CPAC? No thanks, I’m driving

Some kind of convention took place this weekend where a bunch of white men and women complained about the government without using facts and evidence to back up their claims. It was “find a scapegoat” weekend and they found plenty. It all reminded me of the KKK having a convention and sounded like one too. They also failed to admit that their political ideas screwed us all when they were in charge.

Speaking of the straw poll, Ron Paul won it. Seriously. Ron Paul crushed–absolutely crushed–all the other GOP big shots on the list except for Mitt Romney, who took a close second. Romney has a history of doing GOTV on big straw polls, but apparently he didn’t get an operation in gear to best Paul.

Paul’s victory said something about the event, and the type of people who attended it. CPAC was an exposition of ideology and conservative glee, not necessarily political prowess. Ron Paul will probably not be president in 2012; he seems to have no relationship with the tea partiers; he has ceded his conservative stardom to the likes of Sarah Palin.

So it’s questionable how much CPAC has to do with electoral reality–and even the realities of the conservative movement’s preferences.

So This Was CPAC 2010

The plea was made all the more effective by the intertwining of [Glenn] Beck’s own story of struggle and redemption Pointing to his time as a recovering alcoholic, the Fox News host urged the GOP to embark on a 12-step program of recovery. “Hello, my name is the Republican Party, and I got a problem. I’m addicted to spending and big government,” he declared, reading out the apology he wanted lawmakers to deliver. Reflecting on his own lack of formal education, he railed against government handouts – extending the logic to argue against a right to health care.

The crowd was enthralled, even as Beck took them down winding tales of Calvin Coolidge, the Statute of Liberty and the supposed great middle class explosion of the 1920s.

Glenn Beck CPAC 2010 Speech

That is what drives me nuts. Whack jobs like Beck and the other speakers will never admit that the previous 8 years, when they had their way under Bush, screwed us all.

They still drink from the Kool-aid that small government and handouts to the rich works and millions of unemployed people with no homes show that it doesn’t.

The GOP in general believe that spending on war is good but spending to help people live is bad.

How fucked up is that?

I need to take a shower now to get the CPAC idiotic bigotry stank off me…

Why do we need to make up Olympic Stars?

Saw an article today commenting that the injury to Olympic skier Lindsey Vonn “means [NBC] could suddenly be without its most bankable star.” But I question the need to create stars before they participate in the games.

NBC badly needs stars to emerge out of these games. It has already said it will lose money on the Olympics for the first time ever, the result of a too-generous bid to televise the Vancouver Games and false expectations that advertising prices would continue to rise. NBC also needs prime-time success to divert attention from its sagging prime-time lineup and late-night executive bungling.

Injury could deprive NBC of top star

Sure there are favorites going into the games but what if they fail to perform as expected. NBC wastes hours of video and “personal stories” covering a few “faces” as if we need an excuse to root for the team. I know they have hours to fill but it would be better to see more action rather than canned video of some “star” bagging groceries at home.

I get enjoyment out of “stars” who emerge from their performance in an unexpected way. The Turin 2006 men’s curling team comes to mind or Rulon Gardner the Greco-Roman wrestling gold medalist who came out of no where to win at the 2000 Summer games.

The best example is the 1980 men’s hockey team that beat the USSR. The slow burn of excitement is now a classic.

Sometimes I think focusing on a few “stars” causes more pressure than need be at the Olympics and just seems forced.

“SHOCKING” Why I still hate celebrity gossip shows

There have been complaints for years about blurring the line between “real” news and entertainment. The producers say people want entertainment news which includes celebrity gossip. Some of it is factual and can be “news” but a lot more is worthless except to fill up time. A series of incidents, over the years, led me to stop watching “entertainment news” shows all together.

It started with “A Current Affair” back in 1986. Where the grocery store tabloids started to be used as content on television. Then other respectable news shows about entertainment – like “Entertainment Tonight” – emulated that style.

Some starlet being arrested for DUI was “SHOCKING” or some actor’s mental problems were “EXCLUSIVELY” told on one of the shows. Then you had hosts who last worked as weather readers on some obscure TV station breathlessly interviewing a “friend” of a celebrity who had more “SHOCKING” personal problems… and on and on and on.

I was a long time viewer of “Entertainment Tonight” because of the actor interviews, coverage of upcoming movies, movie trailers, and hard news about the industry (news when it was factual and relevant).

Then that all changed.

The first incident was the death of actress Rebecca Schaeffer in 1989. A stalker had murdered the young television star. “Entertainment Tonight” (“ET”) did respectful stories about then unknown problem of stalking and how Schaeffer’s life was cut short. The series of stories lasted as long as the normal grieving process for those not blood relatives – about a week or so. They also did follow up stories as the criminal case of the killer went through the system.

Ten years later there were a series of incidents involving actor Brad Pitt and a stalker. A young woman kept getting arrested after breaking into his home. The last time she was caught in his house wearing some of his clothes. Luckily Pitt was not there at the time.

I expected the same type of factual reporting on “ET” as happened when Rebecca Schaeffer was killed. By this time “ET” had changed into a trashy tabloid type show but I was still “SHOCKED” when they cross promoted an “EXCLUSIVE” interview with Pitt’s stalker on the old Leeza Gibbon’s daytime talk show! Gibbon’s show was giving the criminal stalker an hour of air time to stroke her ego and tell the world how much as just had to be with the actor.

I threw up a little in my mouth. I changed the channel and have never watched “ET” or shows like it since.

Flash forward 10 more years and it seems much worse. “ET” is even more trashy and is joined with shows like “Extra” and “The Insider”. Not only do they still report breathlessly on the personal failings of celebrities, but they report on manufactured celebrities like the Kardasians and Paris Hilton among others. They now have “Z” list celebrities hosting the shows and interviewing their “colleagues” as if they have a psychology degree as if we should care how some one is dealing with obesity or whatever personal demon is lurking within them.

