement with the US. An ASEAN-Australia FTA will complete the link.
Another issue that will be discussed on the table in Laos, surprisingly, at least to me, is the plan to increase the use of renewable energy. It is encouraging to see ASEAN is tackling the issue of energy together while heading to the right direction in matter concerning the economy and the environment.
The summit starts tomorrow. Let's hope the progress towards one more free trade deal will go uninterrupted.
The trade war has reached a new level. It all started when the US imposed anti-dumping taxes on various foreign goods for the relatively few interest groups� benefit. Right now, the trade war includes a substantial amount of goods; from steel to textile, from apple to shrimp. And currently, the symbols of the ongoing trade war are the American Boeing and European Airbus.
The US is digging its own grave and unfortunately, it�s dragging the world with it. This trade war needs to stop sooner rather than later. The majority in the Congress need to realize that the well-being of the few is not as important at the well-being of the many. If this squabbling continues to head for the worst, things are going to look grim for both the producers and the consumers.
With greater trade restrictions, the market size for the producers will get smaller as prices artificially increase. Some of the local producers may benefit from this restriction however but consumers on the other hand will have limited choice due to the higher price. The price of foreign goods has already been forced upward by the weakening dollar.
Things look grim but one of the most watched economic indices, the University of Michigan�s consumer confidence indicates a slight increase. This might be caused by the current shopping season. I suspect in a couple of months, consumer confidence will fall due to trade war that is becoming more visible each day.
Somehow, I think the US is not the place to be in the near future, if one is concerned with its economic environment. Aside from all these, with the issue of social security essentially remains unsolved, the US is a ticking time bomb.
The US is digging its own grave and unfortunately, it�s dragging the world with it. This trade war needs to stop sooner rather than later. The majority in the Congress need to realize that the well-being of the few is not as important at the well-being of the many. If this squabbling continues to head for the worst, things are going to look grim for both the producers and the consumers.
With greater trade restrictions, the market size for the producers will get smaller as prices artificially increase. Some of the local producers may benefit from this restriction however but consumers on the other hand will have limited choice due to the higher price. The price of foreign goods has already been forced upward by the weakening dollar.
Things look grim but one of the most watched economic indices, the University of Michigan�s consumer confidence indicates a slight increase. This might be caused by the current shopping season. I suspect in a couple of months, consumer confidence will fall due to trade war that is becoming more visible each day.
Somehow, I think the US is not the place to be in the near future, if one is concerned with its economic environment. Aside from all these, with the issue of social security essentially remains unsolved, the US is a ticking time bomb.
Bad, knowing it will get worse
It's the first snow of the season and it fell on November 24th. It fell all day long and almost two days after the first snow, the snowflakes are still outside.
It's the first snow of the season and it fell on November 24th. It fell all day long and almost two days after the first snow, the snowflakes are still outside.
Good, knowing that it's fall.
Bad, knowing that it's fall.
The photos show the University in two time periods separated by 27 days.
p/s - the first photo has been released to public domain, via Wikipedia. The photo is now featured along with an article concerning the University of Michigan Ann Arbor. Regardless of that, I would appreciate some acknowledgement if you ever need to use the picture.
Bad, knowing that it's fall.
The photos show the University in two time periods separated by 27 days.
p/s - the first photo has been released to public domain, via Wikipedia. The photo is now featured along with an article concerning the University of Michigan Ann Arbor. Regardless of that, I would appreciate some acknowledgement if you ever need to use the picture.
Usually in class, I would always stick my eyes to the nearest interesting girl despite my effort to sit in the front row and concentrate on what the professor has to say. However, every now and then, sooner rather than later, there are things in economics that catch my unbelievably short attention span. Impossible as it may seem, sometimes, economics does seem to be more interesting than girls. Last week, the economic issue at hand was, by far, more interesting that anything else.
The subject that was discussed concerned international trade theory. More precisely, it was about a model on industrial clustering and behind that, lurks a case for protectionism.
The idea on industrial clustering is quite simple on the surface � firms in the same industry tend to bunch together due to a few factors of which I won't delve myself in. Despite economics having a notorious reputation of having-a-can-opener assumption, I could see the truth behind this; the Silicon Valley in California, the biotech corridor near the east coast or even the Multimedia Super Corridor in Malaysia though in the latter case, that might provide a failing argument.
The model suggests a downward sloping straight line as the usual demand function and some average cost function as a decreasing downward sloping line that crosses the demand function once. Meanwhile, the y-axis represents cost or price in dollar, naturally and the x-axis, quantity. The graph below expresses the words more elegantly. (I made that myself! I must admit that it is not a demanding chore, however.)
Imagine the farthest demand and the average cost, where point A is on, describe some players in some industry (none of the players is a monopolist. It's a competitive market, just as a caveat if there is any other economic enthusiast out there) supply the world with some particular good. At A, which is the original equilibrium, the product is sold at P per unit and the quantity sold is Q. Consequently, there is Q of such good in the world.
In the graph, there are two average cost lines. The lower line, a line for some country, provides a lower average cost and it would make sense for the firms to move to that country to cut down cost. The firms would do just that but if merely one firm wanted to move to the lower line, it would have to sell its product at price higher than P (at P''' in particular, near point E) but selling at that price is not desirable for the firm because the consumers would only buy from the firms that are selling at P (where P < P'''). So, no one will migrate to the country with the lower cost, unless sufficient number of firms moves there in a concerted form.
Notice that if there are two firms moving to the other country with a lower average cost, it would be able to sell at a price lower than the price where there is only one firm at the lower average cost is able to offer. If there are three firms, the price goes down further. If sufficient firms migrate to other country with lower average cost, the new price will be sold at C, which is P'. If all firms do that, then everybody would sell at P'', which is point D.
Therefore, if the government of the country with the lower average cost wants to improve its economy, the government may want to encourage these firms or some new local firms to set up plants in its country. And in order to do this, a presence of incentive is needed.
