The Sins of John McCain

The Radical Moderate was granted unique access to Sen. John McCain's synapses last night. The following is an unedited recording of the thoughts that passed along the neuron trail.

Ahhh, I need another bourbon. Been battling this thing for what, two years now, and what do I have to show for it? This pissant Obama, nothing more than a junior senator is kicking my ass all over the country. What the hell has Obama ever done in his whole life? Another frikin lawyer. A community organizer. what the hell is a "community organizer"? How many years was he a state senator in Illinois? seven, five? and the damned people make out like he is frikin' Abraham Lincoln. makes me sick. He hasn't done shit. I've been a Senator for twenty six years. Twenty six years! I worked with Teddy Kennedy on immigration reform. Got the Republicans pissed at that. I worked with that liberal Paul Feingold on campaign finance reform. they call it the McCain-Feingold Bill. Got everyone pissed at me for that. Told the Republicans that global warming was real. Got laughed at for that from the shit kickers. That's what being a maverick is all about. That's the real deal. And they all make it out like I'm just channeling some old TV show. Now this pissant comes out of the senate cloakroom like some frikin' saviour and everything that I've done gets trashed.

Steve Schmitt. I'll kick his ass good when this thing is over. I wanted Joe Lieberman as my VP but he said No, the base wouldn't allow it and we could pick up women who would have voted for Hillary. I should have told him to fuck the base cause Joe was a guy I trusted. And women who voted for Hillary weren't going to vote for me anyhow. I worked with Joe for years, traveled the world's danger spots with him. He always covered my six. If I had picked Joe they all would have seen I was serious about solving all of our problems. I would have been hero, reaching across party lines to make this country great again. But I listened to that asshole Schmitt, and I wound up with this babe moose hunter who talks in tongues and is half a step away from being indicted in Alaska for some shit she pulled there. She even scares the shit out of me. I should have listened to my heart and picked Joe. Damn, did I screw the pooch on that one.

I can't fuckin' believe this Obama guy. He hasn't done shit. I've given my life to this country. My father gave his life for this country. My grandfather dedicated his life for this country. And this guy comes out of nowhere and says "change" and the people have a frikin' orgasm.

Bush. George Fuckin' Bush. His ass gets kicked, too. Not only is he totally incapable of fighting a war, but he has that other asshole, Rumsfield, as his SecDef. One's a born idiot, the other just acts like one. Boy, did they make Iraq a total cluster fuck. When they finally put together the surge, the Arabs saw we were serious and started to come around. But that Rummy wanted to fight the war on the cheap and we almost got our heads handed to us. And Bush, that idiot, has that attention deficit disorder thing. He couldn't leave well enough alone and take care of Osama and the Taliban first before overextending us to Iraq. Warfighters! Shit! And that Bush is a lying son of a bitch too. Said I had an illegitimate black kid in 2000 in South Carolina and that cost me the primary there. He knew I adopted a kid from Mother Theresa's orphanage, but the gutless wonder lied about it. He says he was a fighter pilot. My ass! No fighter pilot would dream of giving up a chance to strap into a jet, but this guy skated his duty. And then he gets to be president, and he didn't even win the popular vote. Then I kiss his ass for eight years to get credibility with the party. But when I hugged that son of a bitch on stage... damn.. I kissed his ass for eight years. Voted for his stupid programs 90% of the time cause I still wanted to be president..and I can't even get him on stage with me because of the shit storm that he is leaving. What a laugh. And now that things started to look good in Iraq after the surge, cause I was right, it gets buried in the back pages while Bushie has to fuck up the economy and give the Dems the issues that they are strongest at. Damn, the Vietnamese tortured me, but Bush fucked me twice! And what's worse is, I let him. Man, I just bent over and asked for it. I really was a maverick in 2000 and loved my "Straight Talk Express". But I sold my soul for my chance in 2008. For what?

Pennsylvania! I gotta beat him in Pennsylvania! The polls close early enough there and if I can get Pennsylvania, it won't look like such a sure thing. I gotta stop the avalanche in Pennsylvania. I'll campaign like hell in the middle of that state. Even Carville says it's like Alabama and I sure ain't gonna lose Alabama! Then I'll take Florida and Ohio and Missouri. I'll go for Colorado. Shit, three days to go. This kid is killing me.

Ahhh, damn. I need another bourbon. Three days.

One, One and One, One and Two, One and Three....

I'm just contemplating some numbers, courtesy of the Vote-Masters web site(click on the yellow map to the right)and using his algorithm, which uses poll results for a one wee trailing period.

My assumptions: the margin of error for these polls is approximately 3%; to be truly outside the margin of error one must have a lead of twice the margin of error; the so-called Bradley Effect, which states that minority candidates receive higher poll numbers than actual votes, has not been proved.

Therefore, I believe Sen. Obama has a safe lead, defined as equal to or greater than 10% in the following states: WA, OR, CA, IA, WI, IL, MI, PA, NY, VT, NH, MA, RI, CT, NJ, DE ,MD, and Washington, D.C., for a total of 241 safe Electoral Votes.

Using a definition of a probable lead, that being greater than 6%, but less, than 10%, Sen. Obama has leads that fit that criterion in NM, MN, and WV. That gives hime and additional 22 Electoral Votes. I do not have full confidence in those WV polls due to the known difficulty of conducting polls in that state, so eliminating WV's 5 EV's, add another 17 to Obama's 241 and you have 258 EV's for him. He needs 12 more.

CO shows Obama with a steady lead over time and he currently leads by 6 percentage points there. If you are a betting person, put CO's 9 EV's in the Obama column. Likewise for MO, with 11 EV's which currently shows a 6 point Obama lead, but considering that state's voting history in presidential elections, I have little confidence in those numbers and neither should Obama. However, those states could put him over the top, but don't count on it.

I believe we will know the winner of the 2008 Presidential election when we get the results of the states east of the Mississippi.

If Obama now focuses his efforts on the traditional battle ground states of OH and FL, as well as VA, he might just make history of a most exquisite sort.

Ethnics Politics at its Worst!!!

Doin' the Pakistani Fatwa

The fine folks at Abu Muqawama share this little tidbit on the mix of religion and politics in Placid Pakistan:

In crazy Islamicist news, President Zardari has been the target of a fatwa issued by Maulana Abdul Ghafar of Islamabad's Lal Masjid. What was it that provoked Ghafar’s ire? Was it Zardari’s shady business practices, allegations of corruption or money laundering? No…it was Sarah Palin. Troy could not make this stuff up. Apparently Zardari's indecent gestures (shaking hands), filthy remarks (saying he’d like to hug her) and repeated praise of a non-Muslim lady wearing a short skirt is not only “un-Islamic but also unbecoming of a head of state of a Muslim country.” After getting that off his chest, Ghafar added a demand that the military operations in the tribal areas be ceased since they are “creating hatred amongst the general public against the Pakistan army.” Unsurprisingly, Ghafar is a close relative of the fanatic Red Mosque cleric Maujlana Abdul Rashid Ghazi, who was killed by security forces during Operation Silence in July 2007.

However, more to teh point is their assessment on changes in top level ISI personnel and what it might mean for the fight against the Taliban:

Pakistan Army chief, Gen. Kayani, has appointed Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha as director general of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Prior to his appointment, Pasha was Director-General of Military Operations, overseeing the Army’s operations in the NWFP and FATA. Pasha is succeeding Lt. Gen. Nadeem Taj, a relative of Musharraf’s, who was viewed by many to be a key figure in the “double game” Pakistan has been playing with the U.S. on the one hand and the militants in Tribal areas on the other. So, what does this change mean for the U.S. and operations in Afghanistan? Reports indicate that the U.S. has been pushing for Taj’s replacement—believing that intelligence shared with the ISI by Americans was passed to the Taliban. What will Pasha’s appointment mean for the Pakistan Army’s approach to militancy and terrorism? What will it mean for US-Pakistani relations? After a week-long hiatus, the U.S. attacked another target in Pakistan's tribal areas, while Pakistani security forces are still under orders to open fire if American forces attempt to cross the Pakistan/Afghan border. Finally, it is worth noting that in making this appointment, along with that of the new corps commanders in Rawalpindi, Bahawalpur and Karachi, General Kayani (who led the ISI from 2004-2007) now has a number of individuals in key offices who owe their position to him and not to Musharraf.

"Basics" My A**

The marketing gurus have got to be kidding to come up with this product. And they call it "Back to Basics"? How about a frying pan? Anyhow, I won't be buying it until it also takes care of my shower, shaves me and brushes my teeth.

I'm Perverse

I admit it. I almost, actually, really want Sarah Palin elected Vice President so that I can watch Tina Fey make fun of her for at least four years. OK. That might be asking the country to give up a bit too much in order to humor me.

In the alternative, here is a link to Daily Kos where you can watch Saturday Night Live's Tina Fey debate "Joe Biden". For safety's sake, please wear your seat belt s0 that you don't fall on the floor from laughing.

RAILROADED!

From the Daily Kos here.

Excellent!

Great work Aden Nak for this piece!

Trust me! Check out this site.

Palin-Biden 2

Alex writes:

Alex said...

