Posts
Politicians are inherently reactive creatures. In the mean, they must respond to the will of the voter, or they shall quickly forfeit their office. It does not matter whether an individual official bends to the will of the voter; If he does not, his replacement will. In the long view, political leadership will mold to the views of the electorate.
Presidents are particularly reactive creatures. They may arrive in office with the thought that they will implement a bold proactive agenda. But Presidents have responsibilities, and they inevitably find themselves forced to react to events, and spend the greatest part of their time engaged with issues they did not anticipate. In the end, they almost always must settle for implementing some rump of their plans -- and that is almost always the part of their agenda most amenable to the polity at large.
The philosophy of a president can be deeply influential. But rather than helping to drive an agenda, it serves most often in helping to shape his response to events. It emerges from a long series of decisions -- some large, some small -- which are then judged by the people as a whole. The effects of this philosophy are weighed, both consciously and unconsciously, by voters, and that may influence future votes. And a President has an unrivaled platfrom from which he can attempt to influence the values and philosophy of observers with his words. Thus, Roosevelt left a legacy within the federal bureaucracy and judiciary, but he also left a legacy within the electorate, and deeply shaped the philosophies of a generation. The same can be said of Reagan.
Politics, then, is a Darwinian game. You can be a paragon of princple if you like, but if that principle is unpopular, your time in the sun will be very short. And that is as it should be.
For a healthy political system, it is absolutely necessary to have adversaries, and necessary for the widest range of opinions to be represented, at least among candidates standing for office. Even candidates who have no chance of winning are important to the process because they can become significant to the outcome of some election. They can influence by offering contrast. Even with just a small fraction of the electorate behind them, they can become forces to be reckoned with. The major political party who suffers most at their hands is forced to incorporate some aspect of the minor party's philosophy, in order to absorb some of their supporters. This is the true role of politicians like Ralph Nader or Ron Paul. Even Nader's gruff and unpolished exterior is a meme in this Darwinian battle, if only as a reminder of what it sounds like when a man tells you what he really thinks.
What Al Gore realized was that by not being president, an individual is able to focus much more intently on changing the ecosystem in which political creatures must live. Unhampered by the burdens of the Presidential office -- and maybe more importantly, now unhampered by such ambitions -- he is able to focus on a proactive agenda, and he has been astonishingly successful (though not soldiering alone). Gore realized that once you change societal awareness and opinion on an issue, you have moved the ground beneath the feet of the politicians.
We now have an election where the presidential candidates of both parties acknowledge that Global Warming is real, is man-made, and must be addressed. Both of them are dealing with the issue far more realistically than either candidate did four years ago. That's because there has been a sea change in the electorate. A different electorate would have produced -- in fact, did produce -- different candidates. Denial of the reality of global warming, which was considered a respectable political position within the last decade, is now virtually an impossible position for a national candidate.
If the Republicans had offered a candidate identical to John McCain in every respect, but who denied the reality of Global Warming, he might be behind by 20 or 25 points in the polls, rather than 7 or 10. It's a non-issue in this campaign mostly because there isn't a gulf between the candidates on the topic, and their prescriptions are quite similar. As soon as this election sweeps away the last vestiges of the Republican political ascendancy which obstructed action on global warming, concrete policy changes will ensue. When Republicans return to power in the U.S. in the future, it will be as a party which has accepted the reality of climate change.
Policy battles aren't the same as political battles, and politicians are only one influcene on the opinions of the electorate. Political battles are over which people have actual power. Policy battles are essentially cultural: Leaders must make their case to the people, and win their support. Leaders influence the basic beliefs and values of a society.
So, amid our present obsession with partisan electoral politics, the thing forgotten is this: THESE LEADERS NEED NOT BE POLITICIANS. Indeed, very, very few politicians are actually influential on the thinking of the people, and few real leaders hold political office. Once the electorate embraces a certain vision of the way things must be, the politicians will follow. Because they are inherently reactive creatures.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
Say it ain't so, Joe!
So, maybe I missed this tidbit the first time around... But how fitting is it that "Joe the Plumber" isn't really a plumber. And he isn't really named Joe.
Could anyone sum up the outrageous state of modern politics more symbolically than that? It's ridiculous. It's a cultural problem. The political class, of both parties, has gotten so accustomed to blowing smoke up our asses that I guess nobody's really surprised that this guy is -- well, not quite a fraud, perhaps -- but he is certainly not what he seemed.
This is another symptom of my criticism that Sarah Palin is the ultimate post-modern candidate. The same people who unveiled Palin as though they were launching a product were also responsible for the invention of Joe the Plumber.
Then, we find out that the McCain volunteer who claimed she was assaulted over her bumper sticker IS a fraud, and police are calling the whole thing a hoax.
As the Republican Party retreats to rebuild itself over the next 4-8-12 years, perhaps they ought to focus first on changing their own mendacious culture.
Could anyone sum up the outrageous state of modern politics more symbolically than that? It's ridiculous. It's a cultural problem. The political class, of both parties, has gotten so accustomed to blowing smoke up our asses that I guess nobody's really surprised that this guy is -- well, not quite a fraud, perhaps -- but he is certainly not what he seemed.
This is another symptom of my criticism that Sarah Palin is the ultimate post-modern candidate. The same people who unveiled Palin as though they were launching a product were also responsible for the invention of Joe the Plumber.
Then, we find out that the McCain volunteer who claimed she was assaulted over her bumper sticker IS a fraud, and police are calling the whole thing a hoax.
