Give Brad DeLong credit:

He endorses an Economist essay that (on the whole) says we should not measure economic progress based on what's happening within a country, but by how everyone in the world is affected. Immigration is the focus here, but it could also be applied to outsourcing and other free-trade policies.

WARNING: The essay targets Mickey Kaus, who is not the best spokesman for nationalist/protectionist policies.


posted by Quiddity at 12/30/2010 01:03:00 PM

Obama's call to the Philly Eagles owner:

That expressed gratitude for them hiring Michael Vick, was not politically smart. Animal lovers will be outraged and it doesn't help with any other group out there. Obama would have been well advised not to bring the matter up.

I wouldn't be surprised if he walks back this action.


posted by Quiddity at 12/28/2010 03:19:00 PM

Broken record:

Where have we heard this before? (emp add)

John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and potential 2012 GOP presidential candidate, expressed his belief this week that defense spending should be insulated from the likely wave of budget cuts spurred by a new era of GOP leadership next Congress.

"I think you've got to be just as much on the outlook for waste and fraud in defense spending as anywhere else, but the fact is we're entering a very uncertain period in the world. We've got a lot of threats out there that we're not ready for. Not just nuclear proliferation, but chemical and biological weapons," Bolton said on Fox Business,

Bolton is saying that we have to have a massive defense budget because of all the WMD threats. Presumably on the same scale as the Iraq WMD threat of 2003. Or maybe not.


posted by Quiddity at 12/28/2010 03:15:00 PM

One of the many reasons Palin will not be the Republican nominee:

This is not presidential.

"Where are the s'mores ingredients? This is in honor of Michelle Obama, who said the other day we should not have dessert," says the woman who speaks with little accountability for her constant flow of sarcasm. Palin's desire to display her facility with put-downs instead of the intricacies of policy may explain why, after two years on the national stage, she is not seen by many as qualified to be president.

It's got to be Romney in 2012.


posted by Quiddity at 12/25/2010 02:16:00 PM

Why it was always hard to be enthusiastic about Clinton (Bill and, to an extent, Hillary):

They had people like Lanny Davis in their entourage:

As the United States continued to push for President Laurent Gbagbo of Ivory Coast to step down, two former Clinton administration officials were trying to present Mr. Gbagbo, who has clung to power despite international condemnation, in a more sympathetic light.

Michael Espy, the former agriculture secretary who is now a lobbyist, has appeared on Ivorian television on behalf of Mr. Gbagbo’s government, while Lanny J. Davis, former chief counsel to President Clinton who was hired by Mr. Gbagbo’s government this month, worked the phones and described himself as a liaison of sorts to the tainted regime. (...)

By all international accounts, Mr. Gbagbo was defeated by Alassane Ouattara in the Nov. 28 runoff vote for president, but Mr. Gbagbo has disputed the election results. (...)

Mr. Davis, who helped defend President Clinton against impeachment, registered with the Justice Department earlier this month as an agent for Ivory Coast who would be paid $100,000 a month to “present the facts and the law as to why there is substantial documentary evidence that President Laurent Gbagbo is the duly elected president as a result of the Nov. 28 elections.” But he insisted in an interview on Wednesday that he viewed himself not as an advocate but as a “conveyor belt” to pass information about Mr. Gbagbo to the administration and the world.

posted by Quiddity at 12/23/2010 08:18:00 PM

The Fox Nation goes after Lisa Murkowski:

Let's see more of this.


posted by Quiddity at 12/23/2010 02:57:00 PM

Christmas sales up?

In the news: Last-minute holiday shoppers boost U.S. sales

More last-minute shoppers flocked to stores this year on the final Saturday before Christmas than last year, but spending is expected to be even higher late this week.

U.S. retail sales on Saturday were up 15.1 percent from last year to $7.58 billion as many people wrapped up their gift buying, research firm ShopperTrak said on Tuesday. This year also benefited from its comparison to the weekend in 2009 when a blizzard hammered the East Coast.

That storm contributed to a 16.5 percent drop to $6.58 billion in so-called "Super Saturday" spending in 2009. This year's totals were below the $7.87 billion Americans spent for the day in 2008, said ShopperTrak, which analyzes the retail industry.(...)

"Now that we are down to the wire, consumers have stepped up their shopping pace, as well as their purchases," ICSC chief economist Michael Niemira said in a statement. "All and all, retail shopping trends are shaping up to be very favorable for holiday sales, as well as December sales performance, for retailers."

Well, that's what they are reporting, but it doesn't match my experiences here in Los Angeles. Foot traffic has been pretty low and the parking lots are not jammed. The Black Friday of the Thanksgiving holiday registered only a 0.3% increase in sales. That seems about right, considering the persistent high unemployment. This recent news about a shopping surge seems overly optimistic.

MATH TIME: If you drop 16.5% and then rise 15.1%, where do you end up? Not down 1.4%, since simple addition does not apply here. From a base of 100, a 16.5% drop puts you at 83.5. An increase of 15.1% from 83.5 gets you 96.1 - a decline of nearly 4% from the 2008 year (and closely matches the $7.58B/$7.87B = 96.3 [ratio of 2010:2008] figures cited elsewhere). So the bottom line is that this season is not terrible, but it's not boffo either.


posted by Quiddity at 12/21/2010 09:25:00 PM

Faith in America:

At the New Republic, there is an article about the Democrats' attempt to woo Christians, which was successful for a while, but has mostly evaporated by now. Of interest is this observation by a commenter:

Sorry, but looking at religious voters from a 19th century social gospel perspective won't do it with today's evangelicals. The parables in Matthew 25 (that's the Gospel of Matthew for you non-Christians) are right out of the social gospel, as is the mission statement for the charitable organization Matthew 25 ("inspired by the Gospel mandate to put our faith into action to care for our neighbor, especially the most vulnerable"). One would think that, after almost 500 years since Martin Luther and the protestant reformation, Democrats would have a better understanding of evangelical Christians. I will offer two hints. First, it's not the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) that evangelicals look to for guidance; it's the letters of Paul. Second, forget "good works" (the social gospel) as the basis for living a Christian life; it's faith alone in Jesus as savior that is the one true path ("one way") to the kingdom of God ("justification by faith"). The Democrats' failing with evangelicals has nothing to do with "messaging"; it's due to a fundamental misunderstanding of their faith.

That strikes me as correct. I occasionally check in with evangelical sources (web, radio) and for the most part they adhere to a view that is opposed to the social gospel. As the commenter suggests, they are more driven by what St. Paul wrote - along with Pauline thinkers like Augustine, Luther, and Calvin.

That Paul holds so much influence within Christianity has always been something of a puzzle. He never knew Jesus, yet his writings often trump the thoughts and exploits of Jesus and the other apostles (in the four Gospels). The short answer is that Paul has influence because it was his "branch" of Christianity that triumphed over the other variants that were around in the first three centuries.


posted by Quiddity at 12/19/2010 12:05:00 AM

Cartoonist Pat Oliphant on Obama's Deal:

Surprised to see this.


posted by Quiddity at 12/18/2010 11:56:00 PM

Good news everybody!

The Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2010, Part III, passed 277 - 148.

That's what they called it.


posted by Quiddity at 12/16/2010 10:20:00 PM

Christopher Hayes at The Nation on the Obama Deal:

In an essay, Tax Cuts Forever?, he concludes with this: (emp add)

My sense is that the White House economic and political team is starting to panic as they recognize the stubborn persistence of unemployment. They know the economy needs more stimulus, and that Republicans are loath to allow them to deliver it. Through this deal they were able to secure some stimulative tax cuts, like the payroll tax reduction. Briefing liberal writers, the White House sold the plan as stimulus 2.0. And even if tax cuts for the rich aren't stimulative, it's money into the economy. At this point, the White House will take what it can get.

That's the only way I can see why the 2% cut in Social Security taxes was part of the mix.


posted by Quiddity at 12/14/2010 08:17:00 AM

"some agreement on something"

Bill Clinton in the White House press room today:

So in my opinion, this is a good bill, and I hope that my fellow Democrats will support it. I thank the Republican leaders for agreeing to include things that were important to the president. There's never a perfect bipartisan bill in the eyes of a partisan. And we all see this differently. But I really believe this will be a significant net plus for the country. I also think that in general a lot of people are breathing a sigh of relief that there's finally been some agreement on something.

About the Obama Deal. It's an odd beast. You could make yourself like it, by focusing on some provisions. Or you could make yourself hate it.

