NYC Mayor Bloomberg launching awareness campaign on headphone usage

  

From Huffingtonpost.com:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is now focusing his attention on the perils of hearing loss from loud earbuds.

The New York Post reports the mayor is launching a new public health campaign to raise awareness of a well-known, but widely ignored fact that loud music can cause permanent hearing damage.

The program, which will cost roughly $250,000 and be paid for by a grant from the Fund for Public Health, will be social media based and target young adults using Facebook and Twitter.

There's nothing more useless and a waste of time and money than an "awareness campaign". Awareness campaigns are what government does when it sits up top and looks down upon the little people like a game of SimCity and tries to come up with little tweaks here and there to change behavior, to the supposed benefit of the community. Their heart is perhaps in the right place but it amounts to nothing more than making the creators of these campaigns feel good about themselves as if they were actually accomplishing some good in the world. The reality is that it's the equivalent to pouring money down the drain, as not only do people not pay attention to awareness campaigns, but even if they did it would still not likely cause them to change their behavior. Let's say though for argument sake that awareness campaigns are 100% effective and that every person who sees or hears it will immediately change their behavior accordingly. At that most optimistic success rate, it's still not worth the time and money.

People are already aware of the dangers of smoking. They're aware that if they don't wear their seat belts and they're involved in a head-on collision, they're probably going to be fucked. They're aware that if they drink nothing but pepsi and coke all day every day, they'll suffer health consequences later. And yes, they're also aware that listening to music at high volume using headphones on a regular basic may have an effect on their hearing, especially as they get older. What we have is not a problem of people not understanding the risks, but the result of people living in a free country where people are supposed to have the free will to calculate the risks for themselves and make their own choices. As long as we allow people to have free will, people are going to make dumb decisions. You could prevent all dumb decisions if you really wanted to, but that would come at the cost of freedom, and freedom is certainly more valuable than any consequences as the result of a bad decision.

Are awareness campaigns taking away freedom? No. But they're done with the intent of controlling behavior, and it's a waste of resources whether it's effective or not. Stop wasting the people's money with your feel-good campaigns. Having your heart in the right place just doesn't cut it anymore; too many terrible and useless things have been done with the justification of good intentions.

Occupy Wall Street protesters turn their attention to Obama

Well it was only a matter of time. For the past couple months now the Occupy protesters have focused their efforts on big corporations who are raking in big profits and banks who received bailouts while the rest of us were left holding the bag. That was a decent starting point I suppose but at the end of the day, these companies can get only get so powerful without the help of the government. Companies are basically money making machines that operate on one principle only: to maximize profits for the shareholders.

From banks to retailers to car manufacturers, at the end of the day they all have the same goal. And how they conduct their business to achieve those goals is influenced a great deal by the legal and political environment. If rules are enforced and there is an even playing field with no company being favored by the government, companies live and die based on the quality of their products and their benefit to the consumers. If however we create an environment where the government is empowered to pick winners and losers, then companies are going to lobby the politicians to become the winners and ultimately end up with an unfair advantage.

The government essentially sets the stage for how business is conducted. If a company is behaving in a way that breaks the law or has a negative effect on society, that company should be called out and forced to face consequences. But if the government is not only allowing that to happen but is actually instrumental in it occurring, we need to take a look at them as well.

From nytimes.com:

More than 100 Occupy Wall Street protesters marched to a Midtown hotel on Wednesday night to protest a fund-raising event for President Obama.
-
Demonstrators held signs that leveled some of the Occupy protest’s most pointed criticism to date of the president. “Obama is a corporate puppet,” one said.

It will be interesting to see if this is a one time thing simply because Obama is in the area raising money "for the richest of the rich", or if this will spark the beginning of a new chapter in the Occupy movement.

The Republican Presidential Campaigns: Why is Jon Huntsman not getting more attention?

We here at People Liking People have been keeping an eye on the Republican primary presidential campaigns. It seems like every week there's a new front runner, and it almost feels like a game of musical chairs. Early on the focus was on Donald Trump, then it turned out the whole thing was a publicity stunt (shame on you all who actually fell for it). Mitt Romney has long been seen as being the most presidential and the one having the best chance at beating Obama. But to this day it seems a big share of the conservative base is having trouble rallying behind him. His level of support has been the most consistent of all the candidates though, for better or worse. Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain have both had their moments where it looked like they were the new front runner, and now Newt Gingrich is in that spotlight. And of course there is Ron Paul, who has a very strong support base but will have a hard time crossing into mainstream status. Oh and Rick Santorum...yawn. Look for him to be out of the race soon, along with Bachmann.

