Tourney Mode

Sorry guys, I’m going to be out of politics mode and into NCAA Tournament mode for the next four days. But don’t worry, there will still be a new episode of The Current available Saturday, and we’re taping our interview with the film makers of “Not Evil, Just Wrong” today.

You can follow along with my NCAA Tourney Live Blog at my sports blog, JacobJacobDrew.com.

Have a good one!

–jb

I Don’t Care

The right is spazzing out about two relatively unimportant events about Barack Obama.

One, he filled out an NCAA Tournament bracket on ESPN.

Two, he’s going to be on Leno.

I couldn’t care less about those two events, however the republicans and conservative bloggers have for some reason attached themselves to these issues, using them as a cataylst to insult Obama.

Boy, I sound way too much like a liberal now. In actuality I just care too much about the conservative movement for it to be sidetracked by meaningless quips about meaningless actions.

Let’s take the first action, filling out an NCAA bracket on ESPN. From what I’ve read on conservative blogs, they’re concerned that during an economic crisis Obama is wasting time filling out a bracket for the ESPN cameras. Really? You think that’s a waste of time. How long do you suppose that took? Ten, fifteen minutes? I don’t think he was going to solve the economic crisis during in that amount of time, and I’m sure he can compensate for lost time by staying up slightly past his bedtime tonight.

Let’s face it Obama was going to waste that time filling out a bracket anyway. From what I remember President Bush routinely filled out an NCAA bracket. Obama is going to host the winner of this tournament, the least he can do is predict who’s going to stop off at the White House.

The second action is Obama going on the Tonight Show. I must preface this by telling you that I think going on Leno is ill-advised and overall a complete waste of the President’s time. To be perfectly honest I think this economic crisis is too important to be trivialize by going on a late night comedy show. There’s a reason no sitting president has ever gone on a talk show; it’s simply beneath the office.

However, I don’t think conservatives or the GOP stand to gain anything by pointing out that Obama is making a mistake by going on the Tonight Show. When voters go to the ballot box in 2012 (or vote in the mid-terms in 2010) this appearance at 11:35 at night won’t be sticking out in their minds. If anything the GOP should be happy Obama is going to make an unscripted appearance sans a teleprompter, at least we assume they’ll be no script and teleprompter.

The point is this, the conservative movement is at a fragile point. We are starting to make great gains on economic issues considering Obama’s proposals either don’t have the public’s approval or don’t have the public’s confidence. The day after Obama, Geithner, and Dodd screwed up the AIG bonuses we shouldn’t be harping on Obama’s NCAA picks or appearance on a late night show, rather we should be slamming him for his economic decisions.

We have to put our eggs in the basket that people care about. Putting our eggs in the basket that no one cares about wastes more time than Obama filling out an NCAA bracket.

–jb

American Idol Rankings: Top 11

This week on American Idol it was country week, and despite country being my least favorite music genre it is always my favorite week on American Idol. Why? It’s a bunch of young liberal kids singing songs written by conservatives. It’s a great week.

This was the week of the underdog. Performers that needed to step up, namely Anoop Desai, stepped up and they made a huge impact on my rankings. This might be the most active week in the rankings I’ve ever had. When I said last week that the top five was set in stone and the rest would be on the outside looking in, I was wrong. Matt Giraud, who placed eighth on the list last week, jump to four this week because of a great performance. And Adam Lambert, who placed third on the list last week, dropped to fifth after a very bizarre Middle Easternesque performance.

Again I will stress, this year of American Idol is different because there’s very little difference between number 11 and number one, or at least not as much parody as years past.

