Friday, September 12, 2008
Palin's interview
I'm not inclined to take too much meaning out of much of anything she said. Lots of people are all over her for repeating the "second guess" line about Israel over and over and about whether Georgia really should be part of NATO. These things don't worry me too much. I realize she's required to walk a very fine line, for her answers to comply with the messages the campaign wants to put out. Even if she knew lots about the issues, she'd be trying to keep her answers limited to the memorized blurbs provided by the campaign.
But her obvious failure to know what The Bush Doctrine is does worry me, and it confirms my suspicion from the beginning. She's never had much interest in national or international issues. Any one who's been paying even the slightest attention to the U.S. foreign policy over the past eight years knows what The Bush Doctrine is, maybe not with precision (there's some room for varying interpretations of what exactly it is), but enough to not be completely adrift at the question.
[Update: McCain himself makes my point:
But her obvious failure to know what The Bush Doctrine is does worry me, and it confirms my suspicion from the beginning. She's never had much interest in national or international issues. Any one who's been paying even the slightest attention to the U.S. foreign policy over the past eight years knows what The Bush Doctrine is, maybe not with precision (there's some room for varying interpretations of what exactly it is), but enough to not be completely adrift at the question.
[Update: McCain himself makes my point:
Ike blogging
If anyone is interested, I'll use this post to live-blog Ike. Updates will appear below.
10:38 Dr. Frank (can't get embed to work):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGUL7WS7CpQ
10:31 The Chronic is reporting 15 foot surge in Galveston so Fran's house ought to be OK.
10:18 am Lost power last night at 11pm. Blogging by generator. Lots of wind and rain but no flooding, some tree limbs and fences down but that appears to be the worst of it. T and B out now on golfcart to assess neighborhood. Todd reports that the big oak in the backyard is down.
10:18 Yes the Hilton seems to have lost it's skin. Weird, but the worst thing that will happen tonight. Bah.
10:15 Bah. We haven't lost power and we won't.
6:40 I'm calling it now. Complete dud.
6:22 I'm now convinced we're looking at a real time Capricorn One. Just heard a report that people needed rescuing in Seabrook and the rescuers couldn't get to them. Seabrook is no more than 10 miles from here and nothing is happening. The rest of the party took off to see how high the bayous and Lake are. Bah.
4:47 Everyone thinks I'm crazy but I'm saying this is a big dud. Eye is bigger than Mama Cass and pressure is rising. Made three bets with three neighbors that we won't lose power. Earlier forecasts (10am) said we'd have 35 mph winds by noon. Didn't happen. Yes, Galveston and the bay are getting storm surge but it doesn't mean anything to us unless it approaches 25 feet, which isn't happening. Bah.
TBA [Dr. Neil video but youtube is being very slow in processing it]
2:03 So far? Most boring hurricane ever.
1:57 You know the difference between Wayne Dolcefino and a troll? Me neither.
Seawall video:
12:53 Just got back from checking on Fran's house in Nassau Bay. Water is over the dock at the Hilton on Clear Lake (see here for fun fact) and about 5 feet above normal on Clear Creek.
11:13 Water turned off in most of Galveston to prevent saltwater contamination.
10:41 Lost 2 persons and a cat, CPCM: 3 humans, 3 dogs, 1 cat, 1 rodent.
10:12 Hurricane video! Behold the cruelty of Mother Nature!
7:52 am Intrepid reporters (blame Dan Rather, more on that sometime later) are showing me that waves are breaking over the west end of the seawall in Galveston, which is about 15 feet high. uh oh. Partly cloudy and calm here.
Galveston is under mandatory evacuation as are we (zip code 77059). We didn't think Ike would get much over a Cat 2 and it looks like that is right. 110-120 mph winds as it hits the coast. I drove around the neighborhood on my new golfcart yesterday afternoon, and it appears that 20% of the neighborhood is staying.
8:09 Current population chez Michael: 5 humans, 3 dogs, 2 cats. Oh, and 1 piggy (did you remember that he is named PJ?).
8:58 video test
10:38 Dr. Frank (can't get embed to work):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGUL7WS7CpQ
10:31 The Chronic is reporting 15 foot surge in Galveston so Fran's house ought to be OK.
10:18 am Lost power last night at 11pm. Blogging by generator. Lots of wind and rain but no flooding, some tree limbs and fences down but that appears to be the worst of it. T and B out now on golfcart to assess neighborhood. Todd reports that the big oak in the backyard is down.
10:18 Yes the Hilton seems to have lost it's skin. Weird, but the worst thing that will happen tonight. Bah.
10:15 Bah. We haven't lost power and we won't.
6:40 I'm calling it now. Complete dud.
6:22 I'm now convinced we're looking at a real time Capricorn One. Just heard a report that people needed rescuing in Seabrook and the rescuers couldn't get to them. Seabrook is no more than 10 miles from here and nothing is happening. The rest of the party took off to see how high the bayous and Lake are. Bah.
4:47 Everyone thinks I'm crazy but I'm saying this is a big dud. Eye is bigger than Mama Cass and pressure is rising. Made three bets with three neighbors that we won't lose power. Earlier forecasts (10am) said we'd have 35 mph winds by noon. Didn't happen. Yes, Galveston and the bay are getting storm surge but it doesn't mean anything to us unless it approaches 25 feet, which isn't happening. Bah.
TBA [Dr. Neil video but youtube is being very slow in processing it]
2:03 So far? Most boring hurricane ever.
1:57 You know the difference between Wayne Dolcefino and a troll? Me neither.
Seawall video:
12:53 Just got back from checking on Fran's house in Nassau Bay. Water is over the dock at the Hilton on Clear Lake (see here for fun fact) and about 5 feet above normal on Clear Creek.
11:13 Water turned off in most of Galveston to prevent saltwater contamination.
10:41 Lost 2 persons and a cat, CPCM: 3 humans, 3 dogs, 1 cat, 1 rodent.
10:12 Hurricane video! Behold the cruelty of Mother Nature!
7:52 am Intrepid reporters (blame Dan Rather, more on that sometime later) are showing me that waves are breaking over the west end of the seawall in Galveston, which is about 15 feet high. uh oh. Partly cloudy and calm here.
Galveston is under mandatory evacuation as are we (zip code 77059). We didn't think Ike would get much over a Cat 2 and it looks like that is right. 110-120 mph winds as it hits the coast. I drove around the neighborhood on my new golfcart yesterday afternoon, and it appears that 20% of the neighborhood is staying.
8:09 Current population chez Michael: 5 humans, 3 dogs, 2 cats. Oh, and 1 piggy (did you remember that he is named PJ?).
8:58 video test
Thursday, September 11, 2008
The interview
Early transcripts show that Charlie is taking talking points from a dishonest AP report. Josh and Steph still crying fraud?
Last on ad
It's a political ad. It's not designed to give equal time to both sides of the argument in an impartial manner. It is designed to persuade within the bounds of being factual. Everything the ad says is within those bounds. If Barry thinks more should be said let him run an ad. If he does, I'll bet you a dollar it doesn't contain a single word from the actual bill. As I've pointed out in the comments, what Barry has said the bill was supposed to do is found nowhere in the actual bill. So who's lying now?
This is pernicious nonsense
Steph writes about the McCain sex ed ad: "And I'm confident that one of the purposes of the ad is to tap into racist attitudes about the hypersexualization of black people. We'll see more of this, I predict."
As I said when she said the same thing in a comment to her post: "You absolutely must be kidding. You've gone way way over the edge if you really think that."
Reading racist code language in everything McCain says or does is a symptom of something, but I'm not sure what.
As I said when she said the same thing in a comment to her post: "You absolutely must be kidding. You've gone way way over the edge if you really think that."
Reading racist code language in everything McCain says or does is a symptom of something, but I'm not sure what.
More bridge
if you can stand it. Pretty straightforward timeline that shows that Palin did in fact "stop" the bridge.
Re sex ed ad
Geraghty looks at the details and says McCain has it right.
"I’m sure it’s a lot easier to scream that McCain is a shameless liar and that those who deemed the ad valid are hacks than to concede that one’s preferred candidate backed a bill with an unwise provision."
Comments? Still outraged?
UPDATE: Having read the bill, I think I see a possible "innocent" explanantion. They were revising a statute that dealt with sex ed for grades 6 through 12. When they revised it and extended it to Kindergarten, they neglected to take into account that all the explicit language about transmission of STDs and avoiding pregnancy also now applied to Kindergarten. It is possible that this was inadvertant, but with many eyes looking at this you would think someone would have caught it if that wasn't their intent.