It's very hard to analyze since a final judgement - if it passes - will have to wait a couple of years in order to see what tactical positions are established, and exploited, by both sides.


posted by Quiddity at 12/10/2010 07:12:00 PM

Predictable Broder:

You knew he was going to praise Obama's deal with the Republicans:

Future political historians are likely to trace his recovery - and reelection, if that's what happens - back to decisions made in December.

In these past few days, he has regained the economic initiative from the victorious Republicans, separated himself from the left of his own party and staked a strong claim to the territory where national elections are fought and won: the independent center.

... he has begun to regain focus as the pragmatic liberal that he is ...

That is a winning posture for a president seeking a second term.

Obama used his news conference Tuesday to define himself, more clearly than ever before, as a raging moderate ...

This was the best showing for Obama in many months.

posted by Quiddity at 12/08/2010 09:59:00 PM

A comment:

I think Obama gave in this time, but the Repubs will recognize and respect that, and on the next issue go out of their way to give him what he wants. They want nothing more than to reciprocate the good will he has shown them. Next time, the Repubs will agree to do it his way; fair is fair!!

posted by Quiddity at 12/08/2010 09:44:00 PM

The Obama deal:

While I'm not impressed with it, perhaps everybody needs to learn more about how it came about before rendering a judgment. How did the negotiations go? Who was asking for what? What did each side concede, when, and why? Why was Congress out of the loop this time and the White House engaged - the exact opposite of the health care legislative process?

What started out as a simple unemployment extension + keep the middle class cuts in exchange for keeping the upper income cuts, suddenly got much more complex. What I want to know is:

• Where did the cut 2% of FICA taxes come from? That would appear to be something that could be done separately (with support from both parties, even though it carries the risk of becoming permanent and weakening Social Security).
• How did the bargaining on the estate tax go? The Washington Post advocated going to the 2009 schedule of $3.5 million exempt and a 45% rate - which was the lowest of the 10 year period (not counting 2010's no tax). That position, keep the 2009 schedule for estate taxes was considered to be the Republican position by many. How did the Obama deal end up being more generous? It's a mystery.

The deal was reached in a surprisingly short time and feels rushed and overstuffed. Almost as if by bringing in many disparate elements, it becomes harder to critique it - because the complexity makes it harder to assess its value (for Democrats and Republicans).


posted by Quiddity at 12/07/2010 07:55:00 PM

Michael Lind in Salon:

Starts out with this:

Most Americans want Social Security to be strengthened and American manufacturing protected. But the conversation among elites inside the Beltway-New York bubble is about cutting Social Security and more one-sided "free trade" deals with mercantilist nations that, unlike the U.S., protect and promote their domestic industries.

Many Americans have come to the conclusion that nobody represents them in Washington anymore. They are right.

He goes on to discuss mass-membership organizations (e.g. unions) as the main reason why. Two weeks ago Frank Rich said Congress is disconnected from the American people, but gave a different explanation: big money in politics.

Whatever the reason, there continues to be frustration by the typical voter with what's going on in Washington and it's not clear what will change that.


posted by Quiddity at 12/07/2010 09:22:00 AM

Expect to hear more about this:

For the next two years, estates up to $5,000,000 will be protected from the estate tax, and the tax rate for the few estates that are taxed will be 35 percent. That's worse than the 2009 estate tax ($3.5 million exemption, 45 percent rate)

[45 percent was the lowest rate after a series of reductions in the last 10 years, not counting this year's zero rate; the exemption grew during the same period to a maximum of $3.5 million]

In this case Republicans got more than an extension of current rates and policies.


posted by Quiddity at 12/06/2010 10:53:00 PM

The defining Obama quote:

"Sympathetic as I am to those who prefer a fight over compromise, as much as the political wisdom may dictate fighting over solving problems, it would be the wrong thing to do."

Expect that to be cited a lot in coming years.


posted by Quiddity at 12/06/2010 09:40:00 PM

Joe Scarborough tweets:

Politically, I am stunned the President is extending the tax cuts to millionaires. NYTimes: Bush Tax-Cut Deal Near http://nyti.ms/eiV8Nj

posted by Quiddity at 12/06/2010 09:13:00 AM

The strategy explained:

By extending the tax cuts for the rich, in two more years they will be even richer - which will heighten the contradictions - making the Democrats' charge that "Republicans are defenders of the rich" all that more potent. It's a shrewd political move designed to kick the can down the road until better circumstances prevail. Much like the wildly successful Kansas–Nebraska Act.


posted by Quiddity at 12/06/2010 09:00:00 AM

Speeches:

Jonathan Chait ruminates on the (apparent) failure of the Democrats to pass a tax bill without caving to the Republicans. Of interest is this from a commenter: (emp add)

Obama's failure to lead on this issue is going to be the final straw for a lot of liberals and independents, and for precisely the reason Chait points out. Americans want their president to be a leader. Many of us thought Obama had it in him to be a leader when he was breathing fire on the campaign trail. The Jefferson/Jackson speech he gave in Iowa, the victory speech he gave in SC, the race speech in Philly, the nomination speech--those were moments when he showed more grit and passion than anyone else in politics. That man has completely disappeared. (...) What the hell happened?

Speeches are fine, but they are not enough. You have to also work the halls of Congress. And eve if you believe in the power of speeches, where's the tax-policy speech from Obama?


posted by Quiddity at 12/02/2010 02:29:00 PM

Obama's test:

There a lot of grousing about Obama today. Ezra Klein, John Cole of Balloon Juice (and his commenters), even Kevin Drum is not particularly hopeful.

While Obama has been criticized in the past for not doing enough, his supporters could argue that passing new legislation meant dealing with the 60-vote Senate, along with other procedural hurdles. I never found those arguments convincing, but it was often a subjective call as to whether or not Obama was doing as well as expected (or promised).

But the tax cut extension is a different matter. If there is no action, the taxes go back to the 2000 rates. And Obama holds the veto pen. So he can play hardball and demand only a bill to his liking. Play it out and see what happens.

It looks as if that isn't going to take plce. You can think of a number of explanations why. But the key result will be that Obama will lose a ton of support from Democrats if he treats the tax extension like the other legislation: As if both sides have the same bargaining power.

Watch what happens this month. It will be of greater significance than almost anything else that's happened so far.

UPDATE: Here's an interesting observation by a commenter at Balloon Juice:

Obama is a strict Constitutionalist and he understands what the original intent of the Republic was in having the three branches. He wants to pull power back from the executive and put more into the hands of the legislative, i.e., less rule by fiat than we have seen in almost 200 years. He doesn’t believe in the bully pulpit, he believes the president’s job is to do what the legislative tells him to do. He wants to lead the executive branch, not the nation.

It’s a sweet notion that was relevant at the signing but went out the window soon after the ink dried. He doesn’t get it.

He may be right in believing, accepting my premise, that a less powerful executive is better for democracy but he fails to realize that times have changed.

Not sure I buy it, but it's an intriguing notion.


posted by Quiddity at 12/01/2010 07:30:00 PM

Remember that New Your Times' Deficit Puzzle?

There were complaints about including Social Security. Here is part of the Times' response given on November 26: (emp add)

In our puzzle, we ... treated Social Security as part of the federal government. We allowed you to leave it alone, despite its long-term deficit, or we allowed you to make cuts that exceeded the size of its deficit and thus would help pay for other programs.

Stop right there.

Cuts to Social Security that exceed the size of its deficit means defaulting on the bonds (at least a part of them).

The Times continues:

Some readers argue that Social Security should not be considered part of the federal budget and should instead be addressed separately. This approach would ensure that Social Security was not subject to cuts larger than those needed to close its own deficit. This argument tends to be more popular among liberals who want to protect the program.

That's bullshit. It's not a "liberal" thing to want to fully honor the bonds. Wanting to have the program run as promised is not a liberal or conservative position. It's a position that says that the program was set up, and paid into, with the promise that it would be paid back.

There will be a shortfall in 2037, but that's not what's being discussed here. The Times is trying to get people to consider Social Security paying back less prior to 2037 than the program was set up to do. Without expressly saying so (at least in the Deficit Puzzle).

FOR FUTURE REFERENCE: That reply was written by David Leonhardt. Remember that name in case it comes up in subsequent Social Security debates.


posted by Quiddity at 11/28/2010 10:54:00 PM

Declining worth:

There's been some talk about that fellow who, when encountering the TSA screeners said, "Don't touch my junk".

