Let Us Talk

March 30, 2009

Tiger Wins At Bay Hill!

tiger-bay-hill-3-29-09 Magic – absolute magical, impressive and dramatic!!!

Tiger busted the weirdest celebration move ever in the picture above but I guess he didn’t know what to do with the sum of all his athletic parts as he sunk the 15 foot birdie at the 18th hole at Bay Hill as he won the Arnold Palmer Invitational by one shot over Sean O’Hair to match the largest comeback in his PGA Tour career. Did you see Stevie lift him off the ground?! 🙂

“It feels good to be back in contention, to feel the rush,” Woods said. “It’s been awhile, but God, it felt good. I hadn’t been in the mix since the U.S. Open, so it was neat to feel the heat again.”

Starting the final round five shots behind, Woods closed with a 3-under 67. It was the third time Tiger won at Bay Hill with a birdie putt on the 18th hole and his sixth win there.

This is phenomenal and a testament to Tiger’s ability, work ethics and focus.  This is just Tiger’s third start after reconstructive surgery on his left knee 8 months ago!

Magical!

Washington Bans Dishwashing Liquids

dishwashing-liquidIn an effort to improve water quality in Washington waters, the state is reducing one of the most common causes of pollution:  phosphorus in household products.

There are over 260 bodies of water polluted because of nutrients like phosphorus in Washington State.  Phosphorus is a common ingredient in household detergents and fertilizers, where it is often described as “phosphate.” It is used in many industrial processes. Phosphorus also occurs naturally in soil and human and animal wastes.

In water, phosphorus behaves as a fertilizer, accelerating plant and algae growth. When those plants and algae die in the water, bacteria consume oxygen that is dissolved in the water. When this happens, less oxygen is available for fish and aquatic life that need oxygen to survive. Excess phosphorus in drinking water is difficult to remove, and also can require an increase in treatment chemicals which adds cost.

Industry and wastewater treatment plants account for about fifty percent of the phosphorus contributed to Washington waters. The other half comes from a variety of “nonpoint” sources which are hard to trace such as such as storm-water runoff, septic tanks and agriculture.

When we reduce our use of phosphorus-based products we can considerably improve this pollution problem. The best way to protect our water sources is to avoid putting phosphorus into it to begin with.

There are alternatives to phosphorus-containing detergents that can be just as effective at food removal and spot reduction as phosphorus-containing soaps – Palmolive has a phosphorus free version.  Ask your supermarket(s) about phosphorus free products.

Even if your state isn’t regulating phosphorus in its water systems (as yet) we all need to start protecting our lakes and ground water. I believe that regulators should also ban phosphorus from our laundry detergents.

March 27, 2009

LeBron James “RIDICULOUS” Half Court Shot – 60 Minutes

Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes interviewed King James for this week’s broadcast.  While they walked the court at the King’s old high school in Akron, Ohio James bounced a basketball. “Are you going to do anything with this?” asks Kroft.

Before Kroft barely finishes the sentence, James nonchalantly flips the ball underhanded at the backcourt hoop about 60 feet away and SWISH!!! — Nothing but net!

“You got it?” asks a smiling James to the cameraman.

“How many times can you do that in a row? asks a dazzled Kroft. “I’m one take, baby, that’s all. I’m just one take,” laughed James.

Watch the full interview this Sunday, March 29 at 7pm EST on CBS.

Blue-Eyed Whites to Blame for Bank Crisis

president-lula-brazil-and-gordon-brown-pm1  Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva in the past has argued that poor and developing nations have been victims of mistakes made in richer countries, caused by irresponsibility or a lack of regulation in the world’s banking systems.

Appearing at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Gordon Brown just days ahead of the crucial G20 summit in London, he branded those he thought should be blamed for the world’s economic crisis in a less than articulate manner by saying, “It is a crisis caused and encouraged by the irrational behavior of white people with blue eyes, who before the crisis appeared to know everything, but are now showing that they know nothing.”

Later questioned by a reporter, President Lula expanded and further explained his theory by saying that it wasn’t native Indians, nor black, nor poor people that had created and spread the crisis throughout the world and that the world’s poor people should not be forced to pay for the global financial crisis. Quote, “As I do not know any black or indigenous bankers I can only say it is not possible for this part of mankind, which is victimized more than any other, to pay for the crisis.” 

President Lula is also calling for increased regulation of banks and is against protectionism saying, “I compare protectionism to a drug, why do people use drugs? Because they are in crisis and they think the drug will help them. But its effects pass quickly.”

Prime Minister Brown managed not to look uncomfortable but said that he preferred not to attribute blame to individuals.