"minor victory for palin"

-- Disagree. Without even analyzing what she said [including supporting giving the VP MORE power than under Cheney], she's going to come out of it still looking like an imbecile, albeit one that memorizes talking points incredibly well. This is important for the undecideds, who respond to warm fuzzies more than substance.

However, with all the manic down home-isms, the winking, and the mindless "maverick" claims she came off as more a caricature than a candidate taking the evening seriously.

Biden, on the other hand, performed fantastically given the unique nature of the opponent. He seemed authentic, respectful, and knew when to shut up (for the most part).

This Palin performance won't win over a significant amount of the undecideds that will win the election.
October 2, 2008 11:56 PM

Palin-Biden

A friend writes:

I found this on MSNBC's comment board.

Watched the "debate" with my husband who is a McCain supporter. We
agreed to offer no comments while it was on. After about 25 minutes, he
muttered, "I can't take it any more," and left. I stayed through it all
and all I could think of was, she really IS a post turtle. You drive
down a country road and see a turtle on a post; you know it didn't get
there by itself; it doesn't belong up there; it doesn't know what to do
now that it's there; and you wonder about the guy who put it there.

Best of the Worst- The 2008 Ig Noble Prizes!

They're here! The 2008 Ig Noble Prizes were handed out last night at Harvard. Diet Coke as a Spermicide? Strippers make more money when they are ovulating? All true, according to teh best of the wrost research.

Here are the winners:

The 2008 Ig Nobel Prize Winners



NUTRITION PRIZE. Massimiliano Zampini of the University of Trento, Italy and Charles Spence of Oxford University, UK, for electronically modifying the sound of a potato chip to make the person chewing the chip believe it to be crisper and fresher than it really is.
REFERENCE: "The Role of Auditory Cues in Modulating the Perceived Crispness and Staleness of Potato Chips," Massimiliano Zampini and Charles Spence, Journal of Sensory Studies, vol. 19, October 2004, pp. 347-63.

PEACE PRIZE. The Swiss Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) and the citizens of Switzerland for adopting the legal principle that plants have dignity.
REFERENCE: "The Dignity of Living Beings With Regard to Plants. Moral Consideration of Plants for Their Own Sake"
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Urs Thurnherr, member of the committee.

ARCHAEOLOGY PRIZE. Astolfo G. Mello Araujo and José Carlos Marcelino of Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, for measuring how the course of history, or at least the contents of an archaeological dig site, can be scrambled by the actions of a live armadillo.
REFERENCE: "The Role of Armadillos in the Movement of Archaeological Materials: An Experimental Approach," Astolfo G. Mello Araujo and José Carlos Marcelino, Geoarchaeology, vol. 18, no. 4, April 2003, pp. 433-60.

BIOLOGY PRIZE. Marie-Christine Cadiergues, Christel Joubert,, and Michel Franc of Ecole Nationale Veterinaire de Toulouse, France for discovering that the fleas that live on a dog can jump higher than the fleas that live on a cat.
REFERENCE: "A Comparison of Jump Performances of the Dog Flea, Ctenocephalides canis (Curtis, 1826) and the Cat Flea, Ctenocephalides felis felis (Bouche, 1835)," M.C. Cadiergues, C. Joubert, and M. Franc, Veterinary Parasitology, vol. 92, no. 3, October 1, 2000, pp. 239-41.

MEDICINE PRIZE. Dan Ariely of Duke University, USA, for demonstrating that high-priced fake medicine is more effective than low-priced fake medicine.
REFERENCE: "Commercial Features of Placebo and Therapeutic Efficacy," Rebecca L. Waber; Baba Shiv; Ziv Carmon; Dan Ariely, Journal of the American Medical Association, March 5, 2008; 299: 1016-1017.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Dan Ariely

COGNITIVE SCIENCE PRIZE. Toshiyuki Nakagaki of Hokkaido University, Japan, Hiroyasu Yamada of Nagoya, Japan, Ryo Kobayashi of Hiroshima University, Atsushi Tero of Presto JST, Akio Ishiguro of Tohoku University, and Ágotá Tóth of the University of Szeged, Hungary, for discovering that slime molds can solve puzzles.
REFERENCE: "Intelligence: Maze-Solving by an Amoeboid Organism," Toshiyuki Nakagaki, Hiroyasu Yamada, and Ágota Tóth, Nature, vol. 407, September 2000, p. 470.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Toshiyuki Nakagaki, Ryo Kobayashi, Atsushi Tero

ECONOMICS PRIZE. Geoffrey Miller, Joshua Tybur and Brent Jordan of the University of New Mexico, USA, for discovering that a professional lap dancer's ovulatory cycle affects her tip earnings.
REFERENCE: "Ovulatory Cycle Effects on Tip Earnings by Lap Dancers: Economic Evidence for Human Estrus?" Geoffrey Miller, Joshua M. Tybur, Brent D. Jordan, Evolution and Human Behavior, vol. 28, 2007, pp. 375-81.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Geoffrey Miller and Brent Jordan

PHYSICS PRIZE. Dorian Raymer of the Ocean Observatories Initiative at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, USA, and Douglas Smith of the University of California, San Diego, USA, for proving mathematically that heaps of string or hair or almost anything else will inevitably tangle themselves up in knots.
REFERENCE: "Spontaneous Knotting of an Agitated String," Dorian M. Raymer and Douglas E. Smith, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 104, no. 42, October 16, 2007, pp. 16432-7.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Dorian Raymer

CHEMISTRY PRIZE. Sharee A. Umpierre of the University of Puerto Rico, Joseph A. Hill of The Fertility Centers of New England (USA), Deborah J. Anderson of Boston University School of Medicine and Harvard Medical School (USA), for discovering that Coca-Cola is an effective spermicide, and to Chuang-Ye Hong of Taipei Medical University (Taiwan), C.C. Shieh, P. Wu, and B.N. Chiang (all of Taiwan) for discovering that it is not.
REFERENCE: "Effect of 'Coke' on Sperm Motility," Sharee A. Umpierre, Joseph A. Hill, and Deborah J. Anderson, New England Journal of Medicine, 1985, vol. 313, no. 21, p. 1351.
REFERENCE: "The Spermicidal Potency of Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola," C.Y. Hong, C.C. Shieh, P. Wu, and B.N. Chiang, Human Toxicology, vol. 6, no. 5, September 1987, pp. 395-6. [NOTE: THE JOURNAL LATER CHANGED ITS NAME. NOW CALLED "Human & experimental toxicology"]
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Deborah Anderson, and C.Y. Hong's daughter Wan Hong

LITERATURE PRIZE. David Sims of Cass Business School. London, UK, for his lovingly written study "You Bastard: A Narrative Exploration of the Experience of Indignation within Organizations."
REFERENCE: "You Bastard: A Narrative Exploration of the Experience of Indignation within Organizations," David Sims, Organization Studies, vol. 26, no. 11, 2005, pp. 1625-40.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: David Sims

Biden-Palin Debate

Sarah Palin was prepped within an inch of her life and it showed. While nothing can overcome the ignorance she exhibited in her carious television appearances during the past few weeks, she made no major mistakes. Since prior to the debate the bar for her performance was set so low she would have had to walk onstage backwards and naked to make what would have been considered a major error. The fact is Palin made no major error.

For his part, Biden was in a difficult position. He had to approach Palin carefully: attack but not be a brute, talk but not be a gas bag. He accomplished both of his objectives.

In ordinary circumstances this would have been a draw, but since Palin was expected to perform like a drooling idiot, and didn't, the final score was a minor victory for Palin.

More Fun in A Totalitarian State-Life in China

Like all totalitarian states, the Chinese government fears all information that it doesn't control. One of the greatest sources of information today is , of course the internet and the Chinese government does its best to monitor and control its citizens.

Here's a little item on China and fear.

If you're an authoritarian government that closely monitors your citizens' online communications, here's a tip from Ars Technica: tell your minions not to store the logs on publicly-accessible servers. This is exactly what China has done with information pulled from the TOM-Skype network, leading a handful of researchers to discover that China is logging text messages and analyze the country's behavior with regards to the online monitoring and censorship of citizens. In a joint report between ONI Asia and the Information Welfare Monitor, author Nart Villeneuve details evidence that China not only monitors and logs text chat, but also targets specific users for further monitoring.
Related Stories

The report published yesterday, titled "BREACHING TRUST: An analysis of surveillance and security practices on China's TOM-Skype platform" (PDF), explains that full chat text messages from TOM-Skype users were found on insecure, publicly-accessible web servers along with the encryption key required to decrypt the data (TOM Online is Skype's operating partner in China). This—along with "millions of records containing personal information" such as IP address, usernames, and landline phone numbers—were stored along with additional data detailing Skype users outside of China who have communicated with TOM-Skype users in China.

"The captured messages contain specific keywords relating to sensitive political topics such as Taiwan independence, the Falun Gong, and political opposition to the Communist Party of China," reads the report. Villeneuve explains that the surveillance doesn't stop there, either. According to the groups' analysis, many of the captured messages contain content that falls outside of typically-censored words or topics, "suggesting that there may be criteria, such as specific usernames, that determine whether messages are captured by the system." Translation: If you're the type who regularly talks about unapproved topics on Skype, you may be flagged for further monitoring of everything you say.

Sarah Loves the Supremes!(They had Big Hits in the 60s, Right?)