A decade or two earlier, one referred to the "family jewels".

Have said elements declined that badly, from jewels to junk? What the hell is happening in this country?

UPDATE; The "junk" expression is relatively new to me. I was unfamiliar with it until maybe 3 years ago. Being on the west coast, I wonder if "junk" was commonly used in the past on the eastern side of the country.


posted by Quiddity at 11/27/2010 09:58:00 PM

David Broder's latest column:

You'll never guess what it's about. His hopes that Obama and Republicans can compromise on policy.

Of interest is this passage:

Another involves the soon-to-expire Bush tax cuts. Almost everyone agrees they should be renewed for the 98 percent of American families earning below $250,000 a year. The president opposes but Republicans support extending them also for the top 2 percent.

That is another issue on which Boehner and McConnell would be justified in challenging Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to negotiate with them and the top Republicans on the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees.

What's Broder's position on extending the tax cuts for the top 2 percent? He says that Republicans "would be justified in challenging Obama", which could mean that the opposition is justified in challenging - as any opposition party is, or that Broder thinks challenging Obama's position is the right thing to do. Who knows which it is?

It's as if Broder has no particular interest in the policy - see his remarks on the START treaty - just as long as the two parties can come together for a bipartisan accord. That's all that matters to him.

Yet another lazy, formulaic column by the "Dean" of the Washington press corps.


posted by Quiddity at 11/27/2010 07:34:00 PM

Stay out of Tom Friedman's car:

Some years ago:

It’s OK to throw out your steering wheel as long as you remember you’re driving without one.

But watch out! Earlier this year he said of the Israelis:

... right now, you’re driving drunk ...

Which makes it even riskier because now:

... we are driving without a spare tire or a bumper ...

Yow! No steering wheel or bumpers, while drunk Israelis and learning-to-drive Iraqis are on the road. Be careful.


posted by Quiddity at 11/27/2010 06:49:00 PM

He's still out there fighting:

Tony Blair, Christopher Hitchens debate religion

BBC World News and the News Channel will broadcast the debate on Jan., 1 2011.


posted by Quiddity at 11/27/2010 12:03:00 AM

Good to see that's finally settled:

Russia admits Stalin ordered Polish massacre

Takes up to a century to get agreement on historical issues.


posted by Quiddity at 11/26/2010 09:55:00 AM

Black Friday:

In previous years there's usually been a hot item, usually electronic or a toy, that consumers want. Flat-panel televisions were "it" for a couple of years. Various game platforms (Wii) were must-haves. But there doesn't seem to be anything like that this year.

What are people lining up Friday morning to buy?


posted by Quiddity at 11/26/2010 09:45:00 AM

David Broder is delusional:

From his Thanksgiving op-ed:

If you have any doubts about the real meaning of this month's midterm elections, let me refer you to the most notable winner in those contests. I am talking about Lisa Murkowski, the reelected senator from Alaska. (...)

... Murkowski was asked recently by reporter Judy Woodruff on the PBS "NewsHour" how she had overcome Palin's endorsement of Miller to win ...

"I think what [the voters] are looking for is the same thing that any Alaskan is looking for: Represent our state. Work together with people that have opposing viewpoints to build good policy that allows our state and our nation to go in a positive direction.

"I think that's what voters are looking for. I don't think that most are looking for somebody that is going to follow the litmus test of one party or another, and never deviate from it. I think they want us to think, and I think they want us to work cooperatively together. So, that's my pledge to all Alaskans, regardless of whether you are the most conservative Republican or the most liberal Democrat, I'm going to try to find a way that we can find common ground to help the state and to help our country."

Want to know what the election was about? That's an authoritative answer.

One race in a state of only 700,000 people won by a bring-home-the-bacon incumbent (who narrowly lost in a low-turnout primary) and boilerplate heal-the-breach rhetoric, proves to Broder that "bipartisanship" - no matter how absurd it is in today's world of strong differences - is what the entire country wants.

Some bloggy derision:

David Broder Explains It All To Us

And that is why from coast-to-coast, frozen tundra to tropical (and off-the-mainland) Islands, everyone wrote in Murkowski on their ballots, right David? Because the myth of the political center has to be supported at all costs, and when the center is the very conservative Senator from the very conservative state of Alaska, the good daughter appointed by her father to continue their grifting unabated, well, it has to mean something? So Broder, you took a single data point–an incumbent won a tough re-election campaign–and you made it into the political equivalent of the Philosopher’s Stone.

posted by Quiddity at 11/25/2010 05:01:00 PM

But they did:

Jonathan Chait, writing about the Rush Limbaugh - Motor Trend spat:

It's pretty interesting to watch the conservative movement add the American automotive industry to France, academia, environmentalists, and the rest of their enemies. In many parts of the Midwest, especially Michigan, the auto industry is right behind God and country. I don't see how Republicans are going to win a lot of races being attached to a party that sneers at, and diminishes the genuine accomplishments of, an industry that sits at the heart of the region's prosperity.

But they did win a lot of races. One of the surprising results of the 2010 elections was how well Republicans did in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.


posted by Quiddity at 11/24/2010 06:40:00 PM

CBS Evening News reports on Social Security:

The reporter, Anthony Mason, had the following talking heads in the segment:

• Andrew Biggs of the AEI saying that (a) people living longer is a problem, and (b) Social Security was intended to only be a program to keep seniors out of poverty.
• Erskine Bowles, saying that this nation has made promises that it cannot keep.
• Doris Kerns Goodmwin saying that Social Security was (partially) intended to get seniors out of the workforce so that younger people could get jobs.
• Rep. Paul Ryan saying that raising the retirement age is the way to go.

This was presented as something of a crisis since there are "only" 27 years until adjustments would have to be made.


posted by Quiddity at 11/23/2010 07:08:00 PM

The New Yorker's Hendrik Hertzberg looks at Glenn Beck's recent attack on Soros:

Brought up this quote, which was missed by many (probably because it was not on Beck's television show):

The ugliest single sentence Beck uttered that week came on his radio program, which supplements his TV show. “Here’s a Jewish boy helping send the Jews to the death camps,” he said, referring to Soros, age thirteen.

Hertsbarg concludes:

Beck is often dismissed as an “entertainer”—the Rush Limbaugh excuse, calculated to make critics out to be stuffed shirts who can’t take a joke. Beck is nobody’s puppet, but he does have masters: Fox News and the News Corporation. Their respective chief executive officers, Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch, are the responsible—which is to say, irresponsible—parties.

posted by Quiddity at 11/23/2010 07:35:00 AM

That word again:

In light of Ireland's troubles, Tom Friedman is getting a lot of much-deserved ridicule for writing this in 2005:

There is a huge debate roiling in Europe today over which economic model to follow: the Franco-German shorter-workweek-six-weeks’-vacation-never-fire-anyone-but-high-unemployment social model or the less protected but more innovative, high-employment Anglo-Saxon model preferred by Britain, Ireland and Eastern Europe. It is obvious to me that the Irish-British model is the way of the future, and the only question is when Germany and France will face reality: either they become Ireland or they become museums. That is their real choice over the next few years – it’s either the leprechaun way or the Louvre.

Because I am convinced of that, I am also convinced that the German and French political systems will experience real shocks in the coming years as both nations are asked to work harder and embrace either more outsourcing or more young Muslim and Eastern European immigrants to remain competitive.

As an Irish public relations executive in Dublin remarked to me: “How would you like to be the French leader who tells the French people they have to follow Ireland?” Or even worse, Tony Blair!

Yes, there's the pean to Free Trade (work harder or outsource or increase immigration). Yes, there's the foolish derision of the European system as exemplified by Germany and France. But there's also this:

... the less protected but more innovative, high-employment Anglo-Saxon model ..."

"innovative" and "innovation" are words that Friedman constantly uses. "Innovation" will save the U.S. from whatever-the-economic-threat-of-the-day-is. But Friedman never says what it is. It's a largely meaningless word when he uses it.

It does have meaning in some instances. A mathematical proof could be said to be innovative if it uses a new technique or one from a related field of study. A workshop that figures out how to assemble something quicker using existing equipment but in a novel way, can be said to be innovative. But to hand-wave and state that the Anglo-Saxon model is "innovative", absent any context, is an empty way of establishing superiority, without any proof.


posted by Quiddity at 11/22/2010 02:03:00 PM

Stunning:

David Gergen:

What we are seeing now is the high-water mark for the Obama presidency, at least domestically. No matter what else happens, even if he gets re-elected, he will never be as powerful as he was during his first two years. After Obama's election in 2008, I was one of those who believed that we were at a turning point — that the Reagan tide was receding, and we would see a cycle of progressive politics for 15 or 20 years. To have that reversed so quickly is stunning.

posted by Quiddity at 11/21/2010 05:57:00 PM

Taking the maximalist position:

Pope Benedict on Pius XII:

"The decisive thing is what he did and what he tried to do, and on that score, we really must acknowledge, I believe, that he was one of the great righteous men and that he saved more Jews than anyone else."

posted by Quiddity at 11/21/2010 10:54:00 AM

Why is this asshole on Meet the Press?

For this Sunday:

House Democrats overcame internal divisions this week to re-elect Nancy Pelosi as their leader and Republicans backed Rep. John Boehner as the new Speaker of the House. What's ahead for the lame-duck session and battles over the Bush-era tax rates, and Don't Ask/Don't Tell? Plus, newly elected members arrived in Washington for their orientation, what will be the role of the Tea Party in the 112th Congress? And Republicans Governors gathered this week as early 2012 positioning gets underway. We'll take a look at how that landscape is shaping up with our roundtable: Robert Draper, who takes us "Inside Sarah Palin's Inner Circle" in this Sunday's New York Times Magazine; The Wall Street Journal's Paul Gigot; Tea Party-backed Rep.-elect Allen West (R-FL); and Richard Wolffe, author of the new book "Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House."

Allen West. From Weigel (then at the WaPo):

Last night in Jupiter, Fla., GOP congressional candidate Allen West told "tea party" activists that they needed to do more to get accountability from Rep. Ron Klein (D-Fla.).

"Let me tell you what you've got to do," said West, a retired lieutenant colonel. "You've got to make the fellow scared to come out of his house. That's the only way that you're going to win. That's the only way you're going to get these people's attention."

posted by Quiddity at 11/21/2010 08:02:00 AM

What I now believe:

Liberals are Fascists. NPR are Nazis. Obama is Karl Marx without the beard. The United Nations is taking over your neighborhood school. Jesus invented the Constitution. George Soros has a plan. MSNBC is the thin edge of the totalitarian wedge. The Tides Foundation wants to put a microchip in your brain. Every White House "Czar" has been given a Faberge egg worth millions. Flat panel TVs manufactured in China have a hidden camera so they can watch what you're doing. The New Improved Black Panther Party is ACORN with nukes. Amendments other than the Bill of Rights diminish states' rights and should be repealed. All taxation is theft. God Hates Fags. The War of Northern Aggression should be recognized as such. Michelle Bachmann belongs on the Supreme Court. Happiness is a 10 gauge shotgun. Dinesh D'Souza is the best journalist in America. If you are suffering, it's God's plan; turning to the government for aid is blasphemy. If you hang a clove of garlic around your neck, no Democrat will bite you. If you're not listening to Limbaugh-Prager-Hannity-Medved-Levin, you're not paying attention. Swarthy immigrants are putting battery acid in our ketchup bottles. That liberal co-worker you think might be scheming to get you fired, really is. Every public library should have a dozen copies of whatever Newt Gingrich has written. Even Glenn Beck has underestimated the conspiracy to destroy America. If Global Warming is real, then why are they still selling sweaters at Wal-Mart? We need more rootin' tootin' straight-shootin' common sense Christian constitutional conservatives running this country.


posted by Quiddity at 11/18/2010 03:45:00 PM

Fluoridation is next:

First, they took on the political establishment in Congress. Now, tea partiers have trained their sights on a new and insidious target: local planning and zoning commissions, which activists believe are carrying out a global conspiracy to trample American liberties and force citizens into Orwellian "human habitation zones."

At the root of this plot is the admittedly sinister-sounding Agenda 21, an 18-year-old UN plan to encourage countries to consider the environmental impacts of human development. Tea partiers see Agenda 21 behind everything from a septic tank inspection law in Florida to a plan in Maine to reduce traffic on Route 1. The issue even flared up briefly during the midterms, when Colorado Republican gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes accused his Democratic opponent of using a bike-sharing program to convert Denver into a "United Nations Community."

Agenda 21 paranoia has swept the tea party scene, driving activists around the country to delve into the minutiae of local governance. And now that the midterm elections are over, they're descending on planning meetings and transit debates, wielding PowerPoints about Agenda 21, and generally freaking out low-level bureaucrats with accusations about their roles in a supposed international conspiracy.

Has Glenn Beck addressed this critical issue? Fox News is usually in the vanguard when it comes to alerting citizens about dire threats to the nation.


posted by Quiddity at 11/18/2010 07:22:00 AM

Barry Ritholtz says it best:

Too Bad Banks Missed Out On the GM Treatment

... a weakened giant, a shadow of its former self, GM was still a substantial employer. That had political ramifications in an election year. Instead of letting them do the Lehman Brothers pavement face plant, the choice was made for a prepackaged bankruptcy.

This was the single best decision of the bailout era.

It seemed to be the only decision that was not made in a panic. It adhered to the rules of capitalism — when your company is insolvent, it goes into reorganization or dissolution. The brutal, Darwinian rules of the market and of bankruptcy applied — not the influence of lobbyists, or special favors from Senators. The Treasury Secretary’s former gig was not running an auto company, he ran a Wall Street bank — so there could be no special favors expected to come from that quarter either.

Instead, Uncle Sam’s involvement was to provide Debtor-in-Possession financing. The bankruptcy plan was obvious: Wipe out shareholders, give bond holders a haircut, fire management, pare the company down to a sustainable size without sentiment.

... what is arguably the most successful bailout of the 2007-2010 era was in fact a non-bailout: It was a bankruptcy reorganization that eliminated the most toxic aspects of a century old rust bucket of a company. The new firm has clean books, is well capitalized, is without crushing debt, has a less onerous labor contract, pension and health care obligations. Its hard not to see how this was anything but a ginormous winner for all involved.

Which brings me to the Banks. ...

The bank bailout plan was ill conceived and poorly executed. Trillions were thrown at them before Uncle Sam had any idea as to how much debt was actually on the books. What were once considered decent holdings were eventually revealed to be highly toxic assets.

Recapitalizing the banks is a huge priority. But after the first round of trillions were given away to the banks, the public was disgusted. The politicians lost their appetite for overt bailouts. But the banks were still under-capitalized, their balance sheets were still laden with junk. A direct transfer of taxpayer monies was out of the question.

An easy backdoor was found: Arbitrage the Fed and Treasury. Zero interest rates and QE allowed giant Wall Street banks to borrow at no cost from the Fed, and then turn around and lend this same zero cost money back to the Treasury at 3% or so. Do this for another 10 years or so, and the banks would be rcapitalized. By then, maybe there might even be a market for all those REOs. Sure, that would mire the nation in a decade long Japanese-like slump. Hey, at least the bonuses would be paid on time.

There's more outrage (it's a long post) at the link.


posted by Quiddity at 11/18/2010 06:43:00 AM

Nick Kristof is shrill:

I've never seen him this agitated about income inequality.


posted by Quiddity at 11/17/2010 10:21:00 PM

Newly discovered species of jellyfish to be named after Obama:

Why not?


posted by Quiddity at 11/17/2010 10:08:00 PM

Glenn Beck:

"You're probably the only audience in America that's even heard of this theory."

Don't bother with the 17 minute "tutorial" unless you want to listen to a conspiracy theorist.

What's peculiar is why Fox News hasn't been laughed out of the room for having Beck on day after day.


posted by Quiddity at 11/16/2010 07:41:00 PM

Douglas Schoen and Patrick Caddell are insane:

They wrote this: (excerpts, emp added)

... we believe Obama should announce immediately that he will not be a candidate for reelection in 2012.

... by explicitly saying he will be a one-term president, Obama can deliver on his central campaign promise of 2008, draining the poison from our culture of polarization and ending the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity and common purpose.

Obama ... should dispense with the pollsters ...

Obama can restore the promise of the election by forging a government of national unity, welcoming business leaders, Republicans and independents into the fold. But if he is to bring Democrats and Republicans together, the president cannot be seen as an advocate of a particular party, but as somebody who stands above politics, seeking to forge consensus.

Forgoing another term would not render Obama a lame duck. Paradoxically, it would grant him much greater leverage with Republicans ...

Given the influence of special interests on the Democratic Party, Obama would be much more effective as a figure who could remain above the political fray.

... if the president were to demonstrate a clear degree of bipartisanship, it would force the Republicans to meet him halfway. If they didn't, they would look intransigent, as the GOP did in 1995 and 1996, when Bill Clinton first advocated a balanced budget. Obama could then go to the Democrats for tough cuts to entitlements and look to the Republicans for difficult cuts on defense.

If the president adopts our suggestion, both sides will be forced to compromise.

The worst-case scenario for Obama? In January 2013, he walks away from the White House having been transformative in two ways: as the first black president, yes, but also as a man who governed in a manner unmatched by any modern leader. He will have reconciled the nation, continued the economic recovery, gained a measure of control over the fiscal problems that threaten our future, and forged critical solutions to our international challenges.

It is no secret that we have been openly critical of the president in recent days, but we make this proposal with the deepest sincerity and hope for him and for the country.

At the end, there is this:

Patrick H. Caddell ... was a pollster and senior adviser to President Jimmy Carter ... Douglas E. Schoen, [was] a pollster who worked for President Bill Clinton ...

What a joke. What a fairy-tale. Republicans, especially the new crop coming in 2011, are not going to give Obama an inch, no matter what he does. That this advice should come out when many Democrats are critical of Obama for not fighting for policies, tells you that Schoen and Caddell are doing spade work for the Republicans.

These guys are Fox News Democrats, "helpfully" suggesting Obama relinquish power. (Also, It looks as if they might be trying to figure a way for Hillary Clinton to run in 2012.)

Reactions: Jason Linkins at HuffPo thought the column was a joke. Byron York declared the logic faulty. Daniel Larison calls it "extremely bad advice". You have voices from all parts of the political spectrum dismissing the Schoen/Caddell column, which makes you wonder why the Washington Post published it in the first place.


posted by Quiddity at 11/13/2010 09:19:00 PM

Unleash the Krugman!


posted by Quiddity at 11/12/2010 10:21:00 AM

Racism:

There is a lot of unhappiness on the left with Obama. Scouring their blogs and reading comments, I've noticed a disturbing trend. An increase in racial language. Like "The Half-black Hope". That's he's being a good "boy" by doing the work of his corporate masters. Saying that he only got elected because being "the first black president" was a good story.

This is unfortunate. Obama, at least in my view, has definitely underperformed and should be called out for doing so. But this creeping racial language is not good. Let's hope it doesn't grow.


posted by Quiddity at 11/11/2010 06:31:00 PM

The Deficit Commission Co-Chair's report:

People are going to have a field day with it. More taxes on the middle class through higher gas taxes and elimination of the mortgage deduction, but lower marginal rates for the high earners (from 36% or 39% down to 23%). And gems like this:

Current measures of inflation overestimate increases in cost of living by failing to account for "substitution bias"

You can keep inflation very low by constantly substituting an inferior good for whatever you used to consume.

And this laugh line:

Set goal of 3% annual productivity grown in the public sector.

Why not mandate that the private sector do that as well?

If you go through the 50-page PowerPoint-like pdf (available here), it comes off as a fully Republican document.

UPDATE: There can be a case made for increasing gasoline taxes and eliminating the mortgage deduction, but not if all it does is lower the top rate on income taxes.

Also, between 1917 and today, the lowest top marginal rate was 24%, in 1929. If the commission co-chair recommendation of 23% is enacted, that would be the lowest rate in the history of the modern income tax, except for the first 4 years it was in place (1913, 1914, 1915, 1916).


posted by Quiddity at 11/10/2010 02:23:00 PM

U.S. unveils graphic tobacco warnings

So, when do we get to see similarly unpleasant pictures on beer, wine, and spirits?


posted by Quiddity at 11/10/2010 11:27:00 AM

Tom Friedman scales new heights with metaphors:

This is great: (excerpts, emp add)

[Obama's] visit was intended to let China know that America knows that India knows that Beijing’s recent “aggressiveness,” as one Indian minister put it to me, has China’s neighbors a bit on edge.

All of China’s neighbors want China to know, as the sign says: “Don’t even think about parking here.” Don’t even think about using your growing economic and military clout to just impose your claims in border disputes and over oil-rich islands in the South China Sea.

That’s why each one of China’s neighbors is eager to have a picture of their president standing with Secretary Clinton or President Obama — with the unspoken caption that reads: “... please, stay between the white lines. Don’t even think about parking in my space because, if you do, I have this friend from Washington, and he’s really big. ... And he’s got his own tow truck.”

Give this man a fourth Pulitzer Prize!

On a more serious note, Friedman's parking analogy makes sense. China can do wheelies in the South China Sea after 6 PM on weekdays and all day Saturday and Sunday. Similarly, Japan can park in that region, but only if it has an area-permit on the bumper. Vietnam is only allowed 15 minutes in the loading zone. If you're confused by all of that, then you don't know foreign policy like the New York Times' resident expert.


posted by Quiddity at 11/10/2010 03:49:00 AM

Together again, ten years later:

Who? John Bolton and John Yoo.

In 2000 they were both involved with the Florida recount. Bolton on the ground challenging hanging chads. Yoo on the airwaves promoting the Bush case.

Then they parted ways. Yoo to making the sensible legal case that torture isn't torture, and Bolton as ambassador to the hated United Nations where he put those international pansies in their place.

And now in 2010 they are back together, co-writing an op-ed in the New York Times, Why Rush to Cut Nukes?, which opposes the New Start treaty. Much of their argument is about using the Senate to constrain the president's treaty-making power, which is kind of a surprise since only a couple of years ago they took the opposite view. Since these are principled men, we can discount the charge that they have now switched positions because a Republican isn't in the White House.

Congratulations on your reunion, boys. And a special kudos to the University of California at Berkeley, where Yoo continues to teach law.


posted by Quiddity at 11/10/2010 03:33:00 AM

Always searching for common ground:

Obama:

“We thought that if we shaped a [health care] bill that wasn’t that different from bills that had previously been introduced by Republicans, including a Republican Governor in Massachusetts who’s now running for President, that we would be able to find some common ground there."

Looks as if he'll be trying to find common ground with Republicans on Social Security.


posted by Quiddity at 11/09/2010 10:01:00 PM

Go for it dude:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry:

I’d like to see states be given the opportunity to opt-out of the Medicaid program that we are looking at today. We think in Texas over the next six years that we could take and find a private insurance solution and better serve our people, put more people under coverage, and save $40 billion for the state of Texas and $40 billion for the federal government because it is a matching program.

Seriously. Do it and let's see if you get better health care for your money.


posted by Quiddity at 11/09/2010 09:29:00 PM

Good news, everybody!

Leading Chinese credit rating agency downgrades USA government bonds

While the analysis is overwrought, it looks as if the Chinese might finally be pulling away from US bonds.


posted by Quiddity at 11/09/2010 09:16:00 PM

Who likes this?

Obama on 60 minutes:

“Part of my promise to the American people when I was elected was to maintain the kind of tone that says we can disagree without being disagreeable. And I think over the course of two years, there have been times where I’ve slipped on that commitment.”

That's certainly not the in spirit of Harry Truman.

If you are a Democrat or a Republican, and your guy is president and says that, would you be happy?


posted by Quiddity at 11/08/2010 12:21:00 AM

Blast from the past:

Make of it what you will:

January 25, 2010

Jake Tapper and Yunji de Nies report:

Rep. Marion Berry, D-Ark., fears that these midterm elections are going to go the way of the 1994 midterms, when Democrats lost control of the House after a failed health care reform effort.

But, Berry told the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, the White House does not share his concerns.

“They just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”

Asked today by ABC News’ Yunji de Nies if the president said that, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs pleaded ignorance.

“I have not talked to the president about that,” Gibbs said, employing one of his favorite dodges.

Gibbs seemed to suggest that he shared that view, whether or not President Obama said it.

“I hope it's not newsworthy to think that the president hopes and expects to be an effective campaigner in the midterm elections,” Gibbs said.

Berry told the newspaper that he “began to preach last January that we had already seen this movie and we didn’t want to see it again because we know how it comes out…I just began to have flashbacks to 1993 and ’94. ... It certainly wasn’t a good feeling.”

posted by Quiddity at 11/07/2010 05:10:00 AM

Meet the Press:

2006, after the Democrats took back both the Senate* and House and a majority of governorships, the guests were: John McCain (R) and Joe Lieberman (I).

2010, after the Republicans took back the House and a majority of governorships, the guests will be: Jim DeMint (R) and Chris Christie (R).

* because Sanders and Lieberman caucus with the Democrats.


posted by Quiddity at 11/06/2010 09:00:00 PM

Obama calls India creator, not poacher, of US jobs

I doubt that statement will convince many people.


posted by Quiddity at 11/06/2010 01:41:00 PM

Forget it:

David Brooks (yes, him) notes:

The Midwest has lost a manufacturing empire but hasn’t yet found a role. Working-class people in this region overwhelmingly backed George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 but then lost faith in the Republican Party’s ability to solve their problems. By 2008, they were willing to take a flier on Barack Obama. He carried Ohio, Indiana and Iowa.

Over the past two years, these voters have watched government radically increase spending in an attempt to put people back to work. According to the Office of Management and Budget, federal spending increased from about 21 percent of G.D.P. in 2008 to nearly 26 percent of G.D.P. this year. There was an $800 billion stimulus package, along with auto bailouts aimed directly at the Midwest.

Economists are debating the effects of all this, but voters have reached a verdict. According to exit polls on Tuesday, two-thirds of the Americans who voted said that the stimulus package was either harmful to the American economy or made no difference whatsoever.

Between June and August of 2009, the working class became disillusioned with Democratic policies. Working-class voters used to move toward the Democrats in recessions; this time, they moved to the right, shifting attitudes on everything from global warming to gun control. In Tuesday’s exit polls, 56 percent of voters said government does too much, while only 38 percent said it should do more.

On Tuesday, the Democrats got destroyed in this region. They lost five House seats in Pennsylvania and another five in Ohio. They lost governorships in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa. Republicans gained control of both state legislative houses in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Indiana and Minnesota.

You can argue about the health care legislation and the bank bailouts, but there is no doubt that government intervention saved General Motors and Chrysler from going under - along with the feeder buisnesses. You would think that the industrial Midwest (especially Michigan and Ohio) would be firmly Democratic. But that didn't happen.

That's got to be a failure of messaging (White House), a failure of explaining (by the press), or a success of opposition politics (Fox News, Limbaugh). In any event it makes it hard to justify governing in a manner that helps constituents. There is no reward, so why bother?


posted by Quiddity at 11/05/2010 02:02:00 AM

What will he get in return?

In the news:

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs reiterated on Thursday that the president will be open to extending the upper-end Bush tax cuts for one or two years as part of a broader compromise with Republicans.

If this is a compromise, then Obama should be getting something for giving the Republicans a temporary extension of upper-income Bush tax cuts. I wonder what that will be.


posted by Quiddity at 11/04/2010 07:06:00 PM

Clive Crook has it wrong:

He writes: (excerpts)

Blame the Whining Left for the Democrats' Reverse

I don't think progressive Democrats are getting the credit they deserve for the hole Obama and the party are in.

Suppose that the Democratic base had not been sulking.

Suppose it was impressed [with what] Mr Obama did ...

Mr Obama's midterm strategy could have been different. Sure of the loyalty of the base, he could have addressed himself to the anxious middle, defended his policies as centrist compromises ... and told the country ... that its concerns were his concerns.

... he would have had his base and at least a shot at bringing the centre back.

The 2010 results were due to independents shifting strongly from Obama to the Republicans. But that reality doesn't allow Crook to blame the left, say, for not voting - which they did, although at with less enthusiasm.

So he has to conjure up a bank shot by first claiming that Obama spent time placating the left (which he didn't) and therefore wasn't able to attend to independents (which weren't going to be receptive to Obama's clumsy messaging this year). And he totally ignores the Tea Party response and the effects of the listless economy.


posted by Quiddity at 11/03/2010 03:30:00 AM

2010 election result:

Obama is now on his own.

He won't get any help from the House or the Senate for the next two years. Let's see how he handles it.


posted by Quiddity at 11/03/2010 03:22:00 AM

2010 election insight:

Chris Matthews nails it:

"This country's run by the good people that run it, and the bad people, too."

posted by Quiddity at 11/03/2010 12:02:00 AM

The 2010 mid-term elections:

It's bad out there. And I don't mean in terms of Democratic losses. The badness is the misinformation and confusion and lack of clear thinking on all sides - especially on economic issues.

Oddly enough, one place where clear declarations of the problems is found over at FrumForum: The Middle Class Hits a Dead End. At Salon, Michael Lind is one of the few that sees Why center-left parties are collapsing (his reasons: free trade, open borders, multicultural, corporate-friendly).

The timing of the economic melt-down made it harder for Obama to lay the problems at Bush's doorstep, but he didn't articulate a vision particularly well, and it gave the Republicans new life. So now we can look forward to muddle and lots more anger


posted by Quiddity at 11/02/2010 05:17:00 PM

World Series:

Good to see George W. Bush on camera so many times during the Texas home games. Never hurts to remind people about the guy, especially just before an election.


posted by Quiddity at 10/31/2010 08:48:00 PM

No conflicts here:

From TPM we learn: (emp add)

Andrew Breitbart To Provide "Analysis" For ABC News On Election Night

ABC News has confirmed that conservative agitprop artist Andrew Breitbart will join the ABC News team to provide "live analysis" of election returns on Tuesday night.

Breitbart runs the conservative website Big Government. And, as luck would have it his editor, Dana Loesch, will also provide analysis for ABC on November 2.

TPM also reports: (emp add)

'Operation Alaska Chaos': Right-Wingers Pushed Flood Of AK-SEN Write-In Candidates

The flood of write-in candidates in the Alaska Senate race was pushed by Big Government's Dan Riehl and the conservative group Conservatives 4 Palin in an attempt to hurt Sen. Lisa Murkowski's own write-in campaign and give Republican nominee (and tea party favorite) Joe Miller a boost.

Beginning on Riehl's Big Government blog and dubbed "Operation Alaska Chaos" by C4P, Miller supporters were encouraged to file as write-in candidates so Murkowski's name would be buried on the official list of candidates.

posted by Quiddity at 10/29/2010 09:58:00 PM

Timing:

There is a story about Fox News management pressuring reporters to be even more pro-Republican in their work. The Fox management honcho doing this is alleged to be Bill Sammon, who is also described as the author of At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried to Steal the Election.

So why not pop over to Amazon and check out the reviews of the book? The reviews are, as you would expect, bimodal. Many people like the book, a sizable number do not - including a hefty portion of self-described conservatives and Republicans (because they don't think the case was well made, even though they don't like Gore).

Here is a peculiar negative review: (emp add)

I voted Republican, but this book is GARBAGE! Don't waste $, September 10, 2001
By hris D. "rippy1" (Rhode Island)

I voted Republican, and am ever so happy that Jeb, Katheryn Harris, many Floridians, and even noble members of the supreme court were able to fight to get the most qualified and intelligent man for the job, George W. Bush, into the Presidency. It was very nerve wracking and difficult to watch the post election media circus. Naturally, after the dust settled, I was anxious to read books that really investigated and shed light on what really happened. I was very excited to purchase this book, however, it left me angry and very disappointed! It is hard to believe some of the other reviews people gave this book. Even though I am a loyal Republican, I cannot lie and recomend this book. I believe other loyal Republicans must have simply read the book discription and out of strong emotions, immpulsively left a five star rating. They most certainly did not read the same book I read.

This book simply made Pro-Republican, Anti-Democrat claims, which I would of course love to be true, but find little to no evidence to support such serious accusations. This really disappointed me because I wanted to write a paper for my Poly-Sci class that took a critical look at the actions of the Democratic party during the past election. I found nothing I could use in this book (although I found plenty of unsupported accusations fit for a tabloid). Honestly, if I had used anything from this book I would have been afraid of failing for lack of supportive arguments.

I wonder if he felt that way a week later.


posted by Quiddity at 10/29/2010 09:20:00 PM

Illogic:

Patrick Fleenor, a libertarian-ish economist, wrote this in the Christian Science Monitor:

Take the administration’s signature achievement: enactment of healthcare reform, aka Obamacare. This legislation subsidizes health insurance for low- and middle-income groups with taxes on high-earners, leveling material wealth but dampening economic growth by encouraging everyone to pare back on their work effort.

High-income workers have an incentive to work less since they get to keep less of what they earn. Low- and moderate-income workers face the same incentive because they can now maintain the same standard of living with even less effort.

To summarize:

High-income workers	will have less incentive to work	because they will keep less of what they earn.
Low- and moderate-income workers	will have less incentive to work	because they will keep more of what they earn.