UPDATE 2: Geraghty updates his post with the following : "Okay, I think McCain's ad is wrong in one respect. As the bill never passed, it's wrong to call it an Obama 'accomplishment.'"
"I’m sure it’s a lot easier to scream that McCain is a shameless liar and that those who deemed the ad valid are hacks than to concede that one’s preferred candidate backed a bill with an unwise provision."
Comments? Still outraged?
UPDATE: Having read the bill, I think I see a possible "innocent" explanantion. They were revising a statute that dealt with sex ed for grades 6 through 12. When they revised it and extended it to Kindergarten, they neglected to take into account that all the explicit language about transmission of STDs and avoiding pregnancy also now applied to Kindergarten. It is possible that this was inadvertant, but with many eyes looking at this you would think someone would have caught it if that wasn't their intent.
UPDATE 2: Geraghty updates his post with the following : "Okay, I think McCain's ad is wrong in one respect. As the bill never passed, it's wrong to call it an Obama 'accomplishment.'"
The sex ed ad
Seriously, does this not sicken you? How can anyone vote for these people?
[Update: And if this doesn't lose your vote, then what would? Are they really such staunch defenders of free market principles and fiscal responsibility that you're willing to overlook this despicable garbage?]
[Update II: I'm modulating my outrage down one notch, from a 5-out-of-5 to a 4, since the statute doesn't explicitly limit topics for kindergartners to inappropriate touch. But the ad is inaccurate and conveys a false impression by using the phrase "comprehensive sex education" without mentioning the requirement that info be "age appropriate". And I'm confident that one of the purposes of the ad is to tap into racist attitudes about the hypersexualization of black people. We'll see more of this, I predict.
The extent to which schools should be responsible for teaching sex ed is something about which reasonable people can disagree and it would be completely appropriate to run an ad that accurately characterizes Obama's position: that age-appropriate sex ed belongs in the schools starting with kindergarten. But that's not what the ad does.
It's appropriate for Obama's campaign to point out that one reason to be in favor of this bill would be that it would get info into the hands of kindergartners about inappropriate touch. I'm looking at an ABC news story from 2007 that won't allow copy/paste that shows Obama isn't pretending the ONLY thing the bill did w/r/t kindergarten was to teach inappropriate touch. But pointing out this benefit of the legislation and this reason to be in favor of it is not the same thing as denying that the bill provides for age-appropriate sex ed for kindergartners. If he denies that, shame on him.]
[McCain's] sex education ad referred to legislation Obama voted for -- but did not sponsor -- in the Illinois Senate that allowed school boards to develop "age-appropriate" sex education courses at all levels. Kindergarten teachers were given the approval to teach about appropriate and inappropriate touching to combat molestation.
The McCain advertisement calls it "Obama's one accomplishment" in education: "legislation to teach comprehensive sex education to kindergartners."
"Learning about sex before learning to read? Barack Obama, wrong on education, wrong for your family," the ad concludes.
[Update: And if this doesn't lose your vote, then what would? Are they really such staunch defenders of free market principles and fiscal responsibility that you're willing to overlook this despicable garbage?]
[Update II: I'm modulating my outrage down one notch, from a 5-out-of-5 to a 4, since the statute doesn't explicitly limit topics for kindergartners to inappropriate touch. But the ad is inaccurate and conveys a false impression by using the phrase "comprehensive sex education" without mentioning the requirement that info be "age appropriate". And I'm confident that one of the purposes of the ad is to tap into racist attitudes about the hypersexualization of black people. We'll see more of this, I predict.
The extent to which schools should be responsible for teaching sex ed is something about which reasonable people can disagree and it would be completely appropriate to run an ad that accurately characterizes Obama's position: that age-appropriate sex ed belongs in the schools starting with kindergarten. But that's not what the ad does.
It's appropriate for Obama's campaign to point out that one reason to be in favor of this bill would be that it would get info into the hands of kindergartners about inappropriate touch. I'm looking at an ABC news story from 2007 that won't allow copy/paste that shows Obama isn't pretending the ONLY thing the bill did w/r/t kindergarten was to teach inappropriate touch. But pointing out this benefit of the legislation and this reason to be in favor of it is not the same thing as denying that the bill provides for age-appropriate sex ed for kindergartners. If he denies that, shame on him.]
Drudge Watch
I saw Letterman. This is a misrepresentation of what he said. He said first that he'd been talking about McCain's policies, that you can call them "change" (i.e put lipstick on them) but they're still the same as Bush. Then later he said, if I HAD been using this saying to reference Palin (which he'd just explained he wasn't), she would have been the lipstick and McCain's policies would have been the pig. So Drudge makes this a headline.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
On the RealClearPolitics
electoral map, if you move Florida and Colorado from toss-up to McCain, McCain wins 225-217. Heck, moving just Florida makes it 217-216 Obama.
UPDATE: Boy, I'd like to delete this. I of course was not even thinking about the total needed (270) or the effect of the other toss-ups. I just got excited when I moved two states and McCain's number was bigger than Barry's and didn't think beyond that. Sheesh.
UPDATE: Boy, I'd like to delete this. I of course was not even thinking about the total needed (270) or the effect of the other toss-ups. I just got excited when I moved two states and McCain's number was bigger than Barry's and didn't think beyond that. Sheesh.
Troubled bridge over water
From Josh:
Actually, Congress put the kibosh on the Bridge to Nowhere back in November 2005. Since Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was then head of the Senate Appropriations Committee he was able to force a compromise in which the earmark for the bridge was killed but Alaska got to hold on to the money -- some $442 million of federal tax dollars.
Fast forward to November 2006. That's when Sarah Palin was running as a staunch supporter of the Bridge to Nowhere -- that is, after the feds had themselves already said 'No Thanks.'
In 2006, the Democrats took over both houses of Congress. So by the time Palin got into office it was clear that not only was the first Bridge earmark killed but that Congress was not going to be ponying up any more money. That meant that Alaska was going to have to pick up the tab all on its own. So since she couldn't pay for it with the federal pork barrel, in September 2007, Palin officially halted the project which was then a state project since Congress had said 'Thanks. But no thanks' two years earlier.
She couldn't say 'No Thanks' because Congress had already said 'Forget It'.
Jet fuel
More on the jet story:
Moreover, because of the unique purchasing terms of the aircraft -- which required the state to make payments amounting to $20,000 per month even if the jet wasn't in use -- the decision not to hire a broker to help sell the property appears in hindsight to have been a costly mistake....By the time she was elected, there were many state items being offered on eBay. As the Anchorage Daily News reported on December 13, 2006, nine days after Palin took office and the day she announced the jet posting, the state was "auctioning 38 items on the site, including three aircraft -- two Super Cubs and a Cessna... Other items for sale included two sets of used helicopter floats ($300) and King Air exhaust stacks ($500)."
Back in 2003, the state sold an old ferry, The Bartlett, for $389,500. As Jones noted in a Daily News article at that time, "it [was] not usual for Alaska to sell big-ticket items on eBay because the site is cheap and has a big audience."
The state jet, in contrast, was not a good fit for eBay. Palin never actually sold the aircraft online (though, unlike John McCain, she never claimed that to be the case). But more important, while the jet sat unsold, Alaska was on the hook to pay $62,492.79 every three months as part of the initial purchasing deal.
Re: More Pig
I've just seen the entire clip of the Obama (on both Fox News and CNN) "lipstick/pig" statement. He was talking about McCain and his policies and his agreement with Bush. No one in their right mind could say he was calling Palin a pig. What I got from it was that he was calling McCain/his ideas ala change a pig and that you can add lipstick (Palin) to that (McCain), but you still get the same thing (McCain). All the hoopla is the media and political talking heads trying to make something out of nothing. Now McCain has a new ad (shown on Fox News of course) talking about it. That sure didn't take long.
Very much ado about nothing
Very much ado about nothing
RE: Oh my goodness
Here's another one in Salon that has to be read to be believed. See Ace for more.
Supreme Court poll
As I write this our poll is 4-0 in favor of strict construction. I took the wording directly from the Rasmussen poll earlier this week.
Fun campaign fact:
"While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obama’s supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judge’s sense of fairness, while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree."
Fun campaign fact:
"While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obama’s supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judge’s sense of fairness, while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree."
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
More pig
McCain is overreacting. I agree with this: "The McCain campaign has little respect for Obama, but they don't think he is stupid. And the only way one can conclude that Obama meant to refer to Gov. Sarah Palin as a pig is to have concluded that Obama is as dumb as a doornail."