She Gets All The News She Needs From the Weather Report

Problems With George?

And according to this in The Hill some don't like the Soros Solution:

Robert Shapiro, chairman of Sonecon, an economic advisory firm, who served as Commerce Department undersecretary during the Clinton administration, raised questions about Soros’s proposal.

He said that if the government bought stock in troubled firms, a problem would arise regarding how Uncle Sam would be represented as a shareholder.

“How does the government vote the shares?” he asked. “It puts them in a potential conflict of interest. Regulatory interests may hurt the bottom line.”

Why Dems Balked

Democrat Congressman Brad Sherman of California had his reasons for voting "no" on teh bailout, and he circulated this influential memo to fellow Dems:

TAXPAYERS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO RECOUP ANY OF THE COSTS -- Brad Sherman 9/29/08

We know that the Bailout Bill allows million-dollar-a-month salaries to executives of bailed-out firms, and it allows hundreds of billions to be used to buy toxic assets currently held by foreign investors. But we are told: "don't worry, this $700 billion bill won't cost us anything. We will get it all back next decade through a revenue bill."

I. Section 134 of the Bailout Bill merely says that the President must submit a revenue bill to Congress in 2013 that recoups from the financial industry the taxpayers' net losses.

a. If the President has any revenue ideas he actually likes, he would submit them to us anyway.
b. If the President submits revenue ideas only because he is forced to by Section 134, he will send it to us with a note saying that he believes they are bad for the country, and reserves the right to veto.
c. The Bailout Bill does not automatically enact any revenue increases, nor protect a revenue bill from filibuster or veto.

II. Congress is unlikely to pass a tax increase bill of hundreds of billions of dollars in 2013.

a. Tax increase bills are anathema to many.
b. 41 Senators can block the plan. We're giving Wall Street enough money to hire 4100 lobbyists.
c. In recent years, Wall Street has easily defeated every attempt to close every loophole that they exploit, no matter how pernicious-even the abusive use of Cayman Island tax havens by hedge fund managers, who thereby pay zero tax.

III. Any tax on the financial industry would make the good banks pay a huge tax so we can recoup what we gave to the bad banks.

a. Section 134 says the tax will be on "the financial industry." It does not provide for a tax on just those firms that received bailout payments.
b. A bank that doesn't get a bailout payment still pays the tax.
c. Community banks and perhaps credit unions will also be subject to the tax, so we can recoup what we gave to Wall Street.

IV. It is impossible to draft a tax that hits only those firms that received bailout payments, and even more impossible to draft one that taxes each bank in proportion to how much money we lost on its toxic assets.

a. There are no provisions to even keep track of losses on each asset purchased as it is managed over the years. Assets purchased from several
banks will be pooled, managed, and sold together, and we can never know how much we lost on assets purchased from any one bank.
b. If three banks in the year 2013 have the same income and size and operations, they will all pay the same tax-even if one got no bailout payments, a second got a million dollars, and a third got a billion dollars.
c. Many bailed-out firms won't exist in 2013.

1. Some will go under.
2. Some bailed-out firms are only shell companies. Example: Assume the Bank of Shanghai has $30 billion in toxic assets. It will sell these to the tiny subsidiary it has incorporated in California. The subsidiary will then sell these to the Treasury in 2009, and will be dissolved long before 2013.
3. Many bailed-out firms will still be unprofitable in 2013.
4. Some bailed-out firms will move offshore before 2013.

d. The whole purpose of the bill is to improve the balance sheets of the bailed-out firms. If particular bailed-out firms owe us the money they receive, they would have to list this as a liability, and the bill would fail to improve their balance sheets.

In 2013 we will not pass a tax bill that imposes hundreds of billions of dollars of taxes on the financial services industry, including those banks that got no bailouts, community banks, and credit unions. A tax bill imposed only on those entities that got bailout payments is impossible to draft, and contrary to the purposes of the Bill.

If it were easy to pass a bill to recoup hundreds of billions of dollars through taxes to be imposed in 2013 and thereafter, then provisions imposing such taxes would be in today's bill.

Wall Street gets their money now, and we get it back never.

When George Soros Talks-- Everybody-Especially Dems-Listen

George Soros is not a big fan of the Hank Paulson bailout plan, even as tweaked by both the Democrats and the Republicans.

Take a look st this Financial Times op-ed piece. (Register free of charge at the FT website)

Soros states:

Instead of just purchasing troubled assets the bulk of the funds ought to be used to recapitalise the banking system. Funds injected at the equity level are more high-powered than funds used at the balance sheet level by a minimal factor of twelve - effectively giving the government $8,400bn to re-ignite the flow of credit. In practice, the effect would be even greater because the injection of government funds would also attract private capital. The result would be more economic recovery and the chance for taxpayers to profit from the recovery.

This is how it would work. The Treasury secretary would rely on bank examiners rather than delegate implementation of Tarp to Wall Street firms. The bank examiners would establish how much additional equity capital each bank needs in order to be properly capitalised according to existing capital requirements. If managements could not raise equity from the private sector they could turn to Tarp.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is the entire article.


Recapitalise the banking system

By George Soros

Published: October 1 2008 02:05 | Last updated: October 1 2008 02:05

The emergency legislation currently before Congress was ill-conceived – or more accurately, not conceived at all. As Congress tried to improve what Treasury originally requested, an amalgam plan has emerged that consists of Treasury’s original Troubled Asset Relief Programme (Tarp) and a quite different capital infusion programme in which the government invests and stabilises weakened banks and profits from the economy’s eventual improvement. The capital infusion approach will cost tax payers less in future years, and may even make money for them.

Two weeks ago the Treasury did not have a plan ready – that is why it had to ask for total discretion in spending the money. But the general idea was to bring relief to the banking system by relieving banks of their toxic securities and parking them in a government-owned fund so that they would not be dumped on the market at distressed prices. With the value of their investments stabilised, banks would then be able to raise equity capital.

The idea was fraught with difficulties. The toxic securities in question are not homogenous and in any auction process the sellers are liable to dump the dregs on to the government fund. Moreover, the scheme addresses only one half of the underlying problem – the lack of credit availability. It does very little to enable house owners to meet their mortgage obligations and it does not address the foreclosure problem. With house prices not yet at the bottom, if the government bids up the price of mortgage backed securities, the taxpayers are liable to loose; but if the government does not pay up, the banking system does not experience much relief and cannot attract equity capital from the private sector.

A scheme so heavily favouring Wall Street over Main Street was politically unacceptable. It was tweaked by the Democrats, who hold the upper hand, so that it penalises the financial institutions that seek to take advantage of it. The Republicans did not want to be left behind and imposed a requirement that the tendered securities should be insured against loss at the expense of the tendering institution. The rescue package as it is now constituted is an amalgam of multiple approaches. There is now a real danger that the asset purchase programme will not be fully utilised because of the onerous conditions attached to it.

Different focus

‘Tarp’s adverse consequences could be mitigated by using taxpayers’ funds more effectively. If Tarp invested in preference shares with warrants attached, private investors, including me, would jump at the opportunity’

Nevertheless, a rescue package was desperately needed and, in spite of its shortcomings, it would change the course of events. As late as last Monday, September 22, Treasury secretary Hank Paulson hoped to avoid using taxpayers’ money; that is why he allowed Lehman Brothers to fail. Tarp establishes the principle that public funds are needed and if the present programme does not work, other programmes will be instituted. We will have crossed the Rubicon.

Since Tarp was ill-conceived, it is liable to arouse a negative response from America’s creditors. They would see it as an attempt to inflate away the debt. The dollar is liable to come under renewed pressure and the government will have to pay more for its debt, especially at the long end. These adverse consequences could be mitigated by using taxpayers’ funds more effectively.

Instead of just purchasing troubled assets the bulk of the funds ought to be used to recapitalise the banking system. Funds injected at the equity level are more high-powered than funds used at the balance sheet level by a minimal factor of twelve - effectively giving the government $8,400bn to re-ignite the flow of credit. In practice, the effect would be even greater because the injection of government funds would also attract private capital. The result would be more economic recovery and the chance for taxpayers to profit from the recovery.

This is how it would work. The Treasury secretary would rely on bank examiners rather than delegate implementation of Tarp to Wall Street firms. The bank examiners would establish how much additional equity capital each bank needs in order to be properly capitalised according to existing capital requirements. If managements could not raise equity from the private sector they could turn to Tarp.

Tarp would invest in preference shares with warrants attached. The preference shares would carry a low coupon (say 5 per cent) so that banks would find it profitable to continue lending, but shareholders would pay a heavy price because they would be diluted by the warrants; they would be given the right, however, to subscribe on Tarp’s terms. The rights would be tradeable and the secretary of the Treasury would be instructed to set the terms so that the rights would have a positive value.

Private investors, including me, are likely to jump at the opportunity. The recapitalised banks would be allowed to increase their leverage, so they would resume lending. Limits on bank leverage could be imposed later, after the economy has recovered. If the funds were used in this way, the recapitalisation of the banking system could be achieved with less than $500bn of public funds.

A revised emergency legislation could also provide more help to homeowners. It could require the Treasury to provide cheap financing for mortgage securities whose terms have been renegotiated, based on the Treasury’s cost of borrowing. Mortgage service companies could be prohibited from charging fees on foreclosures, but they could expect the owners of the securities to provide incentives for renegotiation as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are already doing.