And guess what the incentive is?
Subsidy, or some sort of protection � the government will need to subsidize (P''' � P) in order to make firms indifferent between locating their plants in the country with lower average cost and the original location. A little bit more subsidy than (P''' � P) would encourage the firms to be in the country with the lower average cost, in the long run.
As time moves on, as forces of economics force the good quantity in the country to move from somewhere below point B to new equilibrium point C. And that point, the subsidy may be lifted if the price after the lifting is still below price of point A.
I find this extremely surprising and for the rest of the day after knowing this, I couldn�t seem to stop thinking about it - a protectionism policy would encourage a lower price in a competitive market in long run. So far, I've always been thought that subsidy is wasteful due to the presence of deadweight loss. Deadweight loss is simply the possible benefit to both consumers and the producers without any tax or subsidy. And a loss is always bad. But, with protection in this case, it allows greater efficiency in the future. With the idea of intertemporal comes into place, a tradeoff between future and current consumption comes into mind. However, I am almost certain, the ability to consume some level of good at a lower price is preferable for many.
Nevertheless, do you find this surprising?
This result makes me rethink my position in supporting the removal of almost all restrictions to free trade. This also easily describes what the Malaysian government is doing with Proton, a Malaysian firm that produces cars. I find that the government is not merely trying to protect Proton. The government is doing exactly what is described in this model!
But, there are problems. Once the situation reaches the point where subsidy could be removed, it is hard to actually remove it. The reason is more political than sound economic reason.
On Proton, I am not sure whether it is about Proton hasn't reached the point where protection could be lifted or it concerns politics.
In the end, a question remains; after 20 years, one has to wonder why Proton is still protected; is there some other variables left unconsidered or does this model aptly explains Proton�s situation?
p/s - economics is fun!
The subject that was discussed concerned international trade theory. More precisely, it was about a model on industrial clustering and behind that, lurks a case for protectionism.
The idea on industrial clustering is quite simple on the surface � firms in the same industry tend to bunch together due to a few factors of which I won't delve myself in. Despite economics having a notorious reputation of having-a-can-opener assumption, I could see the truth behind this; the Silicon Valley in California, the biotech corridor near the east coast or even the Multimedia Super Corridor in Malaysia though in the latter case, that might provide a failing argument.
The model suggests a downward sloping straight line as the usual demand function and some average cost function as a decreasing downward sloping line that crosses the demand function once. Meanwhile, the y-axis represents cost or price in dollar, naturally and the x-axis, quantity. The graph below expresses the words more elegantly. (I made that myself! I must admit that it is not a demanding chore, however.)
Imagine the farthest demand and the average cost, where point A is on, describe some players in some industry (none of the players is a monopolist. It's a competitive market, just as a caveat if there is any other economic enthusiast out there) supply the world with some particular good. At A, which is the original equilibrium, the product is sold at P per unit and the quantity sold is Q. Consequently, there is Q of such good in the world.
In the graph, there are two average cost lines. The lower line, a line for some country, provides a lower average cost and it would make sense for the firms to move to that country to cut down cost. The firms would do just that but if merely one firm wanted to move to the lower line, it would have to sell its product at price higher than P (at P''' in particular, near point E) but selling at that price is not desirable for the firm because the consumers would only buy from the firms that are selling at P (where P < P'''). So, no one will migrate to the country with the lower cost, unless sufficient number of firms moves there in a concerted form.
Notice that if there are two firms moving to the other country with a lower average cost, it would be able to sell at a price lower than the price where there is only one firm at the lower average cost is able to offer. If there are three firms, the price goes down further. If sufficient firms migrate to other country with lower average cost, the new price will be sold at C, which is P'. If all firms do that, then everybody would sell at P'', which is point D.
Therefore, if the government of the country with the lower average cost wants to improve its economy, the government may want to encourage these firms or some new local firms to set up plants in its country. And in order to do this, a presence of incentive is needed.
And guess what the incentive is?
Subsidy, or some sort of protection � the government will need to subsidize (P''' � P) in order to make firms indifferent between locating their plants in the country with lower average cost and the original location. A little bit more subsidy than (P''' � P) would encourage the firms to be in the country with the lower average cost, in the long run.
As time moves on, as forces of economics force the good quantity in the country to move from somewhere below point B to new equilibrium point C. And that point, the subsidy may be lifted if the price after the lifting is still below price of point A.
I find this extremely surprising and for the rest of the day after knowing this, I couldn�t seem to stop thinking about it - a protectionism policy would encourage a lower price in a competitive market in long run. So far, I've always been thought that subsidy is wasteful due to the presence of deadweight loss. Deadweight loss is simply the possible benefit to both consumers and the producers without any tax or subsidy. And a loss is always bad. But, with protection in this case, it allows greater efficiency in the future. With the idea of intertemporal comes into place, a tradeoff between future and current consumption comes into mind. However, I am almost certain, the ability to consume some level of good at a lower price is preferable for many.
Nevertheless, do you find this surprising?
This result makes me rethink my position in supporting the removal of almost all restrictions to free trade. This also easily describes what the Malaysian government is doing with Proton, a Malaysian firm that produces cars. I find that the government is not merely trying to protect Proton. The government is doing exactly what is described in this model!
But, there are problems. Once the situation reaches the point where subsidy could be removed, it is hard to actually remove it. The reason is more political than sound economic reason.
On Proton, I am not sure whether it is about Proton hasn't reached the point where protection could be lifted or it concerns politics.
In the end, a question remains; after 20 years, one has to wonder why Proton is still protected; is there some other variables left unconsidered or does this model aptly explains Proton�s situation?
p/s - economics is fun!
Rose Bowl anybody?
The day started with a loss at Columbus. And with that, destiny was not in our hand anymore. Fate was Wisconsin to command. However, chance stole fate from Wisconsin and voila! Michigan is in the Rose Bowl!
