October 26, 2008
HOW THE DEMS AND ACORN CREATED THE FINANCIAL MELTDOWN
40 years of deliberate race baiting and socialism.
It's pathetic, really, that we allowed this to happen. We were too easily mau-maued and too willing to hope for the best, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Multiple studies proved that there was practically no discrimination in mortgage lending based either on race or home address, but those "community organizations" sued anyway, knowing that sooner or later they'd get a sympathetic judge or a cowardly bank board to pay them off.
The most glaring example of this expanding legal extortion? The banks were required to pay groups like ACORN a finder's fee for forcing them to issue loans that they knew would never be paid back. Blatant goddamn protection racket.
Mafia, step aside. Unions, take your hats off. When it comes to big-time shakedowns, ACORN takes the cake. And now they will have a hand on the shoulder of the President of the United States.
And who does Waxman blame for the problem? Greenspan! For not regulating the companies who were told by the government that they had to buy these sub-prime securities or face lawsuits and investigations! Greenspan can't believe companies took the risks they did, but they took those risks because the government told them they had to. So Waxman spews the Democratic smokescreen that "deregulation" and "free market greed" caused the problems we're in now.
It's madness like this that creates horrible laws like Sartbanes-Oxley, where one part of the government tells you that you have to do something (sign all financial statements swearing that you personally vouch for every number), and the other tells you that you're going to get sued if you do! No wonder nobody wants to be on a corporation board any more.
That bastard Waxman was in congress the whole time this was going on. Did he ever investigate any of these activities, even when Raines was strung up for fraud? Nope. Why? Because he's part of the problem. He's not going to spank Barney Frank or Chris Dodd or Bill Clinton or Mario Cuomo or the dozens of other Democrats who caused this mess. He'd be chopping down his own power base. He knows he's in great shape as long as he limits his investigations to Republicans.
This will all come a cropper very soon. With credit frozen and banks made out to be villains, nobody will invest in anything but super-safe real estate deals, and all those "poor" people who inflated the housing market with subprime loans will have nowhere to go but the government. And we know how well government-owned housing turned out the last two times it was tried, don't we FDR and LBJ?
So watch for more of the Section 8 style mayhem. The government will buy housing and put people who can't afford to pay for it into that housing at no cost to the residents. What happens? No cost = no responsibility, and the place will be turned into a mess in a matter of months. In short order thereafter, the neighbors will sell out at a loss and move away from the crime and decay brought in by the losers. Repeat this process a couple of dozen times until a new ghetto is born, soon to be followed by community organizers and more of the same political strongarming.
It was while he was dealing (unsuccessfully) with previous government housing mayhem that Obama decided to give up community organizing and get into law and politics, so he could take credit without having to actually produce results.
The country will not put with this for long. Hell to pay for the Democrats in 2010, I say.
It's pathetic, really, that we allowed this to happen. We were too easily mau-maued and too willing to hope for the best, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Multiple studies proved that there was practically no discrimination in mortgage lending based either on race or home address, but those "community organizations" sued anyway, knowing that sooner or later they'd get a sympathetic judge or a cowardly bank board to pay them off.
The most glaring example of this expanding legal extortion? The banks were required to pay groups like ACORN a finder's fee for forcing them to issue loans that they knew would never be paid back. Blatant goddamn protection racket.
Mafia, step aside. Unions, take your hats off. When it comes to big-time shakedowns, ACORN takes the cake. And now they will have a hand on the shoulder of the President of the United States.
And who does Waxman blame for the problem? Greenspan! For not regulating the companies who were told by the government that they had to buy these sub-prime securities or face lawsuits and investigations! Greenspan can't believe companies took the risks they did, but they took those risks because the government told them they had to. So Waxman spews the Democratic smokescreen that "deregulation" and "free market greed" caused the problems we're in now.
It's madness like this that creates horrible laws like Sartbanes-Oxley, where one part of the government tells you that you have to do something (sign all financial statements swearing that you personally vouch for every number), and the other tells you that you're going to get sued if you do! No wonder nobody wants to be on a corporation board any more.
That bastard Waxman was in congress the whole time this was going on. Did he ever investigate any of these activities, even when Raines was strung up for fraud? Nope. Why? Because he's part of the problem. He's not going to spank Barney Frank or Chris Dodd or Bill Clinton or Mario Cuomo or the dozens of other Democrats who caused this mess. He'd be chopping down his own power base. He knows he's in great shape as long as he limits his investigations to Republicans.
This will all come a cropper very soon. With credit frozen and banks made out to be villains, nobody will invest in anything but super-safe real estate deals, and all those "poor" people who inflated the housing market with subprime loans will have nowhere to go but the government. And we know how well government-owned housing turned out the last two times it was tried, don't we FDR and LBJ?
So watch for more of the Section 8 style mayhem. The government will buy housing and put people who can't afford to pay for it into that housing at no cost to the residents. What happens? No cost = no responsibility, and the place will be turned into a mess in a matter of months. In short order thereafter, the neighbors will sell out at a loss and move away from the crime and decay brought in by the losers. Repeat this process a couple of dozen times until a new ghetto is born, soon to be followed by community organizers and more of the same political strongarming.
It was while he was dealing (unsuccessfully) with previous government housing mayhem that Obama decided to give up community organizing and get into law and politics, so he could take credit without having to actually produce results.
The country will not put with this for long. Hell to pay for the Democrats in 2010, I say.
Posted by: JBD at
12:49 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 622 words, total size 4 kb.
October 18, 2008
JUST "A GUY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD"
Posted by: JBD at
10:50 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 6 words, total size 1 kb.
October 12, 2008
A DOODLE SIGHTING, AND A MCAIN POST MORTEM?
My brother Doodle sent this along a few weeks back, but I think it is still worth reviewing:
My reply:
Most of this holds up pretty well some five weeks later And yes, indeed, I did use the "Rocky switching to lefty" analogy back in September, and I use it again below. The Obama campaign was not smart enough to let the media and left-wing blogosphere alone take on Palin. Instead of dancing away like Ali on a rope-a-dope, they tried to punch it out, and the polls showed that they were falling behind.
Then the financial meltdown bell rang and saved them. Oh, sure, their surrogates kept hounding and belittling Palin, and the too-cautious handlers in the McCain campaign held her hands behind her while the likes of Charlie Gibson and Katie Courinc slapped her. But the main event became Bush and the meltdown. And McCain=Bush, Obama is change, and the polls turned around in two weeks.
Now, like I say below, does McCain embrace the "Rocky switches to lefty" approach one more time, or does he take a dive on principles?
Take a dive, John. Thanks for the effort, and for your service. Nowhere to go but the White House or Arizona? Say hello to Tombstone for us. Sarah and the rest of us will take it from here.
On Sep 7, 2008, at 2:09 PM, Dennis McMahon wrote:
Hmmm,where do I start?(Ya,I'll ramble a bit!)
Just wondering if it was only me or did anyone else notice that Obama pronounced Gov. Palin's hometown as "Wasilly" while responding to a reporter just after stating that the press should absolutely not drag any candidate's family or children unnecessarily into the public eye?
Funny thing about that is that 2 rumors, earlier that day,came out of the O camp which purported that:
1)Gov. Palin's Down Syndrome stricken son was actually her daughter's illegitimate child.(DOH!)(I quickly wondered what Dave Faust might be thinking about all of that?).Yup,I took it as a very personal slap in the face to a personal friend of mine,as if procreation naturally gone wrong was a blaming point.
and;
2)The actually true fact that Mr. Palin had been convicted on a DUI charge,some 22 flippin' years ago.(DOH!)(Reminds me of Richard Dreyfus in the movie "The American President",dredgeing up decades old "mistakes in judgement",looking for that one thing in someone else's distant past,totally irrelevent at this time,in order to cast doubt on the players at hand rather than focus on the relavent topics of the here and now,and beyond).
Both references seemed to have been quelled or retracted by the end of that same day.
No word if it was the O camp that scrambled to swallow crow or the media to do the same for irresponsibly putting them out there in the 1st place.
I guess this is where the personal responsibility message from the McC camp and,oh!,Bill Cosby btw,come into play.Tell the truth as truth is,not as how you want it to be.