So without further adieu, here is this week’s list…

1. Danny Gokey (Rising)
This week’s performance: 4.5/5
2. Allison Iraheta (Rising)
This week’s performance: 4.5/5
3. Lil Rounds (Even)
This week’s performance: 4/5
4. Matt Giraud (Rising)
This week’s performance: 4/5
5. Adam Lambert (Falling)
This week’s performance: 2/5
6. Alexis Grace (Even)
This week’s performance: 3.5/5
7. Kris Allen (Rising)
This week’s performance: 3.5/5
8. Michael Sarver (Falling)
This week’s performance: 3/5
9. Anoop Desai (Rising)
This week’s performance: 4/5
10. Scott MacIntyre (Falling)
This week’s performance: 3/5
11. Megan Joy (who was Megan Corkrey last week…hmmm?) (Rising, even though she’s dead last)
This week’s performance: 3/5

Megan Corkrey, whose name suddenly changed to Megan Joy, actually sang much better this week than last week, but because other contestants out-performed her she ended up at the bottom of the barrel. That’s why this list is becoming harder to make each week, there’s not much difference between each position on the list. Despite the sudden surge from low ranking performers, there were some that began to slip. I think Scott MacIntyre is quickly becoming irrelevant in this competition because he lacks a variety of performance types and song choices. I also think Kris Allen is irrelevant as well, maybe it’s just because I can never remember his performances.

A quick note about the free fall of Adam Lambert, he needs to tone down on the drama. This week’s performance was very, very strange, and that can be a good thing, but it was a really really bad thing this week. If he wasn’t so over-the-top dramatic he’d be a much better performer. Maybe he’s getting cocky?

Should be kicked off this week: Megan Joy
Will be kicked off this week: Michael Sarver

Performer who has the most to prove next week: Scott MacIntyre
Performer who’s smooth sailing: Allison Iraheta
Performer who’s teetering (could fall from top): Adam Lambert

–jb

What was that about Caterpillar?

Remember when Barack Obama said that Caterpillar, who had just laid off thousands of workers, was going to rehire some of those works because the stimulus was passed? And then the Caterpillar President came out and basically said that he couldn’t guarantee that they would rehire any of those workers?

Guess who was correct in that difference of opinion?

If you guessed the guy who actually runs the Caterpillar company, you’d be correct.

Caterpillar Inc. on Tuesday announced plans to lay off more than 2,400 employees at five plants in Illinois, Indiana and Georgia as the heavy equipment maker continues to cut costs amid the global economic downturn.

Glad to see that stimulus is allowing Caterpillar to rehire some of those employees. This just means they have even more people to rehire when the stimulus actually kicks in…right?

If you forgot this whole ordeal Ace of Spades has the context including the Obama quote from February when he said Caterpillar would rehire.

Obama continued his quest for bipartisanship today in the only way he knows how, by claiming the people who don’t like his budget don’t have an alternative and are “just saying no.”

President Barack Obama on Tuesday accused critics of his $3.6 trillion budget proposal of taking a “just say no” approach to his plan and offering few ideas of their own.

“If there are members of Congress who object to specific policies and proposals in this budget then I ask them to be ready and willing to propose constructive alternative solutions,” Obama said. “‘Just say no’ is the right advice to give your teenagers about drugs. It is not an acceptable response to whatever economic policies are proposed by the other party.”

“Constructive alternative solutions,” that’s exactly what the GOP has been doing this entire time. They offered up a “constructive alternative” to the stimulus and no one listened to them. They’ve offered up some decent proposals for health care and other new government programs that Obama is pining to install.

However, what Obama doesn’t understand is sometimes government needs to “just say no.” Government is not the answer for everything, I know that jibes with Obama’s beliefs, but it’s true. If the government knew how to “just say no” we wouldn’t be sitting on $10+ trillion of debt. In an interview with Charlie Rose, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner pointed to “will” as the key attribute that will get us out of this economic mess. Geithner wasn’t referring to the will of the people, he was referring to the will of government.

Government will not get us out of this economic mess, they got us into it. Obama said that “just say no” is the kind of language parents should use when teaching their kids about drugs (advice, by the way, that Obama didn’t take), but it’s also the kind of language that the government needs to learn.

Then we wouldn’t be passing on trillions of dollars of debt to generations whose parents haven’t even been born yet.