And may I say, thank you Wisconsin. It has been a fun season.
p/s - Ajax 5 - 0 De Graafschap. A nice little warmup for the Champions' League match against Juventus . Ajax needs to win this if they want to save their season. And damn, Rosales is a good purchase!
The day started with a loss at Columbus. And with that, destiny was not in our hand anymore. Fate was Wisconsin to command. However, chance stole fate from Wisconsin and voila! Michigan is in the Rose Bowl!
And may I say, thank you Wisconsin. It has been a fun season.
p/s - Ajax 5 - 0 De Graafschap. A nice little warmup for the Champions' League match against Juventus . Ajax needs to win this if they want to save their season. And damn, Rosales is a good purchase!
... is never objective.
So much for moral value, eh?
p/s - for a cleaner environment! This is our next goal after Kyoto is done!
pp/s - hunting with hounds has been banned in Britain. Hunting ban is probably the biggest environmental issue in Britain at the moment.
The most interesting point on this issue is that, the House of Commons is in favor (or in favour, depending on how messed up your head is) of the ban while the House of Lords is saying nay. While this happens, the House of Commons is pushing the ban forward, regardless of what the Lords thinks. Class war in the making, probably.
ppp/s - this might be a little bit sadistic, but a twin .50 calibre machine gun is the right way to fight poaching. Let the poachers be hunted.
p4/s - Kmart and Sears are merging into a single, bigger, giant entity.
So much for moral value, eh?
p/s - for a cleaner environment! This is our next goal after Kyoto is done!
pp/s - hunting with hounds has been banned in Britain. Hunting ban is probably the biggest environmental issue in Britain at the moment.
The most interesting point on this issue is that, the House of Commons is in favor (or in favour, depending on how messed up your head is) of the ban while the House of Lords is saying nay. While this happens, the House of Commons is pushing the ban forward, regardless of what the Lords thinks. Class war in the making, probably.
ppp/s - this might be a little bit sadistic, but a twin .50 calibre machine gun is the right way to fight poaching. Let the poachers be hunted.
p4/s - Kmart and Sears are merging into a single, bigger, giant entity.
Did you watch Futurama when it was on Fox Network?
If you did, do you remember this one particular episode where Fry was sleeping and an advertisement ran through during one of his dreams and when he woke up, he told Leela that he dreamt an advertisement and Leela said he didn�t dream it but rather, it was some kind of advertisement transmitted via some kind of wave by some marketing firms to the brain for marketing purpose?
(Pardon me but w00t! 68 words in one sentence!) In short, everybody sees commercials during their sleep without wanting to see it.
When I first saw that episode, I laughed so hard that I cried. That idea was so funny because the notion itself is an impossibility. It is so impossible that it is absurd and such extreme absurdity is so impossible, that it is funny.
Currently the US Senate, in the real world of course, is considering an act known as the Intellectual Property Protection Act. As the name of the act suggests, it aims at protecting intellectual properties. Many in the entertainment industry, including the RIAA have hailed this as the way to go.
I haven�t read the whole act yet and I plan not to read the whole boring stuff. But, according to Wired, the idea of fair use might be bulldozed by this act. More:
p/s - there is a growing expectation of Malaysia repegging the ringgit from 3.80 to a dollar to 3.30 to a dollar. Now, this is my first chance to speculate in the face of this appreciation. I should convert almost all of my dollar denominated currency into ringgit before the revaluation and then buy back the dollar. Sounds like a plan!
Now, where can I find a billion dollars...
If you did, do you remember this one particular episode where Fry was sleeping and an advertisement ran through during one of his dreams and when he woke up, he told Leela that he dreamt an advertisement and Leela said he didn�t dream it but rather, it was some kind of advertisement transmitted via some kind of wave by some marketing firms to the brain for marketing purpose?
(Pardon me but w00t! 68 words in one sentence!) In short, everybody sees commercials during their sleep without wanting to see it.
When I first saw that episode, I laughed so hard that I cried. That idea was so funny because the notion itself is an impossibility. It is so impossible that it is absurd and such extreme absurdity is so impossible, that it is funny.
Currently the US Senate, in the real world of course, is considering an act known as the Intellectual Property Protection Act. As the name of the act suggests, it aims at protecting intellectual properties. Many in the entertainment industry, including the RIAA have hailed this as the way to go.
I haven�t read the whole act yet and I plan not to read the whole boring stuff. But, according to Wired, the idea of fair use might be bulldozed by this act. More:
However, under the proposed language, viewers would not be allowed to use software or devices to skip commericals or promotional announcements "that would otherwise be performed or displayed before, during or after the performance of the motion picture," like the previews on a DVD.Yup. If the act is passed, we can no longer skip commercials. That is one step closer to Futurama�s joke. But I will not laugh on this one.
p/s - there is a growing expectation of Malaysia repegging the ringgit from 3.80 to a dollar to 3.30 to a dollar. Now, this is my first chance to speculate in the face of this appreciation. I should convert almost all of my dollar denominated currency into ringgit before the revaluation and then buy back the dollar. Sounds like a plan!
Now, where can I find a billion dollars...
In the past week, two high profile reports on global warming were released. One of them concerns the Arctic and another is about the flora and fauna of the United States.
The first report found that on average the Earth has warmed by about one degree Fahrenheit since 1900. This is not really news since it is almost widely known that the average temperature of the Earth has gone up by a few degrees since the industrial revolution. However, what is spectacular is the temperature increase in the Arctic. It is reported that in the last 50 years, the area has experience 4 to 7 degree increase in temperature and this is strikingly different from the average global increase. An earlier report from the Arctic Council, a group of nations within the Arctic Circle that convened a few weeks ago, states that the temperature in the Arctic will likely rise by 8 to 14 degrees in the next 100 years.
The finding has already sparked concerns on the ability of species to adapt to the changing climate.