After seeing now 5 time divorced officer Wooten openly admit that he tased his young son-in-law because "Uh,he just wanted to see how it felt."(DOH!),and shot a moose out of season(aren't law officers supposed to enforce the law?)(DOH!),I would tend to wonder why someone other than his chief of police buddy wouldn't fire him or better incarcerate him for his actions.
Where would we be if Wooten shot his son-in-law with his service revolver because "Uh,he just wanted to see how it felt?"(DOH!).
Regardless of whether or not Palin may have stepped in inapropriately through channels not of her own making,Wooten didn't exercise sound judgement as a law enforcement officer and his superior didn't exercize his authority in order to properly discipline him,ergo,fire the chief and bring in someone else who will,this was a no-brainer-take action-common sense solution to a longstanding good-old-boy local problem hands down.
Sometimes "the law",as rewritten by people who want it their way to fit their needs and wants doesn't fit what's just downright the right thing to do.
I'm Dennis McMahon,and I approved this message.
Hmmm,where do I start?(Ya,I'll ramble a bit!)
Just wondering if it was only me or did anyone else notice that Obama pronounced Gov. Palin's hometown as "Wasilly" while responding to a reporter just after stating that the press should absolutely not drag any candidate's family or children unnecessarily into the public eye?
Funny thing about that is that 2 rumors, earlier that day,came out of the O camp which purported that:
1)Gov. Palin's Down Syndrome stricken son was actually her daughter's illegitimate child.(DOH!)(I quickly wondered what Dave Faust might be thinking about all of that?).Yup,I took it as a very personal slap in the face to a personal friend of mine,as if procreation naturally gone wrong was a blaming point.
and;
2)The actually true fact that Mr. Palin had been convicted on a DUI charge,some 22 flippin' years ago.(DOH!)(Reminds me of Richard Dreyfus in the movie "The American President",dredgeing up decades old "mistakes in judgement",looking for that one thing in someone else's distant past,totally irrelevent at this time,in order to cast doubt on the players at hand rather than focus on the relavent topics of the here and now,and beyond).
Both references seemed to have been quelled or retracted by the end of that same day.
No word if it was the O camp that scrambled to swallow crow or the media to do the same for irresponsibly putting them out there in the 1st place.
I guess this is where the personal responsibility message from the McC camp and,oh!,Bill Cosby btw,come into play.Tell the truth as truth is,not as how you want it to be.
After seeing now 5 time divorced officer Wooten openly admit that he tased his young son-in-law because "Uh,he just wanted to see how it felt."(DOH!),and shot a moose out of season(aren't law officers supposed to enforce the law?)(DOH!),I would tend to wonder why someone other than his chief of police buddy wouldn't fire him or better incarcerate him for his actions.
Where would we be if Wooten shot his son-in-law with his service revolver because "Uh,he just wanted to see how it felt?"(DOH!).
Regardless of whether or not Palin may have stepped in inapropriately through channels not of her own making,Wooten didn't exercise sound judgement as a law enforcement officer and his superior didn't exercize his authority in order to properly discipline him,ergo,fire the chief and bring in someone else who will,this was a no-brainer-take action-common sense solution to a longstanding good-old-boy local problem hands down.
Sometimes "the law",as rewritten by people who want it their way to fit their needs and wants doesn't fit what's just downright the right thing to do.
I'm Dennis McMahon,and I approved this message.
My reply:
Doodle,
Good to hear from you. Well done.
The shit they've hit her with, like the stuff you bring up, plus stuff we've seen since then, I find near psychotic.
The "smear Sarah" race to the bottom by these supposedly serious journos, and the shocked reactions from the normally laconic pundits to the abject sleaze of that race, is something I've never seen the likes of. Remember how long they fought to avoid the John Edwards baby story, supposedly because of the sleaze factor? Sure didn't stop them this time.
The predictable result: the Democrats have been hosed by their own enablers. Since Big Media ran these stories fully recognizing that they were either plain false or incomplete to the point of slander, they have insulted the very people that they depend on for their revenue. Look what happened to US Weekly with their stupid cover - even before it hit newsstands, people were canceling their subscriptions. Those people will not be back. I'm sure the companies who bought ads in that issue are rethinking as well.
Meanwhile, the non-corporate news geeks - bloggers, mostly - used the low-cost transparency and speed of the Internet to quickly debunk the pants off of nearly every rumor and assertion, in most cases even before it was printed or aired by Big Media. Several commenters I've read have compared this phenomenon to the the OODA loop philosophy of legendary fighter pilot Col. Boyd. It's a fancy name and description for playing aggressive football - blitzing the QB, throwing on first down, mixing up the players and plays, changing looks on defense, going after the ball on defense. What us old guys call the West Coast Offense.
Unfortunately for Obama, you have to practice to play that way. If you slotted players for and practiced a conservative ground game, you can't switch to hurry-up ball in the middle of the third quarter without making big mistakes.
Now that McCain has pulled a Rocky and switched back to his left hand lead (maverick, reform, outsider, aisle-crosser), Obama and his campaign are reacting like Apollo Creed, and instead of dancing away gracefully and playing it smart for the easy win, they think they have to go for the knockout. Rocky won that fight in the movie, so we'll see if Obama's current lead and natural strengths are enough to put away the Republican palooka.
Good to hear from you. Well done.
The shit they've hit her with, like the stuff you bring up, plus stuff we've seen since then, I find near psychotic.
The "smear Sarah" race to the bottom by these supposedly serious journos, and the shocked reactions from the normally laconic pundits to the abject sleaze of that race, is something I've never seen the likes of. Remember how long they fought to avoid the John Edwards baby story, supposedly because of the sleaze factor? Sure didn't stop them this time.
The predictable result: the Democrats have been hosed by their own enablers. Since Big Media ran these stories fully recognizing that they were either plain false or incomplete to the point of slander, they have insulted the very people that they depend on for their revenue. Look what happened to US Weekly with their stupid cover - even before it hit newsstands, people were canceling their subscriptions. Those people will not be back. I'm sure the companies who bought ads in that issue are rethinking as well.
Meanwhile, the non-corporate news geeks - bloggers, mostly - used the low-cost transparency and speed of the Internet to quickly debunk the pants off of nearly every rumor and assertion, in most cases even before it was printed or aired by Big Media. Several commenters I've read have compared this phenomenon to the the OODA loop philosophy of legendary fighter pilot Col. Boyd. It's a fancy name and description for playing aggressive football - blitzing the QB, throwing on first down, mixing up the players and plays, changing looks on defense, going after the ball on defense. What us old guys call the West Coast Offense.
Unfortunately for Obama, you have to practice to play that way. If you slotted players for and practiced a conservative ground game, you can't switch to hurry-up ball in the middle of the third quarter without making big mistakes.
Now that McCain has pulled a Rocky and switched back to his left hand lead (maverick, reform, outsider, aisle-crosser), Obama and his campaign are reacting like Apollo Creed, and instead of dancing away gracefully and playing it smart for the easy win, they think they have to go for the knockout. Rocky won that fight in the movie, so we'll see if Obama's current lead and natural strengths are enough to put away the Republican palooka.
Most of this holds up pretty well some five weeks later And yes, indeed, I did use the "Rocky switching to lefty" analogy back in September, and I use it again below. The Obama campaign was not smart enough to let the media and left-wing blogosphere alone take on Palin. Instead of dancing away like Ali on a rope-a-dope, they tried to punch it out, and the polls showed that they were falling behind.
Then the financial meltdown bell rang and saved them. Oh, sure, their surrogates kept hounding and belittling Palin, and the too-cautious handlers in the McCain campaign held her hands behind her while the likes of Charlie Gibson and Katie Courinc slapped her. But the main event became Bush and the meltdown. And McCain=Bush, Obama is change, and the polls turned around in two weeks.
Now, like I say below, does McCain embrace the "Rocky switches to lefty" approach one more time, or does he take a dive on principles?
Take a dive, John. Thanks for the effort, and for your service. Nowhere to go but the White House or Arizona? Say hello to Tombstone for us. Sarah and the rest of us will take it from here.
Posted by: JBD at
10:49 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1072 words, total size 9 kb.
BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE A TRILLION? OR, WHY 2008 IS NOT LIKE 1932.
We flirted with my worst case scenario on Friday. Italy's Berlusconi even said it out loud, but Bush immediately slapped it down. But how low will the Dow go before Bush and Congress are forced to stop it?
I dunno. My scenario was a mental exercise to help clarify the choices and priorities. As that, think it still holds up well. The two big unknowns are, where is the bottom, and will we hit bottom before or after election? And if we hit bottom before election day, will that bottom be based on a priced-in Obama Soviet state (bad times ahead) or on a low-tax, entitlement-reform McCain presidency (the worst is over)?
Again, I dunno; we'll see. More important now, I think, is this: once we do find bottom, what do we do next? Here's what I think:
Credit market first: Like I said before, somebody has to go first in the credit market. Tom Clancy's novel Debt of Honor had a situation like this, where the Japs had sabotaged the stock market's main computer system, and as a result nobody knew what anything was really worth. To fix it, they had a "do-over"- they changed the numbers back to what they were just before the sabotage, then restarted. At first, everybody hesitated, not wanting to to get burned by making a wrong move. Then one of the "good guys" in the plot made a big move, followed by some others, and soon everything was OK again.
If "somebody goes first" before the election, possibly early this week, and the rest follow suit, and the government stays out of the way except for providing liquidity, the the worst will be over. We'll be able to keep our core productive businesses running while we sort out the real estate asset values. 18 months from now we'll be back up to 11,000 with the LIBOR rates back on the historic (rational, asset-based) ratio trend line.
Real Estate assets second: The fix in the credit market will not work unless we let the bad risks go bankrupt. Unfortunately, neither the bail-out, nor McCain's latest plan, nor Obama's plan, will do that. All these plans are based on trying to avoid the pain of losses based on inflated asset values. And that means propping up "name" companies or "distressed homeowners" who should go bankrupt.
This is the wrong approach. Did the government prop up the tech companies that had hyperinflated market values in the dot com bust? No. And that approach worked out right in the long run, because we took the hits in the short run. We suffered a market crash, companies closed, people lost bundles on investments, stock options & retirement plans, and the housing market tanked. Then, on top of all that, 9/11 hit, killing commerece for 6 months and launching the US into war.
But by 2004, the market had gained everything back. We need to the same thing again. In fact, we were so confident that by 2005 we busily started to screw things up again by creating the new government-sponsored real-estate bubble. So this time, we must shrink government and cap its influence at all levels so it can never again cause these problems.
If we don't let these bad risks go bust (which I think is likely under Obama, and even possible under McCain), then the credit market will freeze again, because the guys who "went first" will get hosed when their debtors start handing those debts over to the government, who will arbitrarily and capriciously re-value them down to near nothing. In effect, the government will be competing with them by inflating assets and sucking up capital into "can't fail" investments. Why take risks and try to make money if the government is going to take some of it from you and give it to people who lost money on previous bad risks?
Until that is settled, the market will continue to tank and stay tanked, ratcheting down with each prime rate decrease (already too low - look out for inflation), or bail-out deal, or stimulus package. Worst case, we keep creeping down until Spring of 2010 (yes, 18 months), after Obama and Congress have repeatedly bailed-out and stimulated and tried every New Deal public works scheme in the book, to no lasting effect. You can't eat carbon credits, or run container ships on wind power, or get volunteers to build cars or grow crops. All the do-gooder programs they try will add to and prolong the misery, just like they did when FDR tried them.
I think that this is now a very real possibility, because the Social Security and public pension crisis is finally starting to get some ink, and there is no amount of Fed money available to fix that. Once that disaster is honestly priced into the mix, there will be a complete loss of faith in the public sector. In effect, the public side of our economy will have to go bankrupt, and be rescued by the private side.
Because while all of this will be happening, smart guys like the Chief will work out side deals with other companies to keep their businesses going. That liquidity will get pulled out of the public system, un-taxed and unaccounted for, creating a giant black market. This is what happens in every command economy - the government elite takes what they can off the top, and everybody else sneaks around doing daily business under the radar.
The main difference between now and what happened in 1932 is that the infrastructure is in place for the private sector to rapidly replace everything the public sector has taken over. Our economy will have an unprecedented opportunity to go lean. Farmers will recalculate their crop values without subsidies, and the most profitable crops will get planted. Car makers will take orders direct from customers and carry their own paper. Shippers will participate in the value of the goods they deliver. Manufacturers will allow complete transparency into their production capabilities so users and distributors can coordinate their buys on a pull basis.
There is no way the public sector will be able to restrain or regulate this without a police state. Analogous to the internet, this "super black market' will be too big and too popular to manage centrally, and all attempts to do so will be met with immediate heavy resistance. Oh, you say we can't build thousands of neighborhood nuke generators without an environmental impact statement for each one and 5 years worth of bureacracy between application and approval? Try and stop us.
In short order, this "super black market" - let's call it the Hayek Community - will have the strength to yank control away from the public sector, and voters will then restore private enterprise and open markets as the basis for a free and strong America.
I dunno. My scenario was a mental exercise to help clarify the choices and priorities. As that, think it still holds up well. The two big unknowns are, where is the bottom, and will we hit bottom before or after election? And if we hit bottom before election day, will that bottom be based on a priced-in Obama Soviet state (bad times ahead) or on a low-tax, entitlement-reform McCain presidency (the worst is over)?
Again, I dunno; we'll see. More important now, I think, is this: once we do find bottom, what do we do next? Here's what I think:
Credit market first: Like I said before, somebody has to go first in the credit market. Tom Clancy's novel Debt of Honor had a situation like this, where the Japs had sabotaged the stock market's main computer system, and as a result nobody knew what anything was really worth. To fix it, they had a "do-over"- they changed the numbers back to what they were just before the sabotage, then restarted. At first, everybody hesitated, not wanting to to get burned by making a wrong move. Then one of the "good guys" in the plot made a big move, followed by some others, and soon everything was OK again.
If "somebody goes first" before the election, possibly early this week, and the rest follow suit, and the government stays out of the way except for providing liquidity, the the worst will be over. We'll be able to keep our core productive businesses running while we sort out the real estate asset values. 18 months from now we'll be back up to 11,000 with the LIBOR rates back on the historic (rational, asset-based) ratio trend line.
Real Estate assets second: The fix in the credit market will not work unless we let the bad risks go bankrupt. Unfortunately, neither the bail-out, nor McCain's latest plan, nor Obama's plan, will do that. All these plans are based on trying to avoid the pain of losses based on inflated asset values. And that means propping up "name" companies or "distressed homeowners" who should go bankrupt.
This is the wrong approach. Did the government prop up the tech companies that had hyperinflated market values in the dot com bust? No. And that approach worked out right in the long run, because we took the hits in the short run. We suffered a market crash, companies closed, people lost bundles on investments, stock options & retirement plans, and the housing market tanked. Then, on top of all that, 9/11 hit, killing commerece for 6 months and launching the US into war.
But by 2004, the market had gained everything back. We need to the same thing again. In fact, we were so confident that by 2005 we busily started to screw things up again by creating the new government-sponsored real-estate bubble. So this time, we must shrink government and cap its influence at all levels so it can never again cause these problems.
If we don't let these bad risks go bust (which I think is likely under Obama, and even possible under McCain), then the credit market will freeze again, because the guys who "went first" will get hosed when their debtors start handing those debts over to the government, who will arbitrarily and capriciously re-value them down to near nothing. In effect, the government will be competing with them by inflating assets and sucking up capital into "can't fail" investments. Why take risks and try to make money if the government is going to take some of it from you and give it to people who lost money on previous bad risks?
Until that is settled, the market will continue to tank and stay tanked, ratcheting down with each prime rate decrease (already too low - look out for inflation), or bail-out deal, or stimulus package. Worst case, we keep creeping down until Spring of 2010 (yes, 18 months), after Obama and Congress have repeatedly bailed-out and stimulated and tried every New Deal public works scheme in the book, to no lasting effect. You can't eat carbon credits, or run container ships on wind power, or get volunteers to build cars or grow crops. All the do-gooder programs they try will add to and prolong the misery, just like they did when FDR tried them.
I think that this is now a very real possibility, because the Social Security and public pension crisis is finally starting to get some ink, and there is no amount of Fed money available to fix that. Once that disaster is honestly priced into the mix, there will be a complete loss of faith in the public sector. In effect, the public side of our economy will have to go bankrupt, and be rescued by the private side.