As the Republican Party retreats to rebuild itself over the next 4-8-12 years, perhaps they ought to focus first on changing their own mendacious culture.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Love sponge
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of Cali. says that Sarah Palin "will get to be qualified" by the time of the inauguration. The reason for his optimism?
If she's such a sponge, how come she hasn't absorbed a little more information at the age of 44? Has she kept her sponge in a vacuum-sealed wrapper all these years?
What a joke: Republicans are trying to paint their veep candidate as a towering intellect -- as maybe the only person in America who can go from "I don't know what the vice-president does" to "Totally the best choice in America to be Vice-President" in just five months. Amazing!
I'm sure there are many brilliant women in Alaska, but none of them are governor. Sarah Palin is a woman of average intelligence and very average education who was plucked from an aerobics class to help put a youthful, energetic face on a plan by Wasilla elders to implement a local sales tax. She discovered that her good looks, naive self-confidence, her penchant for snark and her churchy bona-fides made her a darling to a particular political group which is ascendent in Wasilla and in Alaska generally.
Her approval ratings? It's easy to get good approval ratings when you replace an absolute scoundrel, your state budget is paid for by the oil companies, the roads are paved with federal gold, and you get to send every Alaskan a refund check for several grand each year. Being governor of Alaksa is unlike running any other state in the country -- most governors have to struggle to balance budgets and have to figure out where they're going to get the revenue they need to pay for basic government services. In Alaska, the money just comes out of a spigot.
Do you have the will to get up to speed? Are you a sponge that absorbs information very quickly? That's the kind of person she is.
If she's such a sponge, how come she hasn't absorbed a little more information at the age of 44? Has she kept her sponge in a vacuum-sealed wrapper all these years?
What a joke: Republicans are trying to paint their veep candidate as a towering intellect -- as maybe the only person in America who can go from "I don't know what the vice-president does" to "Totally the best choice in America to be Vice-President" in just five months. Amazing!
I'm sure there are many brilliant women in Alaska, but none of them are governor. Sarah Palin is a woman of average intelligence and very average education who was plucked from an aerobics class to help put a youthful, energetic face on a plan by Wasilla elders to implement a local sales tax. She discovered that her good looks, naive self-confidence, her penchant for snark and her churchy bona-fides made her a darling to a particular political group which is ascendent in Wasilla and in Alaska generally.
Her approval ratings? It's easy to get good approval ratings when you replace an absolute scoundrel, your state budget is paid for by the oil companies, the roads are paved with federal gold, and you get to send every Alaskan a refund check for several grand each year. Being governor of Alaksa is unlike running any other state in the country -- most governors have to struggle to balance budgets and have to figure out where they're going to get the revenue they need to pay for basic government services. In Alaska, the money just comes out of a spigot.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Quick Quiz!!!
Which prominent figure from the McCain campaign has conducted more live press conferences? Is it:
A) Sarah Palin, vice-presidential nominee
-or-
B) Joe the Plumber, lengendary source of folksy debate anecdotes (and incidentally, apparently not a plumber)
A) Sarah Palin, vice-presidential nominee
-or-
B) Joe the Plumber, lengendary source of folksy debate anecdotes (and incidentally, apparently not a plumber)
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Extraordinary facts
Today, exactly 2 weeks before the United States of America goes to vote for their 44th President, and nearly 6 weeks after the Republican convention at which she was introduced to the world, Sarah Palin gave her first-EVER interview to a reporter for CNN.
Since being selected by John McCain to be his vice-presidential running mate, Sarah Palin has held zero press conferences.
And she has the gall to suggest that we don't really know Barack Obama well enough? What planet are we living on?
Here's a bonus factiod: In her only statewide election for public office, Sarah Palin received exactly 114,697 votes . Prior to that, she had been mayor of Wasilla, AK, (population 5,469 as of the 2000 census). What does the mayor of Wasilla do? The Daily Show reports.
Since being selected by John McCain to be his vice-presidential running mate, Sarah Palin has held zero press conferences.
And she has the gall to suggest that we don't really know Barack Obama well enough? What planet are we living on?
Here's a bonus factiod: In her only statewide election for public office, Sarah Palin received exactly 114,697 votes . Prior to that, she had been mayor of Wasilla, AK, (population 5,469 as of the 2000 census). What does the mayor of Wasilla do? The Daily Show reports.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Thinking long-term
Yes, the markets have been crazy. The news is bad all around. Gloom, doom, and the sky is falling. I'm not a trader, but like many of you I am an investor through my various IRA accounts. Like many of you, I sure wish I had sold off stocks and mutual funds when the market was bumping along at all-time highs. I didn't, and here I am.
If you have a long-term view, as I do, I just thought I'd tell you I think it's a good time to begin returning money to the market. Not sure we've hit bottom? Neither am I, but I know we're a lot closer to it than we were 6 months ago. Long-term, this period will look like a good buying opportunity for people thinking long-term. Everything's on sale.
I'm 30-something. For the first time in a long time, today I'm adding a little money to companies I believe are in a great position to benefit from long-term trends: Alterantive energy, health care, Apple, etc. I added some shares of Intuitive Surgical. These stocks have really been hammered. But robotic surgeries will be the rule for virtually all operations within a generation. But do you think Apple is going anywhere? Anybody think we're not going to move to solar power in a big way?
If you are retiring soon, or in retirement now, I sure hope you're mostly in safe investments. But this could be a good time for you to put modest part of your portfolio in blue-chip, dividend-paying stocks that have been beaten down. The next few years could be rocky -- Go for companies that make things people need through thick and thin. But stay away from financials -- they're too risky for retirees.
