Monday, November 24, 2008

Economics

The Citi bailout and all of the blah blah blah around it has me just as bewildered as ever. Those who think this is just about saving the stock market are outraged. Those who think this is about saving the economy are cautiously onboard. I'm still angry but I'm also concerned... and I am starting to agree with those who are seeing a bigger picture.

The market was not the ultimate economic indicator when things were looking bullish and it's not the ultimate indicator now. We've got bigger problems.

The last few grafs from Nouriel Roubini's latest pessimistic piece:

Thus, dealing with this deadly combination of deflation, liquidity traps, debt deflation and defaults that I termed as global stag-deflation may be the biggest challenge that U.S. and global policy makers may have to face in 2009. It will not be easy to prevent this toxic vicious circle unless the process of recapitalizing financial institutions via temporary partial nationalization of them is accelerated and performed in a consistent and credible way; unless such actions are combined with massive fiscal stimulus to prop up aggregate demand while private demand is in free fall; unless the debt burden of insolvent households is sharply reduced via outright large debt reduction (not cosmetic and ineffective “loan modifications”); and unless even more unorthodox and radical monetary policy actions are undertaken to prevent pervasive deflation from setting in.

Thus, while the Fed may pursue radical, “crazy” and “crazier” monetary policy actions the true policy responses to the risk of deflation may lie elsewhere: when monetary policy is in a liquidity trap a properly-targeted fiscal stimulus is more appropriate and effective; cleaning up the financial system and properly recapitalize it is necessary; and debt deflation and debt overhang problems are more directly and properly resolved through debt restructuring and debt reduction than by trying to reduce the real value of such liabilities via higher inflation.

Civic Duty

Check out this civics quiz. Judging by the report card (above), some of us could use a little more studying!

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Deep Thoughts

It's interesting that those who are now out of power in Washington are all suddenly excited about the idea of bi-partisanship.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Scary

Watching a Fox News "discussion" about the current financial markets mess and I am appalled to realize that the passionately arguing host understands less about it than I do.

Not sure why this embarrassment is being aired.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

ReligiFREAKS

Does religion reduce already "fragile" minds down to quivering blobs of gelatinous goo?

We report, you decide.

From Newsweek (yes, Newsweek!):
On Nov. 5, Todd Strandberg was at his desk, fielding E-mails from around the world. As the editor and founder of RaptureReady.com, his job is to track current events and link them to biblical prophecy in hopes of maintaining his status as "the eBay of prophecy," the best source online for predictions and calculations concerning the end of the world. Already Barack Obama had drawn the attention of apocalypse watchers after an anonymous e-mail circulated among conservative Christians in October implying that he was the Antichrist. Former "Saturday Night Live" ingénue Victoria Jackson fueled the fire when, according to news reports, she wrote on her Web site that Obama "bears traits that resemble the anti-Christ." Now Strandberg was receiving up-to-the-minute news from his constituents in Illinois. One of the winning lottery numbers in the president-elect's home state was 666— which, as everyone knows, is the sign of the Beast (also known as the Antichrist). "It is very eerie, and I take it for a sign as to who he really is," wrote one of Strandberg's correspondents.
There's more but you can read it for yourself. God save us from these idiots... and that's all I'm sayin'.

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Recommended Reading

Mom and I were talking the other night about how difficult it's been to try to piece together exactly what caused the economy to implode, what the options are for containing the damage, and how to assess the downstream impact for implementing any of those options. As I told her, it's nearly impossible for me -- as a non-finance industry person -- to come up with any kind of opinion on the matter. I am just kind of emotionally stuck between incredulity and outrage.

Anyway, this morning I read an article called The End of Wall Street's Boom. Written by the author of Liar's Poker, Michael Lewis, it's possibly the most riveting tale I've read on the topic to date. It doesn't provide any insight on what can be done to fix the current crisis but it sure illuminates all of the moving parts.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

State And Local Gloom

The downstream effect I've been worried about...
Mayor Daley said Wednesday he’s been warned by a parade of corporate CEOs that a blizzard of job cuts are about to bury the souring Chicago economy.