At the same time, experts at the University of Zurich reported that the glaciers in Switzerland have shrunk as much as 20% of its 1985 size. This only strengthens a report by the United Nations released a year ago, if I am not mistaken, that concludes that the skiing resorts in the Alps are facing extinction in the near future. On the side note, Switzerland is hardly an Arctic nation.
The other major report was conducted by scientists from Austin and Boulders. Quoting the press release,
In the face of such increasing certainty, I am only glad that the Kyoto Protocol will come into force in less than 80 days. The effect of Kyoto will be slow no doubt but if the current model is correct, the rate of increase in the global temperature should somewhat be abated.
p/s - the NYT picked (reg. req.) up a story on Newmont in Indonesia. Quoting:
For goodness' sake, quit lying already.
The NYT in its Op-ed (reg. req.) is calling Indonesian new President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to act. I strongly support that call.
Apart from the Times, many other major newspapers have ran the story on Newmont's little errand in Sulawesi, Indonesia. The multinational firm will certainly enjoy the publicity, albeit much less than us, the environmentalists.
The first report found that on average the Earth has warmed by about one degree Fahrenheit since 1900. This is not really news since it is almost widely known that the average temperature of the Earth has gone up by a few degrees since the industrial revolution. However, what is spectacular is the temperature increase in the Arctic. It is reported that in the last 50 years, the area has experience 4 to 7 degree increase in temperature and this is strikingly different from the average global increase. An earlier report from the Arctic Council, a group of nations within the Arctic Circle that convened a few weeks ago, states that the temperature in the Arctic will likely rise by 8 to 14 degrees in the next 100 years.
The finding has already sparked concerns on the ability of species to adapt to the changing climate.
At the same time, experts at the University of Zurich reported that the glaciers in Switzerland have shrunk as much as 20% of its 1985 size. This only strengthens a report by the United Nations released a year ago, if I am not mistaken, that concludes that the skiing resorts in the Alps are facing extinction in the near future. On the side note, Switzerland is hardly an Arctic nation.
The other major report was conducted by scientists from Austin and Boulders. Quoting the press release,
Global warming has forced U.S. plants and animals to change their behavior in recent decades in ways that can be harmful�More disturbingly:
The report revealed that some plants are flowering earlier in the spring than ever before and some birds breeding earlier. In addition, species from Edith�s checkerspot butterflies to the red fox have been gradually moving northward or to higher elevations, where more tolerable climate conditions now exist. Some of these species are also disappearing from southern, or lower elevation, portions of their ranges.From all of these reports, the empirical evidence for global warming, or climate change at the very least, is getting stronger and harder to refute from my point of view.
From all of these reports, in my opinion for global warming, or climate change at the very least, is getting stronger and harder to refute.
In the face of such increasing certainty, I am only glad that the Kyoto Protocol will come into force in less than 80 days. The effect of Kyoto will be slow no doubt but if the current model is correct, the rate of increase in the global temperature should somewhat be abated.
p/s - the NYT picked (reg. req.) up a story on Newmont in Indonesia. Quoting:
In a telephone interview from Denver on Saturday, Mr. Baker said the arsenic levels were basically irrelevant because the arsenic was a kind that would not dissolve in water and enter the food chain. Newmont said that it disagreed with the way the arsenic and mercury levels in the fish were calculated and that it believed that the benthos were not polluted.He says it is impossible for arsenic to enter the food chain! I would like to see him eating a fish from a pond full of arsenic!
For goodness' sake, quit lying already.
The NYT in its Op-ed (reg. req.) is calling Indonesian new President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to act. I strongly support that call.
Apart from the Times, many other major newspapers have ran the story on Newmont's little errand in Sulawesi, Indonesia. The multinational firm will certainly enjoy the publicity, albeit much less than us, the environmentalists.
Winter seems to be around the corner. Despite report that this winter should be milder, the cold is still chilling to the bone. My professor, who commutes weekly to and from Ann Arbor and Buffalo, New York via Canada, said that snow has fallen in Ontario.
I like the snow, minus the cold, but fall has always been my favorite season. During the fall, Earth seems to be painted by splashes of colors. Summer is fun but that is for some other reason.
I captured this somewhere in Ann Arbor.
I like the snow, minus the cold, but fall has always been my favorite season. During the fall, Earth seems to be painted by splashes of colors. Summer is fun but that is for some other reason.
I captured this somewhere in Ann Arbor.
One of the great figures of our times, for better or for worse, passes away in Paris, France. And it is said, to pass away in Ramadan is truly a blessing by God.
Yasser Arafat was a good man but he was never effective in reaching the much needed peace. Now, perhaps peace can be achieved, if the PLO doesn't crumble under its own weight. And hopefully, somebody with the right kind of mind, probably Prime Minister Qurei, will pursue a peaceful coexistence between Israel and Palestine. Peaceful coexistence between these two states is the only solution to this age old conflict.
With Israel is currently voluntarily withdrawing from a number of areas, the Palestinians and the Arabs need to emulate such gesture. War cannot possibly go on forever. The killing must stop, the hatred must end.
All other Muslim nations need to realize this, regardless the history of the creation of Israel. What has passed has passed. We need to move on and build a new future.
May God bless him.
Yasser Arafat was a good man but he was never effective in reaching the much needed peace. Now, perhaps peace can be achieved, if the PLO doesn't crumble under its own weight. And hopefully, somebody with the right kind of mind, probably Prime Minister Qurei, will pursue a peaceful coexistence between Israel and Palestine. Peaceful coexistence between these two states is the only solution to this age old conflict.
With Israel is currently voluntarily withdrawing from a number of areas, the Palestinians and the Arabs need to emulate such gesture. War cannot possibly go on forever. The killing must stop, the hatred must end.
All other Muslim nations need to realize this, regardless the history of the creation of Israel. What has passed has passed. We need to move on and build a new future.
May God bless him.
Today marks 15 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Somehow, it feels like hundreds of years ago when in fact, I was 7 back then. Innocent and ignorant.
East German border guard Conrad Schumann leaps to the West over barbed wire in Berlin on August 15, 1961. Photo by Peter Leibing.
Public Domain.
East German border guard Conrad Schumann leaps to the West over barbed wire in Berlin on August 15, 1961. Photo by Peter Leibing.
Public Domain.
Without freedom, life is not worth livingTo freedom, for eternity. Though if I somehow find myself in hell, there might be a little complication with my idealism. But I'm sure God is negotiable. I hope.
- unknown
I received an email through some organization that I am affiliated with that points to a study that was done by ustogether.org. The study is at "Surprising Pattern of Florida's Election Results".
The result seems odd though I must admit, I don't know the credibility of the website simply because I haven't heard of it before. Furthermore, the website certainly takes a biased position. At the same time, I'm not trying to be a sore loser but the finding of the study does raise some questions that need to be answered.
I highly doubt this would change the result of the recent election but it would be interesting if somebody prominent takes the issue up and rolling.
The result seems odd though I must admit, I don't know the credibility of the website simply because I haven't heard of it before. Furthermore, the website certainly takes a biased position. At the same time, I'm not trying to be a sore loser but the finding of the study does raise some questions that need to be answered.
I highly doubt this would change the result of the recent election but it would be interesting if somebody prominent takes the issue up and rolling.
The days after November 2 feel different. There seems to be a lack of something but still, everything that I wanted to change, from the person that is sitting in the Oval Office to the policies regarding the environment, is still in place. That lack of something is seeing Kerry talking, hearing his boring voice. It pains me to see Kerry going into oblivion while Bush and the rightist fundamentalists are rising higher still.
I still can�t believe that Kerry lost, even though before Ohio started calling, even before Florida stays red, even before half of the result was announced, there was hunch that was as clear as the Tahitian waters, that Kerry was fighting a losing battle. It is the feeling of seeing the Netherlands being beaten through penalty shootouts by the Italian after all the possession and flair two European Championships ago. It is feeling of a great injustice after all that had been said and done.
Despite blunder in Iraq, regardless of the fallout from the world community, in the face of lies imitating the truth and the truth continues to be pushed aside, there are still millions of people siding with the current administration. It is a great frustration that transcends far beyond words. Perhaps this is what Voltaire had forseen long ago.
I trust that nearly half of the American people feel the same along with, perhaps, majority of the citizens of the world as it is evident with the Mirror�s �How can 59,017,382 people be so dumb?� front page and so many others. That feeling could not be more pronounced than the words written in the New York Times. Its editorial columns are filled with angry paragraphs and depressed sentences save anything that comes from Mr. Safire and Mr. Brooks and their fans.
Four more years of Bush sounds too harsh for many. I know it is too harsh for me.
America is supposed to be the bastion of secularism but regretfully, the rightist fundamentalists, which are no better than those Islamic extremists, are gaining ground. It is funny and ironic as well that wherever we may be, two species of the same class are there to be fought. Both species of fundamentalist are trying to crush each other while we are in a quagmire, continuously shouting and telling them to stop and think.
p/s - And, some of you better memorize �O Canada�, eh?
I still can�t believe that Kerry lost, even though before Ohio started calling, even before Florida stays red, even before half of the result was announced, there was hunch that was as clear as the Tahitian waters, that Kerry was fighting a losing battle. It is the feeling of seeing the Netherlands being beaten through penalty shootouts by the Italian after all the possession and flair two European Championships ago. It is feeling of a great injustice after all that had been said and done.
Despite blunder in Iraq, regardless of the fallout from the world community, in the face of lies imitating the truth and the truth continues to be pushed aside, there are still millions of people siding with the current administration. It is a great frustration that transcends far beyond words. Perhaps this is what Voltaire had forseen long ago.
I trust that nearly half of the American people feel the same along with, perhaps, majority of the citizens of the world as it is evident with the Mirror�s �How can 59,017,382 people be so dumb?� front page and so many others. That feeling could not be more pronounced than the words written in the New York Times. Its editorial columns are filled with angry paragraphs and depressed sentences save anything that comes from Mr. Safire and Mr. Brooks and their fans.
Four more years of Bush sounds too harsh for many. I know it is too harsh for me.
America is supposed to be the bastion of secularism but regretfully, the rightist fundamentalists, which are no better than those Islamic extremists, are gaining ground. It is funny and ironic as well that wherever we may be, two species of the same class are there to be fought. Both species of fundamentalist are trying to crush each other while we are in a quagmire, continuously shouting and telling them to stop and think.
p/s - And, some of you better memorize �O Canada�, eh?
Just less than an hour ago, Reuters broke to the world that Vladimir Putin, the Russian President, took the last historic, necessary effort to turn the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change into a reality. With Putin's signature, as I have put it in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, the Russian ratification is complete. It will take 90 days for parties of the Protocol � 126 nations in total � to adhere to the greenhouse gases cap through three methods stated in the Protocol.
With Bush in the White House for four more years, I am sure this is some kind of a pain reliever to many who care for the environment. And within the next 24 hours, I am sure all the greens will be sending out congratulatory messages to each other.
Let me be the first one to congratulate all of you who supported or criticized the Protocol. If you supported it, it's obvious that you care for Gaia. If you criticized it, you helped push for a better Protocol.
Kyoto is flawed, no doubt; it has its weaknesses but many will agree that Kyoto is the only effective way to combat accelerated climate change at this moment. Unless there is a better option, Kyoto currently is our only hope. Each day of inaction will cost us and our children billions and trillions of dollars. Every day of inaction eventually will lead to destruction of our planet. The cost of inactive will be unbearable in the future. I am glad that we didn't stay idle. We fought and stayed on the table despite all the differences.