Banks deemed to be insolvent would not be eligible for recapitalization by the capital infusion programme, but would be taken over by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The FDIC would be recapitalised by $200bn as a temporary measure. FDIC, in turn could remove the $100,000 limit on insured deposits. A revision of the emergency legislation along these lines would be more equitable, have a better chance of success, and cost taxpayers less in the long run.

The writer is chairman of Soros Fund Management

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

$700 Billion And They Put You On The Day Shift

In all the talk about the proposed $700 Billion bailout of the finance industry, precious few words have been used to justify that amount of money. This quote from Forbes is more scary than any "Friday the 13th" movie:

"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."

In other words, the pulled the $700 Billion dollar figure out of their collective nether region.

You would have to be insane to construct a crisis management plan that was based entirely on a made-up number. Or you would have to consider the source. Allow me to engage in some political paranoia.

The hallmark of conservative political theory is that government is far too big and it needs to be pared down. One of the favorite tactics of conservatives is to stop funding programs they consider unnecessary. This prevents the conservatives from actually having to stand up to cut a program, instead they simply starve it to death. They call this tactic "Starve the Beast".

Now consider what might be going on in Karl Rove's mind. He knows that the polls are looking grim for McCain and the chance of a Republican being elected President in November are very slim. Rove knows that Democrats now control the House and Senate and that the Dems might achieve a veto proof Senate in November. There is no better way to prevent the Democrats from enacting their programs than to saddle them with a huge debt that will be cripple them for the next decade as the country struggles to pay off its collective mortgage.

Grover Norquist laughs. The people cry.

McCain Lies-- Oops, So Does Obama

Well, debate Number 1 is out of the way, so let's see what FactCheck.org has to say about the accuracy of the candidates' statements:

* Obama said McCain adviser Henry Kissinger backs talks with Iran “without preconditions,” but McCain disputed that. In fact, Kissinger did recently call for “high level” talks with Iran starting at the secretary of state level and said, “I do not believe that we can make conditions.” After the debate the McCain campaign issued a statement quoting Kissinger as saying he didn’t favor presidential talks with Iran.

* Obama denied voting for a bill that called for increased taxes on “people” making as little as $42,000 a year, as McCain accused him of doing. McCain was right, though only for single taxpayers. A married couple would have had to make $83,000 to be affected by the vote, and anyway no such increase is in Obama’s tax plan.

* McCain and Obama contradicted each other on what Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen said about troop withdrawals. Mullen said a time line for withdrawal could be “very dangerous” but was not talking specifically about “Obama’s plan,” as McCain maintained.

* McCain tripped up on one of his signature issues – special appropriation “earmarks.” He said they had “tripled in the last five years,” when in fact they have decreased sharply.

* Obama claimed Iraq “has” a $79 billion surplus. It once was projected to be as high as that. It’s now down to less than $60 billion.

* McCain repeated his overstated claim that the U.S. pays $700 billion a year for oil to hostile nations. Imports are running at about $536 billion this year, and a third of it comes from Canada, Mexico and the U.K.

* Obama said 95 percent of “the American people” would see a tax cut under his proposal. The actual figure is 81 percent of households.

* Obama mischaracterized an aspect of McCain’s health care plan, saying “employers” would be taxed on the value of health benefits provided to workers. Employers wouldn’t, but the workers would. McCain also would grant workers up to a $5,000 tax credit per family to cover health insurance.

* McCain misrepresented Obama's plan by claiming he'd be "handing the health care system over to the federal government." Obama would expand some government programs but would allow people to keep their current plans or chose from private ones, as well.

* McCain claimed Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower had drafted a letter of resignation from the Army to be sent in case the 1944 D-Day landing at Normandy turned out to be a failure. Ike prepared a letter taking responsibility, but he didn’t mention resigning.

Of course, all of the pundits were giving their take on the "debate", that Obama won or McCain won. But the pundits are doing what they do best, which is blowing smoke. First, the debate has to be seen for what it is- political theatre- and to see who can control the medium of television better. It all goes back to the famous Kennedy-Nixon debate of 1960. Nixon was ill with flu and he repeatedly wiped away visible sweat with his handkerchief while Kennedy appeared cool and collected. People who listened to the debate on radio thought Nixon won with his easy familiarity with facts. People who watched the debate on TV thoughts Kennedy won because he looked good.

In this debate, people were eager to see how the 70 year old McCain looked and acted when on the same stage as the 47 year old Obama. Would McCain appear to be on the edge of decrepitude compared to the cool, hip Obama? What were the prevailing images?

To this viewer, McCain more than held his own in the appearance department and he showed he could be a vigorous and engaged commander in chief. Obama, too presented an image of competence, although possibly a quart low in experience. What these two contenders presented, though were markedly different world views, with McCain more in line with a Kissinger-esque realpolitik, while Obama expressed more of an idealist-internationalist position.

The pundits adding up of forensic points and declaring who won or lost, who committed a gaffe or who had the better line is totally worthless. The debate served a valuable function in its capacity to display the real and important differences in the candidates world views, as well as a demonstration of their control over their own images and the power of TV. The real winners of the debate were the viewers.

Like Lipstick on a Pig- Oh, What the Hell, How about a Full Makeover?

Click on this little item to see what some hockey moms think of Sarah Palin. Hint: it ain't pretty!

Obama's Issue

Just as the Russian invasion of Georgia was an issue that highlighted John McCain's perceived strength's, an issue has developed that falls into Obama's lap: the economy.

A CBS/NYTIMES poll, here, states:

(CBS) Nearly half of registered voters say "the economy and jobs" is the most important issue in their decision about whom to support for president, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds.

Forty-eight percent of these voters cited "the economy and jobs," an increase of eight points from one month ago. That's more than 30 percentage points higher than the second most cited issue, "terrorism and national security," cited by 14 percent of registered voters. Another ten percent pointed to "gas prices and energy," while an equal number pointed to health care. Just 8 percent of registered voters cited the war in Iraq.

The poll was conducted between September 12th and 16th, a period of days that was witness to the collapse of Lehman Brothers - the largest bankruptcy in the history of the country - followed by the largest one-day stock market plunge in seven years.

Americans have a slightly more optimistic view of the economy than they did a month ago, but they remain extremely pessimistic. Only 22 percent of Americans say the condition of the national economy is even somewhat good, and six in 10 think the economy is getting worse, not better. About a third of all Americans say they are worse off now than four years ago, and one in five say they are falling behind financially.

Barack Obama rates slightly higher than John McCain in voter confidence in handling the economy, though most voters are at least somewhat confident in both candidates. Sixty percent of voters are very or somewhat confident in Obama's ability to handle the economy, while 53 percent say the same of McCain. Forty-six percent say they are not too confident or not at all confident in McCain, while 39 percent have that opinion of Obama.

Thirty-nine percent of Americans describe the state of the economy as "very bad," down two points from August. Sixty-one percent say it is getting worse, up three points from two months ago.(emphasis TRM)

Of course no one knows the events that will unfurl during the next 48 days before the election, but each side has claimed an area of expertise. Come November 4th , will the prevailing issue be the economy and jobs, or national security? Answer that question and you will be able to predict this year's winner.

McCain's Mistake?

John McCain has disarmed himself. The Arizona republican has always claimed that experience was a critical factor in choosing the next president, and by gum, he was the guy with experience. However, by picking a VP who has less political experience than a New York City co-op president, he has taken away his own most potent weapon.

As CQ politics puts it here:

However, when McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate -- a person just two years removed from being mayor of a town with fewer people than the Fenway Park bleachers -- he essentially gave up experience as a campaign issue. It's hard to argue that Obama is inexperienced when McCain's choice to be just a heartbeat away from the presidency has even less experience.

Further, it looks as though mean-girl Sarah Palin has been discovered by the electorate:

Gov. Sarah Palin's favorable/unfavorable ratings have suffered a stunning 21 point collapse in just one week, according to Research 2000 polling. Last week, 52% approved and 35% disapproved of the GOP vice presidential nominee (+17 net). This week, 42% approved and 46% disapprove (-4 net).

Earlier this week, Newsweek also saw the drop in other polling. "Over the course of a single weekend... Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least."

And if you look at the Vote-master's tally, the country now looks like the lower limit of the Obama victory I feel is a distinct possibility in November. Obama must win Colorado and either New Mexico or Nevada in order to win the election.

Alex Says..

I agree.

This week has been full of those days of roaring optimism about the election. Nearly every day, as I've watched the GOP dirigible float towards Lakehurst, it's seemed as if there's no way the Dems can fumble the gift that's been handed to them in the person of a 72-year old hypocrite who's sold his soul to win the election.

I also have the days of crushing pessimism, as I realize that the voters who are going to decide this election think "Maverick" and only "Maverick" about McCain and...something that's unprintable about Obama. These fools are going to decide the fate of the election, and it doesn't matter how much info about McCain's ridiculousness comes out.

No one is listening.

John McCain - Thief

It has reached a point where John McCain is making a mockery of himself. Have you noticed how staunch Republican McCain steals Democratic/Liberal language and uses it against them? For example, saying the Democrats were sexist for their attack on McCain's VP pick, the incomparable Sarah Palin, had me rolling on the floor with hysterics.

Now Mr. Republican is trying to figure out the worst economic disaster since the great depression, and he finally comes to the conclusion that government bail-outs are a good thing. Last week he was saying he was for small government, this week he has another position.


Just listen to McCain and hear how low he has sunk. Shame!

This Government Reads Your Mind and Finds You Guilty

In a chilling combination reminicent of "Brave New World" and "1984", a local government in India, which likes to bill itself as the world's largest democracy, has taken steps that any totalitarian government would love.

Buried inside the New York Times of September 14th, was this item:

India has become the first country to convict someone of a crime relying on evidence from this controversial machine: a brain scanner that produces images of the human mind in action and is said to reveal signs that a suspect remembers details of the crime in question.

...

But it was only in June, in a murder case in Pune, in Maharashtra State, that a judge explicitly cited a scan as proof that the suspect’s brain held “experiential knowledge” about the crime that only the killer could possess, sentencing her to life in prison.

Certainly, technology marches on, especially in the field of criminal justice and that system first admitted the use of fingerprints and then DNA evidence. But some technologies have not been proven as reliable, such as the so-called "lie detector" which measures stress rather than truth.

This Indian government's reliance on brain waves poses an interesting question: will that government move on to using brain waves to monitor someone who is contemplating a crime?

It seems that the NSA's reading of e-mail messages is but small potatoes compared to a government picking up your brain waves.

I wonder if they will develop this technology to the degree that brain waves will be read without the need to actually hook up someone to a machine?

Targets USA

The November election will come down to traditional battleground states: Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania; and some new battlegrounds: Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada.

In 2004, Bush barely won Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada, but with the a significant change in population demographics, Obama might be able to win some of those south west states. But the Democrat will also have to spend precious time and money in holding actions in Pennsylvania and Michigan, two blue collar states that preferred Hillary Clinton and which were barely won by John Kerry in '04.

Go to 270towin.com to game how you think the election will play out. I see Obama with a good chance of winning New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Michigan with Nevada very close and Colorado, a center for both right wing evangelical activity and increased Democratic activity, as the big battleground.

If Obama is to win, I see him needing the new keystone of Colorado and either New Mexico or Nevada. And that's why the Democrats held their convention in Denver.

Pride Goeth Before the Fall Elections

Just a few weeks ago, Barack Obama was leading in all the state polls and he had an estimated 300 electoral votes, according to some sources. Today, if you check the Votemaster, McCain leads with just 270 votes, but that is enough to be elected President of the United States.

If you are a regular reader of this blog you know that I never believed that Obama's large lead was valid and that I predicted the race would be close, with a possible Obama victory with between 272 and 278 EVs.

In an excellent assessment earlier this week,here, Howard Fineman quoted one Democratic heavy-hitter on Obama's problems:

...if I were an Obama partisan I would be worried that his mistakes have a common thread - pride.

Obama seems to want to do things on his own, and on his own terms. It’s understandable. Obama has his own crowd – from Chicago, from Harvard, and from a new cadre of wealthy, Ivy-educated movers and shakers.

“He’s an arrogant S.O.B.,” one of the latter told me today. “He wants to do it his way, and his way alone.” But politics doesn’t work that way. And has Obama should know, or is about to find out, that everyone needs a little help.

According to Fineman, Obama has committed six major errors:

Declining to take federal financing for the general election

Declining McCain’s offer to hold ten town hall debates

Failing to go all the way with the Clintons

The 22-state strategy

Failing to state a sweeping, but concrete, policy idea

Remaining trapped in professor-observer speak

Failing to attack McCain early

It's not too late for Obama to make some significant changes in his approach, but that would require both a degree of flexibility and an intense and manifest hunger for the presidency and I have not observed either of these qualities in the candidate. On the other hand, McCain is demonstrating a typical Republican approach: Stop at nothing to achieve the biggest prize in the world.

To some extent, the world is playing into McCain's hand. Russia's move into Georgia has stoked those old Cold War fears and I perceive a lack of confidence in the electorate that Obama is up to the task of confronting KGBer Vladimir Putin or Iran's Mahmoud Ahmdinajad and that country's desire for nuclear weapons. Despite the economy, global warming, health care, education, and all of the other domestic issues that the democrats should, and do, own, none of these can be tackled unless the people feel safe. The belief is that the strong McCain is more capable of dealing with safety, and national security issues, and that he should answer that 3a.m. phone call.

A week is an eternity in politics and, that being said, we have about seven eternities before the election. But, along with burning autumnal leaves, I'm starting to smell a McCain victory.

Remember

The lights shine.

World Trade Center Murders

Once again I look out my window to see the lights of the World Trade Center memorial lights probe the sky, pale reminders of the mass murder that took place on that site seven years ago.

Seven years ago, on that brilliant Tuesday morning, I emerged from the Brooklyn Bridge subway station adjacent to City Hall to see that obscene diagonal gash on the north face of the North tower. I was mesmerized. I had to watch these landmarks, these behemoths of the skyline as they ejected smoke, fire, papers and people. Firefighters and other emergency service people and their vehicles flooded the area. I looked at that north tower, and knowing how the building was constructed, I felt there was a real possibility that the building might collapse,and I felt that the last thing that was needed was another pedestrian clogging the street, so I continued to my office, from where I watched the end of an era.

I have worked in the downtown area for more than thirty years and the towers were a constant presence. many times I went to the concourse to visit the Borders bookstore that was there, or to do some banking. Earlier that year I had visited the headquarters of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to interview for a job. I also interviewed for a job at 7 World Trade Center, with the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management. As you can tell, my attachment to those buildings was not abstract, but quite concrete. I could have been inside one of those buildings when those airplanes hit. By the grace of god, I wasn't.

Then, with two tremendous roars, the world turned dark. We evacuated the area in a scene that reminded me of those apocalyptic movies that show long lines of refugees. But pain was absent. Color was absent. Everything was absent as a huge hole expanded to include millions of people.

When I returned to work a week later, I bought two miniature New York City flags and dipped them both into the omnipresent grey dust that constituted much of the remains of the towers and which coated the downtown area. I kept one flag and later presented it to the Midwest City, Oklahoma Rotary Club as a sign of the sad bond that New York had with Oklahoma as victims of mass terrorist murder. I sent the other flag to a friend who was an Apache helicopter pilot who was about to be deployed to Afghanistan. He wrote and told me that he placed the flag in his knee board so that he would never forget why he was going into battle.

Seven years later we still mourn. For some, mourning is a quiet and private affair. For some, sadly, mourning has become their profession.

The World Trade Center now looks like any another major government construction site, architecturally banal, delayed and over budget. Is this normality?

A Fine Democratic Whine

Democrats are at it again, whining that the Republicans aren't playing fair and spreading lies about them through a compliant media.

This reminds of of the story that took place years ago at the Paris peace talks to end the the Vietnam war. It is said that an American general met with his North Vietnamese counterpart. "You know," said the American, "You never beat us on the battlefield." The North Vietnamese looked at the American and replied, "You are quite right. But what you say is also totally irrelevant."

The democrats are quite right that the republicans are playing dirty.Yes, the Republicans are lying about Barack Obama and his "pig in lipstick" statement, as well as other positions that the Democrat has taken in the pastas well as positions taken by Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin.

And it is all quite irrelevant.

The Republicans are engaging in classic Lee Atwater/Karl Rove smear politics. The Democrats are defending themselves by releasing position papers. I have written many times that the electorate likes to get the "warm fuzzies" about a candidate. But in this dangerous world, the electorate also wants to know that their candidate will also prevail in a knife fight in a dark ally, and here is where the Democrats, specifically Obama, fail. Oh, he looks cool, and he talks great, but on a gut level what do you think he would do in an alley fight? Do you think he will serve legal papers on his opponent or do you think he will kick his foe in the balls and gouge his eyes out?

Obama has to stop reacting to the 24 hour news cycle agenda, which is currently being set by McCain, as he forces Obama to react to his charges, however outrageous they might be.

Obama is known for his love of sports, especially basketball. I would love to tell him that the sport here is boxing. Not Olympic style boxing which is won on style points, but American boxing which demands a knock out. Obama has to demonstrate that he has the the ability and desire to bite off a nose or rip off an ear for the sake of gaining the presidency. Otherwise, no one will feel confident enough to have him face heavyweight KGBer Vladimir Putin in the ring that is world politics.

Oil Prices

Oil is now $103 per barrel. Am I the only person who wonders why prices are not coming down with same the speed with which they went up?

Political Brain Farts

Politico.com has this fun roundup of stupid politician tricks here.

We still have 50-odd days or so until the political Superbowl, and I anticipate that this listing will be updated with some real whoppers. If you want some real meat, though, go to the Annenberg Fact Check web site, listed on the right side column.

McCain Moves Ahead

For the first time int his election season , John MCain has taken a lead in a national poll:

(Sept. 7) - John McCain has overtaken Barack Obama in the Gallup daily tracking poll and has his highest level of support in that poll since early May.
McCain leads Obama 48 percent to 45 percent among registered voters, by Gallup’s measure. McCain has so far earned the same convention bounce as Obama, though at a more rapid pace.

...


Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll also reported today that when "leaners” are included, Obama and McCain are now tied at 48 percent. That means that, by Rasmussen’s measure, Obama’s 6-point bounce has been erased. CBS News polling had shown the same outcome midway through the GOP convention.
McCain’s resurgence in the polls comes as Nielsen Media Research reported that the Republican convention earned more television viewers than the Democratic convention. Republicans earned an average audience of 34.5 million, while Democrats earned an average viewership of 30.2 million.

Obama's bounce from the Democratic convention has now been met and exceeded by Senator McCain's increases. Remember, these are national polls and the ones we need to watch are the state polls. I'll keep you posted or check with the Votemaster.

At this point, the political conventions are over and the poll bounce that inevitably occurs for each candidate is all but over and is absorbed into overall poll results. Look for future poll results to flatten out.

Look for the professional pols to try to figure out why McCain is still hanging in and why Obama hasn't gained a sizable lead. How long will it take for some to admit that they might have misread the mood of the electorate and the desire for "change", however nebulously that might be described.

Look for the media to totally ignore the major issue of how they might have manipulated coverage of both the Republican and Democratic campaigns so that their darlings gained their respective party's nominations.

Look for everyone to ignore the real and difficult issues that face this country as the candidates reduce their messages to 60 second television commercials contaning pretty pictures, waving flags, and smiling faces.

Electioneering at its Best-Jib Jab

JibJab says it all right here!


Excellent!

Palin's Northern Exposure

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin may be talking about cleaning up corruption in Alaska, but the truth seems to be quite the opposite as she currently is under investigation.



As the Anchorage Daily News reports:

The allegations are that she, her family or administration improperly pressured then-Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire Gov. Palin's ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Mike Wooten, who had been in the middle of a custody dispute with Palin's sister.

In July, when legislators started talking about conducting an investigation, Palin denied any wrongdoing and said she welcomed an investigation.

"Hold me accountable," she said.

The Legislature took her up on that offer. But this week, she basically told the Legislature, "Never mind."

Palin, at this point, seems to be playing the Emily Letella role to perfection, ignoring what Alaskans are calling "Troopergate", but the news is sure to obtain maximum exposure in the Lower 48 thanks to the Democratic party and its adherents. Palin is starting to take on a remarkable resemblance
to former Democratic VP candidate Geraldine Ferraro, who was inadequately vetted by presidential candidate Walter Mondale's team, and who proved to be a major embarrassment to Mondale's campaign.

Joe Lieberman, Quo Vadis?

CQ Politics speculates on which side of the aisle the Connecticut senator will site when the Senate reconvenes. What is clear is that Lieberman, post his strong speech Wednesday night at the republican Convention in support of his friend, John McCain will be embraced by the Democrats like a Typhoid Mary.

Lieberman, torn between his affection for John McCain an his bitterness at the Democratic establishment, has definitely made himself a man without a party.

Unless McCain wins in November and then appoints Lieberman to a significant position in his administration or to the Supreme Court, Lieberman has put himself into a lose-lose situation. If he stays a nominal Democrat,and the Dems increase their hold over the Senate as it now appears likely, the Democratic leadership will strip him of all powers that accrue to someone with his seniority. If he moves over to the republican side, he once again finds himself sitting with the minority party, another losing hand.

Joe Lieberman has positioned himself in such a way that he has no winning options. All he can do is pray for a McCain win to rescue some aspect of his political life.

Half Time?

The conventions have come and gone and now everyone is taking a deep breath for one day and then the battle will be joined in earnest.

The teams are set: McCain/ Palin vs. Obama/Biden. Each side will devote the 50-odd days left before the election to spinning gossamer-like myths comprised of bull shit. Because the realities facing the electorate, the country, and the world are far too complicated to be expressed within the confines of the 45-second sound bite, the real battle will take place in the media over which side controls its message, which side controls the media, which side spins a better fantasy than the other.

It seems to me that the Democrats had tried to present some facts with their arguments, but the facts had no emotional content, and didn't "stick". The Republicans hurled invective and played with emotions as they wrapped themselves in the flag. Unfortunately, they displayed not a passing interest in engaging with the facts as they presented themselves as the party of change. Well they tried to, as they all drank the Kool-Aid and the conveniently forgot that they were in power for the past 8 years, and in fact ever since the first Reagan administration save for the eight Clinton years. How can you run as the outsider when you've been the insider for a quarter century? Will this drivel achieve any level of credibility with the voters?

Take a day off because halftime is over and the second half starts on Sunday. Winner is the leader of the free world.

McCain Speaks

While listening to John McCain speak Thursday night I was struck by this thought: Didn't he realize that his party has been in control of Washington for the past eight years?

He was talking as though the Democrats were in power during this period. He was running as a change agent against the powers in Washington. Without naming them, he was saying that the Republicans had failed in implementing their basic philosophies. What he ignored was the fact that he was now asking the electorate to vote for him to continue those failed policies.

Obviously, his experiences as a prisoner of war have molded him in significant ways. But those experiences do not qualify someone for he position of president of the United States.

McCain once was a maverick. That all changed when the Bushies savaged him during the 2000 campaign and he rolled over and he became a lapdog to an inferior personality. Since then, he has been a devotee of the flawed and failed Bush agenda.

There is a lot I admire about John McCain as a person, but not his policies.

The Pols Dis McCain and Palin

This YouTube clip was sent to me by NYCLib.

North Korea Endorses McCain

The cold war seems to be on a slow burner and heating up.

This overlooked item shows that the deal with North Korea brokered by the Bush administration may be in the process of decaying like a load of uranium.

updated 11:28 a.m. ET, Wed., Sept. 3, 2008

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea has started work to restore its nuclear facilities after the country suspended operations last week to disable them, South Korea said Wednesday.

South Korea, the United States and other members of a six-party group involved in nuclear negotiations with the North are working together closely to determine how to respond to the North's latest move, the Foreign Ministry said.

Russia moves into Georgia. North Korea starts powering up a reactor. What will China do next?

Is this 2008 or 1958?

Come November, will the electorate want tough guy McCain or Mr. Kumbaya Obama?

John Loves Sarah

Here is a simple fact: John McCain's campaign is in a shambles.

As I stated previously, McCain had the opportunity to regain credibility as a maverick by choosing Sen. Joe Lieberman as his running mate. McCain could have shown he was a smart politician by choosing Mitt Romney as his running mate. He could have picked Tom Ridge. McCain eschewed all of these options and chose the unknown Alaska governor Sarah Palin.

It turns out that not too much is known about Palin, certainly not by McCain's crack political staff. We all know she is cute. We all know we would rather go hunting with her than with Dick Cheney. Obviously, McCain's crack political team didn't call anyone in Alaska, otherwise they would have learned that Palin is under investigation for abuse of power. They would have learned that this family values hockey mom is also the mother of a pregnant unwed daughter. I guess just preaching abstinence doesn't really work. This is a candidate who has the aura of someone with a closet full of skeletons, all of which are rattling around with great vigor.

The real problem is the total incompetence shown by both McCain's staff and by the candidate himself. Two names come to mind immediately: Tom Eagleton and Geraldine Ferraro. Neither candidate was properly vetted and both turned out to be liabilities to McGovern and Mondale, respectively. Palin has the same stink about her.

John McCain, you have not yet committed political suicide, but why are you holding that knife?

Good-bye Joe, He Got to Go, Me-o My-o

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-D-Conn.)committed political suicide last night in the most public and unpleasant manner.

I have long been a supporter of the one-time Democrat, who, over the years, amassed a record that any progressive would be proud of. But Lieberman's support of the Bush war in Iraq set him apart from his fellow Dems, who permitted insurgent Ned LaMont to run against him last year in a primary. When LaMont, a one-trick, anti-war pony, won the primary, Lieberman's political friends deserted him. Lieberman bucked the party, ran as an Independent, won, and continued to caucus with the Democrats, who welcomed him in order to maintain their one vote majority in the Senate.

Lieberman has since been a steady and constant presence at McCain's side, traveling with him to the middle east, correcting him when he slipped up on foreign policy issues, and generally holding his coat as needed.

I had suggested that if McCain truly wanted to regain his long discarded mantle as a maverick, he would be wise to choose Lieberman, his friend, confidant, and adviser, as his vice president. But McCain bowed to political and party realities and picked Sarah Palin (more on that move later).

But Lieberman committed political suicide Tuesday night when he appeared at the Republican convention as a featured speaker. He certainly wasn't a Democrat. He wasn't an Independent. He was a Republican.

Joe, you violated Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment. You spoke against a fellow Democrat. Whatever leverage you had with the caucus disappeared last night, and the caucus now has no option but to evict you when the new congress convenes.

What is beyond my understanding is why you would take this action at a time when the Dems are going to take a significant majority in th Senate, where you have served so long and honorably? You could have kept your mouth shut and avoided this unseemly mess. I certainly understand your bitterness when the party quit you after the primary (which reminds me of the old saying that if you want a friend in Washington,get a dog), but they did what they had to do and you did what you had to do. Fair enough. But you're a big boy and you know how the game is played. Last night, though, you just didn't praise your buddy McCain, but you attacked the Democrats and you attacked Obama. Yours was an act of political suicide.

Bye, Joe!