That's called the old switcheroo. Make the "incentive" for high-income workers the money they keep, but for other workers their standard of living, and conclude that there should be no taxation/redistribution. But you could assign the incentives in the reverse fashion and conclude the exact opposite. How about that?


posted by Quiddity at 10/28/2010 07:42:00 PM

Pre-election musings:

This general election of 2010 seems a little "off" compared to earlier ones. Here we are, a week before the vote, and there isn't a whole lot of discussion about the candidates or ballot initiatives. At least not compared to the past. Could it be that the saturation of (mostly negative) television ads has sucked up all the media oxygen, so that conventional political reporting (including the not-very-interesting horse race angle) has been shoved aside?

The blogs seem bored. The networks and newspapers spend more time on the weather. The level of political energy out there seems equal - or less - to what you'd find in a typical week during the summer of 2009.

My guess is that, deep down, people know there are no solutions on the horizon to our economic problems. By either party, since serious reconstruction of the system, along with plenty of time, is the only way to get out of our current state of imbalance (speaking broadly: worker share of productivity gains, savings rate, house/income ratios, health care costs).

I suppose the conservatives are fired up, but what gets the independent voter motivated? A lot of attack ads? Bromides about jobs? Even the social issues don't resonate like they used to.

What's the national narrative? What's your local one? There's not a lot of "Yes! Let's get moving with this policy!" - whatever the hell it might be.

I think people are basically tired. Tired after the last two years of economic anxiety and the last ten years of stagnation. Thus, the low-energy for November 2010.

This doesn't have to be a permanent state of affairs. After a while, energy returns to the system and vigorous debates and policies follow. But it doesn't seem like we are anywhere close to that at the moment.


posted by Quiddity at 10/27/2010 02:29:00 PM

Question:

Republicans raise the charge of voter fraud every time there is a general election, but never during the primaries. I wonder why?


posted by Quiddity at 10/27/2010 11:03:00 AM

Rewrite!

This is the lead sentence written by the professionals at AP:

BAGHDAD – The international face of Saddam Hussein's regime, Tariq Aziz, was sentenced to death by hanging Tuesday for persecuting Shiites just over three months after the Americans transferred him to Iraqi government custody.

How about that? Three months after being handed over, Tariq Asiz somehow managed to persecute Shiites, for which he has now been sentenced to death.


posted by Quiddity at 10/27/2010 12:06:00 AM

The FOX Nation crowd respond to that Moveon.org worker getting stomped by Rand Paul supporters:

Remember, this is a moderated comment thread:

• Come on folks, don't believe this. This is just a moveon farce, actors or just SEIU slaves, paid by Soro's. I don't believe it for one minute.
  
• MadeUp . org
  
• Lets see? "Moveon" is an openly communist, anti-American organization, that promotes violence. This was staged!!!
  
• I would have wore baseball cleats and made her pay for her stupidity....to me she got off pretty easily.
  
• Should have stomped much harder !
  
• When this man is found....and his background checked.... they will find Soros tattoed all over him.
  
• It's so obvious. In today's fake and fade the democrats will stage anything, including this little stunt in order to gain the publics' sympathy and votes.
  
• Don't worry about Soros' Foot Soldiers, we need to go after Him!!
  He has violated so many laws, when we have control of Congress, he will be Fair Game!!
  
• Over the top but understandable.
  
• I bet it was all a set up to make the tea party look bad.
  
• KUDOS TO MOVE ON,,,,THEY ARE ABLE TO STAGE THESE EVENTS AS WELL AS THEY PLAY THE RACE CARD.
  
• Moveon= ANTI-AMERICAN democrat (commies)
  
• She's lucky they didn't P i s s on her too !!!
  
• Just what Soros hoped would happen!!!
  
• I am wondering why the guy did not kick her in the head. It might have jarred some sense into her. You might as well face it folks, there is going to come a time when being civil to this commie scum will not cut it. That time is approaching fast ! They (the commies) are not going away unless we kick their a s s e s and make them fear us.

posted by Quiddity at 10/26/2010 10:01:00 AM

David Brooks is spinning:

When he writes:

... Democrats and their media enablers have paid lavish attention to Christine O’Donnell and Carl Paladino, even though these two Republican candidates have almost no chance of winning. That’s because it feels so delicious to feel superior to opponents you consider to be feeble-minded wackos.

You can question the strategy, but parties routinely seek out the most vulnerable (or bizarre) on the other side to highlight in order to paint them as the face of the opposition.

Brooks knows that. Brooks doesn't write that because he's in the business of creating false narratives that aid Republicans.


posted by Quiddity at 10/26/2010 12:09:00 AM

More pledge madness:

Dem Rep Caught Omitting 'Under God' During Pledge on House Floor


posted by Quiddity at 10/25/2010 12:22:00 PM

Robots:

Story: (excerpts)

Illinois' top League of Women Voters official said “phony patriotism” is driving criticism over a moderator's reaction when she was asked if the Pledge of Allegiance would be recited before an 8th Congressional District debate this week.

Executive Director Jan Czarnik said what happened at Wednesday's debate and subsequent criticism directed at moderator Kathy Tate-Bradish was an attempt by supporters of Republican candidate Joe Walsh of McHenry and tea party members to bully the organization.

Czarnik said someone is not a better American just by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

“It's a phony patriotism issue is what it is,” she said. “They must think it helps their campaign.”

Brought in from the League of Women Voters Evanston branch because she doesn't live in the 8th Congressional District, Tate-Bradish handled the event at Grayslake Central High School that featured Democratic U.S. Rep. Melissa Bean of Barrington, the Green Party's Bill Scheurer and Walsh.

Tate-Bradish was asked whether the Pledge of Allegiance would be recited after she went over some ground rules and directed the candidates to make opening statements. The query came from a man in the audience.

As Tate-Bradish explained the debate was not scheduled to start with the pledge, almost all in the crowd of more than 300 stood and enthusiastically recited it anyway. Tate-Bradish, who joined in the pledge, issued a scolding when the crowd finished. (...)

Island Lake resident Joseph Ptak, a Walsh supporter, claimed Friday he asked for the pledge at the debate. (...)

Ptak, 58, a U.S. Air Force veteran, said the pledge was a proper way to begin the event that was in a high school and had student participation. He said many veterans were in the audience, and he objects to Czarnik questioning the request's sincerity.

“I'm a Joe Walsh supporter, but first and foremost I'm an American,” Ptak said.

The comments section is interesting. E.g. this was the highest rated (with a +11 thumbs up)

In such a situation, there's two right answers then someone asks if you're gonna lead with the pledge of allegiance:

1. Yes, we will, thanks for the reminder.

2. Yes, we will, will you be kind enough to lead us?

posted by Quiddity at 10/25/2010 08:16:00 AM

Shorter Charles Murray:

America's elite are the upper-middle class professionals. They are running this country, not corporate executives and billionaires (about whom I shall say nothing).

posted by Quiddity at 10/24/2010 12:45:00 AM

Tom Friedman's brilliant solution:

To what ails us economically:

Ultimately, though, good jobs at scale come only when we create more products and services that make people’s lives more healthy, more productive, more secure, more comfortable or more entertained — and then sell them to more people around the world.

That's all there is to it. Plus, he says:

[We should] leverage modern technology so that one American can do the work of 20 Chinese and, therefore, get paid the same as 20 Chinese.

Simple and elegant, because nobody else in the world (including the Chinese) will be thinking of that.

Finally, what about the worker without special skills? Friedman offers:

What about your nurse, barber or waiter? ... Everyone today ... needs to think of himself as an “artisan” — the term used before mass manufacturing to apply to people who made things or provided services with a distinctive touch in which they took personal pride. Everyone today has to be an artisan and bring something extra to their jobs.

Because when your waiter is an artisan, that "something extra" brought to the restaurant table will guarantee a decent income and solid retirement.

But Friedman is no Pollyanna. He issues this caution:

... just doing your job in an average way — in this integrated and automated global economy — will lead to below-average wages.