Oh, and pay down debt, especially credit card debt. That has a guaranteed rate of return equal to your card's interest rate. Right now, that's a GREAT guaranteed rate of return.
If you have a long-term view, as I do, I just thought I'd tell you I think it's a good time to begin returning money to the market. Not sure we've hit bottom? Neither am I, but I know we're a lot closer to it than we were 6 months ago. Long-term, this period will look like a good buying opportunity for people thinking long-term. Everything's on sale.
I'm 30-something. For the first time in a long time, today I'm adding a little money to companies I believe are in a great position to benefit from long-term trends: Alterantive energy, health care, Apple, etc. I added some shares of Intuitive Surgical. These stocks have really been hammered. But robotic surgeries will be the rule for virtually all operations within a generation. But do you think Apple is going anywhere? Anybody think we're not going to move to solar power in a big way?
If you are retiring soon, or in retirement now, I sure hope you're mostly in safe investments. But this could be a good time for you to put modest part of your portfolio in blue-chip, dividend-paying stocks that have been beaten down. The next few years could be rocky -- Go for companies that make things people need through thick and thin. But stay away from financials -- they're too risky for retirees.
Oh, and pay down debt, especially credit card debt. That has a guaranteed rate of return equal to your card's interest rate. Right now, that's a GREAT guaranteed rate of return.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Get well soon...
I hear that Dick Cheney was in the hospital today with more heart trouble. Never fear, however, because the word is that George Bush assumed his powers while he was incapacitated.
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Odd jobs
Bet you didn't know there were openings for the position of "pirate spokesman". But it's been confirmed by no less an authority than the New York Times. Scroll to the bottom of this story.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
What Obama Should Have Said
I thought last night's debate was fine. The candidates rehashed their positions on a number of issues, and both sounded reasonably well-informed and critiqued each other's record. There were no real headlines, and so a couple of items which should have been subheads carried the day: McCain proposed a big new government program, and the Obamaniacs feigned umbrage when McCain called their man "that one." Yadda, yadda. I call it a draw, basically, which plays to Obamas favor. It's like a scoreless seventh inning: An advantage for the team leading the game.
There was a huge missed opportunity for Barack Obama in last night's debate, though: An e-mail question from a 78-year-old who wanted to know what kind of sacrifices average Americans could make to help today. See the video here. McCain asked people to sacrifice government programs. Blech. Obama started well, but bunted, essentially, when he made the obvious reference to George Bush's infamous call to all Americans to "go shopping." He talked about alternative energy, which was the right direction, but he didn't actually propose any real sacrifices. He moved the runners, but didn't score. He didn't make a clear call that would galvanize people, or better yet, make a big headline to help brand himself. Here's what he should have said:
"Thank you for your question; I think it's a profound one. Americans want to be part of the solution, but aren't sure what one person, what one family can do. But families can make a very big difference that helps the economy, improves national security and makes America greener all at the same time.
Tonight I'm calling on every American who can afford it, to support alternative energy by installing wind or solar power at their home. I think it's the patriotic duty of every wealthy American, and I'm serious about that. Consider it a smart investment in today's markets. You'll get a guaranteed return in the form of decades of green electricity. You'll also be supporting this technology and making more affordable for more Americans. And you'll be helping to employ thousands of Americans in a growing industry, to design, manufacture and install these systems. It's so much better than sending our dollars overseas to buy polluting fossil fuels. And of course, it's exactly the sort of thing we need to do to start solving our climate crisis.
The government is helping, by offering tax incentives to do this; the Senate just approved extending tax credits for new solar installations for seven more years. But many Americans don't have five or ten thousand dollars to "go solar." We're fortunate that there are more than a million millionaires in this country. From this day forward, companies that install these systems should never have a day off. Their phones should be ringing off the hook. Americans need to call this week, this month, and get started on installing solar and wind at home.
If you're fortunate enough that you don't have to worry about the next paycheck; if you don't have to worry where the next house payment is coming from, and your needs are met, this is something you can do now. It will benefit all Americans. It will help our economy, make us more secure, and protect our planet. And I think it's clear right now, you have an obligation to act. Let's go!"
If Obama had said that yesterday, it would be the debate headline on every paper in America today.
Friday, October 03, 2008
Debating the Debate
My friend Jason told me yesterday that he was looking forward to the Veep debate like few other political spectacles he could remember. Another train wreck like Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric, he judged, and this thing "would be all over."
Did that happen? No, but it was close.
My take on the debate is that it came through loud and clear that Joe Biden had the intellect and temperament to handle the responsibilities of high office. Even to those who disagree with him or don't like him, it had to be clear that Biden knew what he was talking about. After a few overly complicated answers early on, he hit his stride marking out clear differences. He vigorously supported his ticket and tied John McCain to the Bush administration's policies. He was devestatingly effective at critiquing John McCain's record without being at all vicious on a personal level. I actually think he holds McCain in some esteem, and that came through to me. When Palin floundered, he was neither dismissive or derisive, but treated her with respect. He responded to her points. He was composed and coherent. He also seemed very genuine to me -- these are issues he really cares about, and has cared about for a long time.
Sarah Palin didn't embarrass herself, but she didn't exactly move the chains for her ticket, either. On issue after issue, he showed mastery and understanding, while she mouthed platitudes and repeated talking points. I guess she stayed on message, and hit reliable GOP talking points. But she talked way, way too fast, and sounded to me like many of the high school debaters I faced: Excited, nervous, and eager to talk her way back to key points written down on her notecards.