An argument can be made that a celebrity talking about something serious like drug addiction or domestic violence can lead us regular folks to get help or what not. I agree celebrities can shed light on serious topics of interest to the general public but it should be done in a appropriate setting with real experts or professionals interviewing them – not talking to some failed celebrity hosting a gossip show.

A recent topic on the “The Insider” and one on “Extra” reinforced my decision to not watch these trashy shows if at all possible (I need to change the channel quicker *sigh*).

The other day one of the “The Insider” “hosts” asked “Should John Edwards be wearing an orange jump suit?” Edwards is the former Presidential and 2004 VP candidate who got into a mess when it was revealed he had an affair with a staff member. The question asked was related to the fact that Edwards tried to cover-up the affair.

Covering up an affair is not criminal unless he had someone murdered or committed some other crime. In fact marital issues are and should be private personal matters for everyone including those in the public eye.

On “Extra” they had “EXCLUSIVE” video of actor Nick Nolte dumpster diving in an alley in Hollywood. The voice over breathlessly asked “Is Nick Nolte down and out for real?” playing on one of his most memorable film roles as a homeless man in the movie “Down and Out in Beverly Hills”. They also used the footage to once again bring up is now famous arrest for DUI some years back that produced a crazy looking mug shot of the actor with wild unwashed hair and a cheesy flower print shirt.

If one watched the full story then the fact was he had misplaced a bag with personal items in it and was looking for it as many of us do when we lose something. He was retracing his steps and checking trash bins in case someone had stolen it and dumped it. The final bit of video showed him finding the bag at a coffee shop down the street where he had left it on the counter by mistake.

I guess the factual headline “Actor looses bag” is less interesting then the made up one of “Is Nick Nolte down and out for real?”

Move Your Money

The Huffington Post is publishing articles asking people to move their money from the big banks that are too big to fail to smaller community based banks and credit unions. In my experience it is a good idea and I have few personal stories about it.

My College Loan Story

When I was getting ready to attend college, I needed to get a loan to pay for it. My local bank at the time was a branch of a larger bank. So I go to my branch and talked to one of the reps about college loan options.

I had been a member of the bank for many years. In fact it was my first bank. My mom had setup a kiddie savings account for me when I was like 10 years old and I had always used it for cashing pay checks and other checks.

The bank representative was nice and suggested a Guaranteed Student Loan. It was a product where the bank loaned me the money, the government paid the interest until I graduated, and if I defaulted the government would repay the bank and put me on the hook with them.

I applied and a few weeks later got a letter turning me down. I went back the branch and talked to the same woman. She said because my credit was bad I would need to have the amount of the loan IN my account before they would approve it.

Imagine that. In order to get a $2,500 loan for college I had to have $2,500 in the bank. Wow!

I ended up finding a bank in a nearby town that lent me the money and I closed my account with my bank soon after.

Check cashing problems

In college had two incidents cashing checks from other people. I had an account with another large bank since they had the bank concession at my college. One day I get a check from my Mom for spending money. I go to the branch and see a teller. She tells me if I cash it I had to deposit the full the amount and it wouldn’t be available until the check cleared since I didn’t have enough money in my account to cover the check.

“But the check is from my Mom, see the same last name…” I said.

I ended up getting $10 cash and having to wait for the rest.

A similar tune happened when my roommate wanted me to cash an American Express money order for him since he didn’t have an account. Same thing. No deal because I didn’t have the amount in my account.

“But it is an American Express money order…” It wasn’t like it was Fred’s Money Order or something dodgy like that.

Check card problem

I was at a different bank and out of school and check cards started to come on big. I had been at the bank for 6 years with checking and a savings account and hardly any issues except for an occasional bounced check but at the time I had been bounce free for about two years. I applied for a check card and a week or so later got a letter back turning me down.

I went to the branch to find out why and was told that on some occasions the card system might be down and they would honor transactions as a form of credit. Since my credit score was bad they turned me down. Six years as a customer with a decent record meant nothing for a card that was tied directly to a checking account. In fact any funny business with the card would have more legal problems since check fraud is worse than problems with credit cards not to mention the bounce fees they could make.

I even went to the manager and he put in a special request and I was still turned down. I left that bank after that for a credit union.

Bounce fee pile on

It was at the credit union that I had a bad experience after bouncing an electronic transaction.

I misfigured my account balance and missed it by $1. I then had seven consecutive transactions hit and bounce before they closed my account. I owed over $200 in fees and I was so mad they let six bounces go through I refused to pay the fees. They put me on the naughty list and I was not able to open another bank account – not even a savings account – anywhere.

After some study I would have to wait 5 years for me to drop off and then I might be able to at least open a savings account. So for 4 and 1/2 years I used check cashing places for pay checks and asked other people to give me cash or money orders rather than personal checks if they gave me money.

About six months before I would drop off the naughty list the credit union renewed my ding which started the clock all over again. UGH!

I gave up and decided to pay the fees and be done with it.

The ironic thing was when I went to pay it they had no current record of it since it had been so long. They had to add my account back into the system with the negative balance deposit the fees then close it again. Luckily they didn’t charge me a bounce fee for that.

Today

I am at another credit union now and love it. They don’t give me any flack if an occasional overdraft happens. They ding me the fee but cover the check – had it happen only twice so far. They don’t keep trying to pay it so I get multiple dings.

I once had an unauthorized withdraw. Called them. They sent me a form by fax, I signed it and faxed it back and the withdraw was put back.

I had a large check to deposit and even though it was more than my account balance they let me have $100 cash immediately.

So I agree with the Huffington Post. If you can move your money to a community based bank or credit union.

Move Your Money