“Huge layoffs are coming in November and December. And next year, there’s going to be [even more] huge layoffs. All the corporation CEOs have come in to tell me. That’s just the beginning. It’s not their end result,” Daley told reporters after a City Council meeting.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Maybe my mom will let me out of the basement if I promise to clean my room and get better grades.
In her first national television interview since the election, Gov. Sarah Palin delivered a lengthy post-mortem of the presidential campaign, criticizing the media, her campaign handlers and the aides who anonymously leaked damaging characterizations about her to the press.

...

Ms. Palin directed most of her media criticism at liberal bloggers, whom she twice called, “those bloggers in their parents’ basement just talkin’ garbage.”
It must be a comfort to her to believe that. Whatevs.

Sunday, November 09, 2008

Stimulating The Economy

Nouriel Roubini talks stimulus, via Bloomberg:

Oct. 27 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government should enact an economic stimulus package of between $400 billion and $500 billion before the end of the Bush administration in January, New York University professor Nouriel Roubini said.

Roubini, who predicted the current financial crisis in 2006, said the economy risks falling into “a self-fulfilling animal spirit recession that is more severe than otherwise” because of the collapse of credit markets and weak consumer and corporate spending.

“The only way to increase aggregate demand is going to be through” government spending on roads, bridges and other infrastructure, Roubini said at a Bloomberg conference in New York. “We need a huge plan, $300 billion is not going to be enough. I think we’re going to need a plan of $400 billion to $500 billion.”

U.S. Treasury officials and other policy makers are grappling with financial turmoil that has pushed down the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index by 42 percent this year, its worst annual retreat since 1931.

“If we don’t do that fiscal stimulus today, three months from now, six months from now the collapse of the real economy is going to be so severe that anything we’re doing today to recapitalize the financial system is going to be undone,” Roubini said.

I am alarmed by the degree of alarm on Roubini's website these days. Check this out:

The good news is that America has just elected a president with leadership, vision and great intelligence. President Obama will also choose a first rate economic team: individuals such as Larry Summers and Tim Geithner would be excellent choices for the position of Treasury Secretary. Obama and his team are fully aware of the very difficult economic and financial challenges that the country is facing and will work hard to resolve them.

However, Obama will inherit and economic and financial mess worse than anything the U.S. has faced in decades: the most severe recession in 50 years; the worst financial and banking crisis since the Great Depression; a ballooning fiscal deficit that may be as high as a trillion dollar in 2009 and 2010; a huge current account deficit; a financial system that is in a severe crisis and where deleveraging is still occurring at a very rapid pace, thus causing a worsening of the credit crunch; a household sector where millions of households are insolvent, into negative equity territory and on the verge of losing their homes; a serious risk of deflation as the slack in goods, labor and commodity markets becomes deeper; the risk that we will end in a deflationary liquidity trap as the Fed is fast approaching the zero-bound constraint for the Fed Funds rate; the risk of a severe debt deflation as the real value of nominal liabilities will rise given price deflation while the value of financial assets is still plunging. This is the bitter gift that the Bush administration has bequeathed to Obama and the Democrats.

Given this dismal background, let us consider next in more detail the macro outlook for the U.S. and global economy and its implications for financial markets…

The latest U.S. macro news have been worse than awful: collapsing retail sales and consumption, free fall in capex spending by the corporate sector, sharply falling industrial production, sharply falling employment, housing still in free fall and home prices bound to fall 40% from the peak, collapsing auto sales, forward looking indicators of business (ISM) and consumer confidence dropping to multi-decade lows, sharp surge in corporate defaults, a wrecked banking system and financial system that will have to be partially nationalized. This is the most daunting set of economic and financial challenges that any president has had to face since FDR during the Great Depression. And in the meanwhile in the rest of the world things are as bad: a severe recession in Europe, Japan and other advanced economies; the risk of a hard landing in many emerging markets including China; an almost certain global recession; a severe global financial crisis.

So let us not delude each other: the U.S. and global recession train has left the station; the financial and banking crisis train has left the station. This will be a long and severe and protracted two year recession regardless of the best intentions and good policies of the new U.S. administration. It will take a lot of hard work and sound policies to clean up this mess and reduce the length and severity of this economic contraction.