See also at the link Barry's and McCain's use of that phrase previously. [Corner]
See also at the link Barry's and McCain's use of that phrase previously. [Corner]
Re: CO Peaches
They are very proud of their peaches those Coloradans of the Western Slope. Apparently the cool nights and afternoon sun are really perfect for them.
The Myths of Palin: Bridge and Jet
In response to Michael's question about what she's saying that isn't true: The WSJ:
Regarding the jet sale: eventually someone (it wasn't Palin) brokered a deal for the sale of the jet. But it did not sell on eBay. In fact, I submit that putting it on eBay was a publicity stunt. How many $2.5 million jets sell on eBay, as opposed to more conventional channels. It wasn't a horrible idea she had; in fact, it was common practice for the State of Alaska to sell surplus stuff on eBay. But it didn't actually yield any result, so I give her no credit for this. She may be being careful about her language on the stump ("I put it on eBay"), but McCain keeps saying she sold it on eBay. It's myth-making.
[Update: link to jet story, though I find it hard to believe we haven't all read this.]
[Update II: She didn't tell Congress "Thanks, but no thanks." She told Congress "Thanks. I'll buy what I want to with this money."]
But Gov. Palin's claim comes with a serious caveat. She endorsed the multimillion dollar project during her gubernatorial race in 2006. And while she did take part in stopping the project after it became a national scandal, she did not return the federal money. She just allocated it elsewhere.
Regarding the jet sale: eventually someone (it wasn't Palin) brokered a deal for the sale of the jet. But it did not sell on eBay. In fact, I submit that putting it on eBay was a publicity stunt. How many $2.5 million jets sell on eBay, as opposed to more conventional channels. It wasn't a horrible idea she had; in fact, it was common practice for the State of Alaska to sell surplus stuff on eBay. But it didn't actually yield any result, so I give her no credit for this. She may be being careful about her language on the stump ("I put it on eBay"), but McCain keeps saying she sold it on eBay. It's myth-making.
[Update: link to jet story, though I find it hard to believe we haven't all read this.]
[Update II: She didn't tell Congress "Thanks, but no thanks." She told Congress "Thanks. I'll buy what I want to with this money."]
I know there's at least one Josh Marshall fan here
but really: "On the stump, not a single word that comes out of her mouth -- or not a single word that the McCain folks put in her mouth -- is anything but a lie."
Just a bit over the top, isn't it? And I thought he was one of the saner lefties.
Just a bit over the top, isn't it? And I thought he was one of the saner lefties.
That didn't take long
Slow Joe on Palin and stem cell research here. Initial take down here and you can be sure there will be more.
UPDATE: Allah: "All this does is push that fact back in front of voters. But beyond that, his question is simply stupid and easily answered: She doesn’t support ESCR because she believes in life at conception and isn’t willing to sacrifice it even to help her own son. Unlike Joe Biden, of course, who also claims to believe in life at conception and yet seems willing to sacrifice it at every opportunity.
Exit question: How happy do you think the infanticide candidate is to have this issue suddenly back on the table?"
UPDATE: Allah: "All this does is push that fact back in front of voters. But beyond that, his question is simply stupid and easily answered: She doesn’t support ESCR because she believes in life at conception and isn’t willing to sacrifice it even to help her own son. Unlike Joe Biden, of course, who also claims to believe in life at conception and yet seems willing to sacrifice it at every opportunity.
Exit question: How happy do you think the infanticide candidate is to have this issue suddenly back on the table?"
Oh my goodness
the lefties are in a lather. And not just the nuts at DU, Kos, Huffpo, et al. Here are two articles in Salon that have to be read to be believed. Via Corner and somewhere else.
When you're getting a lot of flak, you must be over the target. Via someone.
UPDATE: Ha! She's haunting their dreams! [Hotair]
Peaches
Our grocery stores are selling Colorado peaches that are spectacular right now. You might walk past them because they're smaller and lighter-colored than the lion's share of peaches we see.
Ark-UT
The old SWC rivalry continues this Saturday in Austin. This was, and is, a MUCH bigger game for the Razorbacks than for the hated longhorns. Last time these 2 teams met in Austin (Sept 2003) C and I were there to witness and celebrate the glorious victory of the Hogs. While we'll be there again this weekend, the outcome (sadly) will probably be much different.
In honor of BEAT TEXAS week, I am refusing to speak or respond directly to the resident T-sippers, Michael and Scooter.
In honor of BEAT TEXAS week, I am refusing to speak or respond directly to the resident T-sippers, Michael and Scooter.
Forget the US election and Palin-mania...
this is the story that has my attention. Body doubles, voice print analysis, surgically altered people. You can't dream this stuff up. I'm heading to Barnes and Noble tomorrow to pick up the new Woodward book - while I'm there, I'll check to see if there is an English language version of the book referenced in the article.
UPDATE 9/9: The MSM is all over this story today as it seems "The Dear Leader" did not make an appearance at the parade celebrating the 60th anniversary of North Korea.
UPDATE 9/9: The MSM is all over this story today as it seems "The Dear Leader" did not make an appearance at the parade celebrating the 60th anniversary of North Korea.
Prager
"For the first time in generations, one party's ticket has no military experience. It does, however, have two lawyers. And neither of the Republican nominees is a lawyer. These facts are not coincidental."
If we're going to start a Palin gaffe-watch
we might as well start one for Biden, plus a lie-watch: “I’m encouraged because they’re doing the things I suggested . . . That’s why it is moving toward some mild possibility of a resolution.” Why should Slow Joe get a pass on this crap when Palin's every verb tense is scrutinized?
Let's not forget
that Stanley Kurtz is going through the CAC documents. I'm predicting ugly revelations about The One and his BFF Ayers and the money they controlled.
Palin's experience
This is In response to Anonymous' comment about why there wasn't outrage about RFK's lack of experience.
The concerns I have with Palin springing from Juneau to the VP job are:
1) she has no experience dealing with national or international issues; it's possible she hasn't even had any interest in national issues. There is no evidence that she has. We don't have any idea what thoughts she has on these issues. She's gungho about exploiting/ "developing" Alaska's national resources. That's it. That's all we know about what's in her head.
2) Her experience as governor is useful but there hasn't been enough of it to know whether she's doing a good job or to know what the consequences of her actions will be.
3) She hasn't been on the national scene long enough for people to be able to evaluate her. We'll have about 6 weeks from the time she does the Charlie Gibson farce-of-an-interview until election day, with early voting starting in some places in early October. You can't expect people to be comfortable with this woman being a heartbeat away.
4) She's perfectly qualified to do some version of the VP job. But that's not the issue to me; she needs to be ready to be President from the get-go. Every VP candidate should be, but it's all the more important when the Presidential candidate is so old.
RFK had held jobs in federal government and worked on national issues from the very early 1950's until his presidential run in 1968. Further, he was on the national scene that whole time; people were able to observe his high profile career.
Obama's resume is thin. But he's been on display for all to see and poke and kick for 19 months, his every move and word revealed. He's written a book on his thoughts on some of the big national issues. He taught U.S. Constitutional law for 12 years. He was interested enough in national issues to run for Senate. He served as a Senator for two years before Palin even became a governor. He's interested enough in national issues to run and run and run for President. Oh, and his undergrad degree from Columbia was in political science with emphasis in foreign affairs. We can safely conclude that he's spent gazillions of hours pondering national and international issues and has had conversations with oodles of experts on these topics while formulating policy plans.
I know, I know that mayors and governors have to make decisions and exercise executive authority in a way that Obama hasn't done in his legislative jobs. But it's possible to do that really really badly. I don't know enough yet about Palin to know whether she did a good job at these activities. I see signs it may not have gone so well. There's the sports complex that's mired in real estate litigation, there's potential abuse of power in firing people willy-nilly and spending state money to attend church events, there's questions about whether the pipeline deal is a good one.
The concerns I have with Palin springing from Juneau to the VP job are:
1) she has no experience dealing with national or international issues; it's possible she hasn't even had any interest in national issues. There is no evidence that she has. We don't have any idea what thoughts she has on these issues. She's gungho about exploiting/ "developing" Alaska's national resources. That's it. That's all we know about what's in her head.
2) Her experience as governor is useful but there hasn't been enough of it to know whether she's doing a good job or to know what the consequences of her actions will be.
3) She hasn't been on the national scene long enough for people to be able to evaluate her. We'll have about 6 weeks from the time she does the Charlie Gibson farce-of-an-interview until election day, with early voting starting in some places in early October. You can't expect people to be comfortable with this woman being a heartbeat away.
4) She's perfectly qualified to do some version of the VP job. But that's not the issue to me; she needs to be ready to be President from the get-go. Every VP candidate should be, but it's all the more important when the Presidential candidate is so old.
RFK had held jobs in federal government and worked on national issues from the very early 1950's until his presidential run in 1968. Further, he was on the national scene that whole time; people were able to observe his high profile career.
Obama's resume is thin. But he's been on display for all to see and poke and kick for 19 months, his every move and word revealed. He's written a book on his thoughts on some of the big national issues. He taught U.S. Constitutional law for 12 years. He was interested enough in national issues to run for Senate. He served as a Senator for two years before Palin even became a governor. He's interested enough in national issues to run and run and run for President. Oh, and his undergrad degree from Columbia was in political science with emphasis in foreign affairs. We can safely conclude that he's spent gazillions of hours pondering national and international issues and has had conversations with oodles of experts on these topics while formulating policy plans.
I know, I know that mayors and governors have to make decisions and exercise executive authority in a way that Obama hasn't done in his legislative jobs. But it's possible to do that really really badly. I don't know enough yet about Palin to know whether she did a good job at these activities. I see signs it may not have gone so well. There's the sports complex that's mired in real estate litigation, there's potential abuse of power in firing people willy-nilly and spending state money to attend church events, there's questions about whether the pipeline deal is a good one.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Colorado...
I haven't lived there since the eve of the new millennium, but my gut tells me it is a big fat R in November. OTOH, my gut is often, if not usually, wrong.
FWIW
In my humble (I have no children and have never served) opinion, the reason why the arguments that Gov. Palin should be at home are all wrong is this:
When one is called to "serve," then sacrifices are demanded of both the individual and the family.
Whether a call to arms, a call to ministry or a call to political service (especially high office), then one is required to serve to the detriment of the immediate family for the good of the nation. This is different from a person who decides on a career that deprives family for the sake of the dollar though I certainly have no understanding of Gov. Palin's motives...they could be ill indeed.
I mean this whatever one's political persuasion (to the extent any of my right- sided brethren have denounced men or women for the same, shame on them).
When one is called to "serve," then sacrifices are demanded of both the individual and the family.
Whether a call to arms, a call to ministry or a call to political service (especially high office), then one is required to serve to the detriment of the immediate family for the good of the nation. This is different from a person who decides on a career that deprives family for the sake of the dollar though I certainly have no understanding of Gov. Palin's motives...they could be ill indeed.
I mean this whatever one's political persuasion (to the extent any of my right- sided brethren have denounced men or women for the same, shame on them).
I am so naive
Certain details altered to protect the guilty.
Had a meeting with client today on a real estate litigation issue. Talking about the property client said, "I'm not going to take less than $1.9M for the property because it's at 19th Street and Drake Boulevard [me: it's a great location]. I know it's not 19th Street anymore but to me it will always be 19th Street." The client said it with a smile and a wink. Client looked at me knowingly for confirmation but I had no idea what client meant. I moved on.
Later I realized. 19th Street isn't 19th Street anymore and hasn't been since at least when I first moved here in 1979. For at least 29 years 19th Street has been...
Martin Luther King Boulevard.
For a guy who was so pleased to see so many Sen. Obama signs behind the "Pine Curtain" in my mom's east Texas town of Athens, I am deflated.
Had a meeting with client today on a real estate litigation issue. Talking about the property client said, "I'm not going to take less than $1.9M for the property because it's at 19th Street and Drake Boulevard [me: it's a great location]. I know it's not 19th Street anymore but to me it will always be 19th Street." The client said it with a smile and a wink. Client looked at me knowingly for confirmation but I had no idea what client meant. I moved on.
Later I realized. 19th Street isn't 19th Street anymore and hasn't been since at least when I first moved here in 1979. For at least 29 years 19th Street has been...
Martin Luther King Boulevard.
For a guy who was so pleased to see so many Sen. Obama signs behind the "Pine Curtain" in my mom's east Texas town of Athens, I am deflated.
Drudge Watch
Drudge is STILL pimping Obama's "my Muslim faith" as a slip. It's been up for at least 24 hours. He still, though, has no entry for Palin's Fannie/Freddie gaffe:
McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking in Colorado Springs, Colo., said Fannie and Freddie had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, however, aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
I don't know how many houses I own
Looks like the Fannie/Freddie bailout provides for the U.S. Treasury to buy stock.
The Treasury can purchase up to $100 billion of a special class of stock in each company as needed to maintain a positive net worth.So now we'll all own more houses than we can count!
Re: Sunday News Shows
I saw parts of the shows too.
Tom Brokaw IS too old. That was not pretty.
I have to note that Obama did indeed name three areas of disagreement with the Dems: 1) wants to enlarge the military; 2) in favor of merit policies for teachers; and 3) wants to reduce litigation costs in the healthcare arena. This begins at about the -6:00 minute mark of the second segment for the video of This Week that you can see here for the moment. (Sorry I can't get a more precise and permanent link.) I don't really know where the majority of Dems are on these points, so I don't know if he's actually bucking the party or would find plenty of agreement; maybe that's what LJ meant by saying he didn't name three areas of disagreement.
Obama handed the right some juicy video with that "my Muslim faith" snippet and some will go to town with it. But no honest person can make hay about this. It's clear that he meant that McCain hadn't ever made the claim that Obama is Muslim. You can judge for yourself at -2:49 in the third segment. Update: Due credit to Hot Air and Ace who called off the dogs. Update II: Washington Times makes hay. Update III: Drudge is more in-the-tank for Palin than for anyone else I've ever noticed:
It is surely painful to watch him dance around the surge success issue. It's not 100% clear to me that it was increased numbers of troops rather than changed tactics (fruits of Petraeus' counter-insurgency strategy) that had the greatest effect on quelling violence, but I'm willing to buy the proposition that the surge was beneficial. We'll never know whether anything other than the surge would have done the job.
Tom Brokaw IS too old. That was not pretty.
I have to note that Obama did indeed name three areas of disagreement with the Dems: 1) wants to enlarge the military; 2) in favor of merit policies for teachers; and 3) wants to reduce litigation costs in the healthcare arena. This begins at about the -6:00 minute mark of the second segment for the video of This Week that you can see here for the moment. (Sorry I can't get a more precise and permanent link.) I don't really know where the majority of Dems are on these points, so I don't know if he's actually bucking the party or would find plenty of agreement; maybe that's what LJ meant by saying he didn't name three areas of disagreement.
Obama handed the right some juicy video with that "my Muslim faith" snippet and some will go to town with it. But no honest person can make hay about this. It's clear that he meant that McCain hadn't ever made the claim that Obama is Muslim. You can judge for yourself at -2:49 in the third segment. Update: Due credit to Hot Air and Ace who called off the dogs. Update II: Washington Times makes hay. Update III: Drudge is more in-the-tank for Palin than for anyone else I've ever noticed:
It is surely painful to watch him dance around the surge success issue. It's not 100% clear to me that it was increased numbers of troops rather than changed tactics (fruits of Petraeus' counter-insurgency strategy) that had the greatest effect on quelling violence, but I'm willing to buy the proposition that the surge was beneficial. We'll never know whether anything other than the surge would have done the job.
Sunday News Programs
I can't believe that I'm actually watching the ABC, CBS and NBC news programs this morning. Not sure what I'm expecting to hear, but since 3 of the 4 top candidates are on them (hmm, wonder which one wasn't), to compare and contrast might be the reason. My observations:
1) Tom Brokaw is either unprepared or too old. Stammering while trying to get questions out to Biden. I'm not a Biden fan really (he's a blowhard and loves to hear himself talk) but I liked his response to the abortion question. Basically, he doesn't think he should impose his personal faith views on others, nor does he think the gov't should impose any view on the public.
2) Obama on ABC, being interviewed by George S. He does his usual dance around the surge question (it's all about semantics) and actally makes a slip when answering questions about his faith by saying..."questions about my Muslim faith...". George corrected him..."you mean my Christian faith...". Obama...."uh, yes, my Christian faith...". He claims that he will offer positions different than those of most Democrats and especially, Reid and Pelosi. When asked to name 3, he wouldn't; when asked to name one, he mentioned education (positions different than what the Teachers Union wants/supports).
3) McCain on CBS. Claims that Palin will come on Schaeffer's program first. Somehow I doubt that; if true, Fox News might revolt. McCain supports the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac bailout (again, I thought the whole Republican/Conservative economic policy was based on "free market" letting businesses succeed or fail on their own). But what I'm hearing lately is that some businesses are too important to let fail - that the gov't (i.e. me/taxpayers) should pay the price. So far that list includes the 2 FM's, Bear-Stearns, certain airlines and from what I'm hearing, the big 3 auto makers. My question would be, what aren't the shareholders being asked to bail them out. They get the profits. And why aren't the CEO's/Board of Directors being held accountable?
But I digress....McCain responds to the question about the lack of minority delegates at the RNC (something like 43 out of 2,500) by saying that Republicans have to let minorities know that they are the party of Lincoln,...."the party of LINCOLN...", he exclaimed. Abe wouldn't recognize "his" party these days.
I've had enough. The only person who made an impression on me was Biden. Not quite as long-winded as usual (but then again, network TV has commercial breaks) and was as concise (as he can be) when answering questions.
1) Tom Brokaw is either unprepared or too old. Stammering while trying to get questions out to Biden. I'm not a Biden fan really (he's a blowhard and loves to hear himself talk) but I liked his response to the abortion question. Basically, he doesn't think he should impose his personal faith views on others, nor does he think the gov't should impose any view on the public.
2) Obama on ABC, being interviewed by George S. He does his usual dance around the surge question (it's all about semantics) and actally makes a slip when answering questions about his faith by saying..."questions about my Muslim faith...". George corrected him..."you mean my Christian faith...". Obama...."uh, yes, my Christian faith...". He claims that he will offer positions different than those of most Democrats and especially, Reid and Pelosi. When asked to name 3, he wouldn't; when asked to name one, he mentioned education (positions different than what the Teachers Union wants/supports).
3) McCain on CBS. Claims that Palin will come on Schaeffer's program first. Somehow I doubt that; if true, Fox News might revolt. McCain supports the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac bailout (again, I thought the whole Republican/Conservative economic policy was based on "free market" letting businesses succeed or fail on their own). But what I'm hearing lately is that some businesses are too important to let fail - that the gov't (i.e. me/taxpayers) should pay the price. So far that list includes the 2 FM's, Bear-Stearns, certain airlines and from what I'm hearing, the big 3 auto makers. My question would be, what aren't the shareholders being asked to bail them out. They get the profits. And why aren't the CEO's/Board of Directors being held accountable?
But I digress....McCain responds to the question about the lack of minority delegates at the RNC (something like 43 out of 2,500) by saying that Republicans have to let minorities know that they are the party of Lincoln,...."the party of LINCOLN...", he exclaimed. Abe wouldn't recognize "his" party these days.
I've had enough. The only person who made an impression on me was Biden. Not quite as long-winded as usual (but then again, network TV has commercial breaks) and was as concise (as he can be) when answering questions.
Saturday, September 06, 2008
LJ's not the only one
who has lingering questions about the anthrax case:
Bureau officials say they are certain they have solved the nation’s first major bioterrorism attack, in which anthrax-laced letters killed five people, after a long and troubled investigation that by several measures was the most complex in the bureau’s history.
But in interviews last week, two dozen bioterrorism experts, veteran investigators and members of Congress expressed doubts about the bureau’s conclusions. Some called for an independent review of the case to reassure the public and assess policies on the handling of dangerous pathogens like anthrax.
Todd Palin at Hay Days
You may have heard that Todd Palin went to Hay Days in Forest Lake, MN following the Republican Convention. Hay Days is a snow "machine" event. Here's a local TV report on his visit (that admittedly isn't interesting).
Barracuda tried to ban books?
Um, no. Although you would believe otherwise if you read this lie on Obama's website: "But a recent list of books that she wanted banned from the Wasilla Public Library truly demonstrates that Palin not only has no new ideas, but is really a throwback to days of old when we needed to always be full of fear, to go back to days when we had a less than equal world and where anyone who does not look like Sarah Palin must fight every day for the same rights and privileges that she and her family have come to take for granted."
There is no such list. The story that this lie is based on is here. I admit that I'm more that a little troubled by the inquiry about censoring books, and that the explanation that it was some sort of loyalty test seems weird, but that's no excuse for Obama to publish an internet rumor as fact. I'm sure that there will be a fuller explanation forthcoming.
There is no such list. The story that this lie is based on is here. I admit that I'm more that a little troubled by the inquiry about censoring books, and that the explanation that it was some sort of loyalty test seems weird, but that's no excuse for Obama to publish an internet rumor as fact. I'm sure that there will be a fuller explanation forthcoming.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Obama polls above McCain in ND
Before Obama's convention speech, this poll showed Obama up 3 points. In the same poll, their incumbent Republican governor is ahead by 44 points.
Perspective
I'm wondering whether Biden's convention speech seemed as sarcastic and mean-spirited to Republicans watching as Palin's speech seemed to me. I guess it's a matter of perspective.
Clearly, Palin's speech was intended to "fire up the base" (another phrase as ubiquitous as the unspeakable "re* mea*") and I would think it accomplished that. But don't Republicans need to nab some independents to win the election? I'll be curious to see if it moved them, because I wouldn't expect it to. Or maybe you don't need independents or the center. Maybe Rove knows you've got the numbers if you just get out your base vote.
Clearly, Palin's speech was intended to "fire up the base" (another phrase as ubiquitous as the unspeakable "re* mea*") and I would think it accomplished that. But don't Republicans need to nab some independents to win the election? I'll be curious to see if it moved them, because I wouldn't expect it to. Or maybe you don't need independents or the center. Maybe Rove knows you've got the numbers if you just get out your base vote.
I'm going vegan
I swear on all that is holy, if I hear another media and/or political hack use the term "red meat", I'm going to go postal. I guess a memo went out and they ALL got it.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
"Political bullshit" says Scooter's girlfriend [UPDATED]
Oil taxes
I think Anonymous was referring me to this at Beldar. Beldar is explaining the difference between the increased tax revenue that Gov. Palin got out of the oil companies and that proposed tax by Obama. Palin negotiated a higher rate on the extraction of a state-owned, depletable asset ("to recompense the state for its loss of a non-replaceable resource"). Obama proposes a tax on windfall profits.
OK. Interesting. Thanks for saying something. I had not appreciated that distinction.
So now I'm wondering why, from a free-market perspective, Palin's higher taxation is better. With a higher severance tax, the oil companies for sure have to pay higher taxes. With a windfall profits tax, they only have to pay if they're wildly ridiculously profitable. Isn't greater taxation of corporations a no-no to fiscal conservatives? Or are you thinking that it's different because with the higher severance tax, the cost gets added to the product and then consumption is reduced in response, and since we're trying to save energy, that's a good thing? But isn't that going to be true of the windfall profits tax too? Or is the objection that the windfall profits tax is too unpredictable for oil companies to do a good job of charging the tax through? Or is it that you view the severance tax as really just a sale price for an asset owned by Alaska, whereas the windfall profits tax would be redistribution of an asset owned by oil companies to all U.S. citizens and that is philosophically unacceptable? How about the fact that the U.S. subsidizes oil production?
OK. Interesting. Thanks for saying something. I had not appreciated that distinction.
So now I'm wondering why, from a free-market perspective, Palin's higher taxation is better. With a higher severance tax, the oil companies for sure have to pay higher taxes. With a windfall profits tax, they only have to pay if they're wildly ridiculously profitable. Isn't greater taxation of corporations a no-no to fiscal conservatives? Or are you thinking that it's different because with the higher severance tax, the cost gets added to the product and then consumption is reduced in response, and since we're trying to save energy, that's a good thing? But isn't that going to be true of the windfall profits tax too? Or is the objection that the windfall profits tax is too unpredictable for oil companies to do a good job of charging the tax through? Or is it that you view the severance tax as really just a sale price for an asset owned by Alaska, whereas the windfall profits tax would be redistribution of an asset owned by oil companies to all U.S. citizens and that is philosophically unacceptable? How about the fact that the U.S. subsidizes oil production?
If I could stop vomiting...
I could write a post telling you that Katherine Kersten is today peddling the myth of Sarah Palin as a gritty hero for ignoring the onset of labor to deliver her speech at that energy conference:
Kersten fails to recognize Palin's decision to risk Trig's life. Find one woman or one doctor or one commercial pilot who isn't appalled that Palin got on a plane under those conditions: 1) leaking amniotic fluid; 2) 43 or 44 years old; 3) a month early; 4) mild contractions; 5) Down syndrome (I've read they have greater health risks at delivery, but I don't know if that is true).
"We were at a national governors meeting on energy in Dallas when Sarah went into labor," said Lingle. "She handled it remarkably, and it's a great example of her talents and toughness. After the keynote speaker canceled at the last minute, Sarah stepped in. She gave an outstanding address on strategic energy policy. Then she boarded a plane back to Alaska to deliver."
Though Lingle didn't know it, Palin was aware this delivery would be different from her others. She would give birth to little Trig, who has Down syndrome. Palin's decision to give Trig life has become a rallying cry for social conservatives.
Kersten fails to recognize Palin's decision to risk Trig's life. Find one woman or one doctor or one commercial pilot who isn't appalled that Palin got on a plane under those conditions: 1) leaking amniotic fluid; 2) 43 or 44 years old; 3) a month early; 4) mild contractions; 5) Down syndrome (I've read they have greater health risks at delivery, but I don't know if that is true).
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Palin: Fahrenheit 451
From Time:
Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor.
Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Palin on the Pledge
From Gov. Palin's 2006 Gubernatorial Candidate Questionnaire:
I'm sure I don't need to point out what's wrong with that. (Maybe if you're grading her answer, you give her extra credit for conveying a spunky attitude.)
H/T JLFinch at DKos.
I'm sure I don't need to point out what's wrong with that. (Maybe if you're grading her answer, you give her extra credit for conveying a spunky attitude.)
H/T JLFinch at DKos.
Palin on oil taxes
How does Gov. Palin's advocacy for increased taxes on oil companies' profits square with free market principles? If you think Gov. Palin's windfall profits tax was good economic policy, then do you also think Obama's windfall profits tax is good economic policy?
Palin on life of the unborn
As described in the Fairbanks paper and elsewhere, Trig Palin was expected to be born May 18, 2008. In mid-April, Gov. Palin, age 44, traveled to an energy conference in Texas. On April 18, while in Texas, she began to leak amniotic fluid. She talked to her doctor on the phone and then got on a commercial flight to travel to Alaska, without seeing a doctor in Texas.
To recap: Her pregnancy was "at risk" by definition due to her age, this was a month before the baby was due, she was leaking amniotic fluid and she got on a plane without seeing a doctor.
I know how romantic the idea is of women popping out babies without making a fuss about it, but this was ridiculously irresponsible and showed no regard for the health and well-being of the baby. I think Trig had the moral right, if not a legal right, to get medical care in Texas. His little life was risked when she instead got on a long flight to Alaska. He was born a month early within hours of her landing in Alaska. Labor had to be induced, so something was amiss.
Why should we care? Couple reasons: 1) it's an example of her decision-making in the midst of a risk-filled situation; and 2) it's inconsistent or hypocritical to take a pro-life position (and trade on it for political purposes) and then be so cavalier about the health and well-being of viable Trig.
To recap: Her pregnancy was "at risk" by definition due to her age, this was a month before the baby was due, she was leaking amniotic fluid and she got on a plane without seeing a doctor.
I know how romantic the idea is of women popping out babies without making a fuss about it, but this was ridiculously irresponsible and showed no regard for the health and well-being of the baby. I think Trig had the moral right, if not a legal right, to get medical care in Texas. His little life was risked when she instead got on a long flight to Alaska. He was born a month early within hours of her landing in Alaska. Labor had to be induced, so something was amiss.
Why should we care? Couple reasons: 1) it's an example of her decision-making in the midst of a risk-filled situation; and 2) it's inconsistent or hypocritical to take a pro-life position (and trade on it for political purposes) and then be so cavalier about the health and well-being of viable Trig.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Palin on the issues
I'm trying to find Gov. Palin's thoughts on the issues of national import (national security, foreign policy, immigration, trade) and I can't seem to find them, not even on the Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President website. She'll be one missed heartbeat away from owning these issues. And every night she'll be on call during McCain's Ambien-induced sleep.
Also, I'm interested in your thoughts on her dairy fiasco from a free-market perspective.
[Update: No? Nothing? I'll settle for this: evidence that she's spent 30 minutes of her life pondering national or international issues.]
Also, I'm interested in your thoughts on her dairy fiasco from a free-market perspective.
[Update: No? Nothing? I'll settle for this: evidence that she's spent 30 minutes of her life pondering national or international issues.]
Experience
Obviously a big topic that will be hashed out in the coming days by bigger minds than mine, but:
From NYT editorial today: "Governor Palin’s lack of experience, especially in national security and foreign affairs, raises immediate questions about how prepared she is to potentially succeed to the presidency. That really is the only criteria for judging a candidate for vice president."
Are you kidding? How can anyone write that with a straight face?
Ace:
"Obama was a junior Senator from a state for about sixteen or seventeen months before he decided he was experienced enough to be president."
"Gee, and I thought two years of high elected office was all an exciting and charismatic newcomer needed to pass the experience threshold."
From NYT editorial today: "Governor Palin’s lack of experience, especially in national security and foreign affairs, raises immediate questions about how prepared she is to potentially succeed to the presidency. That really is the only criteria for judging a candidate for vice president."
Are you kidding? How can anyone write that with a straight face?
Ace:
"Obama was a junior Senator from a state for about sixteen or seventeen months before he decided he was experienced enough to be president."
"Gee, and I thought two years of high elected office was all an exciting and charismatic newcomer needed to pass the experience threshold."
Rethug Strategy
I read this yesterday and agree: McCain/Palin is perfectly poised to run against Bush and the Republican Congress and they must. I got upset recently when I saw a McCain ad that was critical of Bush but now I get it. Rethug reformers/mavericks.
I challenge the person who voted Slow Joe to explain.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Re: Palin
And yes, I'm finally opening up the checkbook. Must be done within the next day or so due to [McCain's (the dope) I think] election laws.
I went from thoroughly depressed about 9:15 last night to deliriously happy this morning. What a sad life I lead.
I went from thoroughly depressed about 9:15 last night to deliriously happy this morning. What a sad life I lead.
Palin Pick
Granted, it was at the very bottom of the post as as an afterthought but I did say in early June, "Sheesh. I hope he’s talking to Sarah Palin. Her name has not been tossed around enough.”
She certainly has the base riled up (in a good way if one is of that ilk). Now let's see if she does him any good.
She certainly has the base riled up (in a good way if one is of that ilk). Now let's see if she does him any good.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
DNC
I don't know if it's a case of "good ole days" syndrome or what, but political conventions these days are totally unwatchable. Even in my younger days, I had a basic knowledge that they were choreographed and dictated to, or by, television. But as time as has gone by and the spontaneity levels have decreased, it has gotten to the point of the absurd. The best part was always the roll-call. Now, it's not even covered by the networks. Did it even happen? I didn't even see "highlights" of it during the whopping hour of coverage on ABC. Speeches are timed to the minute and you can tell when the speakers have gotten the word to wrap it up because their delivery gets quicker and faster the the pauses for applause decrease. I've watched a total of maybe 30 minutes so far and I'm surprised I even made it that long. Here is what I have heard from 95% of the speeches I've seen:
Blah blah blah global warming blah blah blah health care blah blah blah change blah blah blah change blah blah blah borrowing money from the Chinese to buy oil from the Middle East (I literally heard that sentence 3 times by 3 different speakers Tues night) blah blah blah working people blah blah blah middle class blah blah blah change....
I planed on watching Hillary, just to see how much "support" she would give to Obama, but I could only last about 5 minutes. It was a broken record of "me's". I missed most of Bill last night, but I did see what I thought was a great line in his speech...
"...People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power..."
That one line, to me, describes the biggest difference between the parties. Listen to the right wing radio hacks and they all believe in the "democracy by force" doctrine. Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan - don't talk or negotiate, invade or threaten to. I'm not planiing on watching Obama tonight, but I'm sure I'll flip over a couple of times just to check him out.
Blah blah blah global warming blah blah blah health care blah blah blah change blah blah blah change blah blah blah borrowing money from the Chinese to buy oil from the Middle East (I literally heard that sentence 3 times by 3 different speakers Tues night) blah blah blah working people blah blah blah middle class blah blah blah change....
I planed on watching Hillary, just to see how much "support" she would give to Obama, but I could only last about 5 minutes. It was a broken record of "me's". I missed most of Bill last night, but I did see what I thought was a great line in his speech...
"...People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power..."