Pergrine1 Writes...

How well will the McCain/Palin team stand the next several weeks of paparazzi-like scrutiny into every aspect of the nominee's selection that goes BEYOND what has already been exposed in the Lower 48:
-Bridge-to-Nowhere flip/flop?
-Trooper-gate?
-Husband's involvement with BP?

Questions should arise about how well she can simultaneously satisfy her conflicting roles as parent and Vice President, whether she will try to deal with political opponents in the same backwoods manner as she did in Alaska.

Some pundit opined that her selection was the equivalent of "Dan Quayle in a dress". I subscribe to the more likely theory that she's "George W. Bush in a dress". Imagine being invited to go on a moose hunting trip with her...


I would rather go on a moose hunting trip with her than with Dick Cheney-TRM

The Politics of Hurricanes

Watch you TV closely.

The Republicans are using Hurricane Gustave to their advantage and the Democrats are scrambling to come up with a response.

The cable news networks are going wall to wall with Gustave coverage and one of the prime stories is the impact of the hurricane, now in the Gulf of Mexico, on the Republican convention, which is being held several thousand miles north, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

But hurricane coverage has made it impossible for President Bush to attend the convention, as he gives the appearance of being caring and in charge. Bush's absence from the shin-dig gives McCain a graceful way of not being sen on the same stage as the unpopular Bush. Hurricane coverage makes it possible for the pols working the convention to appear caring and compassionate as they talk about conducting a minimum of politics and then turning the convention into a "service project" by raising money for the Red Cross. This is the perfect opportunity for McCain to show he is the Republican anti-Bush. Want to make bets on how long it will take him to fly down to that city once the hurricane passes?

And all the time the TV nets will be giving the Republicans all the free air time they can eat up, as they show how wonderful they really are, ceasing from their political business to care for the unfortunates in Louisiana.

In the meantime, all Barack Obama can do is talk about forming cadres of volunteers to go to Louisiana to help once the hurricane passes.

Even hurricanes are political.

McCain's Luck

John McCain won't have to share a podium with the despised George W. Bush during the republican convention. The White House just announced that due to Hurricane Gustave, Bush and VP Dick Chaney will be in Washington, or perhaps New Orleans rather than Minneapolis.

This is a great way for McCain to get out of being seen with Bush. I wonder whom he prays to? Yogi Berra once said, "I'd rather be lucky than good!"

Luck seems to be running McCain's way right now.

Minnesota Disaster?

No, I'm not talking about the upcoming Republican convention in Minneapolis this week in the face of Hurricane Gustave. I'm talking about the Senate race between incumbent Republican Norm Coleman and his Democratic challenger, pundit and comedian Al Franken.

The latest Survey USA and Rasmussan polls in Minnesota show Barack Obama leading John McCain 47%-42%. With Democrats taking the last four presidential elections in that state, you would think they would have a good chance of coat-tailing its candidate for the Senate, Al Franken, but a look at those Senate race polls show Coleman leading Franken 44%-42%, a statistical tie.

Now, Minnesotans have a history of quirkiness in local elections. Who among us can forget the election of wrestler Jesse Ventura as governor of that fine state? But in this critical election year ( aren't they all?), can Minnesotans again be playing at the polls? More to the point, the Minnesota electorate seems to be decidedly unhappy with their current choices and they would rather have a third choice for the Senate seat, as the Associated Press reports in the Minneapolis StarTribune:

ST. PAUL, Minn. - A new poll finds that many Minnesota voters would at least consider voting for a third-party or independent candidate for president or the U.S. Senate.

The poll is sponsored by Minnesota Public Radio News and the University of Minnesota Humphrey Institute.

It finds that 77 percent of the state's likely voters say they would consider voting for an independent or third-party candidate, while 21 percent would not and 3 percent didn't know.

The poll finds support in Minnesota for independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader at 3 percent, while 1 percent supported Libertarian Bob Barr.

In the U.S. Senate race, Independence Party hopeful Dean Barkley registered 8 percent in a tight contest between incumbent Republican Norm Coleman and DFL challenger Al Franken.

The telephone survey of 763 likely voters was conducted between August 7 and 17. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.

Considering the overall standing of the Republicans this year as well as the traditional liberalism of Minnesotans, Franken should have a healthy lead in the polls at this point. The Dems must be questioning themselves about their choice of Franken as their candidate.

The Sarah Palin Rohrsharch Test

The pundits are bloviating in high gear over John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his VP running mate, as they try to figure out whether it was a stroke of political genius or totally dumb and perhaps even politically suicidal.

Some of the "experts" think it was a grand move by this year's maverick to shore up his support with with right wing of the Republican Party by picking a dedicated right-to-lifer who puts into practice what she preaches, specifically, giving birth to a Down Syndrome baby while in her 40s. She is a dedicated pro-gun advocate and NRA member. She can claim feminist credibility for fighting corruption in the oil game in Alaska and its "good old boys" network. She is perky and cute, the Gidget of big time politics, being embraced by her Moondoggie, John McCain .

Other experts say Palin, who was a small town mayor and governor for only two years, is totally unqualified to sit one heartbeat away from the presidency.

The truth is both more complicated and more simple. Palin is really a neuter, who has no record of substance to stand on to claim the vice presidency. She is nothing more than an ink-blot that reveals the innermost political thoughts and desires of those who perceive her. If you want to see her as a maverick, you will. If you want to see her as a feminist, you will. If you want to see her as a right to lifer, you will. If you want to see McCain as a maverick for picking her, you will. If you want to see this choice as McCain's political suicide, you will.

Sarah Palin - political Rohrsharch test.

A 51%er Writes

If there is anything that most, if not all, women can recognize at 100 meters, it's the slightest hint of Patronization. Chosing Lalin as the Republivan V-P candidate REEKS of same and it has to be the most blantant example I have seen in a long time by either political party. No woman with an I.Q. greater than a brick will see this selection than for what it obviously is and will vote accordingly. I will further predict that this selection will backfire on the Republicans the closer we get to the election. It does warm the heart though to see that the Republicans FINALLY, some 24 years after the Democrats chose a woman as a candidate for V-P, finally got around to acknowledging the other 51% percent of the US population. Way to go Republicans!

A Short Play for Two

I found this while checking out the Votemaster early this evening:

The Veep: A Short Play in One Act

Sometimes fiction is a better vehicle for getting inside someone's mind. Besides, it's all we have. Here is a short play for two actors. Let's call them Schmidt, a tough, savvy consultant, and McCain, a candidate. All names have been changed to protect the innocent.
Schmidt: McCain, Get your ass over here and look at this map.

McCain: It's the U.S. with the states red and blue. Seen it before. What's your point?

Schmidt: Obama's gonna win all the Kerry States. You have a small chance to pick off New Hampshire but 60% of the people think you're pro choice. When they find out you've been pro life for 25 years, forget New Hampshire.

McCain: Where does that leave me?

Schmidt: Bush won 286 to 252.

McCain: Fine with me.

Schmidt: But wait a minute. Obama campaigned like crazy in Iowa. Won the caucuses big time. You barely set foot in the state. The people of Iowa take their caucuses very, very seriously. You insulted them. Make that 279 to 259.

McCain: I still win.

Schmidt: We're not done yet. Obama has been leading in New Mexico all year. State's full of Latinos. They preferred Clinton but they're still Democrats at heart. I think we're toast there. Now its 274 to 264.

McCain: A win is a win. Still better than Florida was.

Schmidt: Yeah, but now Obama is just 5 EVs short of a tie (which means it goes to the House and he'll win there) and 6 EVs short of a clean win. Look, there are six swing states this time: Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Missouri, Colorado, and Nevada. We have to win all six of them. Can't lose a single state or we're dead meat.

McCain: I'm a fighter. You know that. The gooks couldn't break me. I'll campaign like hell in all six. Don't worry.

Schmidt: I'm worried. We're 50-50 on all six. It's like flipping a coin six times and getting six heads. One chance in 64, roughly 2%. We have to do something dramatic. Something that will throw all calculations out the window. Something that completely shakes up everything. Something that gives us a fresh start. Gotta hit the RESET button.

McCain: Have something in mind?

Schmidt: Yeah. Pick a black or a woman for Veep.

McCain: You mean I can't pick Joe? He's my friend and a great guy.

Schmidt: Half the convention would walk out. Besides, Jews aren't a novelty any more. Thank Gore for that.

McCain:. Shit. But blacks are fine with me. Colin Powell is a great American and one of the most respected people in the country.

Schmidt: He doesn't want the job

McCain: No sweat. Condi's the smartest woman I know. Mind like a bear trap. She'll run rings around Biden at the debate. She'll say: "I've been there. I talk to Putin every week. You're just an old windbag"

Schmidt: She's got "BUSH III" emblazoned on her forehead. And Obama is a happily married man with two adorable little girls, Condi's a single black woman who is apparently not much into families. Won't work. What about Kay [Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)]?

McCain: She's tired of the Washington rat race. She wants to go back to Texas. Be governor or something, you know like Ma Ferguson.

Schmidt: Ma's husband, the governor, was impeached and convicted. Ann Richards would be a better role model. What other women do we have?

McCain: Jodi [Rell] and Olympia [Snowe] are smart and popular but pro choice. The Base distrusts me already. They'd mutiny.