Because while all of this will be happening, smart guys like the Chief will work out side deals with other companies to keep their businesses going. That liquidity will get pulled out of the public system, un-taxed and unaccounted for, creating a giant black market. This is what happens in every command economy - the government elite takes what they can off the top, and everybody else sneaks around doing daily business under the radar.
The main difference between now and what happened in 1932 is that the infrastructure is in place for the private sector to rapidly replace everything the public sector has taken over. Our economy will have an unprecedented opportunity to go lean. Farmers will recalculate their crop values without subsidies, and the most profitable crops will get planted. Car makers will take orders direct from customers and carry their own paper. Shippers will participate in the value of the goods they deliver. Manufacturers will allow complete transparency into their production capabilities so users and distributors can coordinate their buys on a pull basis.
There is no way the public sector will be able to restrain or regulate this without a police state. Analogous to the internet, this "super black market' will be too big and too popular to manage centrally, and all attempts to do so will be met with immediate heavy resistance. Oh, you say we can't build thousands of neighborhood nuke generators without an environmental impact statement for each one and 5 years worth of bureacracy between application and approval? Try and stop us.
In short order, this "super black market" - let's call it the Hayek Community - will have the strength to yank control away from the public sector, and voters will then restore private enterprise and open markets as the basis for a free and strong America.
Posted by: JBD at
03:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1157 words, total size 8 kb.
SOME PEOPLE WILL DO ANYTHING TO SELL A BOOK
Christopher Buckley, sensing a change in the wind in Washington, pulls an Arianna Huffington and positions himself to be a part of the in-crowd during the coming Obama administration. And he does so on the new "me-too Arianna!" vanity web site from super-ego but well-married magazine killer Tina Brown
And there's no doubt his book sales will grow now that he has embraced the Strange New Respect approach to Beltway popularity.
He thinks the real McCain, loser in 2000, sold out to the current McCain, chooser of Palin, that ditzy snow Nazi. How dare she think she has any right to criticize an Ivy Leaguer? Listen now as he balls up his shepherds tweed hat in faux anxiety:
And there's no doubt his book sales will grow now that he has embraced the Strange New Respect approach to Beltway popularity.
He thinks the real McCain, loser in 2000, sold out to the current McCain, chooser of Palin, that ditzy snow Nazi. How dare she think she has any right to criticize an Ivy Leaguer? Listen now as he balls up his shepherds tweed hat in faux anxiety:
McCain rose to power on his personality and biography. He was authentic. He spoke truth to power. He told the media they were “jerks†(a sure sign of authenticity, to say nothing of good taste; we are jerks). He was real. He was unconventional. He embraced former anti-war leaders. He brought resolution to the awful missing-POW business. He brought about normalization with Vietnam—his former torturers! Yes, he erred in accepting plane rides and vacations from Charles Keating, but then, having been cleared on technicalities, groveled in apology before the nation. He told me across a lunch table, “The Keating business was much worse than my five and a half years in Hanoi, because I at least walked away from that with my honor.†Your heart went out to the guy. I thought at the time, God, this guy should be president someday.
A year ago, when everyone, including the man I’m about to endorse, was caterwauling to get out of Iraq on the next available flight, John McCain, practically alone, said no, no—bad move. Surge. It seemed a suicidal position to take, an act of political bravery of the kind you don’t see a whole lot of anymore.
But that was—sigh—then. John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.†This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.†Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?
A year ago, when everyone, including the man I’m about to endorse, was caterwauling to get out of Iraq on the next available flight, John McCain, practically alone, said no, no—bad move. Surge. It seemed a suicidal position to take, an act of political bravery of the kind you don’t see a whole lot of anymore.
But that was—sigh—then. John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.†This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.†Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?
So now, having secured himself a place on the Georgetown society A-list, he smugly engages in hedging by employing a few modified limited takebacks.
Writers and pundits can get away with this because they are paid to write, not be right. To them, the only sin is to be unnoticed. Right, Arianna?
Buckley, you're a funny guy - stick with that. You're not in your old man's league, standing athwart history-wise. Your more of a holding history's coat type of guy. Careful you don't get too close to the fight and spill your sherry.
But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.
See? Now once Obama and the New Bolsheviks have engaged in exactly the kind of big government socialism he deplores, he can write another book, publicly switch back by supporting whoever it is has the guts to take on Obama in 2012, and stay tight with the DC homies.Writers and pundits can get away with this because they are paid to write, not be right. To them, the only sin is to be unnoticed. Right, Arianna?
Buckley, you're a funny guy - stick with that. You're not in your old man's league, standing athwart history-wise. Your more of a holding history's coat type of guy. Careful you don't get too close to the fight and spill your sherry.
Posted by: JBD at
01:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 666 words, total size 6 kb.
IS IT TIME FOR ROCKY MCCAIN TO SWITCH BACK TO A LEFT HANDED LEAD?
The Chief takes his frustrations out for a swim:
I replied:
There is an ongoing debate in the McCain campaign about how negative they want to get. One report talks about Palin pushing McCain to get tough, with McCain pushing back, arguing in effect that he would rather lose than win ugly.
McCain is still angry about the negative "whisper campaign" during the 2000 North Carolina primary (that is blamed, without evidence, on Karl Rove) for losing him that primary, and, ultimately, winning the nomination for Bush. McCain does not want to use what he considers to be the same tactics. The problem is, no matter how negative he (or anybody else) is about Obama, it will be construed as unfair and desperate by the media.
So McCain has to chose - embrace the hate, channel the anger of the voters, and win ugly. Or, do what Norm Coleman just did, and infuse his final weeks with a Zen-like calm, and say only positive things about what he, McCain, will do as president. The hope is that the switch will convince the voters that he is the cool, calm, gravitas-filled leader we need to pull out of the mess we're in.
The former tactic is what every successful candidate for president has ever done. The latter is what McCain did in 2000, and Dole in 86, and Ford in 76, and Nixon in '60. And so on down the line. Losers all.
But hey, Rocky won the fight where he switched back to lefty. So there's always a chance, right? Sure, in the movies.
Can McPalin [earthy epithet] this up any worse? They are basically done. Why does he not go down swinging and hope for a knock out punch?
If I were him, I would announce Romney as Sec. of the Tres. Put in a shark like Giuliani at the Attorney General's office and say we are going after everyone of these Mother [ibid]ers on Wall Street. And we are also going after Barney Frank, Dodd and Cox.
If I were him, I would announce Romney as Sec. of the Tres. Put in a shark like Giuliani at the Attorney General's office and say we are going after everyone of these Mother [ibid]ers on Wall Street. And we are also going after Barney Frank, Dodd and Cox.
Oh and tomorrow [McCain should] take out full page ads in every major paper in the country detailing exactly whose vote had to be bought to get the bail out done. Jim Smith Democrat Ohio Wooden Arrows 5 mil. Etc. etc. etc.
If he did that – Obama would be back to community organizing. Is there nobody in his campaign that is telling him how bad it is?
If he did that – Obama would be back to community organizing. Is there nobody in his campaign that is telling him how bad it is?
It’s why I didn’t want McCain in the first place – he’s Bob Dole, Gentleman Senator War Hero, Honorable Loser, Part 2.
On the campaign trail, Palin has been taking hard shots at Obama, giving McCain the openings he needs to follow through, but it’s quickly becoming too late to matter. Unless McCain can create the same kind of buyer’s remorse about Obama as we saw at the end of the Dem primaries, he’s done.
With all the new evidence now coming out that Obama is a life-long socialist, McCain has the chance to light him up, but the economic meltdown is drowning him out. And even if McCain does say all the right words (and so far he has not, even when he had the chance at the last debate), the media will mute or dispute them. To break through that smokescreen, he’s got to go nuclear, and I mean Jerry Springer nuclear, at the last debate, and he won’t.
Who knows? With everything that has happened so far, nothing is certain about this election.
That was a couple of days ago. A lot of this has come to pass,
except that that the effect on the Obama campaign has been nil, and the
news media has, as I predicted, reacted by characterizing these tactics as
hate-mongering.On the campaign trail, Palin has been taking hard shots at Obama, giving McCain the openings he needs to follow through, but it’s quickly becoming too late to matter. Unless McCain can create the same kind of buyer’s remorse about Obama as we saw at the end of the Dem primaries, he’s done.