She was better than she was on Couric, but not much better. Asked about her Achilles heel as a politician, for example, she could only produce a lot of vapid happy talk. Her answers on rights for gay couples didn't make sense to me. And it seemed to me that Biden was more familiar with the details of McCain's policies than Palin was.
I don't think she's stupid -- in fact, I never have. She's no towering intellect, but she's moderately intelligent. She can rub a couple thoughts together. But the cutesy demeanor and can-do attitude do smack of the class-president elections. I can certainly see how they would be reasonably effective in a campaign for small-state governor or even Congress. But people pay attention -- really pay close attention -- to the Presidential elections, and will not forgive a candidate for vast shortcomings. As Palin said herself, "I've been at this now for, what, five weeks?" Yeah, exactly, Governor.
In baseball, they often talk about a prospect's "tools." That doesn't mean talent, but rather their raw abilities. Tiger fans were deliriously excited about Cameron Maybin's "tools" as a player, but understood why the team traded him for the polished talent of Miguel Cabrera.
I can understand why Republicans have been excited about Palin, who displayed some of the political "tools" that helped her win in Alaska. In addition to having a folksy charm, she shows some abilities like poise, positivity and adherance to message which are important for a politician. But she's about 20 years away from being ready for the debate she had last night. Her grasp of the national issues is no better than that of most callers to political talk-show programs.
For those of you who think bashing her inexperience and featherweight grasp of the issues is somehow sexist, here's a dose of equality for you: If she were a male candidate, the label that would stick to her right now is "Empty Suit."
By contrast, Biden was polished, prepared and yes, presidential.
Her performance stopped the bleeding; It wasn't enough.
Did that happen? No, but it was close.
My take on the debate is that it came through loud and clear that Joe Biden had the intellect and temperament to handle the responsibilities of high office. Even to those who disagree with him or don't like him, it had to be clear that Biden knew what he was talking about. After a few overly complicated answers early on, he hit his stride marking out clear differences. He vigorously supported his ticket and tied John McCain to the Bush administration's policies. He was devestatingly effective at critiquing John McCain's record without being at all vicious on a personal level. I actually think he holds McCain in some esteem, and that came through to me. When Palin floundered, he was neither dismissive or derisive, but treated her with respect. He responded to her points. He was composed and coherent. He also seemed very genuine to me -- these are issues he really cares about, and has cared about for a long time.
Sarah Palin didn't embarrass herself, but she didn't exactly move the chains for her ticket, either. On issue after issue, he showed mastery and understanding, while she mouthed platitudes and repeated talking points. I guess she stayed on message, and hit reliable GOP talking points. But she talked way, way too fast, and sounded to me like many of the high school debaters I faced: Excited, nervous, and eager to talk her way back to key points written down on her notecards.
She was better than she was on Couric, but not much better. Asked about her Achilles heel as a politician, for example, she could only produce a lot of vapid happy talk. Her answers on rights for gay couples didn't make sense to me. And it seemed to me that Biden was more familiar with the details of McCain's policies than Palin was.
I don't think she's stupid -- in fact, I never have. She's no towering intellect, but she's moderately intelligent. She can rub a couple thoughts together. But the cutesy demeanor and can-do attitude do smack of the class-president elections. I can certainly see how they would be reasonably effective in a campaign for small-state governor or even Congress. But people pay attention -- really pay close attention -- to the Presidential elections, and will not forgive a candidate for vast shortcomings. As Palin said herself, "I've been at this now for, what, five weeks?" Yeah, exactly, Governor.
In baseball, they often talk about a prospect's "tools." That doesn't mean talent, but rather their raw abilities. Tiger fans were deliriously excited about Cameron Maybin's "tools" as a player, but understood why the team traded him for the polished talent of Miguel Cabrera.
I can understand why Republicans have been excited about Palin, who displayed some of the political "tools" that helped her win in Alaska. In addition to having a folksy charm, she shows some abilities like poise, positivity and adherance to message which are important for a politician. But she's about 20 years away from being ready for the debate she had last night. Her grasp of the national issues is no better than that of most callers to political talk-show programs.
For those of you who think bashing her inexperience and featherweight grasp of the issues is somehow sexist, here's a dose of equality for you: If she were a male candidate, the label that would stick to her right now is "Empty Suit."
By contrast, Biden was polished, prepared and yes, presidential.
Her performance stopped the bleeding; It wasn't enough.
Who won?
Here's an instant read on who won the debate... Take a close look at the green bars on each topic:
MediaCurves
MediaCurves
Unfortunate headline.
From today's "Cay Compass", the tax-advantaged national newspaper of the Cayman Islands:
To be charitable, I believe they meant "storm-hit Haitians" ??
"DHL helps storm hit Haitians"
To be charitable, I believe they meant "storm-hit Haitians" ??
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Riley on the Road to Recovery
As some of you have heard, Riley has had an awful, awful week. We found him struggling to stand at the top of the stairs when we returned from the Tigers game a week ago today. It was heartbreaking and terrifying to see him unable to control his left legs, and looking to us for help. We made an emergency trip to the local vet, who ruled out poisoning or stroke, and said it looked like a neck problem. By Wednesday morning, he was much worse -- virtually paralyzed in all four legs. His big tail seemed the be the only thing working normally.
