BloggeRhythms

Not much of interest in the news today, aside from the president’s latest push for raising taxes on the “rich.” His address on Tuesday night will call for $320 billion in tax increases over 10 years. 

 

According to Fox News.com “The centerpiece of the president's tax proposal is an increase in the capital gains and dividends rate on couples making more than $500,000 per year to 28 percent. The top capital gains rate has already been raised from 15 percent to 23.8 percent during Obama's presidency.”

 

He also wants to “close what the administration is calling the "Trust Fund Loophole," a change that would require estates to pay capital gains taxes on securities at the time they're inherited. Officials said the overwhelming impact of the change would be on the top 1 percent of income earners.”

 

Naturally, Republicans are opposed to the measures, which should add fuel to the pending fires of disagreement between the factions in the coming weeks and months ahead. Primarily because, if economic stimulation is really the president's goal, the proposed changes do absolutely nothing toward that objective while inhibiting investment as well. 

 

Then, there's an update on the issue regarding this year’s Academy Awards. 

 

According to myway.com as reported by the AP, via Drudge: “Responding for the first time to the firestorm of criticism over the lack of diversity in this year's Oscar nominations, film academy president Cheryl Boone Isaacs says the all-white acting slate inspires her to accelerate the academy's push to be more inclusive. She also hopes the film industry as a whole will continue to strive for greater diversity.”

 

This year, all 20 of this year's acting contenders are white and there are no women in the directing or writing categories. 

 

One of the critics, the Asian Pacific American Media Coalition “issued a statement Friday saying the nominations balloting "obviously reflects a lack of diversity in Oscar voters as well as in films generally." And that, “the responsibility for diversity in film should be industry-wide. It behooves Hollywood — as an economic imperative, if not a moral one — to begin more closely reflecting the changing face of America."

 

What’s most interesting about the issue, though, is that Ms Isaacs is: “The first black president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and obviously, female as well.

 

Furthermore, as Ms Isaacs explained, “Each branch comes up with its own criteria for excellence and each nominates its colleagues, all voting is individual and confidential.” Which means that, “only directors can suggest best director nominees and only actors can nominate actors. But the entire academy membership can submit suggestions for best picture.”

 

The Academy itself has 7000 members and, “There is not one central body or group of people that sit around the table and come up with nominations. It really is a peer-to-peer process."

 

Therefore, looking at the composition of voting rules and a sizable, independent membership, instead of a situation based on racial discrimination or conspiratorial motivation as suggested by rabble-rousers like Al Sharpton, isn’t it perfectly reasonable to assume that the reason this year’s nominees won was because they deserved to on merit alone.

 

That's it for today folks.

 

Adios