That one line, to me, describes the biggest difference between the parties. Listen to the right wing radio hacks and they all believe in the "democracy by force" doctrine. Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan - don't talk or negotiate, invade or threaten to. I'm not planiing on watching Obama tonight, but I'm sure I'll flip over a couple of times just to check him out.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Answer: Tickle the tongue
One way to get a bit into a horse's mouth is to put your hand under his jaw and slide your thumb under his upper lip and into his mouth. Then you tickle his tongue with your thumb and that should make him open his mouth and you can slide the bit into place behind his teeth.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
More on Obama's tax policy
This New York Times Magazine story describes these two key components of Obama's tax policy:
1) tax decrease for households in the bottom 80% (those making $118,000 or less) that would average about $900/yr, roughly speaking; and
2) tax increase on the top 0.1 percent of earners (those making an average of $9.1 million).
1) tax decrease for households in the bottom 80% (those making $118,000 or less) that would average about $900/yr, roughly speaking; and
2) tax increase on the top 0.1 percent of earners (those making an average of $9.1 million).
[Obama] would then pay for the cuts, at least in part, by raising taxes on the affluent to a point where they would eventually be slightly higher than they were under Clinton. For these upper-income families, the Tax Policy Center’s comparisons with McCain are even starker. McCain, by continuing the basic thrust of Bush’s tax policies and adding a few new wrinkles, would cut taxes for the top 0.1 percent of earners — those making an average of $9.1 million — by another $190,000 a year, on top of the Bush reductions. Obama would raise taxes on this top 0.1 percent by an average of $800,000 a year.
It’s hard not to look at that figure and be a little stunned. It would represent a huge tax increase on the wealthy families. But it’s also worth putting the number in some context. The bulk of Obama’s tax increases on the wealthy — about $500,000 of that $800,000 — would simply take away Bush’s tax cuts. The remaining $300,000 wouldn’t nearly reverse their pretax income gains in recent years. Since the mid-1990s, their inflation-adjusted pretax income has roughly doubled.
Obama sweet-talking to Scooter
"The market is the best mechanism ever invented for efficiently allocating resources to maximize production," Obama told [David Leonhardt writing for the NYTimes Magazine]. “And I also think that there is a connection between the freedom of the marketplace and freedom more generally.”
Friday, August 15, 2008
Updike Rabbits
I have not read any of Updike's Rabbit novels, but am thinking about reading one. Anyone want to steer me to or away from them? and why?
Our book club has decided that for the 2008-2009 year, we're going to read only prize winners. (My idea after finding this year's picks to be mostly unbearable.) It's time for me to find some candidates for book-pitching and selection at the October meeting. The Updike Rabbit novels would fill the bill (and be something that the group may not have read). Am also considering trying Kavalier and Clay, on Michael's recommendation (even though Wonder Boys was one of my least favorite novels of all time).
Our book club has decided that for the 2008-2009 year, we're going to read only prize winners. (My idea after finding this year's picks to be mostly unbearable.) It's time for me to find some candidates for book-pitching and selection at the October meeting. The Updike Rabbit novels would fill the bill (and be something that the group may not have read). Am also considering trying Kavalier and Clay, on Michael's recommendation (even though Wonder Boys was one of my least favorite novels of all time).
Water for Elephants
This was a book club pick. It's a novel set partly in a traveling circus in 1930 and partly in a nursing home circa 2000. I particularly enjoyed the details about life in a traveling circus. The plot is a little cheesy, a little trite, and the writing is mediocre, but it's constructed well, with an ending revelation that I hadn't guessed. Seems like it would make a good movie. (I just Googled and I see it may be headed for the screen.) It borrows from Fried Green Tomatoes with its elderly nursing home patient telling a story of his younger years, the theme of creating family with non-blood relatives, use of trains/railroad as a key component of the plot, race (FGT) or class (WFE) issues, mentally-ill abusive husband, and an end revelation about a murder.
The novel highlights an interesting bit of trivia about Prohibition. Jamaican Ginger Extract ("Jake") was a medicine that was 70-80% ethyl alcohol and so was used as a beverage by some during Prohibition. To prevent people from drinking it for non-medicinal purposes, the U.S. Treasury Dept decreed that it had to be altered with ginger solids that made it bitter. Supplies of Jake were occassionally tested by the Dept. of Agriculture to make sure the ginger was present. Amateur chemists found a way to make Jake without the ginger, but with another chemical addition that tricked the ginger tests. As it turned out, their additive was a neurotoxin that caused partial paralysis. It is believed to have left thousands or tens of thousands of people partially paralyzed, typically with a characteristic odd gait ("Jake leg"). More details on Wikipedia here.
In an afterword, the author, Sara Gruen, describes a professional battle between Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse that took an elephant as a victim (and a spoiler alert if you're paying attention):
In 1903, an elephant named Topsy killed her trainer after he fed her a lit cigarette. Most circus elephants at the time were forgiven a killing or two -- as long as they didn't kill a [townsperson] -- but this was Topsy's third strike. Topsy's owners at Coney Island's Luna Park decided to turn her execution into a public spectacle, but the announcement that they were going to hang her met with uproar -- after all, wasn't hanging a cruel and unusual punishment? Ever resourceful, Topsy's owners contracted Thomas Edison. For years, Edison had been "proving" the dangers of rival George Westinghouse's alternating current by publicly electrocuting stray dogs and cats, along with the occasional horse or cow -- but nothing as ambitious as an elephant. He accepted the challenge. Because the electric chair had replaced the gallows as New York's official method of execution, the protests stopped.
Accounts differ [as to whether cyanide-laced carrots were also involved], but what is not disputed is that Edison brought a movie camera, had Topsy strapped into copper-lined sandals, and shot sixty-six hundred volts through her in front of fifteen hundred [soulless, depraved, horrible] spectators, killing her in about ten seconds. Edison, convinced that this feat discredited alternating current, went on to show the film to audiences across the country.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
If he only had a heart...
The Star Tribune reports on a loser in a Twin Cities suburb who does not seem to be making the best use of a transplanted heart:
As his community cheered his newly successful heart transplant , 14-year-old Andrew Busskohl of Woodbury told a reporter in 2004 that he had aced his favorite school subject - health - and shared his career aspirations.
"I plan on becoming a surgeon," a grinning, bespectacled Busskohl said, later showing off the scar on his chest while flexing his muscles for the camera.
Fast forward four years: Busskohl, now 18, faces charges that prosecutors say stem from a plan for the gruesome killing of a neighboring stranger. His chilling plan called for cutting out the heart or eyelids of his potential victim, according to a criminal complaint filed this week in Washington County.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Poll
Although we've never discussed it, I asssumed all polls were mandatory. We usually have a fifth voter so several people are not responding. hmm.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Nice article on Houston in latest City Journal
Not yet available online to nonsubscribers but City Journal has an article this month by Edward L. Glaeser that Michael might enjoy:
Houston, New York Has a Problem
The southern city welcomes the middle class; heavily regulated and expensive Gotham drives it away.
Should be available online in next few weeks. Real Clear Politics usually posts the CJ articles once they become available to non-subscribers.
Houston, New York Has a Problem
The southern city welcomes the middle class; heavily regulated and expensive Gotham drives it away.
Should be available online in next few weeks. Real Clear Politics usually posts the CJ articles once they become available to non-subscribers.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Jim DeChamp
Here's what the LATimes reported about Jim DeChamp's forward flip attempt at the X Games:
DeChamp suffered a fractured vertebra when he bailed out in mid-flight and landed flat on his back at the bottom of the landing ramp, [Travis] Pastrana said. DeChamp lay still for a few minutes before walking off under his own power. What television viewers and those in attendance didn't see was DeChamp collapsing afterward in the athlete area.
"He said, 'Look, I've got to get up, I'm going to walk out of here,' " said Pastrana, who was by his side. "Then, he's like, 'cameras off?' I said, 'Yep,' and he just fell down and said, 'Take me to the hospital.' "
DeChamp would have completed the maneuver if he had stayed with the motorcycle, Pastrana said. However, DeChamp's inexperience at the X Games may have played a part in his indecisiveness.
"He just said it felt like everything was in slow motion, and it felt like he was in the air for eight seconds," Pastrana said. That made DeChamp feel like he was closer to the ground than he actually was, Pastrana said, and DeChamp was fearful of being crushed under the weight of his motorcycle.
"It's amazing, adrenaline slows everything down," Pastrana said.
Some thought DeChamp bailed out because he appeared to have overshot the landing ramp. In actuality, that was part of the plan, Pastrana said.