Now, all eyes are on the US, Australia and possibly China. US and Australia will no doubt come under heavy pressure to bend. China on the other hand, will enter the international environmental pact by 2010.
p/s - this week as I understand, the Arctics nations, the US included, met in Berlin, Germany to discuss the increase in temperature in the Arctics. Already, the US is being impossible and disagreeable.
With Bush in the White House for four more years, I am sure this is some kind of a pain reliever to many who care for the environment. And within the next 24 hours, I am sure all the greens will be sending out congratulatory messages to each other.
Let me be the first one to congratulate all of you who supported or criticized the Protocol. If you supported it, it's obvious that you care for Gaia. If you criticized it, you helped push for a better Protocol.
Kyoto is flawed, no doubt; it has its weaknesses but many will agree that Kyoto is the only effective way to combat accelerated climate change at this moment. Unless there is a better option, Kyoto currently is our only hope. Each day of inaction will cost us and our children billions and trillions of dollars. Every day of inaction eventually will lead to destruction of our planet. The cost of inactive will be unbearable in the future. I am glad that we didn't stay idle. We fought and stayed on the table despite all the differences.
Now, all eyes are on the US, Australia and possibly China. US and Australia will no doubt come under heavy pressure to bend. China on the other hand, will enter the international environmental pact by 2010.
p/s - this week as I understand, the Arctics nations, the US included, met in Berlin, Germany to discuss the increase in temperature in the Arctics. Already, the US is being impossible and disagreeable.
Things seem to be heading for the worse close to home.
A few days ago, a few Buddhists were killed as revenge to the unnecessary death of roughly 80 Muslims in southern Thailand. I don�t see the problem subsiding as everyday since the trouble was aggravated has been marred with death related to the issue.
Some in Malaysia have voiced outrage over this. There were a few protests here and there and the most notable was recently held in front of the Thai embassy in Kuala Lumpur. No unwanted incident happened there but it does reveal that part of Malaysians, the Malay Muslims at least, are quite concerned with the development there. And it is not just Malaysia. Practically, every other Muslim nations have somewhat voiced their regret on Thailand�s mishandling of the issue. Even the United States expressed concerns.
What bothers me the most is not the mishandling per se but rather, I am worried with the nearness of the conflict to the Malaysian border and history. So far, most of regional conflicts have occurred well off Malaysian soil. Even when a conflict spilt into Malaysia as what had happened in Sabah a few years ago, it happens at a place where the population density is very low and the effect on Malaysia is negligible. If it gets worse, the worst thing that could happen is a diplomatic row, of which is kind of fun to participate in whenever it concerns Singapore. And whenever all that occur, I may only care for an issue without the fear of knowing Malaysia might become too entangled in it. To say the least, all the diplomatic issues that had risen in the past were much less of an issue when compared to the outbreak of the recent avian flu or the infamous Coxsackie virus.
But the resurfacing issue in southern Thailand brings a different kind of feeling to me. This is simply because the southern Thai states are more culturally similar to Malaysia than to Thailand. And in many ways, the issue affects Malaysia.
Mahathir on the other day suggested autonomy power being granted to the troubled states. It is a sensible option but the administration in Thailand quickly brushed the idea off the table and accused Mahathir of interfering with Thailand�s internal problem.
This is no doubt part of Thailand�s internal issue but it does concern Malaysia. It is similar to the situation when Russia had to drop its paratroopers into Belgrade during the NATO bombing in order to help the people that shared a trait of Russian culture. Malaysia can�t stand quiet while the undercurrent occurs. Malaysia must actively participate in this issue.
At the same time, with the mercury rising in southern Thailand. It is only comprehensible to expect the tension between the Muslims and the Buddhists there to be rather high. Muslims in Malaysia have expressed their opinion but the Malaysian Buddhists haven�t but I in no way expect the Buddhists to stay quiet if the Muslims overreact. However, I trust rationality will overcome any discomfort between Malaysian Muslims and Buddhists. But this possible misunderstanding in Malaysia provides the more reason for Malaysia to lend Thailand a hand.
Of course, Thailand will be outraged by this notion but Thailand must understand that the world is a continuous system. Something that happened somewhere, will affect something else somewhere else, regardless of the magnitude. Whatever Thailand chooses to do, Malaysia will be affected. Furthermore, local trade in the vicinity of the Malaysian and Thai border will hurt if things get worse. Without trade, development along the border will suffer. Local trade must flourish for the benefit of both Malaysians and Thais and for healthy trade to occur, cooperation towards peace is a must. Therefore, it is only acceptable for Thailand to allow a Malaysian intervention. Thailand cannot deny that.
In the near past, Malaysia has acted as a mediator in the region. Malaysia was the one that brokered a ceasefire between the Mindanao rebel and the Philippines government. Malaysia has also been of a help in Aceh and Myanmar. It would be uncharacteristic of Malaysia to not assist Thailand in this issue.
p/s - Totti is an arse.
A few days ago, a few Buddhists were killed as revenge to the unnecessary death of roughly 80 Muslims in southern Thailand. I don�t see the problem subsiding as everyday since the trouble was aggravated has been marred with death related to the issue.
Some in Malaysia have voiced outrage over this. There were a few protests here and there and the most notable was recently held in front of the Thai embassy in Kuala Lumpur. No unwanted incident happened there but it does reveal that part of Malaysians, the Malay Muslims at least, are quite concerned with the development there. And it is not just Malaysia. Practically, every other Muslim nations have somewhat voiced their regret on Thailand�s mishandling of the issue. Even the United States expressed concerns.
What bothers me the most is not the mishandling per se but rather, I am worried with the nearness of the conflict to the Malaysian border and history. So far, most of regional conflicts have occurred well off Malaysian soil. Even when a conflict spilt into Malaysia as what had happened in Sabah a few years ago, it happens at a place where the population density is very low and the effect on Malaysia is negligible. If it gets worse, the worst thing that could happen is a diplomatic row, of which is kind of fun to participate in whenever it concerns Singapore. And whenever all that occur, I may only care for an issue without the fear of knowing Malaysia might become too entangled in it. To say the least, all the diplomatic issues that had risen in the past were much less of an issue when compared to the outbreak of the recent avian flu or the infamous Coxsackie virus.