Is Friedman doing his job in an average way? Or even below-average? Is his writing jejune? Let's hope not or he'll end up below-average economically.


posted by Quiddity at 10/23/2010 11:36:00 PM

George W. Bush's biggest accomplishment:

In his own words:

"my biggest accomplishment is that I kept the country safe amidst a real danger"

He sure did keep the country safe throughout his term in office. And let's not forget the war he initiated against Iraq, which was a clear threat to the nation.


posted by Quiddity at 10/22/2010 11:51:00 AM

Kudos to Juan Williams:

You're now an official Fox News Democrat. *

(I'm not sure if Williams has disclosed party identification, but you get the point.)


posted by Quiddity at 10/21/2010 11:27:00 PM

Shorter David Broder:

My hope is that today's politicians will behave like those who were born 97 years ago.

posted by Quiddity at 10/21/2010 09:42:00 PM

Shorter David Brooks:

If you believe my claim that "money is almost never the difference between victory and defeat", you'll also believe my assertion that the rich and powerful spend millions - not to influence policy, but - "because it makes them feel as if they are doing good and because they get to hang out at exclusive parties".

UPDATE: Brooks' "low" numbers for Republican-friendly spending seemed odd at first reading. Turns out that he was way off, and that the spending is four time as large (at least).


posted by Quiddity at 10/19/2010 02:06:00 AM

Just a reminder:

Of the Supreme Court's reasoning in the Citizens United case: (emp add)

"this court now concludes that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. That speakers may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that those officials are corrupt. And the appearance of influence or access will not cause the electorate to lose faith in this democracy"

posted by Quiddity at 10/18/2010 04:09:00 PM

The Reid-Angle debate:

Best part:

[Moderator Mitch] Fox: [addressing Sharon Angle]

In a television ad, you claim Senator Reid “voted to get special tax breaks to illegal aliens and to give illegals Social Security benefits.”

Most reputable fact checkers have said that’s patently false, especially the line about social security benefits. The ad was even criticized by the chair of the Republican Hispanic Caucus. Would you like to denounce the ad as deceptive or give voters documented evidence about its accuracy.

Angle:

Not at all, I’m glad to give voters, um, the opportunity to see that Harry Reid has voted to give Social Security to illegal aliens. Not only did he vote to give it to them after they have become citizens but even before they were citizens, he voted to give them the benefits of our Social Security.

In other words:

"You just asserted X, which has been shown to be false. What do you say now?"

"I assert X."

posted by Quiddity at 10/17/2010 05:18:00 AM

Jonathan Chait makes an excellent point:

One that I've advocated, but he's a better writer: (emp add)

This week, Republican House Whip Eric Cantor appeared on the Daily Show. An interesting and (relatively) honest moment occured ...

CANTOR: {I don't want] the government sitting here saying, ‘This person here’s too successful, this one’s not, I’m gonna take from this one and give to that one.’ That’s the principle. It’s earned success.

That is indeed the heart of what Republicans believe. They believe that all success is earned success. They do not believe that luck or life circumstance play an important part in economic success. They believe that wealth and poverty are essentially moral categories, interchangeable with "hard work" and "sloth." They decry government, but they don't really oppose government per se. They oppose those government functions that transfer resources from the rich to the non-rich. ...

If you listen to Sean Hannity or read Andrew Sullivan, they frequently invoke the word "success" when defending conservative policies. That word, "success", has largely positive connotations, but it's not always so. A successful doctor may be very rich, but also a poor doctor (in terms of patient treatment).


posted by Quiddity at 10/14/2010 03:01:00 PM

Bin Laden responsible for U.S. infrastructure projects:

News:

A soaring bypass bridge high above the Colorado River near Hoover Dam is set to open after nearly eight years and $240 million worth of work.

The 1,900-foot engineering wonder perched 890 feet above the water is expected to drastically cut travel time along the main route between Las Vegas and Phoenix, as motorists will no longer have to make their way across the dam and its security checkpoints at a snail's pace. ...

Cars previously were routed across Hoover Dam to cross the border between Arizona and Nevada, and checkpoints added after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, often caused miles-long backups of traffic. Federal officials also heavily restricted the types of vehicles and cargo that could cross the dam ...

It's the longest bridge built with concrete arches in the western hemisphere, according to the Transportation Department. The arches measure 1,060 feet.

Wait a minute! The new bridge is itself a target, which means checkpoints and backups of traffic.

Better build another bridge to circumvent this (attractive to terrorists) record size bridge.


posted by Quiddity at 10/14/2010 01:18:00 PM

Transcript of the Coons - O'Donnell debate:

Best part: (edited)

O'DONNELL: I would be remiss not to bring up the fact that my opponent has recently said that it was studying under a Marxist professor that made him become a Democrat. So when you look at his position on things like raising taxes, which is one of the tenets of Marxism; not supporting eliminating death tax, which is a tenet of Marxism -- I would argue that there are more people who support my Catholic faith than his Marxist beliefs ...

COONS: It's an article that I wrote as a senior the day of our commencement speech and the title and the content of that clearly makes it obvious that it was a joke. There was a group of folks who I had shared a room with, my roommates junior year, who are in the Young Republican Club and who thought when I returned from Kenya and registered as a Democrat that doing so was proof that I had gone all the way over to the far left end, and so they jokingly called me a bearded Marxist. If you take five minutes and read the article, it's clear on the face of it, it was a joke. Despite that, my opponent and lots of folks in the right wing media have endlessly spun this. ...

O'DONNELL: [Y]ou writing an article, forget the bearded Marxist comment, you writing an article saying that you learned your beliefs from an articulate, intelligent Marxist professor and that's what made you become a Democrat, that should send chills up the spine of every Delaware voter ...

COONS: If it were accurate, if it were true, I'd agree. But it's not accurate. It's not true.

And so it goes.


posted by Quiddity at 10/14/2010 12:24:00 AM

Just sayin'

Microsoft OS is one of the biggest hassle-making things out there. I guess that's because it's a monopoly of sorts. Why people put up with the arcane, often confusing, and failure-prone "solutions" to various problems is beyond me. I have to conclude that they do not have anybody in QA that cares about straightforward user procedures. For them, if something "works", even if that requires a top-notch understanding of the software, then it's okay for release.

Right now a CD cannot be seen by the OS and finding the driver is a snipe hunt. Microsoft Security Essentials showed up out of nowhere to conflict with AVG and cannot update for reasons unknown even though the Internet is accessible. A system restore is taking forever to settle down - with the bonus feature of apps "not responding" now and then.

Love the

Insert the Windows Vista installation disc in the drive

that MS support pages often display. Where is the disk? Who knows? (This for another person's PC.) Why, for instance, whatever consists a "driver" cannot be had over the internet in a single file for installation is beyond me.

Linux cannot become the world's default OS fast enough. (And, no, Apple isn't all that great either.)


posted by Quiddity at 10/13/2010 09:50:00 PM

Shorter Tony Perkins:

Homosexuality is a sin which you can escape by embracing Christ. Also, because homosexuals have a higher rate of mental health problems, they are abnormal* and therefore opprobrium is merited.

Perkins' essay in the Washington Post has caused quite a stir.

* That second statement is absurd and could be applied to half the population (e.g. veterans, doctors).


posted by Quiddity at 10/13/2010 03:10:00 PM

Art Robinson, Republican challenger to Representative Peter DeFazio of Oregon:

Here is what he's said in recent years: (emp add)

"All we need do with nuclear waste is dilute it to a low radiation level and sprinkle it over the ocean – or even over America after hormesis is better understood and verified with respect to more diseases."

"While ocean dispersal would have long ago turned the radioactive waste disposal issue into a non-problem had pseudo environmentalism not intervened, the best place for that waste is in the concrete foundations and insulation of homes and buildings. Suitably diluted, radioactive substances in our homes would provide a hermetic radiation dose and significantly prolong our lives."

"If radioactive waste were dissolved as water soluble compounds and then widely dispersed in the oceans, no health or other environmental risks would ever occur."

posted by Quiddity at 10/13/2010 02:55:00 PM

Steve Pearlstein's isn't challenged ...

... on his main point: (emp add)

There are lots of reasons why American companies ... have lost market share ... but one is that in too many industries, our labor costs are now too high to be globally competitive. Reducing wages and benefits in those industries would not only help to create and save jobs, but would also force a further reduction in consumption and living standards that is necessary to bring the U.S. economy back into balance.

Neither economist Dean Baker, nor neo-liberal Matt Yglesias and his free-trade-buddy Brad DeLong*, disagree with that central assertion.

* DeLong's excerpt of Yglesias omitted the observation that lowering-wages, devaluing the dollar, and inflation (all responses to globalization):

... are ... all ways of cutting the real wages of Americans

I wonder why?


posted by Quiddity at 10/13/2010 01:23:00 PM