"If he landed at the bottom, he had a better chance of getting the rotation. He was perfect, but he thought he wasn't," Pastrana said.
Pastrana had the same sensation during his double back flip, only he had time between rotations to spot his landing. The front flip doesn't offer riders a sneak peak. "That second rotation was the longest second of my entire life," Pastrana said. "I can remember the crowd, I can remember everything."
Friday, August 01, 2008
Moto X Best Trick 2008: Video of medal winners
The gold medalist doesn't do a backflip, but takes his own body through a simultaneous barrel roll and backflip. I'm more enthused about the silver and bronze medal tricks. Unfortunately, the clip doesn't show these in slow mo which is necessary to get the full effect.
ESPN makes this video available for embed, but didn't make available the video of the failed front flip by Jim DeChamp. I found it on YouTube, though. This video is shot by someone who was at the event:
.
[Update: Initial reports last night were that DeChamp suffered compression fractures in a few vertebrae. He did walk away.]
The wacky world of economics
Just another example that proves my theory that any so-called "expert economist" one sees on tv or sees quoted in print is just spewing theories that have NOTHING to do with the reality of the American model. And the American model is that the stock market controls everything, while it should control nothing.
On the front page of the DMN news today is the following headline...
"Exxon sets record but sees stock fall"
So EM once again announces a record profit, earning $11.68 billion in the 2Q. However, EM's stock dropped 5% yesterday. Now what sense does that make? What "economic theory" does this fall into? And the reason the stock fell - because EM didn't earn what market analysts estimated. So the value of EM stock fell not because of what the company DID (break an earnings record), but because it didn't do (break the earnings record by more $$) what some analysts THOUGHT it should do. This makes no sense to me at all. The value of stock, or a company, should be based on how well do they do what they do, do they make smart business decisions, do they make money, etc. Not do they meet some forecast or ideal of analysts. The message here, in simplistic terms, is that it's not good enough to make more profit in a quarter than any company has ever made. So who or what is controlling the stock market - companies or analysts? And who should?
Later on in the article, there is another example of the power that the stock market has, which in my opinion is too much and is based not on reality, but on theories or perceptions or who knows what. Here are the closing 2 paragraphs of the front page article:
"Investors drove UP (emphasis mine) the share price of Houston-based Marathon Oil Corp., a smaller company that also tries to do it all, after it announced that it MIGHT (emphasis mine) split its exploration and production business and its refining and marketing business into two independent companies.
"You're dealing with a company that's much smaller in terms of market cap," said Mr. Harper. "But nonetheless, I think Marathon's SAYING (emphasis mine) the type of things investors want to hear in respect to maximizing shareholder value for the longer term."
So, Marathon's stock goes up based on them saying they might do something, while EM's goes down based upon something they actually did, which is make record profits. Guess if EM wants their stock price to go up, and therefore maximize shareholder value, it should just start saying things rather than actually doing something. Yea, that makes lots of sense.
On the front page of the DMN news today is the following headline...
"Exxon sets record but sees stock fall"
So EM once again announces a record profit, earning $11.68 billion in the 2Q. However, EM's stock dropped 5% yesterday. Now what sense does that make? What "economic theory" does this fall into? And the reason the stock fell - because EM didn't earn what market analysts estimated. So the value of EM stock fell not because of what the company DID (break an earnings record), but because it didn't do (break the earnings record by more $$) what some analysts THOUGHT it should do. This makes no sense to me at all. The value of stock, or a company, should be based on how well do they do what they do, do they make smart business decisions, do they make money, etc. Not do they meet some forecast or ideal of analysts. The message here, in simplistic terms, is that it's not good enough to make more profit in a quarter than any company has ever made. So who or what is controlling the stock market - companies or analysts? And who should?
Later on in the article, there is another example of the power that the stock market has, which in my opinion is too much and is based not on reality, but on theories or perceptions or who knows what. Here are the closing 2 paragraphs of the front page article:
"Investors drove UP (emphasis mine) the share price of Houston-based Marathon Oil Corp., a smaller company that also tries to do it all, after it announced that it MIGHT (emphasis mine) split its exploration and production business and its refining and marketing business into two independent companies.
"You're dealing with a company that's much smaller in terms of market cap," said Mr. Harper. "But nonetheless, I think Marathon's SAYING (emphasis mine) the type of things investors want to hear in respect to maximizing shareholder value for the longer term."
So, Marathon's stock goes up based on them saying they might do something, while EM's goes down based upon something they actually did, which is make record profits. Guess if EM wants their stock price to go up, and therefore maximize shareholder value, it should just start saying things rather than actually doing something. Yea, that makes lots of sense.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
MotoX Best Trick
is part of the X Games. It's on ESPN now. Looking forward to seeing where the riders have taken the sport to this year. Maybe a forward flip!
[Update: Make that "attempted" forward flip.]
[Update II: does it count if the bike lands upright on its wheels, though the rider landed a tad earlier in the dirt?]
[Update: Make that "attempted" forward flip.]
[Update II: does it count if the bike lands upright on its wheels, though the rider landed a tad earlier in the dirt?]
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Obama as Con Law Prof
In researching Obama's time as a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago, the NYTimes collected some of his teaching materials. Here's his 1996 exam and his answer memo. If you find any errors in his answer memo, I'm sure the NYT reporter would be happy to hear about it.
Monday, July 28, 2008
"It's all downhill from here"
What does the phrase mean? Some folks use it to mean that everything hereafter will be easier, as in the hard part of climbing to the peak is past; now we can coast; everything is now better. Others use it to mean that nothing hereafter will be as great as it was at its peak; now everything will be worse.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout
Yep, the free market system at work. I loved the quote I saw on CNN today..."Freddie and Fannie, too key to fail." Why? I thought it was about keeping gov't out of things. Guess not....
So why aren't all the Conservatives screaming out about bailouts, free market system, etc.?
Why isn't Bush going to veto it? Politics. Politics trumps the free market system every time. Politics trumps everything every time.
So why aren't all the Conservatives screaming out about bailouts, free market system, etc.?
Why isn't Bush going to veto it? Politics. Politics trumps the free market system every time. Politics trumps everything every time.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Re: LJ's Economics
LJ is dead right about the fact that those wages would rise and thus Americans would do those jobs without the wages being driven down by those who will work for less. I don’t feel any dissonance though about wanting to restrict illegal immigration and being a free-marketeer. The free market is also a market that depends on the rule of law. Not related to the economics of the issue but for me the issue is not about numbers but assimilation.
One thing to keep in mind is that those like me are conservatives first and that the Republican Party is just the lesser of two evils when it comes to picking a party. I abhorred the whole Schiavo deal, both the “husband’s” and Republican’s behaviors. Her folks had every right to contest but the congress had no business meddling.
Real conservatives loathe judicial activism no matter the issue. It is the job of the legislature to make laws, not judges appointed for life.
As for company bailouts (and subsidies of any kind), real conservatives loathe those, too.
One thing to keep in mind is that those like me are conservatives first and that the Republican Party is just the lesser of two evils when it comes to picking a party. I abhorred the whole Schiavo deal, both the “husband’s” and Republican’s behaviors. Her folks had every right to contest but the congress had no business meddling.
Real conservatives loathe judicial activism no matter the issue. It is the job of the legislature to make laws, not judges appointed for life.
As for company bailouts (and subsidies of any kind), real conservatives loathe those, too.
Elk Dot
My sister coined the term Grizzly Dot for those bears that are so far away they appear nothing more than dots to the naked eye. This is my Elk Dot. If you click on the image you can verify that it actually is an elk.
Quake Lake
This is Quake Lake, created in 1959 or thereabouts, by an earthquake. In Montana in the SW corner:
On the lake above Quake Lake one finds Scooter's future:
On the lake above Quake Lake one finds Scooter's future:
A week in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming
Call me Troutslayer. Ok, maybe I'm just Troutbotherer but my brother and brother-in-law are both slayers.
The view from my bro-in-law's cabin:
Update: I should point out that we were all catch and release.
The view from my bro-in-law's cabin:
Update: I should point out that we were all catch and release.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
The Seduction of Water
Yuck. This was a book club pick. It illustrates how hard it must be to write a good novel. Goodman seems to have what you would think you'd need: a cast of characters that aren't 2-dimensional (though maybe not quite 3D), a well-described setting or two, a complicated plot spanning decades, personal/family mystery, geopolitical intrigue and artsy literary technique (using fairy tales as metaphor). She puts a sentence together adequately, though not artfully. And yet it adds up to zilch, blech, ugh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