With all the new evidence now coming out that Obama is a life-long socialist, McCain has the chance to light him up, but the economic meltdown is drowning him out. And even if McCain does say all the right words (and so far he has not, even when he had the chance at the last debate), the media will mute or dispute them. To break through that smokescreen, he’s got to go nuclear, and I mean Jerry Springer nuclear, at the last debate, and he won’t.
Who knows? With everything that has happened so far, nothing is certain about this election.
There is an ongoing debate in the McCain campaign about how negative they want to get. One report talks about Palin pushing McCain to get tough, with McCain pushing back, arguing in effect that he would rather lose than win ugly.
McCain is still angry about the negative "whisper campaign" during the 2000 North Carolina primary (that is blamed, without evidence, on Karl Rove) for losing him that primary, and, ultimately, winning the nomination for Bush. McCain does not want to use what he considers to be the same tactics. The problem is, no matter how negative he (or anybody else) is about Obama, it will be construed as unfair and desperate by the media.
So McCain has to chose - embrace the hate, channel the anger of the voters, and win ugly. Or, do what Norm Coleman just did, and infuse his final weeks with a Zen-like calm, and say only positive things about what he, McCain, will do as president. The hope is that the switch will convince the voters that he is the cool, calm, gravitas-filled leader we need to pull out of the mess we're in.
The former tactic is what every successful candidate for president has ever done. The latter is what McCain did in 2000, and Dole in 86, and Ford in 76, and Nixon in '60. And so on down the line. Losers all.
But hey, Rocky won the fight where he switched back to lefty. So there's always a chance, right? Sure, in the movies.
Posted by: JBD at
01:18 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 635 words, total size 5 kb.
WILL OBAMA DENOUCE THE HATERS ON HIS SIDE?
I especially like where the old Leftie goes to complain to the cop. Hey gramps, weren't you calling me a fascist last week when I busted your nephew for boosting a Prius?
So this scene right out of 17th century Salem is no big deal, right? Predictable reactions to direct provocation? Tame in comparison to what Bush/McCain/Palin/Christofascist supporters do?
OK, he's my supporting documentation: Obama Supporters and their Bush Hating Kin. Add to these the ACORN/Alinsky insta-mobs of the last 30 years, plus the rage-against-my-allowance losers who travel the world to riot and shout death threats at G-8 meetings, and the guys who dropped sandbags from freeway overpasses on Republican delegates' busses at the National Convention in Minneapolis. Now they are throwing Molotov cocktails at campaign signs. Classy.
Where's your documentation? Wait, I'll help - A guy shouting a few words st a McCain rally, who McCain immediately scolds? A couple of rally speakers who use Obama's actual middle name, Hussein? The Republicans who correctly identify an denounce Democrat legislators and their friends as the direct causes of the dinancial meltdown?
You really think there is a moral equivalence?
And what's with the boos, catcalls, insults, and the finger from these elite onlookers? These are the supposedly hyper-lettered, super-sophisticated, famously articulate intelligentsia of Upper West Side New York, the trendsetters, the screenwriters, the journalists, the lawyers, the authors. They are well off, secure, insulated, and revered. Where is the tolerance, where is the intellectual engagement? Why no embrace of the bohemian Other, no applause for the speakers of truth to power, no outreach to the counterculturists in Blue right there in front of them?
Remember, now, the people you see in this video are the ones who will be running the country when Obama is elected. You'd better hope you don't cross them, because they own the courts, so you'll be screwed even if you look to the law to defend you. Welcome to Peking, comrade. Be sure to carry your Little Red Book of Obama sayings with you at all times.
UPDATE: I just noticed - go back to that link I put in about the ACORN insta-mobs. Notice what they were protesting in 2005? The were accusing Wells Fargo of racism for not loaning money to black people who could not qualify! Anything there seem germane to what's happening today?
I especially like where the old Leftie goes to complain to the cop. Hey gramps, weren't you calling me a fascist last week when I busted your nephew for boosting a Prius?
So this scene right out of 17th century Salem is no big deal, right? Predictable reactions to direct provocation? Tame in comparison to what Bush/McCain/Palin/Christofascist supporters do?
OK, he's my supporting documentation: Obama Supporters and their Bush Hating Kin. Add to these the ACORN/Alinsky insta-mobs of the last 30 years, plus the rage-against-my-allowance losers who travel the world to riot and shout death threats at G-8 meetings, and the guys who dropped sandbags from freeway overpasses on Republican delegates' busses at the National Convention in Minneapolis. Now they are throwing Molotov cocktails at campaign signs. Classy.
Where's your documentation? Wait, I'll help - A guy shouting a few words st a McCain rally, who McCain immediately scolds? A couple of rally speakers who use Obama's actual middle name, Hussein? The Republicans who correctly identify an denounce Democrat legislators and their friends as the direct causes of the dinancial meltdown?
You really think there is a moral equivalence?
And what's with the boos, catcalls, insults, and the finger from these elite onlookers? These are the supposedly hyper-lettered, super-sophisticated, famously articulate intelligentsia of Upper West Side New York, the trendsetters, the screenwriters, the journalists, the lawyers, the authors. They are well off, secure, insulated, and revered. Where is the tolerance, where is the intellectual engagement? Why no embrace of the bohemian Other, no applause for the speakers of truth to power, no outreach to the counterculturists in Blue right there in front of them?
Remember, now, the people you see in this video are the ones who will be running the country when Obama is elected. You'd better hope you don't cross them, because they own the courts, so you'll be screwed even if you look to the law to defend you. Welcome to Peking, comrade. Be sure to carry your Little Red Book of Obama sayings with you at all times.
UPDATE: I just noticed - go back to that link I put in about the ACORN insta-mobs. Notice what they were protesting in 2005? The were accusing Wells Fargo of racism for not loaning money to black people who could not qualify! Anything there seem germane to what's happening today?
Posted by: JBD at
11:29 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 400 words, total size 3 kb.
October 08, 2008
DID WE JUST HIT BOTTOM?
According to this guy, maybe so. Very persuasive graphs - me likee good graphs.
If so, we need to concentrate on the core value activities of our economy, and keep them moving so that we limit the recession to 12-18 months.
Hat tip: The Weekly Standard
If so, we need to concentrate on the core value activities of our economy, and keep them moving so that we limit the recession to 12-18 months.
Hat tip: The Weekly Standard
Posted by: JBD at
08:46 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.
October 07, 2008
SOMEBODY HAS TO GO FIRST
One of the reasons I like to read NRO's The Corner blog is that they often realize that it is their upscale readers that have most of the answers, not the politicians or other journalists.
Witness this e-mail from a Corner reader, printed by the Editor in cheif without comment.
Events in the next few days will show if he's right.
Witness this e-mail from a Corner reader, printed by the Editor in cheif without comment.
Subject: Commercial Paper [Rich Lowry]
E-mail:
Mr. Lowry,
They are getting close to the source of the problem but the Fed has not taken the one step necessary to put life back into the market place.
Last summer, I was responsible for supervising a major set of money market funds. And, it was last summer that the market first froze up over ABCP (asset backed commercial paper), ie, mortgage backed CP.
At that time we came very close to breaking the buck and in the effort to preserve the $1 and the reputation of our Firm we issued orders to the dealers who oversaw our money market funds: basically nothing, zero, that had any risk, even slight, would be added to the portfolio and anything we held at that time that had even a scent of trouble was to be eased out of the portfolio. I cannot overstate fear of breaking the buck and the reputational damage that would ensue.
I have no doubt that my orders were replicated across the market and are nearly universal now amongst asset managers.
The fact that the Fed buying CP is really nice, but until those orders to "stay away" the problem remains and the fact that the Fed is a buyer is really nice but it doesn't solve the problem. We need money funds to become buyers, not the Fed.
This lack of liquidity will be with us until the Fed opens the window at par for money market funds. Once it does, the market will then reopen and only then will the market learn how to take risk again.
Nice, neat, stark, definitive, authoritative. How many money market managers have you talked to lately?E-mail:
Mr. Lowry,
They are getting close to the source of the problem but the Fed has not taken the one step necessary to put life back into the market place.