There's more but I'll let you read it for yourself. It's all very ungood.

Digging In Their Heels


Check out this map... it shows counties that voted more Republican in 2008 than they did in 2004.

Draw your own conclusions.

Saturday, November 08, 2008

Country First

In what must be one of the most interesting sideshows of the 2008 election, Joe Lieberman -- part time Democrat -- is now weighing his options between the Republican and Democratic parties.

Now, before any Lieb fans go off on an immediate tangent about how he's a great guy who was abused by the Democrats, let's just step back for a minute and ponder the situation because it really is kind of fascinating.

Lieberman, an old and powerful member of the US Senate, has been on a rather tumultuous ride over the past decade. In 2000 he was Gore's VP pick against Bush/Cheney, where he was brutally ridiculed by Republicans (as is their way) both before and after being defeated by them. Remember "Sore Loserman"? Ah yes, I'm sure he was feeling the love.

In 2002, Lieberman became an unquestioning supporter of the Iraq invasion. I say unquestioning because, despite the emerging cracks in Bush's case, and despite the horrific mismanagement of the war post-invasion, Lieberman continued to be Bush's number one fan. Even after John McCain himself finally had the balls to say to Bush, essentially, "What the hell are you doing?" Lieberman continued with his faithful, unflinching support. None of this endeared Lieb to the anti-war faction of the base, all of whom began working overtime to oust Lieberman from the Senate.

Lieberman was forced to defend his seat in a tough primary fight against base-supported Ned Lamont in 2006. His Senate peers were a bit torn on who to back... Lieberman had been outspoken in bucking his party regarding Iraq but he still voted with the Dems on most other issues. In the end they mainly stayed silent, vowing to support whichever candidate -- Lieberman or Lamont -- emerged the victor.

Here's where it gets interesting.

What's probably not known to people who don't follow politics closely is that Lieberman asked for Obama's help in defending his seat against Lamont and received it. By 2006 Obama was already becoming somewhat popular among Dems on the national scene with his youthful charisma. At Lieberman's personal request, Obama lent him whatever influence he had by traveling to Connecticut to actively campaign with Lieberman, including a turn as keynote speaker at the annual Jefferson Jackson Bailey Dinner:

Lieberman, Connecticut's junior senator, is under fire from some liberal Democrats for his support of the Iraq War. He was key in booking Obama, who routinely receives more than 200 speaking invitations each week.

Some at Thursday's dinner said that while they were pleased with Lieberman's success in bringing Obama to Connecticut, they still consider Lieberman uncomfortably tolerant of the Bush administration.

Obama wasted little time getting to that point, calling it the "elephant in the room" but praising Lieberman's intellect, character and qualifications.

"The fact of the matter is, I know some in the party have differences with Joe. I'm going to go ahead and say it," Obama told the 1,700-plus party members who gathered in a ballroom at the Connecticut Convention Center for the $175-per-head fundraiser.

"I am absolutely certain Connecticut is going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the U.S. Senate so he can continue to serve on our behalf," he said.

It was a generous thing to do and it cost Obama some support among the base. Lieberman lost the primary but eventually won the Connecticut general by running as an "Independent Democrat".

Lieberman's idea of paying Obama back, of course, was to not only support McCain in 2008 but to go well out of his way to undermine Obama.

When Lieberman announced he was supporting McCain and planned to speak at the Republican Convention, Democrats asked one thing: Don't publicly attack Obama. Lieberman agreed and then... well... completely disregarded.

"When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle, when Barack Obama was voting to cut off funding for our troops on the battlefield," Lieberman said, "John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion and support the surge (in Iraq), and because of that, today our troops are at last beginning to come home, not in failure but in honor."

Further, Obama "has not reached across party lines to accomplish anything significant," Lieberman added.

Red meat for the Republican base, who gobbled it up with cheers and adoration. After the convention, of course, the Lieb attacks on Obama continued. Not only did Lieberman campaign for McCain, he actively campaigned against Obama. Taking incredible liberties with the truth, such as the "cut off funding" statement above, added insult to injury.

So now Lieberman's guy has lost and Lieberman will most certainly not be electable in Connecticut as a Democrat (Independent or otherwise) anytime during the next 100 years. What's a guy to do? Why, crawl back to the Dems with his tail between his legs, of course.