Schmidt: Elizabeth Dole? Susan Collins?

McCain: With either of those we lose a Senate seat. I don't want to have 60 Democrats to deal with over there. Reid might grow a spine. Can't encourage that.

Schmidt: Lisa Murkowski?

McCain: Her dad appointed her. She won on her own later, but I don't need to deal with nepotism and cronyism. Smells like Bush. I'm a maverick, remember?

Schmidt: Got it. Some businesswomen? Sarah Palin?

McCain: Carly [Fiorina] is great on economics, but she nearly she ran her company into the ground so the board fired her and then gave her $40 million so she wouldn't feel bad. The 20,000 people she fired aren't too keen on her. Meg Whitman did a fantastic job at eBay but nobody's ever heard of her.

Schmidt: So Palin's the only one left? What about her?

McCain: I met her once, at a governors meeting. Cute as a button. She ran for Miss Alaska. Came in second. I woulda voted for her. But it's a real Hail Mary pass. She's popular up north there where the sun never shines (except for some minor problems when she tried to fire her state trooper brother-in-law). She was pregnant with a Down syndrome baby and didn't abort him. The Base will love that. Her hobbies are riding her motorcycle and hunting moose. The coal miners in Appalachia will go wild over her. How fast can we print a million 8x10 color photos of her for their lockers?

Schmidt: Fast. But what about her experience. I mean, she's only been governor a year and a half. What did she do before that?

McCain: I think she was mayor of some village with six igloos. Who cares? I think you're right we have to shake things up completely. Change the game. The Base will eat her up on abortion, the Hillary fans will see that we respect women (unlike their guy). We grab the mantle of reformers. The white guys will be transfixed by this hot chick who hunts moose. I get to be Maverick-in-chief. Sounds like a winner.

Schmidt: What about the debate with Biden? What if the moderator says: "What would you do if Russia invaded Georgia again?" and she says: "I'll get on Air Force One and fly to Atlanta immediately."

McCain: Most Americans can't find Georgia the state on a map, let alone Georgia the country. I'll get Lugar to tutor her on foreign policy. He knows everything about it. I'm sold. Let's go for it.
Curtain falls.

Well, maybe that wasn't the exact dialog, but the core idea is true: they had to do something dramatic to have a chance and picking a woman was probably their best shot. And most of the candidates had some flaw or other. Palin had the fewest problems.

Alex Writes...

Re: McCain's only line of attack.

He's still got:
- Obama is a celebrity
- P.O.W.
- Obama wants to raise taxes on everyone making $42K or higher (in his campaign's response to Obama's acceptance speech)
- Obama's responsible for higher gas prices
- P.O.W.
- Sen. Biden is a misogynist for beating up on Gov. Palin in the VP debate
- P.O.W.

Plus, don't discount that image could put the G.O.P ticket into the White House in '08.

What got Bush elected in '00 was the fact that he'd be more fun to have a beer with than Al Gore.

This November, those same voters are comparing a true Maverick and a beauty queen with a Secret Muslim.

I think Palin's an insipid choice, but I have little confidence in the American people doing the right thing.


Alex,

All true. I didn't say the "experience" angle was his only line of attack, but his strongest. He was set up to use Hillary's 3a.m. ad, which was quite successful. McCain has just given up that weapon with nothing to show in return.- TRM

The Vagina Vote

All the pundits are scratching their heads over John McCain's choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his choice for Vice President. I suppose in some ways that it makes some sort of sense. I can picture McCain thinking, "Boy, I'll show them I'm a real maverick by doing something incredibly stupid and at the same time shoring up support with the looney right wing and with women."

Unfortunately for McCain, this choice absolutely neutralizes his most effective line of attack against Obama, specifically, Obama's lack of experience on the national and world stage. you should note that the choice of vice president has been practically irrelevant in recent years. Sure, John Kennedy picked the powerful Texas Senator Lyndon John as his VP, but can anyone say they voted for George H.W. Bush because he picked Indian's Dan Quayle? Do you remember how Lloyd Bentson absolutely mopped the floor with Quayle when he unleashed his famous statement, " Senator, I knew John Kennedy, and you're no John Kennedy!" Bush won.

So McCain's choice of Palin is both interesting but, at best, irrelevant. At worst, it could be a "Tom Eagleston" type of pick with Palin under investigation in her home state form certain improprieties. A reader sent me this interesting blog from a native Alaskan:

“Is this a joke?” That seemed to be the question du jour when my phone started ringing off the hook at 6:45am here in Alaska. I mean, we’re sort of excited that our humble state has gotten some kind of national ‘nod’….but seriously? Sarah Palin for Vice President? Yes, she’s a popular governor. Her all time high approval rating hovered around 90% at one point. But bear in mind that the 90% approval rating came from one of the most conservative, and reddest-of-the-red states out there. And that approval rating came before a series of events that have lead many Alaskans to question the governor’s once pristine image.

There is no doubt in my mind that many Alaskans are feeling pretty excited about this. But we live in our own little bubble up here, and most of the attention we get is because of The Bridge to Nowhere, polar bears, the indictment of Ted Stevens, and the ongoing investigation and conviction of the string of legislators and oil executives who literally called themselves “The Corrupt Bastards Club”.

OK. She's cute and looks good on TV. Ok. She knows how to use firearms. Ok. She's a mom with 5 kids, the youngest afflicted with Down Syndrome. Ok. She is not qualified to be vice-president. Ok. It is a blatant appeal to women and at the same time, to the Republican right wing.

But in this day and age, the candidate's choice of vice president doesn't matter.

Back

I spent the last two weeks visiting Israel for the first time.

I am convinced that all people are middle east experts. I am also convinced that all middle east experts are wrong.


I'll put my thoughts together in the coming days and share them with you.

I didn't follow the Olympics much, and caught what I could of the Democratic Convention.

Away

Your favorite Radical Moderate will be away for two weeks, refreshing body, mind, and soul. That means I will not be covering either the Democratic or Republican conventions. I'll be around 7,000 miles east and I'll give a full report upon my return.

Let's hope everyone takes a step towards peace.

I'm a dot!

Television at its Best

Two items on TV this weekend that were worthy of the medium. Three, really, if you count the Olympics.

I hope you caught retired Army Colonel Andrew Bacevich on Bill Moyers Journal on PBS this past Friday. Bacevich, currently a professor at Boston University, focuses with laser-like precision at some of the core problems of the United States today. It requires more audacity than I have, and Lord knows I have more than my share, to summarise Prof. Bacevich's positions. But I do urge you to go out and read his book,The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism and think! I look forward to doing the same. (And here are some more works by Prof. Bacevich.)

Pastor Rick Warren hosted individual conversations this past Saturday night, seen on CNN, with the presumptive Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama, and the presumptive Republican Presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain. Of course, Pastor Warren asked questions from a religious perspective, and while I believe religion really has no place in government, I appreciated the fact that he did not play that petty and disgusting game of "gotcha" that debate moderators engaged in previously. Pastor Warren did not play to the lowest common denominator. There was no attempt to titillate. There was no attempt by Pastor Warren to show how much smarter he was than either candidate. It was refreshing and informative.

Finally, the Olympics. I love this quadrennial display of pure athletic skill and grace. Sure, there are events that don't belong on a world stage, such as beach volley ball. But the power, grace, strength, and speed on display is truly magnificent. So, Bravo! Mike Phelps! Brava, to the American female gymnasts. And "Well Done!" to all the competitors who gave their all in the water and on the field.

Cold War Redux

Apparently, all of the oil money flowing into Russia has caused them to become bold and attempt to reconstitute the old Iron Curtain Bloc.

Look at their move into Georgia. And now they are saying they are going to mete out punishment because the US and Poland struck a deal on the placement of defensive missiles in the latter country.

Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy chief of the Russian general staff told reporters Friday that the agreement exacerbates U.S.-Russian relations that are already tense because of fighting between Georgian and Russian forces. He said the deal “cannot go unpunished.”

And in the strongest threat Russia has issued in reaction to plans to put elements of a missile defense system in former Soviet satellite nations, the Interfax news agency quoted Nogovitsyn as saying Poland was risking attack.

“Poland, by deploying (the system) is exposing itself to a strike — 100 percent,” Interfax quoted Nogovitsyn as saying.

This follows on the heels of the US Czech Republic deal to place the radar systems for that missile shield (if it works!) in that former Soviet captive state. If you recall, the US offered the Russians an incredible amount of access to the radar system to assure them that the system was designed to counter an Iranian missile threat and the Russians said "Nyet!".

From a Russian perspective, which historically is a paranoid one, they may be seeing a US attempt to encircle them by placing military systems in Poland, The Czech Republic, Georgia, Khazakstan, and the other former Soviet states in Eurasia. This view however, ignores the fact that these American bases are also directed towards the areas where we perceive the threat to currently reside: Iran and Pakistan. If the US had intentions of striking at Russia, the opportunities were present just after the collapse of their empire, and yet the US took no such action. In fact, US and Western policy has been to draw Russia into the rest of the developed nations world economy and system of politics. Can that policy be called an abject failure? With KGB apparatchick Vladimir Putin in charge, the answer must be "yes".

NY GIANTS--The Great Four Minutes !