Last night, the world heard the news that Osama Bin Laden was killed by U.S. special forces. Bin Laden is rotting in Hell. (I know it is not good to speak ill of the dead, but for someone who murdered innocent Americans, it is warranted.)
Below are Obama’s remarks:
Here are some reactions from those in DC:
God Bless America!
Another interesting take on the two wars.
When President Barack Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize, I questioned whether or not he deserved this honor. After all, he hadn’t done much to deserve it, other than promise to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. Fast forward to 2011, I am now questioning whether the prize should be revoked, especially since the troops haven’t left Iraq or Afghanistan yet, and we are now fighting Operation Odyssey Dawn in Libya. How does war justify the honor of the Nobel Peace Prize?
Just another Barack Obama promise down the drain…
You know, I hate being a naysayer. I hate it, especially during this time of year. According to a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, 71% of voters believe our country is headed on the wrong track.
Why doesn’t this surprise me? The President and Congress continually pass legislation that places our economy in harms way. Unemployment numbers are at an all-time high and the government seems to be consumed by wasting the taxpayers dollar (rather than putting it to good use by giving it back to them). Add to this, the fact that Americans are also concerned with how the Obama Administration is dealing with the Muslim world and they recognize that U.S. relations with Israel will continue to worsen over time.
If anything, it will take a long time to get the country back in the right direction with the Obama Administration. The only way we can see a possible turnaround might be in 2012. In the meantime, the incoming Congress needs to address the unemployment crisis, focusing on lowering taxes across the board, and cutting all unnecessary expenditures.
…you’re against women.
Yeah, that’s right. So says TIME Magazine with its latest war propaganda:
Now, it’s unclear whether or not female face mutilations are official Taliban policy, but forget about that 911 stuff, and while you’re at it, forget about all that drug dealing stuff, too. The mission is now officially for white-knighting on behalf of Afghani women.
While we’re at it, the Iranians are a bunch of misogynists, too. Look at the humiliation they pile upon their women:
Just awful. What do all the Iranian men of the past 40 years have to say for themselves? Well? Anything?
Typical men. Now more American military men have to brave a 50% divorce rate because no Iranian man will stand up for their women’s equality.
If the spirit of alternative dispute resolution, here’s a proposal similiar to that discussed between Kissinger and Mao: how about we send 40 million American women in exchange for 200,000 Afghani women? That way, the Taliban and Al CIAeda will crumble within a year.
Christian Science Monitor has more.
Violence in Mexico escalates:
Last week’s Mexico car bomb in the border town of Cuidad Juarez killed three. It is the first known use of a car bomb against authorities and marks a troubling new level of violence in the country’s brutal drug war.
The significance: Mexico is in complete free-fall, with violence spilling over to the U.S. side of the border. With U.S. law enforcement personnel (such as Sheriff Babeu of Pinal County, Arizona receiving death threats), when will this scene be reenacted in the U.S.?
The prize: national pride and a more favorable three month review from Moody’s on Spain’s Aaa bond rating.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the Republicans in Congress could follow Taiwan’s lead and pommel Nancy Pelosi? Imagine Barney Frank’s reaction to the fight.
Reacting to worldwide currency instability, a report released by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs argues, that “the dollar is an unreliable international currency and should be replaced by a more stable system.”
The use of the dollar for international trade came under increasing scrutiny when the U.S. economy fell into recession. “The dollar has proved not to be a stable store of value, which is a requisite for a stable reserve currency,” the report said.
Many countries, in Asia in particular, have been building up massive dollar reserves. As a result, those countries’ currencies have become undervalued, decreasing their ability to import goods from abroad.
Since 2008, the value of the U.S. dollar has arguably been propped up by its continued status as the world reserve currency. As a replacement standard, The World Economic and Social Survey 2010 supports the International Monetary Fund’s proposal fora standardized international system for liquidity transfer. This would mark a reinvigorated return of Special Drawer’s Rights or SDRs:
The SDR was created by the IMF in 1969 to support the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system. A country participating in this system needed official reserves—government or central bank holdings of gold and widely accepted foreign currencies—that could be used to purchase the domestic currency in foreign exchange markets, as required to maintain its exchange rate. But the international supply of two key reserve assets—gold and the U.S. dollar—proved inadequate for supporting the expansion of world trade and financial development that was taking place. Therefore, the international community decided to create a new international reserve asset under the auspices of the IMF.
However, only a few years later, the Bretton Woods system collapsed and the major currencies shifted to a floating exchange rate regime. In addition, the growth in international capital markets facilitated borrowing by creditworthy governments. Both of these developments lessened the need for SDRs.
The SDR is neither a currency, nor a claim on the IMF. Rather, it is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members. Holders of SDRs can obtain these currencies in exchange for their SDRs in two ways: first, through the arrangement of voluntary exchanges between members; and second, by the IMF designating members with strong external positions to purchase SDRs from members with weak external positions. In addition to its role as a supplementary reserve asset, the SDR, serves as the unit of account of the IMF and some other international organizations.
This revisits a controversy from March 2009 when People’s Bank of China Gov. Zhou Xiaochuan called for a new international reserve currency to replace the dollar:
Zhou suggested that the International Monetary Fund’s Special Drawing Right (SDR) should be given a greater role. Read more on the Chinese currency proposal.
//Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Geithner said that Zhou was “a sensible man” and that “everything he said deserves consideration.”
The dollar fell sharply on confusion about Geithner’s comments regarding SDRs. The Treasury secretary subsequently clarified his comments [Editor's Note: In March 2009, Geithner said that the dollar remains the main global reserve currency and that he doesn't see a change in that status in the foreseeable future].
Meg Browne of Browne Brothers Harriman said that the market had “blown [Geithner's remarks] way out of proportion.”
“[President] Obama has said that there’s no need for another reserve currency,” Browne said. “To use the SDR as a new reserve currency is really a stretch.”
Fast forward to July 2010 and the world economic crisis continues and threatens to intensify. With many predicting the crash of the Euro, how can there be any credibility in an aggregate currency when the price of all world currencies is continuously falling . This is especially evident as gold regularly pushes its all-time high. Lastly, will the aggregated value of the SDRs be nothing more than a cover-up of the impending blowup of the $600 trillion derivative bubble?
Why is the cost for this meeting over $1 billion? How much security do they really need?
Shouldn’t the Green Zone be left in Baghdad?