I thought Lieberman's betrayal of Obama was stunning but if Lieb felt so strongly about McCain that he was willing to throw away the fruits of a long political career for it, you've got to at least give the guy some credit, right? I figured after the election Lieberman would ride out the end of his term and then disappear to "spend more time with his family", quietly paying the price for his principled stand.

As John Belushi used to say, "But noooooooooooooooo..."

What's happened instead is that Lieberman expects to be restored as a full fledged member of the Democratic caucus and retain his two coveted chairmanships. Fortunately Reid had the good sense to put the brakes on that... and while Lieberman will be allowed to caucus with the Dems, he'll be stripped of his chairmanships. I think that's a fair price for party betrayal. The party giveth, the party taketh away.

Lieberman, however, is apparently more politician at heart than principled statesman. He's put out feelers to the Republicans to see what they're willing to offer. If they'll give him a chairmanship, he's willing to flip. So far the Repubs are not biting... they'd love him to come vote with them but they're not willing to fork over a committee. It will be quite interesting to see what happens next.

I have no sympathy for the man at this point.... for me it's all just a bit of entertaining dramz. I kind of hope Lieberman does flip. Republicans might love him now but that's only because he's stabbing his own party in the back. Once he's a Republican who frequently votes like a liberal, they're going to lose that love in a hurry. Quite frankly, I couldn't think of a better punishment for him than being despised by both parties.

Thursday, November 06, 2008

Palin Meets The Bus

Is Palin getting thrown under the bus by her own campaign? I have no idea... and I don't really care.

It's possible that some of the stories about her are exaggerated but her lack of basic knowledge is irrefutable (unless you are so deeply in denial as to disavow evidentiary fact). Argue the nuance all you want but the woman was simply unqualified to be anywhere near the presidency. I'll assert my Midwest common sense here: If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and talks like a duck... it's a god damned duck.

Palin may be cool, hip, sexy, fiesty, etc, but nobody should have to be tutoring a 44 year old vice presidential candidate on basic, elementary facts.

You like her? Great. Send her a letter of support. Put her picture on your wall. Aspire to be like her. Invite her for a beer. Move to Alaska. Join the AIP. Whatever. Do NOT put her a heart beat away from Oval Office.

I am astonished by how many wingers are online and on TV demanding that we believe she's the future of the Republican party, indignant that anyone would dare point out the obvious flaws of her candidacy. You know what? I really do hope she is the future of the Republican party. I believe she represents about 36% of the population perfectly -- a guaranteed minority. The remaining 64% of us will chart our own course.

In the meantime, Fox has more scoop as O'Reilly drills Carl Cameron:

What Might Have Been For McCain

I haven't settled down enough yet to write about what an Obama presidency means to me (and it means quite a lot) but I do want to say this: I'm surprised by how much I've been thinking about "what might have been" with regard to John McCain.

Surely I've written before about my admiration of McCain. In 2000 I thought he was a far more worthy candidate than Bush and, if not for the political dirty tricks of Rove, I could very well be saying good bye to the eight year reign of a president I voted for twice.

McCain ran a straight campaign in the 2000 primaries... he was honest about who he was and what he stood for and he didn't grovel for the christianist vote. He had that mavericky image for bucking his own party, which didn't endear him to the elders but did represent a sort of independent thinking. The press loved him for all of these things because he made good story but the GOP itself, alas, was not a fan. He was one small step away from being regarded with all of the current contempt of a Jeffords or a Chafee.

Fast forward to 2008.

This time McCain knew he needed to get the fundies onboard in the primaries, especially running against such christianist favs like Huckabee and Brownback. He repositioned himself on social issues (God, gays, and abortion), reversals he attributed to a recent "epiphany" (the epiphany being a decision to do whatever it took to win, I assume). He openly courted christianist bullies leaders like James Dobson.

McCain managed to slip through the primaries under the radar, basically outlasting the other candidates whose passionate support was scattered widely among the base (i.e. a Thompson supporter was definitely not a Brownback supporter, and a Romney supporter was definitely not a Huckabee supporter). McCain exited the primaries relatively unscathed... and then for months he had a front row seat to watch the top Dem candidates land punches on each other. It should have been a good start to the general election.