Last summer, I was responsible for supervising a major set of money market funds. And, it was last summer that the market first froze up over ABCP (asset backed commercial paper), ie, mortgage backed CP.
At that time we came very close to breaking the buck and in the effort to preserve the $1 and the reputation of our Firm we issued orders to the dealers who oversaw our money market funds: basically nothing, zero, that had any risk, even slight, would be added to the portfolio and anything we held at that time that had even a scent of trouble was to be eased out of the portfolio. I cannot overstate fear of breaking the buck and the reputational damage that would ensue.
I have no doubt that my orders were replicated across the market and are nearly universal now amongst asset managers.
The fact that the Fed buying CP is really nice, but until those orders to "stay away" the problem remains and the fact that the Fed is a buyer is really nice but it doesn't solve the problem. We need money funds to become buyers, not the Fed.
This lack of liquidity will be with us until the Fed opens the window at par for money market funds. Once it does, the market will then reopen and only then will the market learn how to take risk again.
Events in the next few days will show if he's right.
Posted by: JBD at
08:07 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 340 words, total size 3 kb.
October 06, 2008
BLITZKRIEG IN REVERSE - GERMANY RETREATS FROM THE EU
Pardon me while I engage in some well-earned schadenfreude.
Everything I ever read or heard about the EU sounded like socialism at its worst, and it always seemed to me doomed to failure, as was its most recent incarnation, the late Soviet Union. The difference being, of course, the EU was created and held together by bald bribery and extortion, while the Soviet Union required bribery, extortion and mass murder.
The Irish were on to something earlier this year when they soundly rejected the EU "reform treaty", which was a bald attempt at repackaging their failed "constitution." No taxation without representation, eh, Paddy? The Boston boyos of 1773 would be proud.
Take note - what the EU has been doing in Europe is what Obama and his ilk want to do here.
Everything I ever read or heard about the EU sounded like socialism at its worst, and it always seemed to me doomed to failure, as was its most recent incarnation, the late Soviet Union. The difference being, of course, the EU was created and held together by bald bribery and extortion, while the Soviet Union required bribery, extortion and mass murder.
The Irish were on to something earlier this year when they soundly rejected the EU "reform treaty", which was a bald attempt at repackaging their failed "constitution." No taxation without representation, eh, Paddy? The Boston boyos of 1773 would be proud.
Take note - what the EU has been doing in Europe is what Obama and his ilk want to do here.
Posted by: JBD at
08:40 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.
RIGHT ANALYSIS WRONG CONCLUSION
Well, I knew this was coming.
My cousin Big Tom passes on this cri de coeur from his brother, Professor Mike. His analysis and lamentations are reminiscent of my post on the same subject, but he comes to a different conclusion.
Says Professor Mike:
My cousin Big Tom passes on this cri de coeur from his brother, Professor Mike. His analysis and lamentations are reminiscent of my post on the same subject, but he comes to a different conclusion.
Says Professor Mike:
Republican administration increased spending by a greater percent than revenues! The Reagan tax cuts caused the national debt to increase from about $1 trillion to over $3trillion! The theory was that lower rates would stimulate activity and that taxes would actually go up. That obviously didn’t happen! Under Reagan, spending went up by 25% and revenues only increased by 15%. During the Clinton years, revenues increased by 35% (because of a tax increase and a booming economy) and spending only went up by 9%! Under Bush II, revenues went up by 10% but spending increased by 25%! I was a Republican through this year’s presidential primary.
The party used to stand for individual freedom and fiscal responsibility. I’m embarrassed that recent Republican administrations have demonstrated gross fiscal irresponsibility! I don’t know what the party stands for now other than fundamentalist religious values!
Our government is acting like a household living on debt-credit cards, consumer loans and ever increasing home equity loans! The greater the deficit, the deeper in a hole we get. Interest rates are still relatively low now probably because of the looming recession. They won’t stay that way. Inflation seems inevitable and rates will rise. Even without considering inevitable further increases in the national debt, the $430 billion annual interest payment we have now will increase.
It has been obvious for over five years that reckless real estate loans were occurring. Loans with “nothing downâ€, borrowers with no credit history, on properties with no appraisals seemed obviously imprudent. Deregulation allowed this process to barrel ahead unchecked. As recently as a month ago, McCain was calling for more deregulation. He assumed that the market would regulate itself. What did the regulators believe would happen? As in all pyramid schemes, somebody would be left holding the bag! Exotic securities were created with derivatives to slice and dice the various mortgage loans so no one could relate the securities to the underlying real estate loans. The only
purpose for these securities that I can see was to allow the use of huge amounts of leverage while hiding the risk of the underlying loans. This magnified the risk of the already risky mortgages many times! If the value of the underlying loans fell even a little, all equity was wiped out in the securities! When this happened, it also wiped out the equity of many financial firms. The regulators apparently made themselves not to know (until it was too late) since this is what the administration wanted. That’s why we needed the bailout. It was necessary but may not be sufficient. It remains to be seen how
effective it will be.
Republicans seem clueless. Their answer to everything is ‘tax cutâ€! Nobody likes taxes! However, unreasonable tax cuts plus reckless deregulation and unwise military adventures largely explain how we got in this mess. In the past I have tended to vote Republican. Often it has been a nose holding contest. This year my choice is easy! I’m supporting Obama. His management style is thoughtful and deliberate not impulsive. He has the most competent economic advisors including Warren Buffet (The most successful investor in history) and Paul Volker (who ended the inflation of the 70s during the Reagan administration). His grass roots fundraising tend to allow him independence from the special interests. I can’t imagine voting for McCain! He is grossly ignorant about economics and his election would put Palin one melanoma away from the presidency!
I think its time we had a smart president for a change!
Mike Dunn October 6, 2008
The party used to stand for individual freedom and fiscal responsibility. I’m embarrassed that recent Republican administrations have demonstrated gross fiscal irresponsibility! I don’t know what the party stands for now other than fundamentalist religious values!
Our government is acting like a household living on debt-credit cards, consumer loans and ever increasing home equity loans! The greater the deficit, the deeper in a hole we get. Interest rates are still relatively low now probably because of the looming recession. They won’t stay that way. Inflation seems inevitable and rates will rise. Even without considering inevitable further increases in the national debt, the $430 billion annual interest payment we have now will increase.
It has been obvious for over five years that reckless real estate loans were occurring. Loans with “nothing downâ€, borrowers with no credit history, on properties with no appraisals seemed obviously imprudent. Deregulation allowed this process to barrel ahead unchecked. As recently as a month ago, McCain was calling for more deregulation. He assumed that the market would regulate itself. What did the regulators believe would happen? As in all pyramid schemes, somebody would be left holding the bag! Exotic securities were created with derivatives to slice and dice the various mortgage loans so no one could relate the securities to the underlying real estate loans. The only
purpose for these securities that I can see was to allow the use of huge amounts of leverage while hiding the risk of the underlying loans. This magnified the risk of the already risky mortgages many times! If the value of the underlying loans fell even a little, all equity was wiped out in the securities! When this happened, it also wiped out the equity of many financial firms. The regulators apparently made themselves not to know (until it was too late) since this is what the administration wanted. That’s why we needed the bailout. It was necessary but may not be sufficient. It remains to be seen how
effective it will be.
Republicans seem clueless. Their answer to everything is ‘tax cutâ€! Nobody likes taxes! However, unreasonable tax cuts plus reckless deregulation and unwise military adventures largely explain how we got in this mess. In the past I have tended to vote Republican. Often it has been a nose holding contest. This year my choice is easy! I’m supporting Obama. His management style is thoughtful and deliberate not impulsive. He has the most competent economic advisors including Warren Buffet (The most successful investor in history) and Paul Volker (who ended the inflation of the 70s during the Reagan administration). His grass roots fundraising tend to allow him independence from the special interests. I can’t imagine voting for McCain! He is grossly ignorant about economics and his election would put Palin one melanoma away from the presidency!
I think its time we had a smart president for a change!