I can agree that ‘those in charge’ acted like they knew everything and we now know that they knew nothing.  They were pretty much gambling on the highest level with money that wasn’t theirs to gamble with.  I believe that the powers that be demonstrated that they were narcissistic, connoisseurs of greed and financially gluttonous beyond belief but the whole white devil thing is inappropriate especially from a world leader.

Brazil which has historically been a struggling country has been a model of success in Latin America as of late. According to a recent article in Time, Brazil may well be one of 34 major economies that may come out of the global recession undamaged. Brazil’s state-run energy company, Petrobras, is set to expand operations, although at the moment its workers are striking over changes in their profit-sharing plan.

When unregulated capitalism was out of control in Brazil the government imposed financial regulations, while at the same time assisting corporations to promote job growth and distributed some of the wealth to help Brazil’s legions of poor rise from poverty to take their place amongst the middle class.

March 26, 2009

Gordon Brown: Devalued Prime Minister of a Devalued Government

What a speech by MEP Daniel Hannan!

March 25, 2009

Dear AIG, I QUIT!!!

The following is a letter sent on Tuesday by Jake DeSantis, an executive vice president of the American International Group’s financial products unit, to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G.

DEAR Mr. Liddy,

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,

Jake DeSantis

Original post:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/25/opinion/25desantis.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

President Obama: A 60 Minute Producer’s Perspective

As we waited outside the security checkpoint at the White House’ northwest gate late Friday afternoon, it was hard not to flash back on the first time we waited to be admitted into an Obama home.

On Friday, seven of us submitted our IDs and waited for the uniformed Secret Service officer to verify us against his computer list. It was a long time waiting before Steve Kroft, Executive Producer Jeff Fager, Executive Editor Bill Owens, Senior Producer Michael Radutzky, associate producer Anya Bourg, a Washington make-up artist and I were invited into the guard house for a stroll through the metal detectors. Our three video crews, a camera jib operator and associate producer Jen MacDonald were awaiting us inside the grounds.

On Super Bowl Sunday morning, 2007, a much smaller group of us pulled up at the Obama home in Chicago’s Hyde Park. We waited in the cars on the sub-zero morning until the stroke of ten. We walked through the front gate, up the stairs and rang the bell. Sasha Obama, then five, opened the door to let us in. Her big sister, Malia was standing behind her.

We spent most of the day with the then-Senator, his wife and daughters. We taped a drive through the South Side, did a sit-down interview in the family living room, and watched as Senator Obama made tuna salad in the kitchen (I recall he added pickle juice to the mayonnaise). David Axelrod was the only political staffer at the house that day. By the end of the day, the senator seemed ready to let us leave so he could go watch the game with some friends.

I doubt if one of us that day thought we were sitting with the next president of the United States. Everyone knew it was Hillary Clinton’s year. One of Steve’s questions probed about the possibility that the junior senator from Illinois was really running for vice president.

That standard 12-minute 60 Minutes piece included two other interviews with the then-senator that Steve did with producer Tom Anderson, one in Washington, and a second one on the eve of his formal announcement for the presidency in Springfield, Ill.

Things have changed in the two years we’ve covered the Obamas. With each successive interview we did, it seemed the staff grew larger, schedules grew tighter and the security grew more wary. After the November election, even we changed; the camera and sound crew began wearing jackets and ties, for the interviews.

What hasn’t seemed to change is Barack Obama. His manner has remained the same. He seemed as relaxed and confident with Steve last Friday at the White House as he had two years ago at his own house. He still has a way of engaging you while simultaneously observing the scene as if from afar. It’s a kind of detachment that is common among writers.

Even in hard times and with new responsibilities, he still enjoys the give-and-take, the opportunity to take questions and wrestle with them, before giving often long, often detailed answers. He genuinely seems to enjoy sparring with Steve. He has no idea what’s coming next and seems intellectually engaged by the more challenging questions.

All the pundit talk about the president’s reliance on a teleprompter is a mystery to me. He’s always seemed perfectly comfortable speaking spontaneously with Steve, often taking some very pointed questions.

On Friday night, after nearly 90 minutes of being probed about everything from Afghanistan to AIG bonuses, to budget deficits, he was once again pleased to see 60 Minutes go.

It was nearly eight-thirty and, as on that Super Bowl Sunday, he had someplace else to be. This time it was back in the residence. He still hadn’t had his dinner.

3/22/09 60 Minutes Interview:

Written by 60 Minutes producer Frank  Devine

Original post:

« Previous PageNext Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started