Barack Obama finally did yesterday what he should have done a month ago, though the damage has already been done. For those of you who haven’t guess what I am talking about, I’m referring to Rev. Jeremiah Wright. After being out of the media spotlight for a few weeks since Obama’s first speech on race, Wright has come out with force. With the podium and television cameras at his command, Obama’s retired minister continued with his black church focus while spouting conspiracy theories against the U.S. Government … and a slight against Obama himself.

“The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate.” This is what Obama should have said weeks ago. In the speech a month ago, Obama basically was giving Wright a pass to continue with the bizarre comments and in a way empowered him to continue to do so. The raw emotion and lack of composure in yesterday’s speech showed a more true side of Obama as well, especially compared to the scripted (and poorly delivered) speech from a month ago.

But this is a month too late. Since Obama defended Wright at first and then gave him a pass in a national speech, the prior comments as well as the loony ones as of late have forever tied the two men together. A month ago, Obama could have distanced himself from Wright and avoided much of the speculation many now have regarding his views on the black church movement and racial issues in general. This by no means makes Obama a racist, but it does make people uncomfortable and question if there is a hidden racial motive behind the campaign.

Fortunately for Obama, he still holds the lead in delegates in the democratic race for the nomination, but Hillary Clinton is not mathematically eliminated yet, and the current chaos surrounding Obama gives her argument about being the better candidate against John McCain added weight. If Obama cannot shake Wright, and if Wright remains in the media, Obama will have a tough time among independents who might support McCain in the general election.

For some additional reading, check out these sites:
Kansas City Star – “Could poll numbers be a factor in Obama’s Wright divorce?”
Yahoo! News – “Obama’s Wright Turn”
The Christian Science Monitor – “Blacks wrestle with Obama-Wright rift”
The Boston Herald – “Obama: Wright sure is wrong”
Associated Press – “Voters say Wright has hurt Obama, but question how much”

For some additional reading across the web, check out these blogs:
First Door on the Left – “Obama severs ties with Wright”
My View of “IT” – “Obama strongly denounces former pastor”
The ramblings of an inquisitive idiot – “Bitter? Lots of Voters Are Just Exactly That”
The BoBo Files – “Does Obamessiah really think we’re all that stupid?”
The Volokh Conspiracy – “Obama, Wright, and the problem of nutty friends”

Depending on where you live, you may or may not have to display a photo ID when you currently walk up to the polling station when you go to vote. If you live in Indiana, you will come this November, compliments of the Supreme Court. After hearing an argument by the ACLU, the court voted 6-3 in favor of the Indiana law, and I agree with them.

Al Capone is credited with saying, “Vote early and vote often.” This phrase is used often when suggestion of ballot and voter manipulation occurs, especially when records show individuals who have been dead before the election cast a ballot in person, or when voter turnout exceeds 100% in various precincts. It is reasons like this which cause activists and states to champion photo identification as a requirement as proof of identity at the polling station. Most people already use their driver’s license (issued by the state) as their proof of ID, but in other cases items such as electricity bills or birth certificates are all that are required.

It is easy to see how the last two options are used to manipulate an election. Someone just needs to gain access to a current bill or swipe a birth certificate from a relative and head to the polls. And with the volume of voters on that day, the odds are favorable for a person to slip in under someone else’s identity to vote without being questioned. Now many states (and the Indiana law) requires those who do vote in this fashion to return at a later date with some other form of identification to verify their vote before their numbers are certified. However, as we all know in modern media coverage, unofficial vote totals are reported within 24 hours and, in a close election, can cause a candidate to concede the election to their challenger prematurely.

A perfect example was Al Gore in the 2000 election and the results in Florida. After a long night of waiting for vote returns, and with a state that was bouncing back and forth between Gore and George W. Bush, Gore called Bush and conceded defeat and was heading to his election party to make a formal announcement. However, a doubt over some of the election results caused Gore to suspend the announcement and … well, the rest is history.

So, the need for a valid photo ID becomes necessary to reduce the fraudulent voting. So what about the poor and elderly who might not have a photo ID? Most states will issue these individuals a free ID, and in other states, non-profit groups will pick up the costs for them, so that aspect isn’t a problem. Now, they might have issues obtaining transportation to receive one of these IDs, or they might work two jobs that prevents them from reaching the facility during working hours. If we are close to the time of the election, these individuals might not receive an ID on time. In those instances, the states will still accept some form of identity (birth certificate, passport, etc) at the polls and return at a later date with a photo ID. However, when you are months out from the election, they should be able to find a few hours to obtain the identification cards.

So in close, I can only see this as a good thing for our citizens and the institution of voting within our Republic. While the chance for disenfranchisement might exist because of the law, the disenfranchisement of all voters due to fraud will decrease. Will we one day find a way to remove all fraud from the process while having everyone be able to vote without the need of a photo ID? I hope so. But until then, this is the next best thing.

