Month: November 2006

Marchex Update

Marchex, Inc. (NASDAQ: MCHX): 1:30 PM NYC time, November 29th: It’s been a while since I mentioned Marchex, but at the bottom of a 2-year trading range, I figured I’d take a look. The company owns one of the Internet’s largest domain name portfolios and is monetizing them through development and paid parking programs. The stock is heavily shorted and some of the shorts and friends of shorts are nosing around for dirt (see here and here). The pop you see a couple of weeks ago (two candles ago on the above weekly chart) was driven…



Another $127-$150 Billion for Bush’s War

To put Bush’s request into perspective, lets compare it to the cost of child immunization in developing countries (because Bush openly states how much he cares about children). In 2004, UNICEF supplied vaccines for 40% of the world’s children, or 2.8 billion doses, for $374 million, or 0.25% to 0.29% of Bush’s war money request. To put it another way, for this *one* supplemental request — and that’s one of many — UNICEF could afford to supply vaccines to 100% of the world’s children for up to the next 160 years. All I can say is Wow, George, for a guy who is against abortion and supposedly for protecting children you sure do have a lot of blood on your hands. Nice religion you got there, buddy. Click through to read the LA Times article.


Cubes Update – Follow The Falling Dollar

The Cubes (NASDAQ: QQQQ): 5:10 AM NYC time, November 28th: Just a quick update on this first trading day after the Thanksgiving holiday weekend. As you can see, market posted a distribution day, showing the largest drop and largest volume spikes in months. It’s still above the key 20-day EMA, which has been a great buying spot since August. On the “news” and fundamental side, we have…


Finally a TV Network Calls It What It Is: A Civil War

From the NBC Nightly News anchorman’s (Brian Williams) blog: 2006/11/25: “[O]ur decision today (after much consultation over the weekend with our colleagues, fellow journalists, historians, analysts and members of the military, both present and former) to describe the fighting in Iraq as a Civil War. We believe it is a more accurate reflection of what is happening there, and there was a fair amount of reaction to the decision today… even though a number of news organizations have already made a similar call.”

Click through to read the LA Times article:


Article: No One to Lose To

From the November 25, 2006, NYT:

No One to Lose To

After the Thanksgiving Day Massacre of Shiites by Sunnis, President Bush should go on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News and give an interview headlined: “If I did it, here’s how the civil war in Iraq happened.”

He could describe, hypothetically, a series of naïve, arrogant and self-defeating blunders, including his team’s failure to comprehend that in the Arab world, revenge and religious zealotry can be stronger compulsions than democracy and prosperity.

But W. is not yet able to view his actions in subjunctive terms, much less objective ones. Bush family retainers are working to deprogram him, but the president is loath to strip off his delusions of adequacy.


Article: Bring back Saddam Hussein?

I’ve wondered if the people of Iraq — and the rest of the world for that matter — would have been better off if Bush had never lied his way into the invasion. What would the world look like? Saddam Hussein would likely still be in power, hundreds of thousands of murdered Iraqis would still be alive, the Abu Grab and Guantanamo scandals would have never happened, thousands of “coalition” kids would be alive, billions of dollars would not have been funneled to rich people in the political, military, industrial, war and oil industries, the people who carry out the next grand-scale 9/11-style attack might never have been recruited, etc. But since you can’t go back in time, unless you’re Superman, I’ve turned my curiosity forward, asking myself what would happen if Saddam was put back in power. Can someone explain why that is a worse idea than all the others idiotic ideas out there? I know Saddam is a tyrant… He’s also a tyrant that kept the country out of civil war. And remember, we would not even be having this conversation if it wasn’t for some idiot from Texas named Bush. Thanks, George, you a-hole. See continuation of this posting for the LA Times editorial: