So says a blog reader (former Bush voter...better late than never...), he adds:
"This is leadership right here"
Reader attached this Obama quote:
"While there is plenty of blame to go around and many in Washington and on Wall Street who deserve it, all of us now have a responsibility to solve this crisis because it affects the financial well-being of every single American," he said. "There will be time to punish those who set this fire, but now is the moment for us to come together and put the fire out."
Obama said he had talked with Bush, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and other leaders Tuesday about resurrecting the recovery plan. He also sought to reassure the public, saying the plan had been "misunderstood and poorly communicated."
"This is not a plan to just hand over $700 billion of your money to a few banks on Wall Street," the Illinois senator said.
Without a rescue for the financial sector, ordinary people will soon begin to suffer, Obama said.
"If we do not act, it will be harder for you to get a mortgage for your home or the loans you need to go to college or a loan you need to buy a car to get to work," Obama said.
"What it means is that businesses won't be able to get the loans they need to open new factories, or hire more workers, or make payroll for the workers they have. What it means is that thousands of businesses could close around the country. Millions of jobs could be lost," he said. "
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Grover Norquist: Is a Menace To Society
TW: This is Norquist's contribution to the Politico's dialogue on what to do with the bailout, Norquist was a ringleader in defeating the bill yesterday (btw Norquist is one of the most powerful Republican activists, he is the king of cut taxes no matter what especially for the wealthy):
"If the administration would defer or repeal the mark to market rule, announce that it will unilaterally index the basis for capital gains to inflation -- a move super-lawyer Chuck Cooper has pointed out the president has the power to do as an executive order -- and undo the Clinton era supersizing of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and fight (understandably unsuccessfully with this congress) to reduce/abolish capital gains taxes there might be an argument for the bailout. (Of course if those things were done there would be no need for the bailout.)"
TW: I defer to Mr. Norris on the mark to mkt scam, but then by executive fiat he wants W. Bush to reduce cap gains taxes (because the previous W. Bush reduction just were not enough)and then stop the CRA (you know the item every ecomomist blames for the crisis...not so much really)
From Norris:
"The political lynching of truth-telling in accounting is gatthering steam...If only [the bankers] could value their assets at what they just know they would be worth in a rational world, all would be well...In a Dow Jones column, Michael Rapoport points out the obvious: Wachovia went out with a book value of $75 billion. Citi paid $2 billion. Could it be that asset values are overstated, not understated?..In any case, policy makers should remember the sad history of changing accounting rules to keep banks afloat."
http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/lying-bank-accounting/
"If the administration would defer or repeal the mark to market rule, announce that it will unilaterally index the basis for capital gains to inflation -- a move super-lawyer Chuck Cooper has pointed out the president has the power to do as an executive order -- and undo the Clinton era supersizing of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and fight (understandably unsuccessfully with this congress) to reduce/abolish capital gains taxes there might be an argument for the bailout. (Of course if those things were done there would be no need for the bailout.)"
TW: I defer to Mr. Norris on the mark to mkt scam, but then by executive fiat he wants W. Bush to reduce cap gains taxes (because the previous W. Bush reduction just were not enough)and then stop the CRA (you know the item every ecomomist blames for the crisis...not so much really)
From Norris:
"The political lynching of truth-telling in accounting is gatthering steam...If only [the bankers] could value their assets at what they just know they would be worth in a rational world, all would be well...In a Dow Jones column, Michael Rapoport points out the obvious: Wachovia went out with a book value of $75 billion. Citi paid $2 billion. Could it be that asset values are overstated, not understated?..In any case, policy makers should remember the sad history of changing accounting rules to keep banks afloat."
http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/lying-bank-accounting/
We Are All Argentines Now
From Economist:
"YESTERDAY I wrote an email to an Argentine friend with my condolences.
“Sorry”, I wrote. “You no longer have a monopoly on undermining your financial markets, courtesy of economic populism.” (Though, to be fair, Venezuela has become quite adept at the practise.)
Many Americans continue to see this as a Wall Street problem. If the big banks fail then so be it, they say, but they do not understand how such failures will affect them. Concern centres on executive compensation, rather than on saving financial institutions.
To be fair, the media has done a terrible job, often neglecting to explain how and why this is not just a Wall Street problem. There are exceptions, of course. Willem Buiter explained yesterday exactly what a collapse of credit markets could mean for average Americans.
A little extreme, but not impossible—ask any Argentine."
"YESTERDAY I wrote an email to an Argentine friend with my condolences.
“Sorry”, I wrote. “You no longer have a monopoly on undermining your financial markets, courtesy of economic populism.” (Though, to be fair, Venezuela has become quite adept at the practise.)
Many Americans continue to see this as a Wall Street problem. If the big banks fail then so be it, they say, but they do not understand how such failures will affect them. Concern centres on executive compensation, rather than on saving financial institutions.
To be fair, the media has done a terrible job, often neglecting to explain how and why this is not just a Wall Street problem. There are exceptions, of course. Willem Buiter explained yesterday exactly what a collapse of credit markets could mean for average Americans.
A little extreme, but not impossible—ask any Argentine."
Analysis of the Analysis: The Ultimate Challenge
TW: the Economist looks at the David Brooks column today (see my earlier post for highlights) and focuses on a key opportunity/risk for the Democrats going forward.
From the Economist:
"There has long been an uneasy split between "business" and "social" conservatives. That partnership seems almost entirely ruptured at this point. Such a rupture would destroy the coalition that delivered the White House to its current occupant in 2000 and 2004. To take advantage of this, however, the Democrats will have to balance resurgent social democratic feeling in the party with a workable mix of competent governance, investment in public goods, and responsible internationalism. It will not be an easy feat to pull off. Can Democrats do that, in the process fending off an energised left eager to roll back trade and protect labour? The prize is right—an enduring majority. "
From the Economist:
"There has long been an uneasy split between "business" and "social" conservatives. That partnership seems almost entirely ruptured at this point. Such a rupture would destroy the coalition that delivered the White House to its current occupant in 2000 and 2004. To take advantage of this, however, the Democrats will have to balance resurgent social democratic feeling in the party with a workable mix of competent governance, investment in public goods, and responsible internationalism. It will not be an easy feat to pull off. Can Democrats do that, in the process fending off an energised left eager to roll back trade and protect labour? The prize is right—an enduring majority. "
Newt Gingrich Is a Scumbag
TW: As I have mentioned I detest the wing of the Republican party playing electoral football with our economic well-being.
From NBC:
"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was working aggressively behind the scenes to defeat the Wall Street rescue plan minutes before he himself released a public statement in support of the package, NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported on Tuesday.
Gingrich was whipping up votes for the opposition, Mitchell said, apparently without the knowledge of the current GOP leader, John Boehner, who was responsible for recruiting enough support from his caucus to help ensure the bill's passage. Ultimately, the GOP was only able to rally roughly a third of its members.
"Newt Gingrich," she said on MSNBC, "I am told reliably by leading Republicans who are close to him, he was whipping against this up until the last minute, when he issued that face-saving statement. Newt Gingrich was telling people in the strongest possible language that this was a terrible deal, not only that it was a terrible deal, it was a disaster, it was the end of democracy as we know, it was socialism -- and then at the last minute [he] comes out with a statement when the vote is already in place...
...Joe Scarborough called Gingrich's backstabbing of John Boehner "undercutting his own."
Mike Barnicle offered his own bit of reportorial insight: "Andrea, I could hug you for saying that, because I was told last night by two or three members of Congress that this was the opening salvo of Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign four years hence."
From NBC:
"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was working aggressively behind the scenes to defeat the Wall Street rescue plan minutes before he himself released a public statement in support of the package, NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported on Tuesday.
Gingrich was whipping up votes for the opposition, Mitchell said, apparently without the knowledge of the current GOP leader, John Boehner, who was responsible for recruiting enough support from his caucus to help ensure the bill's passage. Ultimately, the GOP was only able to rally roughly a third of its members.
"Newt Gingrich," she said on MSNBC, "I am told reliably by leading Republicans who are close to him, he was whipping against this up until the last minute, when he issued that face-saving statement. Newt Gingrich was telling people in the strongest possible language that this was a terrible deal, not only that it was a terrible deal, it was a disaster, it was the end of democracy as we know, it was socialism -- and then at the last minute [he] comes out with a statement when the vote is already in place...
...Joe Scarborough called Gingrich's backstabbing of John Boehner "undercutting his own."
Mike Barnicle offered his own bit of reportorial insight: "Andrea, I could hug you for saying that, because I was told last night by two or three members of Congress that this was the opening salvo of Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign four years hence."
A Responsible Conservative
From Jim Manzi at National Review
"Irresponsible Folly
Well, apparently the House Republicans have decided to run a neat little experiment to test the actual odds of the current financial crisis turning into another Depression in the absence of a bailout plan. What alternative do they propose that could realistically be enacted? How long do they think this would take, and what risks would we run during the period of uncertainty, even if it were successful? I have no visibility into the current machinations on Capitol Hill, but I'm with Noah Millman: as far as I can see, if I were a senior Democrat right now, I'd introduce a Democratic alternative tomorrow and pass it on a party line vote. I sure hope House Republicans are holding some cards they haven't yet revealed."
"Irresponsible Folly
Well, apparently the House Republicans have decided to run a neat little experiment to test the actual odds of the current financial crisis turning into another Depression in the absence of a bailout plan. What alternative do they propose that could realistically be enacted? How long do they think this would take, and what risks would we run during the period of uncertainty, even if it were successful? I have no visibility into the current machinations on Capitol Hill, but I'm with Noah Millman: as far as I can see, if I were a senior Democrat right now, I'd introduce a Democratic alternative tomorrow and pass it on a party line vote. I sure hope House Republicans are holding some cards they haven't yet revealed."
Stuck Between a Rock and Hard Place...
TW: 538.com makes a compelling argument, albeit not a very strong argument for McCain's chances or judgment. Net net, McCain is damned if he does and damned if he does'nt. I still hold to my stance that McCain should fess up and move on to a legitimate nominee but I readily acknowledge the challenge in doing so.
From 538:
"It’s important to reinforce what Nate wrote Sunday night. Not gonna happen. It would be overt surrender. As most of you know, I’ve been on the road for the past two weeks, so far visiting at least a dozen McCain campaign offices in six battleground states as well as Palin’s first solo rally in Carson City, Nevada. If McCain dumps Palin, it is over.In the Colorado Springs volunteer office, “you could hear a pin drop” in the days before Palin was picked. In Reno, the volunteering had been anemic; the Saturday morning after the Palin pick, organizers arrived to an early morning volunteer line waiting at the door.Our direct observation shows McCain is being overwhelmingly outworked on the ground as it is; take Palin away and you can add 2-5% to Obama’s total in every close state due to ground game. As Bill Paxton once said, "Game over, man, game over!"There really isn’t much more to say. It’s already the Obama v. Nobama election – you overhear it in all the volunteer-to-volunteer discussions. “Obama Scares Me” is not just the unofficial motto, it’s actually a button we’ve seen sported.But that’s not good enough to win. Bush v. Not Bush didn’t turn out well for Democrats, and Obama v. Nobama in a huge partisan ID switching and massive new voter reg year isn’t going to get the job done for Republicans.Taking away Sarah Palin is not an option – it would be worse than having never put her on the ticket in the first place. This ticket is soldiering on til the bitter end, or else they're giving up."
From 538:
"It’s important to reinforce what Nate wrote Sunday night. Not gonna happen. It would be overt surrender. As most of you know, I’ve been on the road for the past two weeks, so far visiting at least a dozen McCain campaign offices in six battleground states as well as Palin’s first solo rally in Carson City, Nevada. If McCain dumps Palin, it is over.In the Colorado Springs volunteer office, “you could hear a pin drop” in the days before Palin was picked. In Reno, the volunteering had been anemic; the Saturday morning after the Palin pick, organizers arrived to an early morning volunteer line waiting at the door.Our direct observation shows McCain is being overwhelmingly outworked on the ground as it is; take Palin away and you can add 2-5% to Obama’s total in every close state due to ground game. As Bill Paxton once said, "Game over, man, game over!"There really isn’t much more to say. It’s already the Obama v. Nobama election – you overhear it in all the volunteer-to-volunteer discussions. “Obama Scares Me” is not just the unofficial motto, it’s actually a button we’ve seen sported.But that’s not good enough to win. Bush v. Not Bush didn’t turn out well for Democrats, and Obama v. Nobama in a huge partisan ID switching and massive new voter reg year isn’t going to get the job done for Republicans.Taking away Sarah Palin is not an option – it would be worse than having never put her on the ticket in the first place. This ticket is soldiering on til the bitter end, or else they're giving up."
Its the Credit Markets Stupid
TW: That should be the message to the House Nays. Some of you have ARMs based on Libor. Libor has risen roughly 1.5% in the past week. Credit markets are basically frozen. This is not about the stock market. Some say the economy is doing okay. The stats on economic growth are slow to emerge. We are in recession, count on it. And recall the numbers below do not integrate the latest financial heart attacks we are absorbing. To be clear, this is not about avoiding tipping into a rinky dink recession with a few quarters of minimal contraction (i.e. the only type recessions we have seen since 1974). This is about a big time double digit contraction spread across several years.
From Floyd Norris at NYT:
"Consumers did spend some of their stimulus checks this summer, but the August personal spending numbers that came out today indicate that there was no carryover. August was the first month that a substantial number of stimulus checks did not go out, and the slowness in spending makes it likely that the third quarter will show a decline in gross domestic product.
If so, that would be the second decline in four quarters. Robert Barbera, the chief economist of ITG, is more bearish than most, saying the quarterly figure could be down more than 3 percent.
If it fell more than 3.4 percent, that would mean that real G.D.P. was down over a four-quarter period, something that has not happened since 1991.
That would end the arguments over recession. (I think it is clear that a recession began in late 2007, or at the latest early this year but that is not the consensus view. The official definition of recession does not require two quarterly declines in G.D.P., but instead relies on other indicators of economic activity that have been weaker.)
The first estimate of third-quarter G.D.P. growth is to be released Oct. 30, less than a week before the election.
Whatever happened to those economic fundamentals that were supposed to be so strong? Wasn’t this credit crisis supposed to be contained a long time ago?"
From Floyd Norris at NYT:
"Consumers did spend some of their stimulus checks this summer, but the August personal spending numbers that came out today indicate that there was no carryover. August was the first month that a substantial number of stimulus checks did not go out, and the slowness in spending makes it likely that the third quarter will show a decline in gross domestic product.
If so, that would be the second decline in four quarters. Robert Barbera, the chief economist of ITG, is more bearish than most, saying the quarterly figure could be down more than 3 percent.
If it fell more than 3.4 percent, that would mean that real G.D.P. was down over a four-quarter period, something that has not happened since 1991.
That would end the arguments over recession. (I think it is clear that a recession began in late 2007, or at the latest early this year but that is not the consensus view. The official definition of recession does not require two quarterly declines in G.D.P., but instead relies on other indicators of economic activity that have been weaker.)
The first estimate of third-quarter G.D.P. growth is to be released Oct. 30, less than a week before the election.
Whatever happened to those economic fundamentals that were supposed to be so strong? Wasn’t this credit crisis supposed to be contained a long time ago?"
A Plague On Both Your Houses
From the Economist:
"..Pat Buchanan, that great crypto-socialist, makes his case against the bail-out in familiar terms. Naturally, the financial crisis is the fault of "the elites" in New York and Washington. "[W]hat did the American people do to deserve this?" asks Mr Buchanan, apparently unaware of the hundreds of thousands of homeowners who bit off a little more mortgage than they could chew. This may be getting repetitive but I think it bears repeating (if not shouting): All evidence suggests that the current meltdown was built from layered irresponsibility.
This financial crisis is a genuinely democratic one, with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role...I suppose a whiff of scapegoat might be a kind of homeopathic treatment for sclerosis of the account, but a more comprehensive response in which each of us owns up to his or her role and sacrifices for the solution sounds much more promising. "
"..Pat Buchanan, that great crypto-socialist, makes his case against the bail-out in familiar terms. Naturally, the financial crisis is the fault of "the elites" in New York and Washington. "[W]hat did the American people do to deserve this?" asks Mr Buchanan, apparently unaware of the hundreds of thousands of homeowners who bit off a little more mortgage than they could chew. This may be getting repetitive but I think it bears repeating (if not shouting): All evidence suggests that the current meltdown was built from layered irresponsibility.
This financial crisis is a genuinely democratic one, with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role...I suppose a whiff of scapegoat might be a kind of homeopathic treatment for sclerosis of the account, but a more comprehensive response in which each of us owns up to his or her role and sacrifices for the solution sounds much more promising. "
When Leaders Fail
TW: David Brooks (moderate conservative NYT columnist) pretty much nails the "bailout" situation
"...let us recognize...the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.
House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.
Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century. With this vote, they’ve taken responsibility for this economy, and they will be held accountable. The short-term blows will fall on John McCain, the long-term stress on the existence of the G.O.P. as we know it.
I’ve spoken with several House Republicans over the past few days and most admirably believe in free-market principles. What’s sad is that they still think it’s 1984. They still think the biggest threat comes from socialism and Walter Mondale liberalism. They seem not to have noticed how global capital flows have transformed our political economy.
...[the plan] was an effort to address the crisis of authority in Washington. At least it might have stabilized the situation so fundamental reforms of the world’s financial architecture could be undertaken later.
But the 228 House members who voted no have exacerbated the global psychological free fall, and now we have a crisis of political authority on top of the crisis of financial authority.
The American century was created by American leadership, which is scarcer than credit just about now."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30brooks.html?hp
"...let us recognize...the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.
House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.
Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century. With this vote, they’ve taken responsibility for this economy, and they will be held accountable. The short-term blows will fall on John McCain, the long-term stress on the existence of the G.O.P. as we know it.
I’ve spoken with several House Republicans over the past few days and most admirably believe in free-market principles. What’s sad is that they still think it’s 1984. They still think the biggest threat comes from socialism and Walter Mondale liberalism. They seem not to have noticed how global capital flows have transformed our political economy.
...[the plan] was an effort to address the crisis of authority in Washington. At least it might have stabilized the situation so fundamental reforms of the world’s financial architecture could be undertaken later.
But the 228 House members who voted no have exacerbated the global psychological free fall, and now we have a crisis of political authority on top of the crisis of financial authority.
The American century was created by American leadership, which is scarcer than credit just about now."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30brooks.html?hp
Rothenburg's Latest House Race Update
TW: Stu Rothenberg's latest House of Representative forecasts, one might want to evaluate aggressively supporting opponents of some of the cynical Representatives who defeated the Paulson plan yesterday.
http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/2008/09/2008-house-ratings_30.html
http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/2008/09/2008-house-ratings_30.html
Monday, September 29, 2008
"Dave" (2008 ed.)
TW: As directed by Steve Schmidt, produced by John McCain and making her big screen debut, Sarah Palin
From Hotline:
"Ex-WH adviser David Gergen, on Palin talking about dealing with "gotcha" journalism: "If you want to play in the big leagues, you've got to hit big-league pitching."
GOP strategist Ed Rollins, on how the interview came across and how Palin did: "The thing that bothers me, John McCain shouldn't be in that scene. It looks like a father taking care of the daughter. And the truth of the matter is, yes, she messed up last week. She had to go back there with Katie and prove to everybody that she can handle the big-league pitching, as David said."
From Hotline:
"Ex-WH adviser David Gergen, on Palin talking about dealing with "gotcha" journalism: "If you want to play in the big leagues, you've got to hit big-league pitching."
GOP strategist Ed Rollins, on how the interview came across and how Palin did: "The thing that bothers me, John McCain shouldn't be in that scene. It looks like a father taking care of the daughter. And the truth of the matter is, yes, she messed up last week. She had to go back there with Katie and prove to everybody that she can handle the big-league pitching, as David said."
The House Vote Was Populism Run Amok
TW: This is the roll call of the vote by rep
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml
TW: The vote was what happens when populism gets ahead of responsibility. I understand Main Street may not understand the bill's importance and need but their elected official must act regardless. This is not about the stock market, it is about credit markets, if the credit markets fry then the economy will follow to a place you do not want to see. The 30-day TBill rate is down to 0.03% or essentially zero. This is the institutional equivalent of putting one's money in the mattress. The commerical banks previously relatively stable were the biggest losers today as people are now wondering if their cash is really safe.
The timing of this is obviously horrible with every (non-retiring) House member facing re-election in just over a month. Wonder why the Senate is not the problem? Only a third of the seats are facing re-election and of those maybe a dozen are close enough for the Senator to worry about having to answer for the vote in November. I understand those House members in competitive districts facing popular dissent especially if faced with an opponent taking the "populist" position. Nate Silver at 538 threw up these stats:
"Among 38 incumbent congressmen in races rated as "toss-up" or "lean" by Swing State Project, just 8 voted for the bailout as opposed to 30 against: a batting average of .211.By comparison, the vote among congressmen who don't have as much to worry about was essentially even: 197 for, 198 against."
TW: Ultimately 67% of the Republicans voted against while 40% of the Democrats voted against the bill.
There were two other groups of House members who were not merely vulnerable candidates covering their respective electoral asses. The radicals (i.e. Kucinich Dem OH or Paul Rep TX) who think the best solution is to burn the system down and start over. And the Republican cynical ideologues like Mike Pence Rep IN with an agenda to create crusade along with their father figure, Newt Gingrich. These Republicans bear not exclusive but disproportionate responsibility for this irresponsible action.
There are responsible Republicans. Senator Judd Gregg Rep NH stood up on CNBC with another adult, Chris Dodd Dem CT, and took the mature approach while outlining why this deal matters not for Wall Street but for Main Street.http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=872214272
John McCain just made a statement suggesting a start over in negotiations (what!!) and claiming Barack Obama "infused partisanship into the negotiations". That is why we have a problem. I have not heard Obama's statement if he has made one. I will judge it solely on how LITTLE partisanship he injects into the statement.http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=872188977
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml
TW: The vote was what happens when populism gets ahead of responsibility. I understand Main Street may not understand the bill's importance and need but their elected official must act regardless. This is not about the stock market, it is about credit markets, if the credit markets fry then the economy will follow to a place you do not want to see. The 30-day TBill rate is down to 0.03% or essentially zero. This is the institutional equivalent of putting one's money in the mattress. The commerical banks previously relatively stable were the biggest losers today as people are now wondering if their cash is really safe.
The timing of this is obviously horrible with every (non-retiring) House member facing re-election in just over a month. Wonder why the Senate is not the problem? Only a third of the seats are facing re-election and of those maybe a dozen are close enough for the Senator to worry about having to answer for the vote in November. I understand those House members in competitive districts facing popular dissent especially if faced with an opponent taking the "populist" position. Nate Silver at 538 threw up these stats:
"Among 38 incumbent congressmen in races rated as "toss-up" or "lean" by Swing State Project, just 8 voted for the bailout as opposed to 30 against: a batting average of .211.By comparison, the vote among congressmen who don't have as much to worry about was essentially even: 197 for, 198 against."
TW: Ultimately 67% of the Republicans voted against while 40% of the Democrats voted against the bill.
There were two other groups of House members who were not merely vulnerable candidates covering their respective electoral asses. The radicals (i.e. Kucinich Dem OH or Paul Rep TX) who think the best solution is to burn the system down and start over. And the Republican cynical ideologues like Mike Pence Rep IN with an agenda to create crusade along with their father figure, Newt Gingrich. These Republicans bear not exclusive but disproportionate responsibility for this irresponsible action.
There are responsible Republicans. Senator Judd Gregg Rep NH stood up on CNBC with another adult, Chris Dodd Dem CT, and took the mature approach while outlining why this deal matters not for Wall Street but for Main Street.http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=872214272
John McCain just made a statement suggesting a start over in negotiations (what!!) and claiming Barack Obama "infused partisanship into the negotiations". That is why we have a problem. I have not heard Obama's statement if he has made one. I will judge it solely on how LITTLE partisanship he injects into the statement.http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=872188977
From Tumulty at Time:
"My only insight: the most frightening thing about CNBC's coverage is that Jim Cramer is calm"
TW: she is right
From Tumulty at Time:
"Oh, please. So the House Republicans say that they were willing to let the credit markets slide into the abyss because Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings?"
"My only insight: the most frightening thing about CNBC's coverage is that Jim Cramer is calm"
TW: she is right
From Tumulty at Time:
"Oh, please. So the House Republicans say that they were willing to let the credit markets slide into the abyss because Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings?"
Disgraceful Irresponsibility!!!
The nay voters in Congress should be drawn and quartered!! This is what happens when folks like Dick Morris hold more sway than the POTUS and the House leadership of both parties and the Chairman of the Fed and the Sec of Treasury.
The markets will answer quickly.
From Rev Shark at Street.com
"At lot of folks are stunned that the House has failed to pass the "rescue" bill. I think what many have overlooked is the absolute outrage on Main Street. House members have been overwhelmed by calls and emails from folks who hate the whole idea of bailing out Wall Street. Yes, there might be some major misunderstanding about what the bill does, but it's the idea in theory that has inflamed emotions."
From Craig Crawford:
"George W. Bush's White House has gone belly up, not unlike those big banks that failed. The president's political credit was revoked today as his financial bailout failed to pass in the House of Representatives.
This is what happens to a president who lied to Congress to start a war, among other things, even if this time what he is proposing is the best thing for the country."
TW: Fine "Main Street" does not understand it. Responsible elected representatives are meant to understand things better than Main Street sometimes and exercise leadership and maturity. There are reasons mob rule is generally not regarded as effective governance. This is not a bailout of Wall Street, it is an effort to avert a collapse of the world economy.
The markets will answer quickly.
From Rev Shark at Street.com
"At lot of folks are stunned that the House has failed to pass the "rescue" bill. I think what many have overlooked is the absolute outrage on Main Street. House members have been overwhelmed by calls and emails from folks who hate the whole idea of bailing out Wall Street. Yes, there might be some major misunderstanding about what the bill does, but it's the idea in theory that has inflamed emotions."
From Craig Crawford:
"George W. Bush's White House has gone belly up, not unlike those big banks that failed. The president's political credit was revoked today as his financial bailout failed to pass in the House of Representatives.
This is what happens to a president who lied to Congress to start a war, among other things, even if this time what he is proposing is the best thing for the country."
TW: Fine "Main Street" does not understand it. Responsible elected representatives are meant to understand things better than Main Street sometimes and exercise leadership and maturity. There are reasons mob rule is generally not regarded as effective governance. This is not a bailout of Wall Street, it is an effort to avert a collapse of the world economy.
The Financial Bailout/Investment Plan (Post 2 of 3): The Miserable Politics
TW: I think the Republicans initially saw the "bailout" as an opportunity for political gain before apparently agreeing to do the right thing (such as it is).
1) McCain tried his stunt that backfired:
From Craig "the Curmudgeon" Crawford:
"As the dust begins to settle...let's look back at John McCain's weird theatrics in the days leading up to last week's debate. What was his point?
Given how the Republican presidential nominee said nothing during the debate about his threats to skip it, we can rule out any plans on his part to somehow use his brinkmanship against Democratic nominee Barack Obama during their faceoff on Friday night.
Assuming McCain had a strategy for nearly de-railing the debate -- and maybe there wasn't one -- perhaps he was just messing with Obama's head, trying to disrupt the opponent's plans for three days of preparation...If the objective was to rattle Obama, it did not work. Although Obama is a methodical guy who does not relish chaos -- a trait that the Republicans might have been hoping to exploit -- he seemed unflappable on stage.
In retrospect, McCain's pre-debate drama was just plain silly and a pathetically hysterical attempt to dominate the campaign narrative for a couple of news cycles."
From Pethokoukis at USNWR:
"Here is, I think, a pretty safe prediction: The Republican presidential nominee in the summer of 2012 will have come out against the Paulson-Bernanke bailout plan in the fall of 2008...And don't be surprised if there are insurgent Republicans in 2010 who run against incumbent GOPer who voted for the bailout...there is a conservative meeting every Wednesday here in DC where aspiring conservative politicians show up to make their case to the activists. Each one is asked his or her view on "babies (meaning abortion), guns, and taxes." I think "bailout" might get added to that mix."
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/9/26/how-paulson-just-picked-the-2012-gop-nominee.html
1) McCain tried his stunt that backfired:
From Craig "the Curmudgeon" Crawford:
"As the dust begins to settle...let's look back at John McCain's weird theatrics in the days leading up to last week's debate. What was his point?
Given how the Republican presidential nominee said nothing during the debate about his threats to skip it, we can rule out any plans on his part to somehow use his brinkmanship against Democratic nominee Barack Obama during their faceoff on Friday night.
Assuming McCain had a strategy for nearly de-railing the debate -- and maybe there wasn't one -- perhaps he was just messing with Obama's head, trying to disrupt the opponent's plans for three days of preparation...If the objective was to rattle Obama, it did not work. Although Obama is a methodical guy who does not relish chaos -- a trait that the Republicans might have been hoping to exploit -- he seemed unflappable on stage.
In retrospect, McCain's pre-debate drama was just plain silly and a pathetically hysterical attempt to dominate the campaign narrative for a couple of news cycles."
2) TW: Dick Morris (Fox political consultant/toe sucker) captures the true irresponsible cynicism of some Republican efforts in a post entitled "McCain's Trump Card". While pushing opposition as a political ploy, he baldly acknowledges the lack of substantive value of the Republican plan only the value of appearing to oppose the proposed Paulson plan:
"During Friday's debate, John McCain assiduously and inexplicably avoided using the issue that might have won him the debate and the presidency: opposition to a taxpayer-funded bailout of the financial crisis...In an unusual act of political foresight and skill, the normally dead-headed House Republican leadership has crafted a platform that can carry the party to victory in November. All that remains is for the Party's candidate - and perhaps even its president and Treasury Secretary - to get on board. McCain can recover at the negotiating table the economy issue he lost in Friday's debate. He needs to have the courage of his convictions and insist on a bailout without requiring taxpayer-funded purchase of defunct mortgages from failing institutions.
The difference in the bailout plans is, of course, largely cosmetic. Dead paper is dead paper whether it is on the books of the government, purchased from banks, or on the books of the banks, insured by the government...But it makes all the difference in the world politically...Loans are politically viable. Purchase of bad debt with tax money is not.
If McCain stands firm, the Democrats will either have to pass the bailout package on their own, without Republican votes, and rely on Bush's signature on the bill to provide a fig leaf of bipartisanship - or they will have to cave in and pass the Republican package. Either way, McCain comes out ahead. If he gets his way, he gets credit for the bailout. If he doesn't, he can spend the campaign attacking Obama and the Democrats for spending $700 billion of taxpayer money.If the Democrats don't adopt either course and play a game of chicken with the Republicans, their Congressional status as the majority party dooms them to taking the blame for any ensuing collapse."
3) TW: Some Republicans have seen and perhaps still see the bailout as a wedge issue for 2012. They see parallels with the 2002 Iraq War vote. I believe the analogy to be false. Yet I am sure some ambitious Republicans will not. Note the ideology check at the little right wing nut luncheons they apparently have weekly in DC.From Pethokoukis at USNWR:
"Here is, I think, a pretty safe prediction: The Republican presidential nominee in the summer of 2012 will have come out against the Paulson-Bernanke bailout plan in the fall of 2008...And don't be surprised if there are insurgent Republicans in 2010 who run against incumbent GOPer who voted for the bailout...there is a conservative meeting every Wednesday here in DC where aspiring conservative politicians show up to make their case to the activists. Each one is asked his or her view on "babies (meaning abortion), guns, and taxes." I think "bailout" might get added to that mix."
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/9/26/how-paulson-just-picked-the-2012-gop-nominee.html
New Poll!!! Who Will Do Best on Thursday
TW: A much anticipated event, the campaigns have different challenges with their respective candidates (obviously I would take Biden's challenges over Palin's). So we will see...
Obama won the last poll regarding Friday's debate 72% to 28%, thx.
Obama won the last poll regarding Friday's debate 72% to 28%, thx.
Taxi To the Darkside
TW: Premieres Tonight on HBO 8 CST, I have posted on my view of torture previously
We Shall See...
From Taegen Goddard:
"Sen. John McCain's campaign "moved its top officials inside Gov. Sarah Palin's operation Sunday to prepare for what is certain to be the most important event of her vice-presidential campaign: her debate on Thursday with Democrat Joe Biden," according to the Wall Street Journal.
Additionally, at the urging of McCain himself, Palin "will leave late Monday for his Arizona ranch to prepare for the high-stakes debate."
"The moves follow several shaky performances by Gov. Palin last week and come amid concern and grumbling from Republicans, and even a few queries from her husband, Todd Palin."
"Sen. John McCain's campaign "moved its top officials inside Gov. Sarah Palin's operation Sunday to prepare for what is certain to be the most important event of her vice-presidential campaign: her debate on Thursday with Democrat Joe Biden," according to the Wall Street Journal.
Additionally, at the urging of McCain himself, Palin "will leave late Monday for his Arizona ranch to prepare for the high-stakes debate."
"The moves follow several shaky performances by Gov. Palin last week and come amid concern and grumbling from Republicans, and even a few queries from her husband, Todd Palin."
Fox Makes the Pro Palin Argument
TW: Brit Hume and William Kristol (I can think of no one I despise more politically than Kristol)make the Palin case: 1) "let her be Sarah" whatever that means, freed of coaching from those damn Bushies, 2) have her admit she knows nothing about most national/international issues but will learn eventually. How many times have you heard post-mortems for losers where someone says- "if he/she had only been themself sooner".
As for their shots at Biden, there is a massive difference between a gaffe (i.e. Biden's 1929 comment) and showing utter lack of qualification and grasp of issues. Biden was not nominated based upon his knowledge of when TV initiated its role in politics. Palin claimed national security expertise based on Alaska's proximity to Russia, when that claim (and others) becomes absurd she has a problem.
As for their shots at Biden, there is a massive difference between a gaffe (i.e. Biden's 1929 comment) and showing utter lack of qualification and grasp of issues. Biden was not nominated based upon his knowledge of when TV initiated its role in politics. Palin claimed national security expertise based on Alaska's proximity to Russia, when that claim (and others) becomes absurd she has a problem.
Poll Trend Comps 2000/2004/2008
TW: Obviously comparing polls for '00/'04/'08 is somewhat tricky given the different timing of conventions and debates etc. but I find the comp interesting nevertheless. No doubt Mr. Obama is doing better than his immediate predecessors. Note how the polls in '00/'04 stabilized come October.This is from Pollster.com (which understates Obama's current position as Pollster average move fairly slowly, also you can click image to enlarge).
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Whatever Dude...Shut Up And Get a Real VP Nominee
From Taegan Goddard:
"I'll leave that up to others to make that judgment. This was an issue that was transcendent. I suspended my campaign and came back to Washington because I thought that it was vital to do so. Sen. Obama said he was available to discuss the issue by phone. I didn't want to phone it in. I'm proud that we were able to get this done, and I'll give the credit to everybody else."
-- Sen. John McCain, in an interview with the Columbus Dispatch, on why he needed to be back in Washington, D.C. to work on the bank rescue package
"He can effectively do what he needs to do by phone. He's calling members on both sides, talking to people in the administration, helping out as he can."
-- McCain aide Mark Salter, quoted by CBS News, explaining why his boss could work on the rescue package over the weekend from his campaign office and wasn't needed on Capitol Hill.
"I'll leave that up to others to make that judgment. This was an issue that was transcendent. I suspended my campaign and came back to Washington because I thought that it was vital to do so. Sen. Obama said he was available to discuss the issue by phone. I didn't want to phone it in. I'm proud that we were able to get this done, and I'll give the credit to everybody else."
-- Sen. John McCain, in an interview with the Columbus Dispatch, on why he needed to be back in Washington, D.C. to work on the bank rescue package
"He can effectively do what he needs to do by phone. He's calling members on both sides, talking to people in the administration, helping out as he can."
-- McCain aide Mark Salter, quoted by CBS News, explaining why his boss could work on the rescue package over the weekend from his campaign office and wasn't needed on Capitol Hill.
The Financial Bailout/Investment Plan (Post 1 of 3): Hold Nose and Be Thankful
TW: As I originally posted, this deal creates a financial dictatorship but I have yet to see a credible and politically viable alternative. Doing nothing is not an alternative. Many on both the left and the right hate this bill sometimes for the same reasons. Some economists who live in ivory towers think they could fashion a more elegant solution, none of which would have the slightest chance of being enacted. We should hope we are creating a not only benevolent but more importantly an effective dictatorship.