For some additional reading, check out these sites:
Yahoo! News – “Supreme Court upholds photo ID law for voters in Indiana”
Associated Press - “Supreme Court says states can demand photo ID for voting”
Assocaited Press – “Advocates: Voter ID ruling may disenfranchise US voters”
Biloxi Sun Herald – “Miss. attempts at voter ID law have failed”
ABC 7 News – “Dems oppose id law”

For some additional reading across the web, check out these blogs:
Y’all Politics – “Supreme Court upholds photo ID law for voters in Indiana”
Future Majority – “Supreme Court upholds Indiana’s Bogus Photo ID Law”
La Shawn Barber’s Corner - “Supreme Court Upholds Voter Photo ID Law”
Dispatch Politics – “Supreme Court upholds Indiana’s photo ID law for voters”
Vote Trust USA – “Response to Supreme Court Ruling on Photo ID Law for Voters”

I work all night, I work all day, to pay the bills I have to pay
Aint it sad
And still there never seems to be a single penny left for me
Thats too bad
In my dreams I have a plan
If I got me a wealthy man
I wouldnt have to work at all, Id fool around and have a ball…

Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich mans world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich mans world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
Its a rich mans world

Thirty-six years ago, ABBA penned those famous words on their way yet another #1 album, but you could say they were penned today. The recent drop in the economy has hit many people in our country. Between gas prices jumping up and home values falling down, some people are finding themselves in a pinch. Truck drivers are threatening to protest while thousands of families are foreclosing on their homes each week, and what is the best our Federal government can come up with? Rebate checks costing taxpayers over $150 Billion.

Now, before I go any further, “free” money is always a nice thing, even if it was money originating from your income taxes. However, is giving out $600 per taxpayer really the best solution our bipartisan government could do for us at this time? The intention of these checks are for us to go out and spend spend spend in order to stimulate our economy, but is it our lack of spending the problem right now? In my view no to both questions. Addressing the second question first, many in our country have a spending problem, not a lack of spending. We are such a materialistic country that many people live in credit debt because they want the latest flat screen TV or fancy car or … a house they can’t afford. And that leads back to the first question.

If each taxpayer receives $600 and runs right to the store, what happens? The stores make money (which they pay taxes on), pays their employees (who go out and spend money), and cover their bills (which sends money to other companies). With each cycle, that $600 passes through multiple hands and transforms into more money and more credit. This is good for the economy and the government, but it doesn’t help treat one of the big reasons for our lagging economy, being the collapse of the housing bubble. So what should the government do?

In my view, that $150 Billion should have been used to restructure many of these interest-only mortgages and ARMs that have caused so many to lose their homes. By restructuring the loans, those who are invested in the mortgages will see a return on their investment quickly, rather than waiting years with the risk of their investment drying up due to increased foreclosures. This is good for business and investors. The homeowners in turn are placed into a new mortgage with fixed rates that they can afford and know that it won’t go up in the future. This brings stability to a volatile market by decreasing foreclosures. It also brings peace of mind to the homeowners that were close to losing their home (which is the best investment a person can make in their future). Also, banks retain their customers and aren’t left with homes that they must sell for a loss just to get it off their hands.

And what does all of this do? Increases tax returns! Banks pay taxes on their income from mortgage payments. Investors pay taxes on their return on investment. More taxes come from homeowners since they can now pay their bills. Property values remain stable and higher since there will be less foreclosures. In no time, the government will be receiving a return on their $150 Billion investment in the government while helping to stabilize the economy.

From a business point of view, it is a smart investment for their future. Why the government didn’t do this is beyond me, but then again, I do not have a degree in Macroeconomics. However, from a “common sense” point of view, it would have been more beneficial to those who are in need of help as well as for our economy than sending out $600 checks that may simply find a home in their savings accounts, being used as part of a monthly mortgage payment, or paying for gas. I do not see how this type of stimulus will improve the national economy.

For some additional reading, check out these sites:
Breitbart – “Bush says rebates going out Monday will boost economy”
USA Today – “Retailers dangle discounts to lure tax-rebate checks”
San Antonio Business Journal – “Uncle Sam plans to issue economic recovery checks early”
Rochester Homepage – “Early rebate checks: should you save or spend?”
M LIve – “The rebate checks are coming! The rebate checks are coming!”

For some additional reading across the web, check out these blogs:
Rocket Finance – “Saturday’s are for Coffee: Economic stimulus rebate checks”
The Consumerist – “Rebate Checks Start Arriving Monday!”
Moments in Time – “U.S. Citizens Get Ready For A Little Extra Green”
In Business TV’s Weblog – “2008 Tax Rebate checks: Is your tax rebate a fish for a day?”
The Wall Street Journal Economics Blog – “Too Afraid to Spend Rebate Checks”

Well, if you’ve tried to access the site within the past hour or two (it is currently 7:30pm EST on Friday), you probably saw an error message on the page.  I would like to apologize for the interruption in service.  I couldn’t identify the error, so I simply restored a back-up copy of the site from earlier today.  If you left a comment which is now “missing,” I did not intentionally delete it.  Things seem to be working with no problems now.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Ok, now that I have the tab option working, I have added a tab for recent comments on the site.  This way, you can follow the discussions without having to search for them by clicking on each post (not that I wouldn’t mind you reading each post).  If you have any recommendations on future upgrades to the site, please let me know!