The problem for McCain was that he still had the same basic reputation he had in 2000. The party elders didn't trust him and the base didn't like him. They liked him better than Obama or Hillary, of course, but they didn't like him enough to volunteer their time and money. Facing an enthusiasm gap, and without the money and volunteers that come with supporter enthusiasm, McCain was looking a bit like a lame horse out of the gate.

Enter Sarah Palin and the great Hail Mary. Seeing opportunity in the disenchanted PUMA crowd, McCain made a few feeble attempts to win them over. Fixating on the idea of using a running mate to generate the enthusiasm he couldn't achieve on his own, handpicked Neocon apprentice Sarah Palin must have seemed perfect for the job: young, female, sassy, sexy, impeccable christianist creds, "outsider", and best of all, backed by the full faith and credit of one Mr William Kristol.

And there, I think, is where McCain did himself the most damage. In theory Palin was a good play but in practice she was a disaster.

Palin delighted Republicans at the convention with her ability to deliver blistering Democratic mockery. It seemed like the entire GOP had a collective 2004 flashback orgasm. The christianist wingers were particularly delighted by the choice since, despite McCain's best attempts to portray himself as born-again, the fundies never quite believed him. And perhaps most importantly, in a year when Democrats were openly passionate about both of their top candidates, the Republicans were desperate for a little O-factor of their own. McPalin was suddenly the belle of the ball.

And then the rain came.

Despite grumblings to the contrary, there was no "gotcha" journalism in exposing Palin's intellectual and educational weakness. The press was doing what the press is supposed to do, they were vetting an unknown candidate. People seem to have forgetten that the press (and Hillary/McCain operatives) had vetted Obama thoroughly over 23 months... he did countless interviews and press events, including EIGHT interviews on Fox alone. You cannot run for public office and not let people poke at you... it's how we the public find out what you're made of. Shame on Palin supporters to insist we should buy a carefully crafted image. The simple truth is that you can't hide ignorance, not when it's in plain view of an entire nation. Spunky Sarah Palin might have gotten by on novelty alone in more prosperous times but with two active wars and an economy on the brink of implosion, serious conservatives were in no mood to humor her.

The selection of Sarah Palin also meant that McCain immediately lost his most compelling argument against Obama: experience. McCain might have pulled off the election if he'd been able to comparatively hammer away at Obama's inexperience instead of defending Palin's ("I can see Russia from my house!"). A lost opportunity.

Would McCain have fared better with someone unquestionably qualified like, say, Kay Bailey Hutchison? Maybe. I think McCain was in an awfully difficult situation here, though... Hutchison would have carried tremendous appeal among women, moderates, and independents --however -- McCain was still in dire need of getting that base out there working for him. In the end, he chose to move right instead of center. Palin did what she was meant to do (excite the base) but the numbers show that she cost him the center and, as goes the center, so goes the election. She's the Howard Dean of the GOP.

Another course changer was, I think, the economy. In what was perhaps the most freakish coincidence I have ever seen, McCain started his "the fundamentals of the economy are strong" campaign at almost the precise moment the economy started to implode. Clearly McCain's strategy was to begin neutralizing Obama's natural strength, the economy, by making it a non-issue. Moving the discussion away from economics and onto foreign policy, his particular strength, would have given him an advantage. No sooner did he begin this play, though, on the exact day he dispatched adviser Donald Luskin to publicly ridicule the Dems in the Washington Post for their economic pessimism, the financial meltdown launched itself into public awareness. Timing is everything, they say.

A frustrated McCain began injecting radical negativity into the campaign, hurling the kind of crazy rhetoric and invective that quickly becomes a story unto itself. I'm not sure McCain intended it to get as crazy as it got -- the press kept insisting it couldn't be McCain's idea, that McCain himself was "not like that". That may be true, for by all accounts McCain refused to enter Pastor Wright territory until the last few desperate days of the election. As I think about the way it rolled out I'm almost convinced McCain lost control of his message to the echo chamber that is Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and the Drudge Report. Instead of helping McCain, they simply drowned him out.