But the resurfacing issue in southern Thailand brings a different kind of feeling to me. This is simply because the southern Thai states are more culturally similar to Malaysia than to Thailand. And in many ways, the issue affects Malaysia.
Mahathir on the other day suggested autonomy power being granted to the troubled states. It is a sensible option but the administration in Thailand quickly brushed the idea off the table and accused Mahathir of interfering with Thailand�s internal problem.
This is no doubt part of Thailand�s internal issue but it does concern Malaysia. It is similar to the situation when Russia had to drop its paratroopers into Belgrade during the NATO bombing in order to help the people that shared a trait of Russian culture. Malaysia can�t stand quiet while the undercurrent occurs. Malaysia must actively participate in this issue.
At the same time, with the mercury rising in southern Thailand. It is only comprehensible to expect the tension between the Muslims and the Buddhists there to be rather high. Muslims in Malaysia have expressed their opinion but the Malaysian Buddhists haven�t but I in no way expect the Buddhists to stay quiet if the Muslims overreact. However, I trust rationality will overcome any discomfort between Malaysian Muslims and Buddhists. But this possible misunderstanding in Malaysia provides the more reason for Malaysia to lend Thailand a hand.
Of course, Thailand will be outraged by this notion but Thailand must understand that the world is a continuous system. Something that happened somewhere, will affect something else somewhere else, regardless of the magnitude. Whatever Thailand chooses to do, Malaysia will be affected. Furthermore, local trade in the vicinity of the Malaysian and Thai border will hurt if things get worse. Without trade, development along the border will suffer. Local trade must flourish for the benefit of both Malaysians and Thais and for healthy trade to occur, cooperation towards peace is a must. Therefore, it is only acceptable for Thailand to allow a Malaysian intervention. Thailand cannot deny that.
In the near past, Malaysia has acted as a mediator in the region. Malaysia was the one that brokered a ceasefire between the Mindanao rebel and the Philippines government. Malaysia has also been of a help in Aceh and Myanmar. It would be uncharacteristic of Malaysia to not assist Thailand in this issue.
p/s - Totti is an arse.
A few networks have claimed that Ohio called for Bush. The official result should be the same.
The race was close but this time, the Republicans convincingly maintained and improved their influence in both the White House and the Senate. I don't think anybody could dispute that.
To me, the result is not surprising though it is disappointing. But who would have imagined it would come down to Ohio? I certainly didn't.
But talking after the fact is always easy. Therefore, I'll stop here and go to straight to bed.
Oh shit, I can't get the phrase four more years out of my head. This is going to be a long night. Remember Arnie shouting four more years at the Republican National Convention in New York?
I am hearing just that. Sometimes, it hurts to know democracy works both ways. At least, Barack Obama managed to get a place in the Senate.
Alrighty! Hillary Clinton for President in 2008! There is no way Darth Cheney gonna get the White House.
p/s - it's just too bad that the proposal to change the current voting system in Colorado into proportional system was struck down. In Michigan, Proposal 2 received sufficient ayes and thus, marriage is being conservatively defined. Proposal 1, which is on gambling, according to somebody from NPR, was creamed.
pp/s - at 0304, NPR projected Michigan to call for Kerry but that is useless with the current situation in Ohio. Boy, we should have invaded Ohio when we had the chance a long time ago.
p3/s - well, Kerry conceded at around 1500.
From the Michigan Daily.
The race was close but this time, the Republicans convincingly maintained and improved their influence in both the White House and the Senate. I don't think anybody could dispute that.
To me, the result is not surprising though it is disappointing. But who would have imagined it would come down to Ohio? I certainly didn't.
But talking after the fact is always easy. Therefore, I'll stop here and go to straight to bed.
Oh shit, I can't get the phrase four more years out of my head. This is going to be a long night. Remember Arnie shouting four more years at the Republican National Convention in New York?
I am hearing just that. Sometimes, it hurts to know democracy works both ways. At least, Barack Obama managed to get a place in the Senate.
Alrighty! Hillary Clinton for President in 2008! There is no way Darth Cheney gonna get the White House.
p/s - it's just too bad that the proposal to change the current voting system in Colorado into proportional system was struck down. In Michigan, Proposal 2 received sufficient ayes and thus, marriage is being conservatively defined. Proposal 1, which is on gambling, according to somebody from NPR, was creamed.
pp/s - at 0304, NPR projected Michigan to call for Kerry but that is useless with the current situation in Ohio. Boy, we should have invaded Ohio when we had the chance a long time ago.
p3/s - well, Kerry conceded at around 1500.
From the Michigan Daily.
Kerry or Bush?
The latest Pew�s polling shows Bush should win by a small margin. However, the standard error is nowhere in sight (actually, I'm too lazy to calculate it) and therefore, I don�t know how well the poll goes in predicting the outcome for tomorrow. Furthermore, the survey seems to represent popular votes rather than predicting the electoral college result. If that is the case, then the poll is probably as useless as the popular votes that Al Gore received.
Regardless of the result, I am not sure if I strictly prefer Kerry to Bush anymore. I don�t like Bush but Kerry doesn�t seem to be sufficiently good.
One reason for this is that I do think Bush is doing a good job in some area.
I don�t like taxes and I do believe taxation is an excuse for the government to steal our money. However, I am content to concede the ideal of no taxation given that certain structure in the society stands protected. With this, it is only possible for me to agree with Bush�s tax cut. Moreover, Bush�s tax cut does stimulate the economy. The budget deficit however is another story � it is Bush�s failure, as was Reagan�s failure, to realize the notion of a limited government, of which, another thing that I believe in.