There is one candidate whose experience is very solid and he has carried himself quite well in the debates, but for some reason or another has not gained the attention and support of the media or the conservative base, which is becoming puzzling for us because he seems like one of the more solid candidates. That candidate is Jon Huntsman. He gets much less speaking time during the debates than most of the other candidates and you rarely hear his named tossed around seriously as having a real chance. But why is this? Let's look at Jon Huntsman's experience:

- Executive of the Huntsman Corporation (a chemical company)
- United States Trade Representative
- Ambassador to China
- Governor of Utah



Huntsman is arguably the most moderate of all the candidates, which is probably why there's not much excitement behind him within the conservative base. He's somewhat like Romney, except with Huntsman we get the feeling he stands by his positions, whereas with Romney he has a history of flipflopping on almost every issue (abortion and universal healthcare, for example).

We're making a prediction here: Newt Gingrich will be in the lead for the next few weeks and it'll seem like he'll end up being the guy. But that will also come with increased scrutiny and people will begin to reconsider if he's really the one they want as the Republican nominee. When the excitement over Gingrich begins to fade and people look back over the list of candidates to make sure there wasn't anyone better that was overlooked, they'll discover Huntsman - and it'll be just in time for the primary elections.

Herman Cain is Done

Well it's official: Herman Cain is finished. He no longer has a chance to become president in this upcoming election. If by some miracle he ends up winning the Republican primary, there is no way he will be able to beat Obama. Either way he's toast. And it has nothing to do with the sexual harassment allegations. We gave Herman Cain the benefit of the doubt and still do. More details may come out later of course that indicate he did sexual harass those women, but at this point in time we simply don't have any evidence that he did. No, the reason Herman Cain is toast is this "performance" during an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Watch below:



This is just embarrassing, and it's too terrible to justify. There's no way to spin this one at all. How could anybody be so clueless as to what's going on in the world? Sure, when you run for President of the United States, you have to quickly learn a ton of information - everything from international politics to tax policy to more local issues that are going on in the towns that you visit while campaigning. But at this point in the campaign he should be up to date with what happened in Libya.

And let's say we give him a pass for not knowing too much about Libya or the Middle East. Let's look at how he handled it. A third grader could have done a better job answering the question. "Uhmm Libya...ok let's see....uhh....Obama...was.....for...the opposition..right? Ok...uh" He's asking the interviewer to help him answer the question, and that's pathetic. And you gotta love how he shuffles his water bottle back and fourth on the table like he's some kind of genius deep in thought. Nope, not fooling anybody. That may have worked during corporate board meetings but it definitely didn't help here.

Once he's at the understanding that Obama was for the uprising and the ousting of Gaddafi, he then begins to offer his criticism on the way Obama handled it:

"I don't agree with the way he handled it for the following reasons:

uhmmmm.....nope that's a different one. Uhm... let's see..I gotta go back and see..uhh...I got all this stuff twirling around in my head...uh...specifically what are you asking me what do I agree or not disagree with Obama on?"

That's just terrible man. Just admit that you don't know. People already know that you don't know much about what's going on in the middle east, we get it, it's not your specialty. But to try to pretend that you do and fail so miserably is just embarrassing. And to attempt to criticize Obama for the way he handled it when you don't even know the situation or how Obama handled it? How are you going to criticize something before you even know the details of what happened? For all Cain knows, Obama's strategy on Libya was genius.

For the record: we here at People Liking People would prefer not to get involved at all with Libya or any other of these uprisings and civil wars. Do we not have enough of our own issues to deal with? And that's the real answer Cain should have given. Why are we talking about Libya when we have so many problems of our own? Let's take care of our own first, Libyans will find a way to work things out on their own.

And that reveals another problem with Cain. He's afraid to give his real opinion on international politics. Now maybe he isn't the brightest guy in the world when it comes to the middle east, but he's gotta have some kind of views one way or the other. But instead of giving his honest view, he's sitting there trying to remember what the establishment Republican positions are. He doesn't want to say anything that's out of line with the status quo, because he knows if he gets called out on it and asked to back it up, he's in trouble. So he's trying to play it safe and give the standard answers. Israel? Support it 100%. Libya? whatever Obama did, that was wrong. He's afraid to take real unique positions. He may have a "bold" 999 plan but with everything else he's merely going along with the Republican talking points and is afraid to take a stand or real position on anything.

We wanted to see Cain do well, in the beginning he really seemed to shine above the other candidates. But the more his campaign continued the worse it got. In the beginning of his campaign when he was asked international questions, he would say things like "I do not know the best way to resolve that because I need to look over the facts". Back then we thought it was kind of a weak answer but at least it was honest and we understood. Now he's trying to fudge his way through answering those types of questions and it just doesn't work.

