How do you Spell Chutzpah

The dictionary defines this word as a slang noun coming from the Yiddish vernacular, meaning:

1.unmitigated effrontery or impudence; gall.
2.audacity; nerve.

Today on Drudge I read a story (original story on Reuters) about Barney Frank, once again, asking Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac to relax lending restrictions on condominiums. Here are my problems with this.

1. Making loans to risky buyers (along with mark to market accounting) is what got us into the mortgage melt down.

2. Barney Frank sits on the Banking Committee and got a sweetheart deal.

3. Barny Frank lied to the American People about the viability of Fanny and Freddie just weeks before they collapsed.

4. Barney Frank pushed for more lenient loaning practices for low income buyers.

If that were all perhaps I could look past it.... BUT then when the melt down happens Frank acts as though he were just a spectator in the whole affair and blames the meltdown on Bush. Spouting lies that it was the Bush administration that deregulated the banking industry. While he was pushing for over site. YOU ARE THE OVER SITE, BARNEY. And yet you did nothing to stop this. As a matter of fact, you said all was well with Fanny and Freddie. Now when the spotlight is off, You are once again pushing for deregulation. Asking Fanny and Freddie to make loans that you know are risky. Barney Frank have you no honor.

The classic definition of chutzpah is that given by Leo Rosten: "that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan."

Government to Monitor Your Blog

Watch what you are saying boys and girls on the blogosphere, Uncle Sam wants to make sure you are on the up and up. According to reports from the AP, The Federal Trade Commission is set to monitor blogs to ensure any product review you make, is not made in exchange for compensation. According to the FTC many bloggers have received $500 gift cards or even thousands of dollars for a 200-word post. Apparently under the new regulations which are expected to be approved latter this summer a simple graphic ad with link for which you receive compensation, would be enough to trigger oversight.

Is this really necessary? Are there really throngs of people out there buying products based on anonymous reviews. Where is the personal responsibility? Are we really going to pay people to read and monitor blogs to make sure you aren't getting paid?

If you follow this trail to it's logical conclusion it does not end well for the individual. Imagine you tell your friend to shop at Wal-Mart because they always have the lowest price. (or so they claim) But soon you are being sued by the federal government because you own stock from Wal-Mart from back when you worked there in college. Sure you had forgotten all about it, but never the less, you have an interest in the company.

Perhaps I'm being a bit overly dramatic, but maybe not.

How does Obama Differ from Chavez Again?

I'm sure they're different. I just can't seem to remember how at the moment. Apparently Obama not wanting to be out done by his friend in the southern hemisphere is seeking more power to seize the companies that he has deemed necessary for the American Economy. Here is more from the story written in the LA Times.

Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would
have new powers to seize key companies -- such as insurance giant American
International Group Inc. -- whose failure jeopardizes the financial system.
Currently, the government's authority to seize companies is mostly limited to
banks.

So, just to clarify. Chavez bad for seizing privately held companies. Obama good. Hmmm. So I guess Obama gets to decide which companies would jeopardize the financial system if they fail. Or maybe we should appoint a czar for this task. After all Senate approval and over site of something of this magnitude is not really necessary. No, as with all the czars he will answer directly to Obama. I guess we didn't really need the separation of powers, as dictated in our constitution.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

I was pondering our constitution today and had a thought that I've continued to roll around in my head. As the constitution reads;

"that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

It has occurred to me that these are placed in this sentence very intentionally, not just that these exist, but that they are listed from greatest to least. Do you agree?

Life - We have a right to this above all else. You do not have the right to take the life of someone else.

Liberty - Your freedom. You have freedom as long as exercising this freedom does not take the life of another individual or interfere with the liberty of another.

Pursuit of Happiness - You have the right to pursue your happiness anyway you see fit. Just so long as it does not deprive another individual of their life or freedom.

This is how I believe we should make judgements regarding our laws and our lives. It makes complex issues much more simple.

When looking at the abortion issue we all agree that murder is wrong, and we all agree that a woman has right to do what she wishes with her body. So how do you make the decision. Well according to what I believe our founders were trying to tell us. Your liberty does not extend beyond the life of another.

What about drugs. I think I might be on a limb here, but as long as you are not depriving another of their freedom (liberty) or their life, you should be free to do so.

Ahh... To be a Man

We were rushing out the door this past Sunday as we were meeting the rest of our family 30 miles away to attend the baptism of a long time friend. My wife's father is also in town. He's been here roughly 3 weeks. It has been a blast and I'm sad to say he is leaving next Sunday. But I digress.

We had gotten moving a little later than we should have and Naomi was scrounging around the kitchen for something to eat on the way. Finally we gave up and decided to grab something on the way. We hopped in our pickup and took off down the road. Naomi had jumped int he back seat to give her taller father more room in the front seat. I enjoyed this as I could make eye contact with my good looking wife in the rear view mirror.

We were making eyes at one another as we were driving through town when suddenly her entire demeanor had changed. Something was wrong. Normally it doesn't take long for me to figure out what the problem happens to be, for usually it was something that I or someone else had said. But instead the vehicle was quiet when the change occurred. I was genuinely perplexed, and attempted to make eye contact with my wife, she was having none of it.

As we arrived in the Cody where we were meeting up with my folks for the final 30 mile drive, I finally caught her eye. She was saying something. Mouthing it voicelessly. I was excited that I now had an opportunity to resolve this obvious misunderstanding, but I could not make out what she was trying to say. I asked her to repeat it. She did. I still couldn't understand. I knew this was obviously something she wanted to keep between us, so I smiled as sweetly as I could to her in the mirror and shook my head yes. This obviously didn't alleviate the problem.

A few miles later as we were pulling into the parking lot where we were meeting it suddenly came to me like a pile of bricks falling from a multi-story building. My wife was hungry. I promised her we would stop somewhere in town before we left, but instead I drove right on by each restaurant. Then as we approached the next restaurant she looked at me in the mirror and mouthed the words, "Am I too fat?"

I was replaying it in my mind and yes.... I had shaken my head yes, all the while grinning like a dope.

Not good.