It seems that anger has swept across America as Americans thought that their president had disgracefully bowed to another statesman (in this case, the Saudi king). Well, anybody can have his/her own opinion, so I have mine. I came from Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, so I know very well how Indonesian Muslims greet each other. Yes, that's right, they bow slightly before shaking hands. Obama, who spent a few years as a child in Indonesia, should know this and probably thought he was being polite and sensitive by doing so. If this was indeed Obama's original intention, then such backlash is unfortunate at best.

I had an epiphany earlier today, that I finally understand who the "real" victims of capitalism are, at least from my point of view. With recession getting worse and worse each day, I can't help but start rethinking about myself and others around me. First of all, my own job is not secure and my company is near bankruptcy. Then a few days ago I had to summon a technician to the office (many workers were put off work for the whole month); he was thankful for being called back to work, said it felt good to know he was still needed. Then earlier I went to DHL to pick up a package that was not delivered on time. I was ready to go mad as hell, then after the lady told me DHL had cut down Bay Area coverage from 11 to 2 facilities and many workers had been laid off therefore things got messy, I became quiet. I was still really angry, but I guess my pity overwhelmed the anger.

And that's when I had the epiphany: the "real" victims of capitalism are the working class. Let me explain why. The extraordinary rise of the working class in the last century was very much attributed to a capitalism. It had created tremendous amount of wealth and increased the living standards of many, many people. However, at the same time, a tiny group of people rose to become the wealthiest, and another tiny group of people disappeared into the oblivions of poverty.

Boom time or bust time, the wealthiest often thrive. They might be affected slightly, but they have plenty of rooms to adjust. Similarly, boom time or bust time, the poorest and the homeless mainly remain the same. Besides, the poorest people in the US, if compared to their counterparts in other parts of the world, are in fact not that poor at all (they at least receive government support; those in Asia are left rotten on the streets). Anyway, ironically, the poorest are probably more hurt by boom time than bust time (because of inflation), but at the same time they have more opportunities to make better living. During a recession, these poorest people can't go any poorer, can they?

The working class, however, are different. They have to ride with the economy. When it's up, they're up; when it's down, they're down. It's especially dire for those whose whole living rest upon a company. Fortunately, here in the US, the government can afford to provide some kind of alleviation, for example unemployment benefits. Nevertheless, the working class are always the first to feel the effect of a recession. Since business cycle is inherent to capitalism, there is no way to avoid cyclical recession, and hence, for their entire lives, the working class have to face recession at least once or twice. Some may make it through, some may not and have to start over again. It's just a part of life, right?

With that said, if you want to live in comfort and ignorance in a capitalistic society, it's better to be either freakin' rich, or to be freakin' poor, because either way, you couldn't care less about what's happening around you or with the economy. These people are within the comfort zone of capitalism, whereas the working class aren't.

Iraqi officials had said the Iraqi journalist who threw shoes at Bush asked for leniency and regretted his 'ugly' actions.

The conspiracy theorist in me says..."YEAH RIGHT...!". In the profession of journalism, neutrality usually comes with it, so for a journalist to react in such anger, he/she must have an extremely strong conviction about an issue. The only other reason would be he/she's high on coke or some demons had gotten into his/her head. Anyway, this Iraqi journalist must have been really disgusted by Bush and his foreign policy. I mean, who in Iraq isn't? But this guy got the balls to do the unbelievable: throwing shoes at an American president. Damn!

So now he's apologetic? Oh c'mon. Well, OK, no one knows, he probably is. But is it possible that he had done so because...he was tortured, or threatened? Or is it possible that, in order to save face, Iraqi officials had fabricated his apology? I found his apology hard to believe, because if he really had a strong conviction and anger towards Bush, he would refuse to apologize, no matter what. Why should he? With increasing support from the public, he has nothing to fear. Besides, if Iraq really is turning democratic, the shoe-throwing act would simply be a form of freedom of expression/opinion (Bush said it himself). In a free world, the journalist has his rights and he knows it. So does his apology come from his sudden conscience? Maybe. Or does his apology come from torture/threat/blackmail? Hm...