Herman Cain and Rick Perry both have their own "Oh shit" moment

The Republican primary campaign has been going on for a few months now but it's really starting to get entertaining lately and is making the 2008 campaign look like a snooze fest. Remember John McCain? Rudy Guiliani? God it's no wonder Obama won. Of course, it didn't help that the majority of the country was fed up after 8 years of Bush but that's another story. Anyways...one of the most entertaining parts about this whole process is watching these politicians squirm as they're asked questions on things they know nothing about - and they have to pretend to be very knowledgeable on the subject. Most of the time they can pull it off pretty well. One of the things that works in their favor is that half the population doesn't understand the issues so people barely notice when politicians are bullshitting their way through answers. For all Joe Sixpack knows, the politician is offering some genius proposal. But every now and then their knowledge is so lacking that they can't even pretend to bullshit their way through, which is what happened to Herman Cain a few days ago during a debate between Cain and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, watch below:



And then tonight during the debate on CNBC came what is probably the most embarrassing moment yet during the campaign: Rick Perry completely forgot what he was going to say mid-speech, and ends it by saying "oops". Ouch.

"I will tell you, it is three agencies of government when I get there that are gone: Commerce, Education, and — what's the third one there? Let's see..."

Notice how after saying "oops" he immediately looks over to his right, presumably at Mitt Romney.

Herman Cain's Campaign Ads: WTF?

Well we here at People Liking People really thought it was starting to look like Herman Cain was going to become the Republican nominee. He's the most likable candidate, he offers clear solutions, and he isn't a career politician. We were really rooting for the guy. But we've checked out a couple of the ads he's recently put out and it's got us scratching our heads. Check this out:



Can anybody make sense of this? I think they had a point somewhere in there but I'm not sure what it has to do with Herman Cain. I think what makes it so bad is how poorly produced and acted it is. They're definitely going to need to do better than this if they're going to go against Obama in the general election. This is second rate material. Did the Herman Cain camp just hire the people who worked on Ron Paul's ads last campaign?



"He's catchin' on, I'm tellin ya"

Wow...I forgot how bad that was.

Anyways...Mr Cain we suggest you remove this ad as soon as possible and hopefully everyone will just forget it ever happened.

Jack Conway for US Senate: What were they thinking?

We've been following the Senate races here at People Liking People and there's one in particular that has us scratching our heads. Kentucky has presented us with a great opportunity to gain a democratic seat in the Senate, as the Republican incumbent Jim Bunning decided not to run for re-election due to his unfavorable chances to win. It's pretty typical that unless someone is retiring due to old age or moving on to another position, the incumbent runs for re-election. In most cases it's an easy win, you've already earned the trust of the voters before and you're able to pull in a lot of support from all the relationships you've built while in office. So when someone decides not to run again because they're afraid of losing, it's a strong sign that they royally screwed up and the other party should have a really good chance to use this to their advantage.

Unfortunately this probably won't be the case for the election in KY because for some reason unbeknownst to us, the state democratic party propped up this absolute clown by the name of Jack Conway. This should be the easiest win in the history of Senatorial campaigns because the Republican candidate is Rand Paul, a guy who's never held a political position in his life and has only got as far has he has riding on his dad's name. Jack Conway is currently the attorney general of Kentucky and we're not quite sure how much pole he had to suck to get where he is today but unfortunately that's just not going to cut it when you're running for Senate in KY. This isn't San Fransisco we're talking about here.

The issues of the day are unemployment, the economy, health care, and our war activity in Iraq and Afghanistan. What Jack Conway's big issue? Combatting drug use. I swear every time we turn on a debate with Jack Conway and Rand Paul or see him being interviewed, he constantly brings up how we need to crack down on drug use. What is this, the mid 1980s? Right now we're at a time where support for the legalization of marijuana is higher than it's ever been before and everyone has realized that the drug war has been a complete failure, and this jackass decides that's going to be his big platform?

What were they thinking letting this ass clown run for Senate? Really guys? This is the best you could come up with, in a crucial race where there was a real possibility that we could switch the seat from R to D? Most people wouldn't trust Jack Conway to get their order right at McDonalds, let alone be elected a U.S. Senator. This was a golden opportunity and we completely dropped the ball. I wouldn't be surprised if whoever encouraged Jack Conway to run and made him think he actually had a chance is actually a republican infiltrator. Please get your shit together guys, this douche needs to be completely kicked out of the party.

By the way, is it just us or does this guy Conway give anyone else that creepy Ted Haggard type vibe?