Bush however can�t be blamed too much for the deficit. When it comes to the question of cushioning the recession, an expansionary fiscal policy is a way to do it. Furthermore, nobody, neither Clinton nor Bush, is to be blamed for the recession. It was just unfortunate for Bush to come into office when the business cycle took a dip. But the unnecessary so-called war on terror does worsen the deficit and that is certainly Bush�s fault.
With the exception of Bush�s spending spree, I agree with most of Bush�s economic policy. In fact, this is the only thing I agree with Bush and as a graduating economic major, this counts a lot in shaping my opinion.
At the same time, I am not a citizen of the United States and I recognize myself as an environmentalist (In fact, I love to call myself as a libertarian green or maybe a green libertarian but I�m a green first and libertarian second. What does it mean? Frankly, I have no idea. I just like labels). Bush�s unilateral moves on many issues and his bad environmental record are enough to sway me into the anybody-but-Bush camp.
Kerry on the other hand, seems to be sitting well with the greens and the world community at large. And with him, it is easier to imagine the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the US somewhere in the future.
But then, his economic policy will probably not move towards more free-trade - already he promised to make outsourcing more costly. In the name of efficiency, capital and labor should be allowed to roam freely. Any friction towards free flow of trade should be eliminated, unless there is a very strong reason for some restriction.
More importantly, I think most of Kerry�s plans are almost impossible to be implemented without raising taxes. He is promising to do a lot of things and at the same time, promises to not raise taxes on the middle and lower classes. He probably realizes that he has to raise taxes on somebody and so he said he is going to raise the taxes on the higher income level earner. This kind of taxation is called progressive tax rate � the tax rate goes up as the income level goes up. I don�t know about most people but in my view, punishing somebody for being successful is wrong.
So, Kerry or Bush? I don�t know anymore.
Nader? He is hopeless unfortunately, as with other candidates.
So, if I could vote, who would I vote for?
The only real candidate, My Teddy Bear!
MTB for President of the World!
Whatever the outcome, the one quote to rule them all:
p/s - apart from the Presidential stuff, people in Michigan will be voting on at least two other issues. Proposal 1 is about gambling and Proposal 2, the highly debated issue of gay marriage.
I don't agree with gay marriage but at the same time, I don't feel the need for me to go against it. If they amend it, I'll feel good because I'm a Muslim (no matter how liberal I am). If they don't, I'll be fine too because I'm a libertarian - I respect personal freedom.
The latest Pew�s polling shows Bush should win by a small margin. However, the standard error is nowhere in sight (actually, I'm too lazy to calculate it) and therefore, I don�t know how well the poll goes in predicting the outcome for tomorrow. Furthermore, the survey seems to represent popular votes rather than predicting the electoral college result. If that is the case, then the poll is probably as useless as the popular votes that Al Gore received.
Regardless of the result, I am not sure if I strictly prefer Kerry to Bush anymore. I don�t like Bush but Kerry doesn�t seem to be sufficiently good.
One reason for this is that I do think Bush is doing a good job in some area.
I don�t like taxes and I do believe taxation is an excuse for the government to steal our money. However, I am content to concede the ideal of no taxation given that certain structure in the society stands protected. With this, it is only possible for me to agree with Bush�s tax cut. Moreover, Bush�s tax cut does stimulate the economy. The budget deficit however is another story � it is Bush�s failure, as was Reagan�s failure, to realize the notion of a limited government, of which, another thing that I believe in.
Bush however can�t be blamed too much for the deficit. When it comes to the question of cushioning the recession, an expansionary fiscal policy is a way to do it. Furthermore, nobody, neither Clinton nor Bush, is to be blamed for the recession. It was just unfortunate for Bush to come into office when the business cycle took a dip. But the unnecessary so-called war on terror does worsen the deficit and that is certainly Bush�s fault.
With the exception of Bush�s spending spree, I agree with most of Bush�s economic policy. In fact, this is the only thing I agree with Bush and as a graduating economic major, this counts a lot in shaping my opinion.
At the same time, I am not a citizen of the United States and I recognize myself as an environmentalist (In fact, I love to call myself as a libertarian green or maybe a green libertarian but I�m a green first and libertarian second. What does it mean? Frankly, I have no idea. I just like labels). Bush�s unilateral moves on many issues and his bad environmental record are enough to sway me into the anybody-but-Bush camp.
Kerry on the other hand, seems to be sitting well with the greens and the world community at large. And with him, it is easier to imagine the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the US somewhere in the future.
But then, his economic policy will probably not move towards more free-trade - already he promised to make outsourcing more costly. In the name of efficiency, capital and labor should be allowed to roam freely. Any friction towards free flow of trade should be eliminated, unless there is a very strong reason for some restriction.
More importantly, I think most of Kerry�s plans are almost impossible to be implemented without raising taxes. He is promising to do a lot of things and at the same time, promises to not raise taxes on the middle and lower classes. He probably realizes that he has to raise taxes on somebody and so he said he is going to raise the taxes on the higher income level earner. This kind of taxation is called progressive tax rate � the tax rate goes up as the income level goes up. I don�t know about most people but in my view, punishing somebody for being successful is wrong.
So, Kerry or Bush? I don�t know anymore.
Nader? He is hopeless unfortunately, as with other candidates.
So, if I could vote, who would I vote for?
The only real candidate, My Teddy Bear!
MTB for President of the World!
Whatever the outcome, the one quote to rule them all:
I voted for it before I voted against it.It couldn't get any better than that.
p/s - apart from the Presidential stuff, people in Michigan will be voting on at least two other issues. Proposal 1 is about gambling and Proposal 2, the highly debated issue of gay marriage.
I don't agree with gay marriage but at the same time, I don't feel the need for me to go against it. If they amend it, I'll feel good because I'm a Muslim (no matter how liberal I am). If they don't, I'll be fine too because I'm a libertarian - I respect personal freedom.