Regardless of what McCain did or didn't intend in impugning the Americaness of Obama, I think the whole thing started to wear pretty thin on a public more focused on their 401Ks.

In this it seems McCain fell into the same death trap Kerry fell into in 2004, which is to say he made his theme about running against someone instead of running for something. While appeasing the base (Bush bashing, anyone?), it does almost nothing to attract the middle and actually starts to sound whiny and melodramatic and slanderous after a while. By the time McCain found a real message -- accidentally, from Joe the Plumber -- it was a day late and several dollars short.

Given the fact that he was running against a heretofore unknown black man, I think McCain might have stood a pretty good chance of winning if he'd made a more serious running mate selection and found a more consistent, positive message.

As an aside...
I'm the last one to give the Republican party any advice but I think they're suffering the same malady the Dems suffered in 2000 and 2004. The base is passionately insisting the party needs to need to move further away from the center but that's a position that doesn't hold with the majority of Americans. The Republicans are looking at a similarly long journey in the wilderness if they decide to let the base rule their heads.

Obama saved the Dem base from themselves by leading them to the center so slowly they didn't even realize it was happening until they'd already bought in. It's funny that most people don't know how soundly the base rejected Obama when he first appeared on the scene. I remember the day Obama made a single tentative post on Daily Kos back in 2006 to try to explain a vote he'd made that had enraged them. He got pummeled (irrationally, IMO). He never came back to dkos after that... I don't think he ever intended to pander to the base. In the end he won them over with his electability... because, for everything the Dem base aspires to achieve, losing another election isn't one of them.

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

Oops

Looks like a case of mistaken identity.
Results for Guilford County, where Sarah Palin made her remarks about real Americans in pro-America parts of the country:

Obama/Biden 58.75%
McCain/Palin 40.44%

Dangerous

Wow... wow. Just wow. Fox News -- yes, that Fox News -- is reporting that:

Palin did NOT know Africa was a continent.
She did NOT know who the parties to NAFTA were.
She threw dramatic temper tantrums over bad press.
She refused to prepare for the Gibson or Couric interviews.



Most of us picked up on the fact that she was terribly uninformed but holy shit... she's dangerously uninformed. And I would have been dependent on her to keep my babies safe?

What was McCain thinking????

Holy Crap!

I went to bed in Real America and I woke up in Fake America!



Pride

Condoleezza Rice has the right be proud... she was one of the trail blazers.

WASHINGTON -- An emotional Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reveled Wednesday in Barack Obama's election, calling it an "extraordinary step forward" for the nation.

A child of the segregated deep South who became the highest-ranking African-American woman ever in American government and was once considered a potential Republican presidential nominee, Rice called the Democratic president-elect "inspirational" and said his victory was proof of America's promise.

"This was an exercise in American democracy of which Americans across the political spectrum are justifiably proud," she said.

"As an African-American, I'm especially proud," said Rice, her eyes glistening with emotion, "because this is a country that's been through a long journey, in terms of overcoming wounds and making race" less of a factor in life. "That work is not done, but yesterday was obviously an extraordinary step forward."

Getting To Know You...

The most powerful man in the GOP.
With his party in tatters, Mitch McConnell is now the most powerful Republican in the country — the lone GOP senator who can stand in the way of an unfettered liberal agenda in Washington, and a key go-to man to rehabilitate his party.

McConnell, a soft-spoken Washington insider from Kentucky with a canny understanding of Senate tactics, is an unlikely pick to be the GOP’s Stonewall Jackson. Yet by virtue of surviving a tight reelection for a fifth term and having no real challenger to his position as Senate minority leader, McConnell is positioned to be both the ultimate dealmaker and the Republican firewall against a leftward tilt in American government.
I really am a fan of checks & balances and as such was not terribly disappointed to see the Dems fall short of a 60 seat majority in the Senate. That's said, I prefer intelligent checks and balances. Here's hoping Senator McConnell is a good egg.

Robbed!


EXCLUSIVE: GOP claims ACORN registered Mickey Mouse to vote in Pennsylvania 600,000 times, disputing state's 55%-44% result

Also... 13 New Yorkers renting an apartment in Ohio prior to election may have swung the state's result... Fox News investigating stolen election... Developing...