After a trip to MSU's animal hospital, we were refereed to private-practice specialists. Dr. Galle at the Animal Neurology and MRI Center in Commerce Twp. diagnosed a ruptured disc in Riley's neck. We left Riley in his capable hands for a Thursday morning surgery to remove the ruptured disc material, which was pressing down on his spinal cord. He didn't seem to recover much in the first 48 hours; A second surgery was required Saturday night in the same spot to remove a blood clot which formed in the area.
After several days where things looked a little bleak, he has begun to rebound. He's walking again, I understand, but not necessarily very well. It will be a pretty long recovery for him, as the surgery itself involved cutting through a lot of muscle to get to the spine, and of course the recovery of neurological function is somewhat unpredictable. But it's a very good sign that he has motor function... it means he's on track for a recovery. We're now cautiously optimistic that he'll recover 80-90% of his mobility and strength.
We're silly, sentimental pet owners, I guess. A week ago, I really feared losing him, and I still don't know if it will be worth the effort and expense. I just hope Riley is able to recover enough to enjoy several more healthy years.
I understand it's sort of an unusual injury for a retriever mix, but the MRI that revealed the rupture also shows he has degenerating discs. Our crash-o-matic red rover isn't a puppy anymore, and is going to have to endure some lifestyle changes to prevent a re-occurance. He'll probably get more walks to prevent rambunctiousness, and he'll be a downstairs dog from now on, as his love of leaping off the stairs is a no-no.
It's been stressful and sad... I apologize that we haven't been able to keep everyone up to date, but those aren't easy phone calls to make. We'll let you know when we know more. Riley may be coming home later this week... Think good thoughts for him, everyone.
After a trip to MSU's animal hospital, we were refereed to private-practice specialists. Dr. Galle at the Animal Neurology and MRI Center in Commerce Twp. diagnosed a ruptured disc in Riley's neck. We left Riley in his capable hands for a Thursday morning surgery to remove the ruptured disc material, which was pressing down on his spinal cord. He didn't seem to recover much in the first 48 hours; A second surgery was required Saturday night in the same spot to remove a blood clot which formed in the area.
After several days where things looked a little bleak, he has begun to rebound. He's walking again, I understand, but not necessarily very well. It will be a pretty long recovery for him, as the surgery itself involved cutting through a lot of muscle to get to the spine, and of course the recovery of neurological function is somewhat unpredictable. But it's a very good sign that he has motor function... it means he's on track for a recovery. We're now cautiously optimistic that he'll recover 80-90% of his mobility and strength.
We're silly, sentimental pet owners, I guess. A week ago, I really feared losing him, and I still don't know if it will be worth the effort and expense. I just hope Riley is able to recover enough to enjoy several more healthy years.
I understand it's sort of an unusual injury for a retriever mix, but the MRI that revealed the rupture also shows he has degenerating discs. Our crash-o-matic red rover isn't a puppy anymore, and is going to have to endure some lifestyle changes to prevent a re-occurance. He'll probably get more walks to prevent rambunctiousness, and he'll be a downstairs dog from now on, as his love of leaping off the stairs is a no-no.
It's been stressful and sad... I apologize that we haven't been able to keep everyone up to date, but those aren't easy phone calls to make. We'll let you know when we know more. Riley may be coming home later this week... Think good thoughts for him, everyone.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
The Meltdown
Dad wrote this morning, expressing amazement that I hadn't commented on "this week's triumph of Reaganism." With a few edits, here is my reply:
============
Reaganism?
Financial crises have been around a lot longer than Reaganism or, for that matter, the Republic. Maybe Reagan et. al. bear some responsibility, but the biggest culprit was a lack of investor scrutiny toward the banks they invested in. It's easy and seductive to claim this is a political problem. I think that's secondary to the fact that this is a business problem, brought on by a cultural obsession with short-term profits. We're finding that such profits often come at the long-term expense of these financial companies, and the chickens have come home to roost. And these sophisticated big banks weren't ignorant buyers of these shaky mortgages in the first place -- if they were going to invest tens of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities, they could have done a bit more homework on what they were buying. Wall Street lost its appreciation for credit risk, and that wasn't the fault of any politician. Goldman, in particular, did a good job of recognizing these risks and unloading them.
The main political issue, to me, has been the loss of manufacturing jobs and the turmoil that comes with the massive job turnover we've had in a "globalized" economy. Families which used to be able to depend on a stable, well-paying job now find that they've been living much closer to insolvency. Rather than a secure job that pays $25/hr, blue-collar guys are in tenuous jobs which pay $17. They lose their overtime for a few months, gas prices spike, and suddenly they can't make all the mortgage payments... Down comes the house of cards. The mortgage-holders didn't appreciate the actual default risk, and now the effects are cascading through the system.
So, maybe Reagan and his cronies bear some blame, but the lion's share goes to the management of these companies, who sold out their shareholders for immediate gain -- an old, old tale. But I'd be interested to hear why you think this is all Reagan's fault.
============
Reaganism?
Financial crises have been around a lot longer than Reaganism or, for that matter, the Republic. Maybe Reagan et. al. bear some responsibility, but the biggest culprit was a lack of investor scrutiny toward the banks they invested in. It's easy and seductive to claim this is a political problem. I think that's secondary to the fact that this is a business problem, brought on by a cultural obsession with short-term profits. We're finding that such profits often come at the long-term expense of these financial companies, and the chickens have come home to roost. And these sophisticated big banks weren't ignorant buyers of these shaky mortgages in the first place -- if they were going to invest tens of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities, they could have done a bit more homework on what they were buying. Wall Street lost its appreciation for credit risk, and that wasn't the fault of any politician. Goldman, in particular, did a good job of recognizing these risks and unloading them.
The main political issue, to me, has been the loss of manufacturing jobs and the turmoil that comes with the massive job turnover we've had in a "globalized" economy. Families which used to be able to depend on a stable, well-paying job now find that they've been living much closer to insolvency. Rather than a secure job that pays $25/hr, blue-collar guys are in tenuous jobs which pay $17. They lose their overtime for a few months, gas prices spike, and suddenly they can't make all the mortgage payments... Down comes the house of cards. The mortgage-holders didn't appreciate the actual default risk, and now the effects are cascading through the system.
So, maybe Reagan and his cronies bear some blame, but the lion's share goes to the management of these companies, who sold out their shareholders for immediate gain -- an old, old tale. But I'd be interested to hear why you think this is all Reagan's fault.
Modern-Day Robin Hood?
St. Pioneer Press:
GOP delegate's hotel tryst goes bad when he wakes up with $120,000 missing
I'm sure it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy:
Schwartz is now mum on the event, but he was more talkative with media beforehand:
GOP delegate's hotel tryst goes bad when he wakes up with $120,000 missing
I'm sure it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy:
The theft occurred early on Sept. 4, hours after Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gave her speech accepting her party's vice presidential nomination. A police report said Schwartz told officers he met a woman at the bar and took her to his $319-a-night room.
"Victim reported suspect made victim drinks, told him to get undressed, which is the last thing he remembers," a police narrative said. "Upon waking, victim discovered money, jewelry gone; total loss over $120K."
...Aside from the watch, ring, necklace, earrings and belt, Schwartz also reported a $1,000 purse or wallet, a $1,500 cell phone, $500 in cash and a couple of rings worth $50 had been taken.
Schwartz is now mum on the event, but he was more talkative with media beforehand:
In an interview filmed the afternoon of Sept. 3 and posted on the Web site LinkTV.org, Schwartz was candid about how he envisioned change under a McCain presidency.
"Less taxes and more war," he said, smiling. He said the U.S. should "bomb the hell" out of Iran because the country threatens Israel.
Monday, September 08, 2008
A few more thoughts on Sarah Palin
To use a baseball anaolgy, Sarah Palin has done well in AAA. Now she's being asked to bat cleanup for the Yankees, and there's no real reason to think she's up to the job.
Four or eight years from now, after having a chance to build a track record in a position of real responsibility, maybe she would make a strong V.P. candidate. Maybe she serves a couple terms as governor, and gets herself elected to the Senate. Maybe she authors some legislation and gets some visa stamps on that brand-new passport of hers. After all, she seems to have some of the prerequisite characteristics:
Palin might be one tough cookie. I had a boss at my first gig in New York, working for TIME Online, who was also one tough cookie. That boss, Janice, was smart, no-nonsense, likable and professional. She knew a lot about a lot of issues, as you'd expect of an editor for TIME. Palin may also be one tough cookie. But that doesn't qualify her to be president.
Palin might be an admirable person. She is raising a child with Down Syndrome and dealing with a rebellious teenage daughter who is proving to be a challenging kid. But America is filled with millions of great people -- even other people who have raised kids with Down Syndrome. They're not necessarily qualified to be President.
Palin might have an ability to get things done. If I lived in Wasilla, I know that during those long Alaskan winters, I'd appreciate the hockey arena she worked to build as mayor. Hell, I'd even think it was worth the debt the town took on to make it happen. And as governor, it seems she did move quickly on some of her agenda. But that is still small potatoes. Lots of people get lots more important things done everyday, and mostly, they're not qualified to be President.
Palin might have some real political skills. She fought to the top of Alaska's old-boys club, delivered a much-admired speech (at least in some quarters) and seems to be more polished than you'd expect. But then we didn't expect much, and every state capitol has a few truly skilled politicians in-house. So that doesn't really qualify her to be President.
None of that qualifies her to be President of the United States of America. Not even close.
There is no G.E.D. to replace actual experience in national and international issues. Maybe in 4 or 8 years, Palin would be ready to make a bid for one of America's top offices. I'd still disagree with her politics. But at least she'd have some preparation.
Four or eight years from now, after having a chance to build a track record in a position of real responsibility, maybe she would make a strong V.P. candidate. Maybe she serves a couple terms as governor, and gets herself elected to the Senate. Maybe she authors some legislation and gets some visa stamps on that brand-new passport of hers. After all, she seems to have some of the prerequisite characteristics:
Palin might be one tough cookie. I had a boss at my first gig in New York, working for TIME Online, who was also one tough cookie. That boss, Janice, was smart, no-nonsense, likable and professional. She knew a lot about a lot of issues, as you'd expect of an editor for TIME. Palin may also be one tough cookie. But that doesn't qualify her to be president.
Palin might be an admirable person. She is raising a child with Down Syndrome and dealing with a rebellious teenage daughter who is proving to be a challenging kid. But America is filled with millions of great people -- even other people who have raised kids with Down Syndrome. They're not necessarily qualified to be President.
Palin might have an ability to get things done. If I lived in Wasilla, I know that during those long Alaskan winters, I'd appreciate the hockey arena she worked to build as mayor. Hell, I'd even think it was worth the debt the town took on to make it happen. And as governor, it seems she did move quickly on some of her agenda. But that is still small potatoes. Lots of people get lots more important things done everyday, and mostly, they're not qualified to be President.
Palin might have some real political skills. She fought to the top of Alaska's old-boys club, delivered a much-admired speech (at least in some quarters) and seems to be more polished than you'd expect. But then we didn't expect much, and every state capitol has a few truly skilled politicians in-house. So that doesn't really qualify her to be President.
None of that qualifies her to be President of the United States of America. Not even close.
There is no G.E.D. to replace actual experience in national and international issues. Maybe in 4 or 8 years, Palin would be ready to make a bid for one of America's top offices. I'd still disagree with her politics. But at least she'd have some preparation.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Sarah Palin: A Postmodern Veep candidate
Sarah Palin read a capable speech last night. But she is not qualified to be President. Therefore, she isn't qualified to be Vice-President.
If she's so qualified, how come even Republican insiders are all over the television admitting that they didn't know much about her before last week? Aren't most qualified candidates, you know, people we've heard of?
Choosing her as a Veep candidate embodies the most blatantly cynical post-modernist aspects of our political process. Palin was chosen precisely because she is an unknown personality -- a blank red slate onto which all the right-wing crazies can write their own opinions and beliefs. America has never seen a Veep candidate chosen so much for symbolism as Sarah Palin.
In the last 48 hours, I have heard an astonishing amount of propaganda about Sarah Palin from the mouths of Republicans. Propaganda is distinguished from actual argumentation by the fact that it's disingenuous, and designed to make an emotional appeal. She read a speech, written by George W. Bush's speechwriter, whom she had met just a week ago. She had met John McCain exactly once in her life before being chosen as Veep candidate.
I've heard that she is being discriminated against because she's a working mother. They say that questioning the value of her almost-2-years as governor of Alaska (population, 670,000) and her stint as small-town mayor (Quoth Palin, "It's not rocket science") is an insult to working mothers everywhere. I've heard that examining her experience is "sexist", because the same standard isn't applied to Barack Obama... a patently false claim. Obama's experience and preparedness to be president was a question fought over 50 states for some 18 months. The voters have given their verdict, and Obama passes the test. In her speech, she assaulted Obama's experience. She must have brass balls under that skirt. Consider: He has been a candidate for President almost as long as she has been governor of Alaska (about 1 month less).
I've heard that she represents certain values. I'm listening now to Pat Robertson explain that this really shows that -- despite a career of showing a distaste for "agents of intolerance" -- John McCain really is a fire-breathing God-in-government conservative. Thank the Lord, say the Christianists, he chose this God-fearing exemplar, this hero of the right wing, to be his co-pilot.
The Republicans at the convention, good partisans all, tell us how much -- how DEEPLY they love Sarah Palin. That seems improbable, since most of them couldn't have told you the name of Alaska's governor a week ago. But she's the blank slate, the empty vessel into which they must pour their adoration. They have no choice; they must.
It's all propaganda. If she were a second-term governor who had some serious accomplishments on her resume, you could take this nomination seriously. I can't. I'm going to venture a guess that there are approximately 10,000 Republican women currently living in the United States with more "executive experience" and more seasoning than Sarah Palin.
Hey, being a working mom is hard, do doubt. It's a credit to her. But it's also a credit to about 100 million other American women who have done it. What makes her so special? Running a suburb 30-odd miles from Anchorage which has a reputation as the Meth capital of Alaska? Being elected governor as the hand-picked choice of "Uncle Ted" Stevens, the dean of the Alaska's Republican machine? She should thank her good fortune.
People point to her 80% approval ratings -- in a state that keeps electing Don Young, Ted Stevens and the Murkowskis. It's a lot easier to keep those approval ratings up when people don't pay taxes, and the government distributes $3200 bribes from the oil industry on an annual basis to each and every resident. You don't have to make many "tough decisions" when you never have to think about raising unpopular taxes and there's a trans-Yukon pipeline of federal money rolling into your state.
Can you imagine her -- really, now -- six weeks into the McCain administration thrust into the Oval Office if the aging McCain's ticker fails? The neophyte governor, so excited about building roads and getting to fire political appointees, would be a doe in the headlights having to make future-of-the-world decisions. She hasn't the first bit of understanding how to wield power. THAT is the key to being a President. Understanding what power is, how to use it, how to store it up. Does anyone truly think she is the best lieutenant for John McCain?
No... No... She's been chosen entirely for image purposes. Substance is not the issue. McCain disagrees with her on key issues like global warming, religious intolerance, and so on. Palin, not McCain, thinks Iraq is a mission from God.
Yet he abandoned his principles to choose her, and in so doing, the key question for the voter is, What the hell does he stand for anymore?
If she's so qualified, how come even Republican insiders are all over the television admitting that they didn't know much about her before last week? Aren't most qualified candidates, you know, people we've heard of?
Choosing her as a Veep candidate embodies the most blatantly cynical post-modernist aspects of our political process. Palin was chosen precisely because she is an unknown personality -- a blank red slate onto which all the right-wing crazies can write their own opinions and beliefs. America has never seen a Veep candidate chosen so much for symbolism as Sarah Palin.
In the last 48 hours, I have heard an astonishing amount of propaganda about Sarah Palin from the mouths of Republicans. Propaganda is distinguished from actual argumentation by the fact that it's disingenuous, and designed to make an emotional appeal. She read a speech, written by George W. Bush's speechwriter, whom she had met just a week ago. She had met John McCain exactly once in her life before being chosen as Veep candidate.
I've heard that she is being discriminated against because she's a working mother. They say that questioning the value of her almost-2-years as governor of Alaska (population, 670,000) and her stint as small-town mayor (Quoth Palin, "It's not rocket science") is an insult to working mothers everywhere. I've heard that examining her experience is "sexist", because the same standard isn't applied to Barack Obama... a patently false claim. Obama's experience and preparedness to be president was a question fought over 50 states for some 18 months. The voters have given their verdict, and Obama passes the test. In her speech, she assaulted Obama's experience. She must have brass balls under that skirt. Consider: He has been a candidate for President almost as long as she has been governor of Alaska (about 1 month less).
I've heard that she represents certain values. I'm listening now to Pat Robertson explain that this really shows that -- despite a career of showing a distaste for "agents of intolerance" -- John McCain really is a fire-breathing God-in-government conservative. Thank the Lord, say the Christianists, he chose this God-fearing exemplar, this hero of the right wing, to be his co-pilot.
The Republicans at the convention, good partisans all, tell us how much -- how DEEPLY they love Sarah Palin. That seems improbable, since most of them couldn't have told you the name of Alaska's governor a week ago. But she's the blank slate, the empty vessel into which they must pour their adoration. They have no choice; they must.
It's all propaganda. If she were a second-term governor who had some serious accomplishments on her resume, you could take this nomination seriously. I can't. I'm going to venture a guess that there are approximately 10,000 Republican women currently living in the United States with more "executive experience" and more seasoning than Sarah Palin.
Hey, being a working mom is hard, do doubt. It's a credit to her. But it's also a credit to about 100 million other American women who have done it. What makes her so special? Running a suburb 30-odd miles from Anchorage which has a reputation as the Meth capital of Alaska? Being elected governor as the hand-picked choice of "Uncle Ted" Stevens, the dean of the Alaska's Republican machine? She should thank her good fortune.
People point to her 80% approval ratings -- in a state that keeps electing Don Young, Ted Stevens and the Murkowskis. It's a lot easier to keep those approval ratings up when people don't pay taxes, and the government distributes $3200 bribes from the oil industry on an annual basis to each and every resident. You don't have to make many "tough decisions" when you never have to think about raising unpopular taxes and there's a trans-Yukon pipeline of federal money rolling into your state.
Can you imagine her -- really, now -- six weeks into the McCain administration thrust into the Oval Office if the aging McCain's ticker fails? The neophyte governor, so excited about building roads and getting to fire political appointees, would be a doe in the headlights having to make future-of-the-world decisions. She hasn't the first bit of understanding how to wield power. THAT is the key to being a President. Understanding what power is, how to use it, how to store it up. Does anyone truly think she is the best lieutenant for John McCain?
No... No... She's been chosen entirely for image purposes. Substance is not the issue. McCain disagrees with her on key issues like global warming, religious intolerance, and so on. Palin, not McCain, thinks Iraq is a mission from God.
Yet he abandoned his principles to choose her, and in so doing, the key question for the voter is, What the hell does he stand for anymore?
Monday, August 04, 2008
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Clark's comments
I'll take it for granted that you, dear reader, have seen the whole firestorm about Gen. Wesley Clark's comments about John McCain. If you have not, you can catch up here, among other places.
Clark, a man I admire deeply, has run aground on the shoals of political naivete. He's out of his element playing in politics, and I think he proves it. There's nothing really wrong with what he says, as long as it's seen/heard in the full context of the questions he was asked and his full reply. But if you grab a line or two, it sure sounds really bad, and a lot of voters only listen to a line or two. Saying that "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification
to be president," well, that just sounds insulting. But when you learn that he picked up the verbiage Bob Scheiffer used in the question, and hear him go on to explain that he views McCain as a hero and a courageous man, but he's concerned about McCain's lack of executive experience -- well, then the comment makes quite a bit of sense, and doesn't really come off all that mean-spirited.
But it was an amatuerish mistake by Clark, and is the perfect sort of coal to stoke the furnaces of fake outrage. Now Obama has to distance himself from Clark and those comments to cool this down, and it puts the nominee in the strange position of essentially having to say, yeah, getting shot down and tortured DOES qualify McCain to be President.
Which probably isn't the outcome Clark wanted.
For what it's worth, I think McCain's POW episode says a great deal about his character and mettle, and that probably matters to voters. On the other hand, I don't think his military service provided a great deal of executive experience, and I don't think it necessarily endowed the man with good foreign policy judgment, as McCain's votes in the Senate and bone-headed comments re:Iraq attest.
Clark, a man I admire deeply, has run aground on the shoals of political naivete. He's out of his element playing in politics, and I think he proves it. There's nothing really wrong with what he says, as long as it's seen/heard in the full context of the questions he was asked and his full reply. But if you grab a line or two, it sure sounds really bad, and a lot of voters only listen to a line or two. Saying that "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification
to be president," well, that just sounds insulting. But when you learn that he picked up the verbiage Bob Scheiffer used in the question, and hear him go on to explain that he views McCain as a hero and a courageous man, but he's concerned about McCain's lack of executive experience -- well, then the comment makes quite a bit of sense, and doesn't really come off all that mean-spirited.
But it was an amatuerish mistake by Clark, and is the perfect sort of coal to stoke the furnaces of fake outrage. Now Obama has to distance himself from Clark and those comments to cool this down, and it puts the nominee in the strange position of essentially having to say, yeah, getting shot down and tortured DOES qualify McCain to be President.
Which probably isn't the outcome Clark wanted.
For what it's worth, I think McCain's POW episode says a great deal about his character and mettle, and that probably matters to voters. On the other hand, I don't think his military service provided a great deal of executive experience, and I don't think it necessarily endowed the man with good foreign policy judgment, as McCain's votes in the Senate and bone-headed comments re:Iraq attest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)