From Jim Cramer (btw I use him not because I believe him infallible but because he communicates succinctly on this issue without digressing into economic speak):
"...it looks like most people in America have no idea that what I'm referring to as the Treasury's 'Invest in America' plan -- I simply refuse to call it a bailout -- may forestall or actually stop the crash that anyone who understands finance and has any sophistication knew was going to happen soon, most likely this coming week. Explained poorly by the Bush administration and received with great hostility by the public, this plan was actually a great idea because it will eliminate the issue of solvency for the strong banks. They will be able to get rid of soured mortgage-related paper and raise capital to mitigate other losses in their portfolios. The irresponsibility of the grand standers who didn't understand the proposal or dallied about it shows how clueless Congress is about the precipice on which we continue to teeter...Without the plan it seems pretty certain that there could be some pretty large bank failures...
...I still believe that as it dawns on investors worldwide that we are in a severe recession...it will become clear that we aren't out of the woods by any means."
TW: The Republican House leadership appears to be finally reconciling themselves to behaving like Americans instead of Machiavellian partisans.
From Politico:
"In a closed-door session with House Republicans Sunday evening, Minority Leader John A. Boehner called the $700 billion financial rescue deal a “crap sandwich” — then said he plans to vote for it...After bashing the bailout plan for more than a week, rank-and-file Republicans are starting to accept what Boehner and others stated early on: The current economic meltdown is a bad situation – and a massive government intervention in the financial markets is regrettable response – but it’s their only option at this late stage in the crisis...Rep. Paul Ryan, a staunch conservative from Wisconsin, told his colleagues Sunday that he believes inaction could lead the country into a deep and prolonged recession...'This sucks'Ryan told his colleagues, according to people in the room, before telling Republicans that one of his local banks failed shortly after he withdrew money for his campaign." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14054.html
From Jim Cramer (btw I use him not because I believe him infallible but because he communicates succinctly on this issue without digressing into economic speak):
"...it looks like most people in America have no idea that what I'm referring to as the Treasury's 'Invest in America' plan -- I simply refuse to call it a bailout -- may forestall or actually stop the crash that anyone who understands finance and has any sophistication knew was going to happen soon, most likely this coming week. Explained poorly by the Bush administration and received with great hostility by the public, this plan was actually a great idea because it will eliminate the issue of solvency for the strong banks. They will be able to get rid of soured mortgage-related paper and raise capital to mitigate other losses in their portfolios. The irresponsibility of the grand standers who didn't understand the proposal or dallied about it shows how clueless Congress is about the precipice on which we continue to teeter...Without the plan it seems pretty certain that there could be some pretty large bank failures...
...I still believe that as it dawns on investors worldwide that we are in a severe recession...it will become clear that we aren't out of the woods by any means."
TW: The Republican House leadership appears to be finally reconciling themselves to behaving like Americans instead of Machiavellian partisans.
From Politico:
"In a closed-door session with House Republicans Sunday evening, Minority Leader John A. Boehner called the $700 billion financial rescue deal a “crap sandwich” — then said he plans to vote for it...After bashing the bailout plan for more than a week, rank-and-file Republicans are starting to accept what Boehner and others stated early on: The current economic meltdown is a bad situation – and a massive government intervention in the financial markets is regrettable response – but it’s their only option at this late stage in the crisis...Rep. Paul Ryan, a staunch conservative from Wisconsin, told his colleagues Sunday that he believes inaction could lead the country into a deep and prolonged recession...'This sucks'Ryan told his colleagues, according to people in the room, before telling Republicans that one of his local banks failed shortly after he withdrew money for his campaign." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14054.html
McCain Will Drop Palin By Tuesday
TW: This is my prediction. I make it not because it is the right thing to do for America but because I believe McCain has no choice if he has any chance of becoming POTUS. The context is that after both conventions and the first debate combined with serious structural factors favoring the Democrats (e.g. the economy, Iraq, Bush fatigue etc.), McCain is now behind in the latest poll by at least 6 points, and perhaps 8 after the polls catch up to the first debate impact by Tuesday. Time is running low in order for McCain to shift the narratives. If anything is clear about McCain he does not hesitate to take risks. One caveat is I do not know how one removes/resigns a party nominee in the interim between the convention and the election I am assuming it is legally feasible.
Fundamentally McCain can continue to try to defend the indefensible or take his medicine and move on. Sarah Palin has evolved from the moose mama taking arrows from the snobbish elites to a nearly defenseless Bambi taking shots not so much from the left who merely mock her now but also from the right. Palin is apparently off the campaign trail this weekend. My assumption is that the McCain folks are trying to work with her in order to ascertain whether she can appear legitimate in the upcoming debate next Thursday. I am forecasting their answer will be no. The move must be made this week prior to the debate in order to cauterize the wound and shift narratives before it is too late.
The pros and cons are:
Cons
Fundamentally McCain can continue to try to defend the indefensible or take his medicine and move on. Sarah Palin has evolved from the moose mama taking arrows from the snobbish elites to a nearly defenseless Bambi taking shots not so much from the left who merely mock her now but also from the right. Palin is apparently off the campaign trail this weekend. My assumption is that the McCain folks are trying to work with her in order to ascertain whether she can appear legitimate in the upcoming debate next Thursday. I am forecasting their answer will be no. The move must be made this week prior to the debate in order to cauterize the wound and shift narratives before it is too late.
The pros and cons are:
Cons
- McCain would endure a brutal 48 hour cycle during which he would rightly be castigated for the foolishness of the "Dave" Palin experiment. McCain's judgment would rightly be called into question for having been so reckless. During this 48 hour period his poll numbers will suffer an additional 3-5 point drop leaving him 10-13 points behind Obama
- The social conservatives originally energized by Palin will be perplexed and demotivated
Pros
- McCain will re-capture the narrative of the campaign. After the initial brutal period the narrative would shift immediately to vetting the new nominee and to process stories about how the new nominee can actually speak to the press, answer questions above the high school level, be a viable POTUS etc.
- The new nominee would be someone oriented to address the economic crisis. Mitt Romney is one possibility, I think Rob Portman (OH) former budget director and congressman is the more likely candidate. McCain would make argument that he is decisive. He would argue that he made a mistake but is putting the ecountry first by inserting a candidate prepared to work primarily on America's economic problems. In one stroke he excises an increasingly indefensible nominee and re-takes the initiative.
- Currently the relative inexperience of Obama, his weakest attribute, is more or less off the table due to Palin. With a new nominee, experience regains its place in the campaign.
- McCain will start to re-cover in the polls at which point the narrative will quickly turn to "McCain's comeback" as the media almost always focuses on relative change in the polls rather than the absolute poll numbers.
- As for the social conservatives, McCain will keep their money taken in over the past month. Heck some of them have probably already voted due to the early voting trend. At the end of the day, the base may lose some enthusiasm but that enthusiasm is bound to fade as Palin loses any remaining grip on viability.
- This ultimately is a "better late than never move", the conservative pundits would applaud the boldness and say the real John McCain is back.
To be clear, I do not believe John McCain wins this election merely by blowing out Palin and replacing her with Portman. Obama is a very strong candidate with what might then be a double digit lead with a month left to the election. To win, other material events would have to emerge- a serious Obama gaffe, an international event playing to McCain's benefit etc. However, with Palin on the ticket McCain might not be able to take advantage of such events and no amount of Rev Wright ads would do the trick. A change while risky might position him to be ready in the event of an Obama slip. Most importantly it would help mitigate what could turn into another Democratic wave election which would sweep in dozens more Congressional Democrats.
Update: Nate Silver at 538.com for whom I have great respect has posted on this topic arguing that McCain is stuck with Palin mostly because of risk of really pissing off the Republican social conservatives and appearing reckless in dropping his nominee. I addressed both in my post but here is his story. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/mccain-is-stuck-with-palin.html
The Stockton Record Endorses Obama
TW: The obvious question would be...so? Yet, this is its first Democratic endorsement since FDR over Alf Landon in 1936. This paper operates in Stockton/Lodi area of California which if you know that area you know it is NOT in any way liberal, the area has more in common with say Idaho than San Francisco. The paper picked such luminaries as: Goldwater over LBJ; Dewey and Wilkie over FDR during WWII; Dewey over Truman in '48; Nixon over Kennedy in '60 amongst others. Their editorial is actually a fairly good read, it is not merely an anti-McCain rant because he is not a true conservative or merely reckless for choosing Palin (although that is an issue for them). They actually seem to be impressed with Obama as well. The only downside is having picked a continuous string of Republicans arguably their judgment is a bit impaired but better late than never...
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080928/A_OPINION01/809280301/-1/A_OPINION
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080928/A_OPINION01/809280301/-1/A_OPINION
A Defensive Crouch Is No Position From Which To Lead
From the Economist:
"Peter Kirsanow at the National Review is enraged. Quoting the debate, he says
Obama concludes by saying "I don't think any of us can say that our standing in the world now, the way children around the world look at the United States, is the same." CLANG.
Explaining his fury, he writes that:
Criticizing George Bush or any of our other political leaders is one thing. Contending America's ideals and values are somehow suspect is a breathtaking statement for a prospective commander in chief to make, especially when thousands of Americans have given life and limb, sons and daughters, in brave demonstration of our ideals and values.
Come again? Barack Obama did not say that "America's ideals and values are somehow suspect." He said what everyone on earth knows. Worldwide, America is vastly less respected and loved than it was before George Bush. That is not because those ideals are suspect, but because the current government has tarnished America's reputation for upholding them, beyond recognition to many former fans of America. The rule of law, habeas corpus, torture, not starting wars unnecessarily... These were America's values. Now, as the kids say, not so much. Are there still people out there who do not see the damage to America's global leadership wrought by the Bush administration? Apparently there is at least one. "
TW: This is classic right-wing attack modality- brook no criticism of "America" and extrapolate any hint at such criticism into an anti-American insult. Reactionaries love a monochromatic idealized view of "America" and are afraid. Crouching into a defensive stance accomplishes nothing. Lashing out hither and yon achieves little while wasting precious resources.
Progressives love the US and wish to make it better by keeping it vigorous, adaptable and legitimate. Maintaining vigor and legitimacy while adapting to a changing world require aggressive questioning and action not rigidity.
"Peter Kirsanow at the National Review is enraged. Quoting the debate, he says
Obama concludes by saying "I don't think any of us can say that our standing in the world now, the way children around the world look at the United States, is the same." CLANG.
Explaining his fury, he writes that:
Criticizing George Bush or any of our other political leaders is one thing. Contending America's ideals and values are somehow suspect is a breathtaking statement for a prospective commander in chief to make, especially when thousands of Americans have given life and limb, sons and daughters, in brave demonstration of our ideals and values.
Come again? Barack Obama did not say that "America's ideals and values are somehow suspect." He said what everyone on earth knows. Worldwide, America is vastly less respected and loved than it was before George Bush. That is not because those ideals are suspect, but because the current government has tarnished America's reputation for upholding them, beyond recognition to many former fans of America. The rule of law, habeas corpus, torture, not starting wars unnecessarily... These were America's values. Now, as the kids say, not so much. Are there still people out there who do not see the damage to America's global leadership wrought by the Bush administration? Apparently there is at least one. "
TW: This is classic right-wing attack modality- brook no criticism of "America" and extrapolate any hint at such criticism into an anti-American insult. Reactionaries love a monochromatic idealized view of "America" and are afraid. Crouching into a defensive stance accomplishes nothing. Lashing out hither and yon achieves little while wasting precious resources.
Progressives love the US and wish to make it better by keeping it vigorous, adaptable and legitimate. Maintaining vigor and legitimacy while adapting to a changing world require aggressive questioning and action not rigidity.
Financial Deal Moving Forward
TW: Thankfully a deal albeit tardy appears headed to completion. John McCain deserves severe retribution for another reckless maneuver to place his political needs above the country. Furthermore do not lose sight of the fact that his fellow Republican "rebels" are the same incoherents whose ideological bent toward blind de-regulation and unfunded tax cuts (primarily oriented to the wealthy in particular the really wealthy in other words those "Wall Street Gordon Gekkos" who took home the 10-12 figure bonuses) helped get us here in the first place. The Washington Post piece is very interesting reading for those interested in understanding the cynical ways of DC.
From the Economist:
"...The political dealings are excruciating. Republican leaders are apparently making the case that they were about to sign on to a bad bill until John McCain saddled up his white horse and led a rebellion against the plan, helping leaders to arrive at this new, far better, compromise. As best I can tell, the new bill mainly differs from the old one in that it nominally includes the GOP plan to increase federal insurance of mortgage-backed securities, a plank which seems unlikely to do much of anything"
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2008/09/sunday_update.cfm
From WaPo:
" 'I appreciate what you've done here, but I'm not going to sign on to a deal just to sign the deal,' McCain told the gathering, according to Graham and confirmed by multiple Senate GOP aides. 'Just like Iraq, I'm not afraid to go it alone if I need to.'
For a moment, as Graham described it, 'you could hear a pin drop. It was just unbelievable.' Then pandemonium. By the time the meeting broke up, the agreement touted just hours before -- one that Sen. Lamar Alexander, the No. 3 GOP leader, estimated would be supported by more than 40 Senate Republicans -- was in shambles."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/26/AR2008092603957_pf.html
From the Economist:
"...The political dealings are excruciating. Republican leaders are apparently making the case that they were about to sign on to a bad bill until John McCain saddled up his white horse and led a rebellion against the plan, helping leaders to arrive at this new, far better, compromise. As best I can tell, the new bill mainly differs from the old one in that it nominally includes the GOP plan to increase federal insurance of mortgage-backed securities, a plank which seems unlikely to do much of anything"
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2008/09/sunday_update.cfm
From WaPo:
" 'I appreciate what you've done here, but I'm not going to sign on to a deal just to sign the deal,' McCain told the gathering, according to Graham and confirmed by multiple Senate GOP aides. 'Just like Iraq, I'm not afraid to go it alone if I need to.'
For a moment, as Graham described it, 'you could hear a pin drop. It was just unbelievable.' Then pandemonium. By the time the meeting broke up, the agreement touted just hours before -- one that Sen. Lamar Alexander, the No. 3 GOP leader, estimated would be supported by more than 40 Senate Republicans -- was in shambles."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/26/AR2008092603957_pf.html
Does She Survive At This Point?
Fey actually sounded more convincing than "Dave" using some of the same phrases used by Palin. I repeat this nomination is an irresponsible, reckless farce.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Can the Dems Get To 60 Seats In the Senate
TW: A new poll in Kentucky has me thinking about the Senate races. The Dems have dreams of getting to 60 Senate seats which would allow Senate Dems to achieve cloture and greatly increase their operational control of Congress. Going from the current 51 which includes Lieberman to 60 would require another wave election like 2006. Recall though until the Mark Foley scandal blew up the first week of Oct 2006, the Dems while ascendent were not expected to gain control of the Senate or even necessarily the House. When a "wave" hits, the ascendent party suddenly takes almost all close races plus previously barely competitive races become tos-ups. You can go to Congressional Quarterly or Stu Rothenburg's site to get regular status reports but roughly the Dems situation is as follows:
They will likely not lose any Senate seats, Landrieu in LA is the only vulnerable seat but expected to hold.
Mark Warner is heavily favored for John Warner's open seat in VA
Tom Udall is favored for Pete Domenieci''s open seat in NM
Mark Udall (Tom's cousin) is favored for Wayne Allard's open seat in CO
Jeanne Sheehan leads incumbent John Sununu in NH
Mark Begich leads incumbent Ted Stevens (the crooked one) in AK
Those five would get the Dems to 56. The Dems are in tight races in 3 more to get to 59:
MN with Al Franken v. incumbent Norm Coleman
MS with Roger Musgrave v. incumbent Roger Wicker
NC with Kay Hagan v. incumbent Elizabeth Dole
So the Dems would have to pull a sweep just to get to 59 unless...the wave hit putting another 3 or 4 seats in play
KY with Bruce Hubbard v. incumbent Mitch McConnell
OR with Jeff Merkley v. incumbent Gordon Smith
ME with Tom Allen v. Susan Collins (Smith and Collins are decent Senators just in the wrong party)
"Dave" Palin had really helped the Congressional Republicans by energizing their base but she may no longer be enough. The KY result is only one poll but if legit these races are correlated, if McConnell is truly struggling then several other Republicans will be as well. All the tight races get really interesting for the Dems and those marginally competitive races like KY, OR, and ME become competitive. We still have five weeks though many things can change either way.
From Taegen Goodard:
"A new Courier-Journal Bluegrass Poll finds Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in a dead heat with challenger Bruce Lunsford (D), 41% to 41%, among likely voters...McConnell does inch ahead 45% to 44% [if leaners included]. Knocking off McConnell would dramatically help Democrats in reaching 60 seats in the U.S. Senate.
Said Larry Sabato: "If Lunsford is actually doing this well, its got to be because the public is so upset by the economic meltdown and may be blaming the legislative leaders. If this is true, Democrats may win a lot more seats in both the House and the Senate than people are predicting."
They will likely not lose any Senate seats, Landrieu in LA is the only vulnerable seat but expected to hold.
Mark Warner is heavily favored for John Warner's open seat in VA
Tom Udall is favored for Pete Domenieci''s open seat in NM
Mark Udall (Tom's cousin) is favored for Wayne Allard's open seat in CO
Jeanne Sheehan leads incumbent John Sununu in NH
Mark Begich leads incumbent Ted Stevens (the crooked one) in AK
Those five would get the Dems to 56. The Dems are in tight races in 3 more to get to 59:
MN with Al Franken v. incumbent Norm Coleman
MS with Roger Musgrave v. incumbent Roger Wicker
NC with Kay Hagan v. incumbent Elizabeth Dole
So the Dems would have to pull a sweep just to get to 59 unless...the wave hit putting another 3 or 4 seats in play
KY with Bruce Hubbard v. incumbent Mitch McConnell
OR with Jeff Merkley v. incumbent Gordon Smith
ME with Tom Allen v. Susan Collins (Smith and Collins are decent Senators just in the wrong party)
"Dave" Palin had really helped the Congressional Republicans by energizing their base but she may no longer be enough. The KY result is only one poll but if legit these races are correlated, if McConnell is truly struggling then several other Republicans will be as well. All the tight races get really interesting for the Dems and those marginally competitive races like KY, OR, and ME become competitive. We still have five weeks though many things can change either way.
From Taegen Goodard:
"A new Courier-Journal Bluegrass Poll finds Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in a dead heat with challenger Bruce Lunsford (D), 41% to 41%, among likely voters...McConnell does inch ahead 45% to 44% [if leaners included]. Knocking off McConnell would dramatically help Democrats in reaching 60 seats in the U.S. Senate.
Said Larry Sabato: "If Lunsford is actually doing this well, its got to be because the public is so upset by the economic meltdown and may be blaming the legislative leaders. If this is true, Democrats may win a lot more seats in both the House and the Senate than people are predicting."
Early Voting Harms the Electoral Process
TW: Newsweek's George Will rightly excoriates the increasing use of early voting in the US. This issue gets little attention but has significant implications. Amongst other problems, voting weeks before the actual election creates a material void into which new events can intervene. For instance, I believe there is a material chance "Dave" Palin withdraws (assuming it is technically feasible) before the election. One could think of a hundred more.
From Will:
"...in 1980, only 5 percent of the votes were cast before what really was Election Day. If this year, like 2004, produces an increase in early voting, close to 30 percent of the votes will have been cast before Nov. 4...'the academic consensus is that mail and absentee-ballot voting "has little or no effect on voter turnout except in low-turnout elections'...A word describes most of the people who will vote only if a ballot is shoved through their mail slot: "slothful." What kind of people will not bestir themselves to exercise their franchise if doing so requires them to get off their couches and visit neighborhood polling places? People who are barely interested, and hence probably are barely informed."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161202
From Will:
"...in 1980, only 5 percent of the votes were cast before what really was Election Day. If this year, like 2004, produces an increase in early voting, close to 30 percent of the votes will have been cast before Nov. 4...'the academic consensus is that mail and absentee-ballot voting "has little or no effect on voter turnout except in low-turnout elections'...A word describes most of the people who will vote only if a ballot is shoved through their mail slot: "slothful." What kind of people will not bestir themselves to exercise their franchise if doing so requires them to get off their couches and visit neighborhood polling places? People who are barely interested, and hence probably are barely informed."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161202
It Is Hard To Be Smug When You Are a Debtor Nation
TW: The US is used to being the big dog on the worldstage, telling other nations what to do and how to manage their economies. Those days may be coming to an end. Below is only one person's opinion, but when one builds up multi trillion $ debts and has one's financial system fall apart with major component banks lying prostrate (and several carcasses being snapped up by international firms), one cannot expect to strut with quite the same gusto.
From Bloomberg:
Japan, China and other holders of U.S. government debt must quickly reach an agreement to prevent panic sales leading to a global financial collapse, said Yu Yongding, a former adviser to the Chinese central bank...'We are in the same boat, we must cooperate...If there's no selling in a panicked way, then China willingly can continue to provide our financial support by continuing to hold U.S. assets...An agreement is needed so that no nation rushes to sell causing a collapse'... Japan is the biggest owner of U.S. Treasury bills, holding $593 billion, and China is second with $519 billion. Asian countries together hold half of the $2.67 trillion total held by foreign nations.
`China is very worried about the safety of its assets...If you want China to keep calm, you must ensure China that its assets are safe.' China is helping the U.S. 'in a very big way' and added that it should get something in return...It is not fair that we are doing this in good faith and are prepared to bear serious consequences and you are still labeling China this and that...China knows what to do. We don't need your intervention.'
The U.S. financial crisis had taught China a lesson and that was: ``Why are we piling up these IOUs if they may default?...Our export-growth strategy has run its natural course...We should change course..[these IOUs are] paper and it may default and it will not increase China's national welfare.' '
http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=anZHfo6tQi60&refer=home
From Bloomberg:
Japan, China and other holders of U.S. government debt must quickly reach an agreement to prevent panic sales leading to a global financial collapse, said Yu Yongding, a former adviser to the Chinese central bank...'We are in the same boat, we must cooperate...If there's no selling in a panicked way, then China willingly can continue to provide our financial support by continuing to hold U.S. assets...An agreement is needed so that no nation rushes to sell causing a collapse'... Japan is the biggest owner of U.S. Treasury bills, holding $593 billion, and China is second with $519 billion. Asian countries together hold half of the $2.67 trillion total held by foreign nations.
`China is very worried about the safety of its assets...If you want China to keep calm, you must ensure China that its assets are safe.' China is helping the U.S. 'in a very big way' and added that it should get something in return...It is not fair that we are doing this in good faith and are prepared to bear serious consequences and you are still labeling China this and that...China knows what to do. We don't need your intervention.'
The U.S. financial crisis had taught China a lesson and that was: ``Why are we piling up these IOUs if they may default?...Our export-growth strategy has run its natural course...We should change course..[these IOUs are] paper and it may default and it will not increase China's national welfare.' '
http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=anZHfo6tQi60&refer=home
The Panic Sets In...
TW: I mentioned a couple of days ago if McCain did not come out of Oxford with some some serious Mo that panic would ensue. McCain is now faced with both strategic headwinds (e.g. the disastrous economy, Iraq, Bush fatigue etc.) and self inflicted wounds (e.g. the airdrop into the DC negotiations that pissed off many and accomplished nothing, the growing Palin embarassment). I expect the really nasty negative Obama ad stuff to be out by next Friday (not sure if they will wait for the VP debate or not so it could be earlier as McCain could be approaching double digit poll deficits by Monday). Rev. Wright will have his next 15 seconds of fame soon enough. Perhaps this is all a huge effort to lower expectations for the VP debate but I do not think so.
From Dan Larison at the American Conservative:
"The entire Palin episode has been like some drunken bacchanalia that gave way to a terrified awakening several weeks too late. When her critics were painting her as a new Eagleton, her supporters were laughing at them as lunatics filled with hate, and now they are beginning to think that the haters may have been onto something. The GOP is experiencing self-immolation, and I can’t say that I am very bothered by that."[TW: Larison is apparently a member of a Republican sect which believes the party house needs to be burned down in order to re-build it, those House Republicans opposing the financial bailout are members of the same sect]
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/09/26/t-minus-six-days/
From Ed Shultz (progressive pundit)
"Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin. The campaign has held a mock debate and a mock press conference; both are being described as 'disastrous.' One senior McCain aide was quoted as saying, 'What are we going to do?' The McCain people want to move this first debate to some later, undetermined date, possibly never. People on the inside are saying the Alaska Governor is 'clueless.' "
From Dan Larison at the American Conservative:
"The entire Palin episode has been like some drunken bacchanalia that gave way to a terrified awakening several weeks too late. When her critics were painting her as a new Eagleton, her supporters were laughing at them as lunatics filled with hate, and now they are beginning to think that the haters may have been onto something. The GOP is experiencing self-immolation, and I can’t say that I am very bothered by that."[TW: Larison is apparently a member of a Republican sect which believes the party house needs to be burned down in order to re-build it, those House Republicans opposing the financial bailout are members of the same sect]
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/09/26/t-minus-six-days/
From Ed Shultz (progressive pundit)
"Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin. The campaign has held a mock debate and a mock press conference; both are being described as 'disastrous.' One senior McCain aide was quoted as saying, 'What are we going to do?' The McCain people want to move this first debate to some later, undetermined date, possibly never. People on the inside are saying the Alaska Governor is 'clueless.' "
Paul Newman
TW: Vanity Fair ran a great piece on Newman back in April, if you were a fan the piece provided background not only on the acting but the rest of Newman's considerable contributions. I also pulled up my favorite Newman scene from Cool Hand Luke.