–jb

A Quick Lesson in Media Economics

Our lawmakers in Washington simply don’t understand media economics.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is urging the Justice Department to allow certain mergers to go through, basically change the rules, to make sure that newspapers don’t go under.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, worried about the fate of The Chronicle and other financially struggling newspapers, urged the Justice Department Monday to consider giving Bay Area papers more leeway to merge or consolidate business operations to stay afloat.

I guess just Bay Area papers have competition from different media outlets. But apparently Pelosi is worried about newspapers all over the country going out of business, I guess she thinks there will be no one left to report the news.

“We must ensure that our policies enable our news organizations to survive and to engage in the news gathering and analysis that the American people expect,” Pelosi wrote.

The speaker said the issue of newspapers’ survival and antitrust law will be the subject of a hearing soon before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy, chaired by Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga.

For Pelosi and all the democrats allow me to explain this phenomenon in the newspaper industry. It’s called convergence, it’s a real term, used by real media people, and it’s really what’s happening to the newspaper industry.

See, I don’t think that Pelosi, or many congressmen for that matter, really understand the internet and fully grasp the way the economy is adjusting in the digital age. The fact that they don’t get it is scary, because they think that newspapers going under is a terrible event, when in reality it’s natural and regardless of what they do, it will happen.

Let me begin by explaining convergence. Put simply convergence is the transition from old media (newspapers) to new media (the internet). In this instance convergence is happening in two ways; one, newspapers are moving exclusively to the internet, and two, newspapers are moving part of their business to the internet. Step one in this process was moving part of their business to the internet, every major newspaper has a website and posts all of their print content on their website. The second step is moving all of their content on their website and doing away with the print edition.

This is the step that lawmakers don’t understand. They can’t fathom a world without a physical newspaper to read. For older generations it’ll be an adjustment, but for younger generations it’s going to be the norm.

There’s really one big reason why newspapers want to move exclusively to the web; cost. It’s costly to operate a website and a print edition, so newspapers are faced with a decision to drop one, and because printing a paper cost more than posting an article on a website, the print edition gets the boot. Not to mention it’s easier to sell advertisements on a website for a variety of reasons, mainly because you can rotate through multiple ads in one spot and the user can literally click the ad and go to the advertisers website.

For newspapers if they have to choose between being exclusively online or exclusively in print it’s an easy decision. Your content has much more potential online because there’s no geographical boundaries holding it back. With print, a newspaper is limited to a particular geographical area, and if you want to expand your area it costs a significant amount of money. When content is online it doesn’t matter where the reader is at; the newspaper will pay the same price.

The lack of geographical boundaries is not only appealing for the company, but also for the advertiser. When content is on the internet it has a further reach than simply in print, readership also has a greater chance of expansion online than in print.

To inject some media economics jargon, when newspapers post exclusively online their first copy costs are significantly reduced. Basically it costs them a lot less to produce the first copy of an article to go online than to go in print. Even better for newspapers their marginal cost is significantly reduced as well. When you print a newspaper the company has to pay a large sum of money to print the physical paper, thus increasing readership and circulation costs the company more. But when the content is online there’s no cost difference between 1,000 readers and a million readers.

So ya see lawmakers, convergence is a really easy concept. Now you can probably see why newspapers are folding. It’s not because their liberal (that’s what Bill O’Reilly wants you to think), it’s because the market is demanding it, and it simply makes more sense for their bottom lines to switch their content exclusively online.

Pelosi can do all see wants to stop it, but in this economic climate she’s simply delaying the inevitable.