Oh Noes!

BREAKING: Real Virginia announces plans to secede after Fake Virginia delivers Virginia's 13 electoral college votes to Obama.

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

The Winner

Obama.

I know in my gut this is the right thing.

The Vote

I have cast my vote. Finally.

Hard to believe it's been four years since I heard Obama's words for the first time as a keynote speaker during Kerry's Democratic convention. I knew -- immediately -- that this was someone worth watching, not just for his amazing charisma (let's face it, Gore and Kerry had been total snoozers) but because his "One America" speech zeroed in on what had become one of the most painful aspects of politics for me... the idea that the power elite find it politically expedient to pit Americans against each other for their own political gain. He articulated perfectly what my brain had been screaming for years.

Over these past four years I've gotten to know Obama better and found him worthy of my respect and support. While I'm not confident of a win tonight, I am at least confident that I have backed the right candidate, the candidate who truly reflects my vision of America, and I am damn proud to have participated in his campaign. Even if my phone calls to South Carolina were not fruitful, I like to think the $90 we donated to the campaign bought a few hardworking staffers some pizza and cokes during an all nighter.

Obama has conducted himself and his campaign with intentional integrity... the kind of integrity one has to purposefully commit to or else succumb, as McCain did, to an escalating list of disappointing, bottom-feeder behaviors. John McCain, whose desperate, pathetic, cynical pandering to christianist James Dobson in the primaries turned out to be only the beginning of what would become a series of desperate, pathetic, cynical actions.

Fox News and the Drudge report have also behaved deplorably, lowering the level of discourse beyond what I thought most reasonable people would tolerate. It's not their right-leaning slant that's at issue... it's their intentional distortion of fact and perspective. It's a still frame from a video of Obama wiping the corners of his mouth that suddenly becomes "Obama flipping off McCain". It's a "recently uncovered" interview with Obama that's actually been posted on a newspaper's website for 11 months, easily accessible to everyone. It's a weeks-long tirade about ACORN registering Mickey Mouse when actual people are forced to wait in line for 8 hours in order to cast the vote their country asks of them. The list goes on and on.

A functional democracy depends on the ability of its citizens to weigh facts and maintain perspective. This tragic breakdown of critical thought makes me sad.

And yet there is hope, no? There's always hope.

Monday, November 03, 2008

Funny HaHa

So... I cruised over to do my daily Faux News headline scan to see what the GOP talking points are for the day and I see the infamous Obama coal headline about "a newly surfaced tape" that the San Francisco Chronicle has been allegedly sitting on.

Zoh My Gawd, a newly surfaced tape! A Grand Liberal Media Conspiracy to HIDE the TRUTH!! Thank goodness Faux News has uncovered the scheme!

So I follow the Faux News link that says "Obama's Interview with the San Francisco Chronicle" and lo and behold, it takes me directly to the San Francisco Chronicle website where they had posted the damn interview with Obama on 1/18/2008, the day after it was recorded. It's still there, cleverly hidden in plain view of anyone who might want to read it, Google it, reference it, link to it, etc.

I swear to gawd, if these people did not exist we would have to make them up.

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Puppycam


My whole family is in love with Puppycam... the website a friend turned me on to with live streaming video of these adorable little puppies. We've been watching them all weekend.

Maybe we're getting too attached.

On Wealth Redistribution

I expected McPalin to campaign on the evils of "tax and spend" but I am absolutely flabbergasted that my fellow Americans have so readily latched onto such a one-sided definition of "wealth redistribution" as is currently being associated with Obama.

How can anyone be so seemingly unaware that the "free market" we love to worship naturally results in wealth redistribution as well, such as a massive concentration of wealth at the top? How can they be oblivious to the fact that as the rich suck dollars out of the working class, they use their growing power to rig the system to ensure their continued success at the expense of everyone else? How can Americans reject the idea -- to their own detriment -- that a reassertion of balance is occasionally necessary to the equation? Taxes and targeted tax cuts and tax deductions are all forms of wealth redistribution. They're economic tools. It's silly for McPalin to attribute wealth redistribution to Obama like it's some kind of terrible sin.