Mike Dunn October 6, 2008
My Dear Cousin Professor Mike Dunn (as opposed to My Dear Cousin Mike McMahon) ignores reality and the Consititution. Congress controls spending. Re-run the deficit chart against congressional majorities instead of Presidential administrations. Same correlation, but this time it's Democrat congressional majorities to spending. However, starting with the 2002-2006 budgets, with majority Republican congresses, I agree 100% with Prof. Mike - the RINOs joined the Democrats in a binge, and they deserved their Congressional losses in 2006. But things were still going up in 2006. Once Pelosi and Reid got behind the wheel, it's been all down hill, culminating in the recent head-on collision with mortgages and credit..
Let's remember that every dime that was spent was requested and approved by Democrats in Congress. In fact, the budget amounts that ultimately got to Bush for his signature were in every case a reduction in the amount Obama and his party wanted to spend. Remember all the crying about Bush and his "draconian" budget cuts? Professor Mike sounds like a drunk blaming the bartender for not cutting him off sooner, or a gambler blaming the casino for taking his bets. It's the President's fault for not preventing the spending, not the Congress for actually, you know, spending.
But I'm convinced that regardless of logic & history, Obama will be elected, and with him will come a wave of Democrat greed and corruption that will hasten the pension fund & Social Security crash that McCain as Pres would only kick down the road with fixes.
Once that crash hits, dwarfing this one, we'll finally see some real federal reform, and Obama will join Jimmy Carter in the Presidential Hall of Lame.
Oh, and by the way, Mike Dunn - your exclamation point key is stuck. May want to get it looked at.
And if you really think "deregulation" caused our current financial problems, you need to ask for your money back on your education. Democrats voted down all attempts by Bush and McCain to tighten regs on Fannie May and the Community Reinvestment Act, the primary causes of the current crisis. And remember that it was the CRA that gave Obama his first big slurp at the federal teat, and he's been latched on like a piglet ever since. Chicago - Hog butcher to the world no more - more like hog breeder. If you think Chicago and Detroit are well run fiscally, you'll love what smart, deliberate Obama and his team will do to Washington
Warren Buffet, The Sage of Omaha, who told investors earlier this year to short the dollar (how's that working out?) is not the only financial advisor Obama has. As the meltdown saga continues to unravel, we'll hear more about Obama advisors Raines and Johnson, and their roles in the feeding frenzy at Fannie Mae.
Take a second look before you vote, Professor.
Let's remember that every dime that was spent was requested and approved by Democrats in Congress. In fact, the budget amounts that ultimately got to Bush for his signature were in every case a reduction in the amount Obama and his party wanted to spend. Remember all the crying about Bush and his "draconian" budget cuts? Professor Mike sounds like a drunk blaming the bartender for not cutting him off sooner, or a gambler blaming the casino for taking his bets. It's the President's fault for not preventing the spending, not the Congress for actually, you know, spending.
But I'm convinced that regardless of logic & history, Obama will be elected, and with him will come a wave of Democrat greed and corruption that will hasten the pension fund & Social Security crash that McCain as Pres would only kick down the road with fixes.
Once that crash hits, dwarfing this one, we'll finally see some real federal reform, and Obama will join Jimmy Carter in the Presidential Hall of Lame.
Oh, and by the way, Mike Dunn - your exclamation point key is stuck. May want to get it looked at.
And if you really think "deregulation" caused our current financial problems, you need to ask for your money back on your education. Democrats voted down all attempts by Bush and McCain to tighten regs on Fannie May and the Community Reinvestment Act, the primary causes of the current crisis. And remember that it was the CRA that gave Obama his first big slurp at the federal teat, and he's been latched on like a piglet ever since. Chicago - Hog butcher to the world no more - more like hog breeder. If you think Chicago and Detroit are well run fiscally, you'll love what smart, deliberate Obama and his team will do to Washington
Warren Buffet, The Sage of Omaha, who told investors earlier this year to short the dollar (how's that working out?) is not the only financial advisor Obama has. As the meltdown saga continues to unravel, we'll hear more about Obama advisors Raines and Johnson, and their roles in the feeding frenzy at Fannie Mae.
Take a second look before you vote, Professor.
Posted by: JBD at
06:21 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1106 words, total size 8 kb.
October 04, 2008
YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT HE'S DANGEROUS - TO TROUT
Here's what Dick "The Most Dangerous Vice-President in the History of Joe Biden's Mouth" Cheney does for relaxation. Undisclosed location, indeed.
Oh you didn't know this? And he's been a heartbeat away from being the most powerful man in the world for how long now? If Obama did anything anywhere near this cool and down-to-earth, CNN would do a miniseries on it.
Oh you didn't know this? And he's been a heartbeat away from being the most powerful man in the world for how long now? If Obama did anything anywhere near this cool and down-to-earth, CNN would do a miniseries on it.
Posted by: JBD at
10:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.
OBAMA'S VIEW OF MCCAIN
Scary man! Bad words! Evil helpers! AGGGHHH!
Posted by: JBD at
10:27 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.
HOWSABOUT WE BUILD OUR OIL REFINERIES UNDERGROUND?
These people are so goddamn smart.
From nextbigfuture.com via Instapundit.
From nextbigfuture.com via Instapundit.
Posted by: JBD at
09:15 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.
SEE WHAT HE DID THERE?
KC Jones stands in front of the faux brick wall, taps the mic and says:
Try the veal, please tip your waitress.
The best line I heard about Sarah Palin during the frenzied orgy of chauvinist condescension and gutter-crawling journalistic intrusion that greeted her nomination for vice-president a week ago came from someone who knows a thing or two about Alaska.
"What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?"
"One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.
"The other kills her own food."
"What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?"
"One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.
"The other kills her own food."
Try the veal, please tip your waitress.
Posted by: JBD at
09:08 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.
JBD 4 MEE, SEE?
My cousin Mike Mc, taking time out from sorting his Obama holy cards, asks the question on everybody's mind tonight:
My response (quoting The Great Gonzo): THE WORLD WILL NEVER KNOW! Sensing a soft spot, Mike channels his inner Letterman:
As for what JBD really stands for, those who know, know; those who don't, don't. Right, Chief?
And if it were somehow in my power, I'd host the Irish relatives monthly. Man, they are wonderful people.
Hi Jim,
A question about your blog...what's the JBD stand for?
- Mike -
A question about your blog...what's the JBD stand for?
- Mike -
My response (quoting The Great Gonzo): THE WORLD WILL NEVER KNOW! Sensing a soft spot, Mike channels his inner Letterman:
Hmmm.
That leaves it open to interpretation, I guess. Hope it's not too crass but knowing my political views being at odds with your respected views, could it be:
Just Been Duped
No...couldn't be. Just kidding Mr. Jim. Keep smiling...come visit us on one of your S Diego business trips. Thanks again for hosting the Irish Reunion!
- Cousin Mike -
So, are you in love with S. Palin or just in like?
You're a riot, Norton. Har de har har har. Let's see if you're still laughing when Obama forces you to connect your propeller beanie to the electrical grid.That leaves it open to interpretation, I guess. Hope it's not too crass but knowing my political views being at odds with your respected views, could it be:
Just Been Duped
No...couldn't be. Just kidding Mr. Jim. Keep smiling...come visit us on one of your S Diego business trips. Thanks again for hosting the Irish Reunion!
- Cousin Mike -
So, are you in love with S. Palin or just in like?
As for what JBD really stands for, those who know, know; those who don't, don't. Right, Chief?
And if it were somehow in my power, I'd host the Irish relatives monthly. Man, they are wonderful people.
Posted by: JBD at
08:44 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 191 words, total size 2 kb.
October 03, 2008
LITTLE BIG MAN IN PHOTOSHOP LAND
The Goose sends this one our way - Manbabies!
Some are so creepily good, you have to look twice to believe it.
The InterTubes - you know I love 'em.
Some are so creepily good, you have to look twice to believe it.
The InterTubes - you know I love 'em.
Posted by: JBD at
07:19 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
BIDEN'S DEBATE WHOPPERS - HAVING IT HIS WAY
Biden's debate assertions vs. actual truth. I've seen some lists with a dozen more, but these are the ones McCain's campaign came up with, so they are probably unquestionably wrong. A pretty poor record. Had Palin had even one lie as big as any of these, she would have been hammered mercilessly.
Here's a nice little breakdown of what Biden said last night about McCain's health care proposals, and what the proposal actually says.