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/09/newman200809
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/09/newman200809
One More Debate Post...
TW: because Mike Murphy (Republican strategist but not a complete homer) makes some good points.
From Murphy:
No game-changer...Both campaigns will now employ first-rate funhouse mirror logic to claim smashing victories. McCain will say this puts him back in the race. They won't complete that sentence which should read...'after two weeks of Keystone Cops style bumbling around.' The McCain campaign's all tactics/no strategy management style continues to hobble his campaign...He has no room for any more mistakes
Some questions going forward:
After Hurricane CBS, does Sarah Palin now carry some actual expectations into her debate? As in proving she can do the job. I think so. I've argued since the beginning that on a strategic level she was a poor choice. She is now on the verge of being a real problem by election day.
Will Joe Biden react to the inevitable Democrat insider complaints about Obama's bloodless style by over-doing his attacks on Palin in their debate?
Will the Obama generals look at McCain's spending freeze idea and see a juicy opportunity for the traditional Democrat tactic of attacking the proposed freeze as dire "cuts" on the most vulnerable or on popular programs with a lot of political support? Team Obama is already shamelessly distorting McCain's position on Social Security... this would be an easy, if shameless, next step."
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/debate_thoughts.html
From Murphy:
No game-changer...Both campaigns will now employ first-rate funhouse mirror logic to claim smashing victories. McCain will say this puts him back in the race. They won't complete that sentence which should read...'after two weeks of Keystone Cops style bumbling around.' The McCain campaign's all tactics/no strategy management style continues to hobble his campaign...He has no room for any more mistakes
Some questions going forward:
After Hurricane CBS, does Sarah Palin now carry some actual expectations into her debate? As in proving she can do the job. I think so. I've argued since the beginning that on a strategic level she was a poor choice. She is now on the verge of being a real problem by election day.
Will Joe Biden react to the inevitable Democrat insider complaints about Obama's bloodless style by over-doing his attacks on Palin in their debate?
Will the Obama generals look at McCain's spending freeze idea and see a juicy opportunity for the traditional Democrat tactic of attacking the proposed freeze as dire "cuts" on the most vulnerable or on popular programs with a lot of political support? Team Obama is already shamelessly distorting McCain's position on Social Security... this would be an easy, if shameless, next step."
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/debate_thoughts.html
Where Oh Where Is My Wingwoman...
From New Republic:
"CNN's Wolf Blitzer: 'We've been getting some emails from views out there wondering why we spent some time interviewing Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee and not Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. We would have loved to interview--we'd still love to interview Sarah Palin. Unfortunately we asked, we didn't get that interview...We're hoping that Sarah Palin will join us at some point down the road.'
I'm told that Biden appeared on every major network tonight except ABC (which only turned him down because Palin wasn't available, on an equal-time sort of basis). It's pretty strange when a candidate can't trust his own running mate to be out there spinning on his behalf.
And it's funny that a lot of McCain supporters seem to think that's about media bias and not the fact that Palin is in lockdown somewhere."
"CNN's Wolf Blitzer: 'We've been getting some emails from views out there wondering why we spent some time interviewing Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee and not Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. We would have loved to interview--we'd still love to interview Sarah Palin. Unfortunately we asked, we didn't get that interview...We're hoping that Sarah Palin will join us at some point down the road.'
I'm told that Biden appeared on every major network tonight except ABC (which only turned him down because Palin wasn't available, on an equal-time sort of basis). It's pretty strange when a candidate can't trust his own running mate to be out there spinning on his behalf.
And it's funny that a lot of McCain supporters seem to think that's about media bias and not the fact that Palin is in lockdown somewhere."
Pakistan a Mess That Is Getting Messier
TW: Andrew Bacevich is a very good national security pundit who writes for the LA Times amongst others. Pakistan is our next emerging international flash point. A potentially very bright flash point given Pakistan nuclear armed status. Pakistan has a population of 170MM growing by 10K/day, barely navigable terrain, deep ethnic divisions, an internal security organization with likely more ties to the Taliban than to our CIA and a huge rivalry with India. It is the Afghanistan or Iraq mess squared, maybe cubed.
The topic was broached briefly in the first debate, Obama if anything is more bellicose than McCain relative to Pakistan. Regardless the next President will have his hands full. I would take any media reporting on our activities inside Pakistan with a grain of salt. Perhaps we and the Pakistanis have been exchanging fire. More likely our special forces have been operating inside Pakistan for years including pre-9/11. Both sides have an interest in keeping what is "really going-on" out of the public eye. I disagree with Bacevich in that Bush is just now opening this front, what is just now starting is this front being discussed more openly in public.
From Bacevich:
"To the existing fronts in Afghanistan and Iraq, [Bush] is adding a third: Pakistan...Musharraf was not only a dictator, he was incompetent...Pakistan has become the next problem that the president intends to solve through the application of armed force. Without congressional authorization and almost entirely shielded from public view, a new war has begun...The real aim of these raids is to goad Pakistan into action...
The problem with this strategy of goading is twofold. First, U.S. expectations probably exceed Pakistani capabilities: Pakistan's army is large but not notably effective, especially as a counterinsurgent force. Second, Pakistani national security priorities differ from our own. Traditionally, Pakistani generals like Kayani worry more about India than the Taliban. In short, when it comes to doing our bidding, Pakistan's army can't and won't. Rather than prodding Pakistan to act, the Pentagon over the next several months could again find itself starting something that it cannot finish...
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-bacevich27-2008sep27,0,4559985.story
The topic was broached briefly in the first debate, Obama if anything is more bellicose than McCain relative to Pakistan. Regardless the next President will have his hands full. I would take any media reporting on our activities inside Pakistan with a grain of salt. Perhaps we and the Pakistanis have been exchanging fire. More likely our special forces have been operating inside Pakistan for years including pre-9/11. Both sides have an interest in keeping what is "really going-on" out of the public eye. I disagree with Bacevich in that Bush is just now opening this front, what is just now starting is this front being discussed more openly in public.
From Bacevich:
"To the existing fronts in Afghanistan and Iraq, [Bush] is adding a third: Pakistan...Musharraf was not only a dictator, he was incompetent...Pakistan has become the next problem that the president intends to solve through the application of armed force. Without congressional authorization and almost entirely shielded from public view, a new war has begun...The real aim of these raids is to goad Pakistan into action...
The problem with this strategy of goading is twofold. First, U.S. expectations probably exceed Pakistani capabilities: Pakistan's army is large but not notably effective, especially as a counterinsurgent force. Second, Pakistani national security priorities differ from our own. Traditionally, Pakistani generals like Kayani worry more about India than the Taliban. In short, when it comes to doing our bidding, Pakistan's army can't and won't. Rather than prodding Pakistan to act, the Pentagon over the next several months could again find itself starting something that it cannot finish...
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-bacevich27-2008sep27,0,4559985.story
It Was a Push But Obama Wins Ties At This Point
TW: I will not spend much time parsing the debate. There are a hundred folks in the blogosphere on that job. I post two items which I thought were the best I read: an Economist live blog blow by blow and Joe Klein's re-cap. I have also put in a Fox post debate video (Luntz is a Republican btw), it seems the snap polling shows Obama "winning" but I will be far more interested to see if the daily trackers budge over the next couple of days.
Would certainly be interested in your comments.
Net net I would take either of the two in a heart beat as my President over W. Bush. Watching those two folks, who both command the facts and nuances in a sophisticated manner, is comforting relative to the guy who has been in the White House for the past eight years. If forced to score the debate, I would give McCain a slight advantage but nothing profound and again Obama just needed to stay close. More importantly Obama as the relatively new face needed to seem plausible as a POTUS, he did without question. This is Obama's race to lose now, it has been for awhile but the finish line is quickly coming into focus.
PS Jonathan Alter on MSNBC: "The biggest loser? Sarah Palin. The debates set a standard she cannot live up to"
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/09/an_oxfordstyle_debate.cfm
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1845114,00.html
Would certainly be interested in your comments.
Net net I would take either of the two in a heart beat as my President over W. Bush. Watching those two folks, who both command the facts and nuances in a sophisticated manner, is comforting relative to the guy who has been in the White House for the past eight years. If forced to score the debate, I would give McCain a slight advantage but nothing profound and again Obama just needed to stay close. More importantly Obama as the relatively new face needed to seem plausible as a POTUS, he did without question. This is Obama's race to lose now, it has been for awhile but the finish line is quickly coming into focus.
PS Jonathan Alter on MSNBC: "The biggest loser? Sarah Palin. The debates set a standard she cannot live up to"
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/09/an_oxfordstyle_debate.cfm
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1845114,00.html
Friday, September 26, 2008
A Nation In Debt Is a Nation At Risk
TW: I have been harping on our debt as a primary cause of our current crisis. This chart from the Economist highlights my point. One can see the debt spike during the Great Depression (am still hoping that name retains its exclusivity) and WWII. Then a period of steady debt ratios then boom, Reagan Revolution. The ideology of cut taxes regardless of consequences began. One sees another inflection point after the relative steadiness of the Clinton years, when we combined reckless tax cuts with reckless warmaking.
Who Would Handle the Economy Better?
The latest Hotline daily has Obama up 7%, one can see why given the data on the left which asked who would better manage the economy. So far McCain's gambit with the financial crisis which started on 9/24 has failed miserably. But it is still early. Needless to say he must perform well tonight otherwise expect panic (and alot of Rev Wright ads).
Greatest Hits From Past Debates
TW: Time pulled together 10 key moments from past Presidential/VP debates, if you have a little time take a look. I post my all-time favorite, I cannot imagine a more humiliating recurrence than the Bentsen/Quayle slapdown (but even that one ultimately made little impact).
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/preview/article/0,28804,1844704_1844706,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/preview/article/0,28804,1844704_1844706,00.html
Wag the Dog: McCain Won the Debate
TW: McCain's campaign apparently already has internet ads up trumpeting McCain having won the debate. You know the one tonight, the one he was not going to go to until about an hour ago...http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_wins_debate.html
Atlantic: Bush Pushed Gonzales To Subvert Laws
TW: This is the type story that gets lost because of everything going on and overall fatigue with W. Bush's travesties. But these stories are important and should not be ignored, the things W. Bush's Administration perpetuated during his two terms will soil history books for years to come.
From Atlantic:
"Sources say Alberto Gonzales now claims that President Bush personally directed him to John Ashcroft's hospital room in the infamous wiretap renewal incident—and that in another instance the President asked him to fabricate fictitious notes"
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200809u/gonzales-investigation
From Atlantic:
"Sources say Alberto Gonzales now claims that President Bush personally directed him to John Ashcroft's hospital room in the infamous wiretap renewal incident—and that in another instance the President asked him to fabricate fictitious notes"
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200809u/gonzales-investigation
As Predicted the Man Is a Putz
TW: admittedly it was an easy prediction but McCain is doing more or less exactly as I predicted, headed to Oxford now that he has set Congress straight...
From Dick Morris (amoral political consultant nutbag, former Bill Clinton advisor, Hillary Clinton hater, McCain sycophant, and toe sucker {yes he was the one busted in 1996 with the callgirl}):
"McCain has transformed a minority in both houses of Congress and a losing position in the polls into the key role in the bailout package, the main man around whom the final package will take shape. He arrived in Washington to find the Democrats working with the Bush Administration to pass an unpopular $700 billion bailout. The Democrats had already cut their deal with Bush. The Dems agreed to the price tag while Bush agreed to special aid to families facing foreclosure, equity for the taxpayers, and limits on executive compensation. But no sooner had McCain arrived than he derailed the deal...By Monday, at the latest, the Democrats have to cave in and pass the Republican version. They don’t dare pass their own without GOP support, so they will have to cave in to the Republican version.Then McCain comes out of the process as the hero who made it happen when the president couldn’t and Obama wouldn’t. He becomes the bailout expert."