Concentrated wealth was the hallmark of the Gilded Age as well as the roaring 20's. It was the legacy of the Reagan era and we've seen it again in the financial industry boom of the past decade. Concentration of wealth is a natural outcome of laissez fair capitalism. Fortunately for us, our economy has never been what we might call "pure bred". Over the years (through actions both intended and accidental), socialist elements have been introduced to restore balance, waxing and waning in cycle. Our economy has been dynamic enough to tolerate such influences without succumbing to them entirely, swinging like a giant pendulum intent on finding economic equilibrium.

We should be appreciative of the economic tools at our disposal. We should work to increase our objective understanding of the rules and functional boundaries of this hybrid economic system. What we should not do is demonize the concept out of ignorance and fear like a bunch of 17th century Salem witch hunters.

I understand the proud tradition of doing for yourself. I understand the natural desire to ascend to personal wealth and prosperity. Believe me, I have no desire to adopt extreme socialist economic models, most all of which are deeply flawed. For the most part, capitalism has proven to be an adequate foundation for our economy. But come on... let's be smart about the reality of the capitalist model and its limitations.

And most importantly, let's never confuse the economic with the political. What Obama is proposing -- stabilizing the middle class -- is smart in a consumer driven economy but it's not without cost. Repealing Bush's tax cut for the upper tier is probably the right thing to do (the tax cuts DURING WAR TIME were irresponsible anyway).

I'm Shocked... Shocked!

Gee... who coulda guessed?

Georgia's Secretary of State Promotes Voter Challenges and Refuses to Extend Early Voting Hours

Add Georgia to the list of states where Republican officials are actively engaged in voter suppression efforts.

In the midst of a record turnout for early voting in Georgia, that has led to long lines, discouraged voters and exhausted poll workers, Secretary of State Karen Handel, a Republican, has claimed federal law ties her hands, preventing her from extending early voting hours.

With just days to go to the election, Democratic politicians demanded yesterday that Handel step in and extend early voting hours -- as has been done in both North Carolina and Florida.

But in an opinion piece published in the AJC on Thursday, Handel blamed her inaction on the issue on federal law which requires Justice Department approval to change voting law.

Ironically, it is Georgia's history of discriminatory voting practices that puts it on a federal "pre-clearance" list, mentioned in Section 5 of the Voter Rights Act of 1965.

While the DOJ can take up to 60 days to review any change that is submitted, it has the power to grant expedited review in emergency situations -- and Georgia's situation would certainly seem to qualify, Gerry Hebert, a former acting head of DOJ's voting-rights section, told TPMmuckraker.

"Georgia has asked and been granted expedited review by the DOJ in the past, so to say because of the voting act, we can't do this -- that's not really accurate," Hebert said. "The DOJ has done this in as little as 24 hours. . . so to use Section 5 as an excuse that this isn't possible, that's someone that really doesn't want to make the change."

But hey, ACORN ACORN ACORN... booga booga, scary!!!

Saturday, November 01, 2008

Troublesome

I got home yesterday after spending a week in fake Virginia. Unfortunately, I didn't get to mingle much with the local fake Americans since I was locked up in a data center for 15 hours a day. It was a long and grueling week!!

Speaking of long and grueling... instead of hyperventilating about the eeeeevils of Mickey Mouse appearing on voter rolls across America, maybe folks should be a little more outraged that real live people are being made to stand in line for 8 hours at a stretch just to cast their vote. Look at the photos below from Atlanta. And this is early voting! This scenario will repeat itself all over the country on Tuesday. My husband is an hourly worker... taking a day off to vote would cost him a day's worth of pay. That's a pretty heavy poll tax on working class voters. And that, my friends, is bullshit. It's not as if states have been unaware that this was going to be a big year. I can only guess that some of these states -- including Georgia -- have a certain vested interest in discouraging voter turnout.

This situation makes me particularly ill since I routinely hammer on people to get off their asses and vote, as is their civic duty in a democracy. As it turns out, this year it's not voters who are abdicating their responsibility to the country... it's the country who is in danger of abdicating their responsibility to voters.

To the faux outraged among us: This is what real voter fraud looks like.