The McCain program sounds pretty good to me. One benefit not stated (that I've seen) is that the cost to business of administering the existing system would disappear. In my experience, the cost and hassle of maintaining employee benefits is significant, sometimes onerous, and always not what the company does for a living!
Imagine if your company had to buy and manage an insurance program for, say, groceries, or clothes, for everybody in the company. Crazy, right? Absolutely no way to deal fairly and efficiently with all the variables and complexities of personal taste, family sizes, individual needs, etc.
But that's what happens now with health insurance, except that it would actually be easier doing something like groceries, since there is no grocery equivalent to the large unavoidable costs associated with major surgery or a broken bone. That is the real role of insurance - to restore your covered losses, not to manage your expenditures.
Read the McCain plan. It's good.
Here's a nice little breakdown of what Biden said last night about McCain's health care proposals, and what the proposal actually says.
The McCain program sounds pretty good to me. One benefit not stated (that I've seen) is that the cost to business of administering the existing system would disappear. In my experience, the cost and hassle of maintaining employee benefits is significant, sometimes onerous, and always not what the company does for a living!
Imagine if your company had to buy and manage an insurance program for, say, groceries, or clothes, for everybody in the company. Crazy, right? Absolutely no way to deal fairly and efficiently with all the variables and complexities of personal taste, family sizes, individual needs, etc.
But that's what happens now with health insurance, except that it would actually be easier doing something like groceries, since there is no grocery equivalent to the large unavoidable costs associated with major surgery or a broken bone. That is the real role of insurance - to restore your covered losses, not to manage your expenditures.
Read the McCain plan. It's good.
Posted by: JBD at
07:13 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.
October 02, 2008
SEE?! I TOLD YOU! THE OZONE HOLE IS ... (WAIT FOR IT) ... NATURAL!!!
Consider: we let a couple of low-budget UC Irvine scientists panic us into getting rid of the cheapest, cleanest, most non-toxic and energy efficient refrigerant in the world, and for what? To protect the holy ozone layer, which, according to those boneheads, was being destroyed by chlorofluorocarbons. I remember it vividly - I was a freshman Anteater that year.
Well, guess what. The ozone "hole" is a natural phenomenon, caused by the interaction of cosmic rays and the earth's magnetic fields.
And even better, like I reported before, it's most likely that his same mechanism is part of the sun's effect on our climate, causing warming and cooling.
Gee, really? The sun? Affects our climate? And carbon, from whatever source, has practically no effect?
Then why in the hell are we planning to further cripple our already punchdrunk economy with carbon caps and energy restrictions?
I feel the tide is finally turning. By this time next year, we'll be feeding Al Gore to the poor.
Well, guess what. The ozone "hole" is a natural phenomenon, caused by the interaction of cosmic rays and the earth's magnetic fields.
And even better, like I reported before, it's most likely that his same mechanism is part of the sun's effect on our climate, causing warming and cooling.
Gee, really? The sun? Affects our climate? And carbon, from whatever source, has practically no effect?
Then why in the hell are we planning to further cripple our already punchdrunk economy with carbon caps and energy restrictions?
I feel the tide is finally turning. By this time next year, we'll be feeding Al Gore to the poor.
Posted by: JBD at
10:31 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.
PALIN DELIVERS SWEET POISON WHILE MCCAIN RACKS HIS SHOTGUN
Sarah Palin's performance at tonight's debate will help McCain pull back even in the polls. Biden did fine, told some whoppers, was polished and smooth, just what you would expect from a guy who is on every Sunday show producer's speed dial. He literally does this for a living - spouting 90-second partisan soundbites on TV.
But Palin refused to play his game, and just stuck to her job, which was to:
So why did she start off by avoiding the easiest of pointed retorts re: the cause of the financial crisis, letting Biden hammer away at Bush, while she stayed safely with the "greedy Wall Street fatcats" line. What about the Democrats bloody hands in the whole sub-prime/Fannie Mae debacle? Simply, she was keeping McCain's powder dry - Ace explains it all.
I think this is absolutely correct, and very canny, and if pulled off correctly, will leave Obama and his media supporters no time to dig back out of the hole before election day, no matter how many times they recycle their lies.
This line of thinking makes total sense to me. McCain holds back on the haymakers until after the bailout crisis plays out, and Congress has recessed for the election, so Pelosi, Reid, Dodd and Frank can't walk over to the nearest media enabler and immediately spin against McCain's attack. They'll be too busy defending their own seats back home to spend any time helping Obama, and many will probably even distance themselves once McCain's slugs start drawing blood.
And remember, Obama and his team - and the mainstream media - tend to panic and over-react when the polls and facts start to turn against them. Like the backstabbing rabblerouser at the back of the crowd who finally gets called out by the beleaguered good guy and righteously fingered for being the real cause of all the trouble, the angry stares of the betrayed mob soon turn him into a babbling fool, and he retreats in disgrace.
This strategy will also help the down-ticket GOP races, allowing the true-blue Republicans to shout "We were right on Iraq, we were right on Fannie/Freddie, so it's time to sack the 'Crats who tried to quit, and who tanked the economy in the 18-months they've had control!"
I still think Obama is going to win, and he should if he 1) makes sure his campaign and supporters stay cool when McCain drops his senatorial gentility and turns back into the Naval aviator headed "downtown" for Haiphong Harbor, and 2) does not get flustered during the last two debates.
2) he can do. 1) will be another story.
UPDATE: When I say "racking his shotgun" I don't mean putting it on a gun rack, I mean racking the action - one of the most unmistakable and recognizable sounds in the world. Sarah's comments today make it more likely that McCain will follow suit and start spraying the Obama campaign with double-ought buckshot.
Or maybe he's more of a Lucas McCain.
more...
But Palin refused to play his game, and just stuck to her job, which was to:
- pitch the McCain line (think she said 'maverick' often enough - like maybe she got $500 every time she said it?); and,
- destroy the "stupid hick" meme launched by the Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson hit pieces.
So why did she start off by avoiding the easiest of pointed retorts re: the cause of the financial crisis, letting Biden hammer away at Bush, while she stayed safely with the "greedy Wall Street fatcats" line. What about the Democrats bloody hands in the whole sub-prime/Fannie Mae debacle? Simply, she was keeping McCain's powder dry - Ace explains it all.
I think this is absolutely correct, and very canny, and if pulled off correctly, will leave Obama and his media supporters no time to dig back out of the hole before election day, no matter how many times they recycle their lies.
This line of thinking makes total sense to me. McCain holds back on the haymakers until after the bailout crisis plays out, and Congress has recessed for the election, so Pelosi, Reid, Dodd and Frank can't walk over to the nearest media enabler and immediately spin against McCain's attack. They'll be too busy defending their own seats back home to spend any time helping Obama, and many will probably even distance themselves once McCain's slugs start drawing blood.
And remember, Obama and his team - and the mainstream media - tend to panic and over-react when the polls and facts start to turn against them. Like the backstabbing rabblerouser at the back of the crowd who finally gets called out by the beleaguered good guy and righteously fingered for being the real cause of all the trouble, the angry stares of the betrayed mob soon turn him into a babbling fool, and he retreats in disgrace.
This strategy will also help the down-ticket GOP races, allowing the true-blue Republicans to shout "We were right on Iraq, we were right on Fannie/Freddie, so it's time to sack the 'Crats who tried to quit, and who tanked the economy in the 18-months they've had control!"
I still think Obama is going to win, and he should if he 1) makes sure his campaign and supporters stay cool when McCain drops his senatorial gentility and turns back into the Naval aviator headed "downtown" for Haiphong Harbor, and 2) does not get flustered during the last two debates.
2) he can do. 1) will be another story.
UPDATE: When I say "racking his shotgun" I don't mean putting it on a gun rack, I mean racking the action - one of the most unmistakable and recognizable sounds in the world. Sarah's comments today make it more likely that McCain will follow suit and start spraying the Obama campaign with double-ought buckshot.
Or maybe he's more of a Lucas McCain.
more...
Posted by: JBD at
09:44 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 548 words, total size 4 kb.
90kb generated in CPU 0.0271, elapsed 0.0794 seconds.
31 queries taking 0.0633 seconds, 82 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
31 queries taking 0.0633 seconds, 82 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.