–jb

The Current #128

The Current #128
March 14, 2009
Hosts: Jacob Bodnar and Logan Sparrow

A Second Stimulus? Believe it
Believe it or not, I choose not to, Nancy Pelosi and the democrats have said they’re open to the idea of a second stimulus. Although they say the effectiveness of the first stimulus needs to be taken into account when determining the size of the second. So it’s no longer a question of if there will be a second, but rather when. Jacob and Logan discuss the insanity.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

It Ain’t Your Money to Spend
A new segment was inaugurated on the show this week, The Current Spotlight Interview. This week Jacob interviewed Kathleen Stewart and Steve Jones. Stewart and Jones teamed up to create a song protesting the stimulus and bailouts titled, “It Ain’t Your Money to Spend.” You can listen to the song here.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Fly Away Pelosi
It was 2007 when Nancy Pelosi was accused of asking for a bigger jet. She denied the allegations but Judicial Watch submitted a FOIA request to see if she was being truthful. Surprise, she wasn’t, but there was a lot more plane business the group uncovered.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Taliban Diplomacy
How exactly do you “talk” with the enemy that you admit is winning? That’s the exact question Jacob asked when it was announced this week that Obama was interested in “talking” with the “moderate” Taliban. This despite the fact that both himself and Joe Biden admit the U.S. is losing in Afghanistan.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

FULL EPISODE

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

DOWNLOAD
64kbps | 96kbps

SUBSCRIBE (ITUNES)

SUBSCRIBE (RSS)

LINKS TO STORIES

Obama signs Omnibus Spending, Defends Earmarks

Obama is like a circular logic inducing Jedi master.

Yeah I said it, and you know it’s true.

He signed the omnibus spending bill today, with its thousands of earmarks and billions in pork projects, and at the same time he decried earmarks and pet projects, but then he kinda didn’t because he was making excuses for the pet projects in the omnibus bill.

Talk about mixed signals.

President Barack Obama, sounding weary of criticism over federal earmarks, defended Congress’ pet projects Wednesday as he signed an “imperfect” $410 billion measure with thousands of examples. But he said the spending does need tighter restraint and listed guidelines to do it. Obama, accused of hypocrisy by Republicans for embracing billions of dollars of earmarks in the legislation, said they can be useful and noted that he has promised to curb, not eliminate them.

So I’m really confused now. Obama has said on the campaign trail and in office that he was against earmarks. He’s correct in saying he never said he would fully eliminate them, but I thinking “curbing” would include cutting them down from over 9,000. He is literally doing the exact opposite of what he said he would do. He could have used the omnibus bill as his first fight against earmarks, I seriously think this was a missed opportunity for Obama.

And may I also mention this bill was not online for five days before Obama signed it, another campaign promise that’s been thrown down the toilet several times already.

Obama also used a Bush tactic that he criticized.

On another potentially controversial matter, the president also issued a “signing statement” with the bill, saying several of its provisions raised constitutional concerns and would be taken merely as suggestions. He has criticized President George W. Bush for often using such statements to claim the right to ignore portions of new laws, and on Monday he said his administration wouldn’t follow those issued by Bush unless authorized by the new attorney general.

Obama also signed the bill in private, what happened to transparency? I think any president that signs a bill that spends taxpayer money should do so in the light of day with television cameras to witness.

–jb

Sanford Will Reject Funds

When South Carolina governor Mark Sanford announced that he would reject the stimulus money for his state I was wishing and hoping that he would follow through.

Well good news…he did.

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is expected Wednesday to become the first governor to formally reject some of the federal stimulus money earmarked by Congress for his state.

The problem with the stimulus is that it allows state legislators to take some of the money that the governor rejects (despite the fact that the political leader of the state doesn’t want it), so Sanford can’t reject 100% of the money (assuming his state legislator wants any).

Mitch McConnell also came out today with a startling statistic. Since Obama’s inauguration the federal government has spent $1 billion an hour, most of which is borrowed money.

Which leads me to a video you should all watch. It’s on YouTube and discusses why Keynesian economics doesn’t work. It’s actually common sense, if government is borrowing money to spend money, they’re simply taking the money out of the economy’s right pocket and putting it in its left. It’s a very good video.

Also something new that hit the net the last couple of days. A jazz singer, Kathleen Stewart, has released a new single called “It Ain’t Your Money to Spend!” Very catchy song, we’re working out a time right now to do an interview with her for the show so look out for that!