From Dick Morris (amoral political consultant nutbag, former Bill Clinton advisor, Hillary Clinton hater, McCain sycophant, and toe sucker {yes he was the one busted in 1996 with the callgirl}):
"McCain has transformed a minority in both houses of Congress and a losing position in the polls into the key role in the bailout package, the main man around whom the final package will take shape. He arrived in Washington to find the Democrats working with the Bush Administration to pass an unpopular $700 billion bailout. The Democrats had already cut their deal with Bush. The Dems agreed to the price tag while Bush agreed to special aid to families facing foreclosure, equity for the taxpayers, and limits on executive compensation. But no sooner had McCain arrived than he derailed the deal...By Monday, at the latest, the Democrats have to cave in and pass the Republican version. They don’t dare pass their own without GOP support, so they will have to cave in to the Republican version.Then McCain comes out of the process as the hero who made it happen when the president couldn’t and Obama wouldn’t. He becomes the bailout expert."
Giving Couric Credit- UPDATED As Conservatives Turn Tail on Palin
TW: Jim Fallows from the Atlantic gives a calm but devastating critique of the Couric Palin interview while rightly crediting Couric for a very strong interview approach. I think Couric was
very tough but so subtly and fairly that no one can legitimately criticize her approach. I have added other critiques as the Couric impact settles in. The right-wingers like Parker have been very slow on the uptake but now they are running for the hills.
From Kathleen Parker (probably one of my least favorite conservatives):
"It was fun while it lasted...[the interviews] have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League. No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted. Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there...If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself...Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons"
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more
Fallows:
"She is not as smart or disciplined as Barack Obama. If she were, she would sound better than she does at this point. And the McCain team has done absolutely nothing to defuse these problems -- nor, to be honest, has Palin herself apparently learned the first thing about successfully finessing questions she is not ready to handle. (Hint: the approach is not the one she has tried to apply with Katie Couric, that of repeating verbatim the answer that did not do the job the first time around.)"
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/ive_now_seen_much_of_the_katie.php
From Economist:
"IT'S too ghastly to laugh at: you almost (not quite, but almost) feel some pity for her. A drama-critic friend of mine made a good point: I think what we're seeing is someone who thought she knew everything discover how little she actually knows, and it terrifies her. Compare her demeanor in the Gibson interview to this one. In the first, she was poised and confident. Sure, she spat out talking points and opaque answers, but she stuck to her script, until Mr Gibson rattled her with the Bush doctrine question. With Ms Couric, conversely, she rambled, she edited her own sentences recursively, she looked away from time to time, and her answers did not make sense—and I don't mean political sense; I mean they made no grammatical or logical sense. Vladimir Putin rearing his head and floating into American air space, tax relief needing to accompany tax reductions, one in five jobs coming in "the trade sector": these are the words of someone who's rattled. She's politically savvy, so she has a modicum of self-awareness and, as she's said before, she knows she can't blink; she knows she has to seem confident in what she's saying. But I'm also willing to bet she's just smart enough to know how truly out of her depth she is."
very tough but so subtly and fairly that no one can legitimately criticize her approach. I have added other critiques as the Couric impact settles in. The right-wingers like Parker have been very slow on the uptake but now they are running for the hills.
From Kathleen Parker (probably one of my least favorite conservatives):
"It was fun while it lasted...[the interviews] have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League. No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted. Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there...If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself...Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons"
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more
Fallows:
"She is not as smart or disciplined as Barack Obama. If she were, she would sound better than she does at this point. And the McCain team has done absolutely nothing to defuse these problems -- nor, to be honest, has Palin herself apparently learned the first thing about successfully finessing questions she is not ready to handle. (Hint: the approach is not the one she has tried to apply with Katie Couric, that of repeating verbatim the answer that did not do the job the first time around.)"
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/ive_now_seen_much_of_the_katie.php
From Economist:
"IT'S too ghastly to laugh at: you almost (not quite, but almost) feel some pity for her. A drama-critic friend of mine made a good point: I think what we're seeing is someone who thought she knew everything discover how little she actually knows, and it terrifies her. Compare her demeanor in the Gibson interview to this one. In the first, she was poised and confident. Sure, she spat out talking points and opaque answers, but she stuck to her script, until Mr Gibson rattled her with the Bush doctrine question. With Ms Couric, conversely, she rambled, she edited her own sentences recursively, she looked away from time to time, and her answers did not make sense—and I don't mean political sense; I mean they made no grammatical or logical sense. Vladimir Putin rearing his head and floating into American air space, tax relief needing to accompany tax reductions, one in five jobs coming in "the trade sector": these are the words of someone who's rattled. She's politically savvy, so she has a modicum of self-awareness and, as she's said before, she knows she can't blink; she knows she has to seem confident in what she's saying. But I'm also willing to bet she's just smart enough to know how truly out of her depth she is."
Cramer on the Republicans Playing With Fire
Jim Cramer (from the Steet.com):
"Suddenly, there is a new consensus that we are not in trouble and that there are better ways to get bad loans off the books. Suddenly, we have competing plans and professors who tell us not to hurry. Suddenly, we are back on the complacency bandwagon.
Suddenly, Eric Cantor[Republican Congressman] from the great state of New Jersey [sic he is actually from VA] has a plan that's "better" than Paulson's plan.
Suddenly, we are in even more trouble than I thought.
Now it is beginning to dawn on me. When we were all growing up we learned about what caused the Great Depression and how it seemed so easy to stop, but they wouldn't do the right thing. They didn't understand the way things could go badly so quickly. They didn't understand the psychology of the moment and how it was undermining the whole nation. "
"Suddenly, there is a new consensus that we are not in trouble and that there are better ways to get bad loans off the books. Suddenly, we have competing plans and professors who tell us not to hurry. Suddenly, we are back on the complacency bandwagon.
Suddenly, Eric Cantor[Republican Congressman] from the great state of New Jersey [sic he is actually from VA] has a plan that's "better" than Paulson's plan.
Suddenly, we are in even more trouble than I thought.
Now it is beginning to dawn on me. When we were all growing up we learned about what caused the Great Depression and how it seemed so easy to stop, but they wouldn't do the right thing. They didn't understand the way things could go badly so quickly. They didn't understand the psychology of the moment and how it was undermining the whole nation. "
Two Views On McCain
TW: Here are two columns on McCain. David Brooks' (NYT) basic message is that McCain may have run hard to the right in campaign using Rovian tactics but if elected will like Cinderella magically morph back into the maverick man of honor and judgment he used to be. Judis (New Republic) rebuts Brooks with the obvious. Whether McCain was a maverick or not (TW: and that is highly debatable), McCain of 2008 cannot be reconciled with the recklessness he has displayed with the Palin pick, his interference in the financial crisis and his aggressive embrace of the right wing nut elements of his party.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/opinion/26brooks.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/26/putting-country-last.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/opinion/26brooks.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/26/putting-country-last.aspx
NYT Norris: The Decline of American Power
TW: I will continue to harp on American debt being at the center of this crisis, Norris adds support:
From Norris: "Following is an excerpt from a recent book, “For the Soul of Mankind: The United States, the Soviet Union and the Cold War,” by Melvin P. Leffler, a historian at the University of Virginia. He is discussing Dwight Eisenhower’s policies when he became president in 1953:
"The real challenge, Ike maintained in one of his campaign speeches, 'is to build the defense with wisdom and efficiency. We must achieve both security and solvency. In fact, the foundation of military strength is economic strength. A bankrupt America is more the Soviet goal than an America conquered on the field of battle."
More from Norris:
If Ike were able to hear what is going on now, he would probably cringe at the comments made today by Peer Steinbrueck, the German finance minister, as reported by Bloomberg:
“One thing seems probable to me: The U.S. will lose its status as the superpower of the global financial system.”
Economist: The Farce Continues
"Details are very unclear at this point, but it seems that an agreement on principles between administration officials and Congressional leaders feel apart roughly around the time the two presidential candidates were meeting with president Bush...Treasury secretary Hank Paulson apparently got down on his knees and begged House speaker Nancy Pelosi to move ahead with the bill, despite the fact that House Republicans were turning tail and running as rapidly as their partisan legs would carry them. Anxious to salvage their own political fortunes and those of their presidential candidate, John McCain, the GOP basically gave up on the bill and offered a counter-proposal consisting of '...insurance on mortgage-backed securities and advocating tax cuts and relaxed regulations'...
Markets are spooked, as you might expect, and central banks have been working to keep the situation under control while the bailout debacle plays out. The Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and Swiss National Bank have been injecting massive amounts of capital into money markets, which have nearly screeched to a halt. Libor remains near its highest level since January...Washington Mutual is no more.
Hold on to your hats, readers. This could be a Friday to remember."
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2008/09/above_the_fold_267.cfm
Markets are spooked, as you might expect, and central banks have been working to keep the situation under control while the bailout debacle plays out. The Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and Swiss National Bank have been injecting massive amounts of capital into money markets, which have nearly screeched to a halt. Libor remains near its highest level since January...Washington Mutual is no more.
Hold on to your hats, readers. This could be a Friday to remember."
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2008/09/above_the_fold_267.cfm
CNN: Party First Then Country
From Ed Rollins (Republican strategist)
"At the end of the day, there's a lot of people thinking about how to rebuild this party...And I think to a certain extent this 110, 115 members of this study group are saying, here's the time to draw the line in the sand."
"That's pretty scary stuff that they're thinking about party right now and not country, is that what you're saying?" responded host Anderson Cooper.
"I think they're, yes, they're thinking about themselves," said Rollins. "I think they don't think that the threat is as great as a lot of other people do."
From Politico:
"some House Republicans are saying privately that they'd rather 'let the markets crash' than sign on to a massive bailout."
"At the end of the day, there's a lot of people thinking about how to rebuild this party...And I think to a certain extent this 110, 115 members of this study group are saying, here's the time to draw the line in the sand."
"That's pretty scary stuff that they're thinking about party right now and not country, is that what you're saying?" responded host Anderson Cooper.
"I think they're, yes, they're thinking about themselves," said Rollins. "I think they don't think that the threat is as great as a lot of other people do."
From Politico:
"some House Republicans are saying privately that they'd rather 'let the markets crash' than sign on to a massive bailout."
Thursday, September 25, 2008
One More Palin Couric Video: This One Is Not Amusing
TW: It was one thing for Palin to claim foreign policy experience based on the ridiculous basis that Alaska is next to Russia and sound incompetent trying to sell the concept. It is another thing entirely to hear her incoherently and irresponsibly attempt to articulate how the US and Israel should interact in matters potentially involving nuclear weapons.
I heard Republican strategist Ed Rollins tonight opine in reaction to the Couric interviews that Palin had lost the confidence she displayed initially in Minneapolis. I agree she has lost confidence but in MN Palin was like the young athlete brashly taking the reins not knowing any better. She was also merely making campaign speeches. Now that she is being asked to play in the big leagues after having let the enormity of what she is meant to be doing sink in, things are different, very different. She is in over her head, for that John McCain is to blame.
I heard Republican strategist Ed Rollins tonight opine in reaction to the Couric interviews that Palin had lost the confidence she displayed initially in Minneapolis. I agree she has lost confidence but in MN Palin was like the young athlete brashly taking the reins not knowing any better. She was also merely making campaign speeches. Now that she is being asked to play in the big leagues after having let the enormity of what she is meant to be doing sink in, things are different, very different. She is in over her head, for that John McCain is to blame.
The Farce in DC
TW: I will go out on the limb a bit. Despite the ruckus this evening a deal on the "bailout" will be announced by say 2 CST (in time for McCain to get to Oxford in time for the debate). McCain will claim to have exerted his maverick, bi-partisan, country first magic in order to pull his own Republican rebels into line while minimizing the damage proposed by the Dems.
I mentioned earlier this deal had to be bi-partisan otherwise every little Republican Congressman would be out there shrieking about how they opposed the "bailout" or in other free ride off a bill that must pass unless one wants to wake up to complete finanical gridlock next week. Gridlock that would make what has happened thus far seem like a weak prelude.