–jb

American Idol Top 13 Rankings

Michael Jackson made a weird announcement this week that he was going to do some more concerts in London, so the American Idol producers thought it would be a good idea to honor that decision by dubbing this week “Michael Jackson week.” Don’t get me wrong it’s a great theme, with a lot of good song choices, but it could have been made all better if the King of Pop himself would have shown up. On second thought, that would have been really weird.

The rankings were tough this week. The top five was obvious, there’s no question in my mind that the top five are the best on that show. Where exactly they rank within that five is certainly up for debate and it will certainly fluctuate in the coming weeks, but everything after five is hazy. I don’t think anyone was terrible enough to be in the 11, 12, or 13 spot. In the rankings I had written down after each individual performance I had everyone outside the top five in the 6, 7, or 8 spot, so it was difficult to fill out.

But I did it, and I think I did a damn good job. Some of you won’t agree with my placement of Adam Lambert (the judges being one of them), but I thought his performance was just a notch over-the-top.

1. Danny Gokey (Rising)
This week’s performance: 5/5
2. Allison Iraheta (Rising)
This week’s performance: 4.5/5
3. Adam Lambert (Rising)
This week’s performance: 4.5/5
4. Lil Rounds (Even)
This week’s performance: 4/5
5. Alexis Grace (Even)
This week’s performance: 3.5/5
6. Michael Sarver (Rising)
This week’s performance: 3.5/5
7. Scott MacIntyre (Even)
This week’s performance: 3.5/5
8. Matt Giraud (Rising)
This week’s performance: 3/5
9. Kris Allen (Rising)
This week’s performance: 3/5
10. Jorge Nunez (Falling)
This week’s performance: 3/5
11. Jasmine Murray (Even)
This week’s performance: 3/5
12. Megan Corkrey (Falling)
This week’s performance: 2/5
13. Anoop Desai (Falling)
This week’s performance: 2.5/5

As you can see no one was truly terrible this week, but there were some off performances. Megan Corkrey sang “Rockin’ Robin” which is a stupid old fashioned song by the Jackson Five. Anoop sung a song that should be a in a vault never to be sung (Beat It) and did a fairly awful job. The difference between this group and last year’s group is I honestly don’t know who is going to get kicked off and I don’t think there’s one singular performer that’s at the bottom of the barrel.

Should be kicked off this week: Anoop Desai
Will be kicked off this week: Kris Allen

Performer who has the most to prove next week: Anoop Desai
Performer who’s smooth sailing: Danny Gokey, Allison Iraheta, Adam Lambert
Performer who’s teetering (could fall from top): Lil Rounds

Results tomorrow at 9pm!

–jb

Senate Passes Pork UPDATE: School Choice goes Down

The Senate passed the porky $410 billion omnibus spending bill by a vote of 62-35. There’s upwards of $8 billion of pork packed into the bill. If you’d like a list of some of the projects check here.

Obama will more-than-likely sign the bill, despite his claim that he’ll fight against earmarks. Just some of those comments come in this video, and this one, and this one as well.

Anyway you slice it when Obama inevitably signs this spending bill he’ll be getting his earmark crusade off on the wrong foot.

UPDATE: I wrote this post while I was watching American Idol so I didn’t get to read some of the specifics of the vote, I was just reading on Michelle Malkin that the school choice amendment, that would have saved the D.C. scholarship program, went down 39-58. Notable GOPers that voted against school choice; Specter and Murkowski.

While I was at CPAC I had a chance to hear the woman who ran the effort to save the program speak, and she told some very good stories of children who have benefited immensely from the opportunity to attend a school that doesn’t suck. The D.C. public schools are a mess and this scholarship program was giving children an opportunity at a real education, but now it will be discontinued.

We hear about the democrats looking out for the inner city and for the poor, but this shows their true colors. They only pretend to look out for those people to get their votes, when it comes down to voting for legislation that actually helps those people, they turn it down.

Sad.

–jb