There is a small chance McCain truly goes for broke and opposes the bill forcing the Dems and the Bush Admin to fashion a bill without many Republicans and maybe Lieberman. While this would allow McCain to wield his bloody maverick shirt and separate soundly from W. Bush, even I do not think he is that reckless.
From the Obama campaign:
"John McCain sought to change the subject from his out-of-touch response to the economic crisis with a big announcement that he was 'suspending' his campaign. But the only thing McCain really wants suspended is the American people's disbelief. In fact, he's been in full campaign mode the entire time..."When McCain finally arrived in Washington, almost twenty-four hours after his announcement -- and after Congressional leadership announced a deal in principle -- he huddled with his lobbyist campaign advisors while his running mate held a political rally and his political spokesmen and surrogates were out in full force, continuing to attack Barack Obama."So make no mistake: John McCain did not 'suspend' his campaign. He just turned a national crisis into an occasion to promote his campaign. It's become just another political stunt, aimed more at shoring up the Senator's aimed more at shoring up the Senator's political fortunes than the nation's economy. And it does nothing to help advance this critical legislation to protect the American people during this time of economic crisis."
I mentioned earlier this deal had to be bi-partisan otherwise every little Republican Congressman would be out there shrieking about how they opposed the "bailout" or in other free ride off a bill that must pass unless one wants to wake up to complete finanical gridlock next week. Gridlock that would make what has happened thus far seem like a weak prelude.
There is a small chance McCain truly goes for broke and opposes the bill forcing the Dems and the Bush Admin to fashion a bill without many Republicans and maybe Lieberman. While this would allow McCain to wield his bloody maverick shirt and separate soundly from W. Bush, even I do not think he is that reckless.
From the Obama campaign:
"John McCain sought to change the subject from his out-of-touch response to the economic crisis with a big announcement that he was 'suspending' his campaign. But the only thing McCain really wants suspended is the American people's disbelief. In fact, he's been in full campaign mode the entire time..."When McCain finally arrived in Washington, almost twenty-four hours after his announcement -- and after Congressional leadership announced a deal in principle -- he huddled with his lobbyist campaign advisors while his running mate held a political rally and his political spokesmen and surrogates were out in full force, continuing to attack Barack Obama."So make no mistake: John McCain did not 'suspend' his campaign. He just turned a national crisis into an occasion to promote his campaign. It's become just another political stunt, aimed more at shoring up the Senator's aimed more at shoring up the Senator's political fortunes than the nation's economy. And it does nothing to help advance this critical legislation to protect the American people during this time of economic crisis."
Katie Couric With "Dave" Palin Vol. 3
TW: Watch Couric's eyes, one can read her mind, we have all been in job interviews where we slipped off the rails and the interviewer could barely contain their derision. Couric was there last night.
From Rod Dreher (conservative blogger and former "Dave" adherent)
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/09/palin-debacle-on-cbs-evening-n.html
"Couric's questions are straightforward and responsible. Palin is mediocre, again, regurgitating talking points mechanically, not thinking. Palin's just babbling. She makes George W. Bush sound like Cicero... remember the morning I woke up in my college dorm room and went in to take my final exam in my Formal Logic class. I knew I was unready. Massively unready. And now I was going to be put to the ultimate test. I sat down in Dr. Sarkar's class and resolved to wing it. Of course I failed the exam and failed the class, because I had no idea what I was talking about. I wasn't a bad kid, or even a stupid kid. I was just badly unprepared, and in way over my head...New Palin excerpt up, in which she discusses why having Russia next to Alaska gives her relevant foreign policy experience. I am well and truly embarrassed for her. I think she's a good woman who might well be a great governor of Alaska. But good grief, just watch this train wreck"
From Rod Dreher (conservative blogger and former "Dave" adherent)
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/09/palin-debacle-on-cbs-evening-n.html
"Couric's questions are straightforward and responsible. Palin is mediocre, again, regurgitating talking points mechanically, not thinking. Palin's just babbling. She makes George W. Bush sound like Cicero... remember the morning I woke up in my college dorm room and went in to take my final exam in my Formal Logic class. I knew I was unready. Massively unready. And now I was going to be put to the ultimate test. I sat down in Dr. Sarkar's class and resolved to wing it. Of course I failed the exam and failed the class, because I had no idea what I was talking about. I wasn't a bad kid, or even a stupid kid. I was just badly unprepared, and in way over my head...New Palin excerpt up, in which she discusses why having Russia next to Alaska gives her relevant foreign policy experience. I am well and truly embarrassed for her. I think she's a good woman who might well be a great governor of Alaska. But good grief, just watch this train wreck"
Two Presidential Styles: Crisis or Calm
From Tom Barnett my favorite national security guru:
"McCain will be a presidency built around crisis. It's what he loves.
Obama's presidency will be conducted at room temperature: calm, cautious, careful, calculating.
It depends on what turns you on right now: Exhausted after eight years of Bush's neverending crises? Or ready for more?"
"McCain will be a presidency built around crisis. It's what he loves.
Obama's presidency will be conducted at room temperature: calm, cautious, careful, calculating.
It depends on what turns you on right now: Exhausted after eight years of Bush's neverending crises? Or ready for more?"
Rachel Maddow: NYT Criticizes Her Echo Chamber
TW: I posted earlier about my positive view on Maddow. NYT's review is fairly consistent with my impressions with the significant caveat that they perceive her show so far as an echo chamber without proper Republican rebuttal guests. I fully agree her show and most others are suffering from the echo chamber effect. As Maddow points out regularly, in her case at least it is not from trying to bring in credible opposing views. The Republicans essentially boycott her show (as well as Olbermann's). MSM is quickly bifurcating into opposing camps with neither side forced to face challenging questioning from pundits with opposing views. We really miss Tim Russert, no one could avoid him.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/arts/television/25watc.html?ref=arts
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/arts/television/25watc.html?ref=arts
WaPo Cilliza: Clinton's Clinical Support For Obama
TW: Bill Clinton has been all over the talk shows this week although the impact has been muted by other events. His support for Obama has come across as tepid at best. It is simple to say that Bill is merely positioning things for Hillary should Obama lose. I honestly do not know. I agree having Bill hyperventilate for Obama or against the Republicans is not needed, but more passion from Bill for Obama would not hurt certainly.
Cilliza:
"[Clinton]'I just don't believe that, you know, getting up here and hyperventilating about Governor Palin or Senator McCain, for that matter, is a productive use of a former president's time, and is not a vote-getter'...[Cilizza]The best way to summarize Clinton's position in this race is a sort of clinical support for Obama..."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/bubba_and_obama_still_tense.html?nav=rss_blog
Cilliza:
"[Clinton]'I just don't believe that, you know, getting up here and hyperventilating about Governor Palin or Senator McCain, for that matter, is a productive use of a former president's time, and is not a vote-getter'...[Cilizza]The best way to summarize Clinton's position in this race is a sort of clinical support for Obama..."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/bubba_and_obama_still_tense.html?nav=rss_blog
Profile In Stupidity Exhibit C: Our Country For Allowing This Person To Run For National Office
TW: This explanation of why she knows more than a 3rd grader about Russia is asinine. Again will anyone come out and defend this choice!!
And this from Ross Douthat (conservative at Atlantic)
"And now, an excerpt from my inner monologue, as transcribed while watching various clips from Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric (I can't link to them; they're too painful):
'And that, Douthat, is why nobody's ever going to hire you to help pick their running mate'
But hey, maybe it's all just effing brilliant rope-a-dope for the Biden debate ...."
Watch CBS Videos Online
And this from Ross Douthat (conservative at Atlantic)
"And now, an excerpt from my inner monologue, as transcribed while watching various clips from Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric (I can't link to them; they're too painful):
'And that, Douthat, is why nobody's ever going to hire you to help pick their running mate'
But hey, maybe it's all just effing brilliant rope-a-dope for the Biden debate ...."
Watch CBS Videos Online
In Other News...
TW: Guantanamo just continues to fester while providing no evident value...
From WaPo:
"A military prosecutor involved in war crimes cases here has quit his position, citing ethical concerns about his office's failure to turn over exculpatory material to attorneys for an Afghan detainee scheduled to go to trial in December...Vandeveld's departure is the latest blow to the military trials process and a prosecutor's office that has been buffeted by resignations over issues of fairness. Other officials have alleged that the leadership of the military commissions is sacrificing principles of justice in a rush to secure convictions."
TW: While we thrash about in Afghanistan, the Republicans (as is to be expected at this point) will keep any NIE updates secret until at least a few days after the election...wagging the dog...
From ABC:
"US intelligence analysts are putting the final touches on a secret National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Afghanistan that reportedly describes the situation as "grim", but there are "no plans to declassify" any of it before the election, according to one US official familiar with the process...According to people who have been briefed, the NIE will paint a "grim" picture of the situation in Afghanistan"
From WaPo:
"A military prosecutor involved in war crimes cases here has quit his position, citing ethical concerns about his office's failure to turn over exculpatory material to attorneys for an Afghan detainee scheduled to go to trial in December...Vandeveld's departure is the latest blow to the military trials process and a prosecutor's office that has been buffeted by resignations over issues of fairness. Other officials have alleged that the leadership of the military commissions is sacrificing principles of justice in a rush to secure convictions."
TW: While we thrash about in Afghanistan, the Republicans (as is to be expected at this point) will keep any NIE updates secret until at least a few days after the election...wagging the dog...
From ABC:
"US intelligence analysts are putting the final touches on a secret National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Afghanistan that reportedly describes the situation as "grim", but there are "no plans to declassify" any of it before the election, according to one US official familiar with the process...According to people who have been briefed, the NIE will paint a "grim" picture of the situation in Afghanistan"
Priceless Sarah Silverman...A Jew For Obama
TW: I mean not as priceless as the Damon video but still strong...and btw a couple of non-kosher words so beware...
The Great Schlep from The Great Schlep on Vimeo.
The Great Schlep from The Great Schlep on Vimeo.
Matthews On the McCain Razzle Dazzle
"It is a tricky time, with the war and especially with the economy. People usually look at current conditions when they decide how to vote. Every time we do that these days, people reach for that default button and they say, “We‘re changing parties.”
John McCain is in trouble every time conditions prevail. And that‘s when he pulls a razzle-dazzle. McCain calls this move when he sees the voter going back to the default button.
“Fire Chris Cox.” “Bring in Gov. Palin. “ “Call off the first night of the Republican convention,” anything that changes the situation away from that default button where people naturally say “when one administration fails, when one party fails, you try the other one.”
We saw it again when he called Wednesday night calling for a delay of the debates, 'I‘m not going to the debates...' That‘s true north politically and every time McCain sees our compass going to that, he goes, 'Shake the compass up. Don‘t let them see that. That arrow points to the Democrats.'
How would you like eight years of razzle-dazzle?
I think people like predictability and pattern and they like to see a philosophy carried out. They like to see some sort of, well, he used the word himself, 'mission.' Are we going to extend the role or expand the role of the public sector? Are we going to reclaim the balance this country once had between public and private enterprise? Will we bring back the role that government has always played in energy development, in transportation, in education, in regulation? Are we going to regain the balance we had before the ‘80s? That is a pattern and that is, in fact, a mission. I think that‘s Barack Obama's mission.
What‘s McCain's? So far, razzle-dazzle."
John McCain is in trouble every time conditions prevail. And that‘s when he pulls a razzle-dazzle. McCain calls this move when he sees the voter going back to the default button.
“Fire Chris Cox.” “Bring in Gov. Palin. “ “Call off the first night of the Republican convention,” anything that changes the situation away from that default button where people naturally say “when one administration fails, when one party fails, you try the other one.”
We saw it again when he called Wednesday night calling for a delay of the debates, 'I‘m not going to the debates...' That‘s true north politically and every time McCain sees our compass going to that, he goes, 'Shake the compass up. Don‘t let them see that. That arrow points to the Democrats.'
How would you like eight years of razzle-dazzle?
I think people like predictability and pattern and they like to see a philosophy carried out. They like to see some sort of, well, he used the word himself, 'mission.' Are we going to extend the role or expand the role of the public sector? Are we going to reclaim the balance this country once had between public and private enterprise? Will we bring back the role that government has always played in energy development, in transportation, in education, in regulation? Are we going to regain the balance we had before the ‘80s? That is a pattern and that is, in fact, a mission. I think that‘s Barack Obama's mission.
What‘s McCain's? So far, razzle-dazzle."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)