More Church History in Contemporary Media

We thank gentle reader Tim R for directing us to this latest irreverent example of subversive Christian media that stands in the tradition of such hits as "The Reformation Polka" and "Baby Got Book":

More Advice for President-Elect Obama

As this momentous evening comes to a close, we reflect on the President-Elect's prospects with the Congress. As it appears that the so-called filibuster-proof majority will elude the Dems, and that the House will not swing violently toward a substantially larger majority, Obama needs skilled help.

The current Democratic leadership--the deservedly maligned Reid and Pelosi--aren't skilled. They lead a Congress with more dismal approval ratings than the less deservedly maligned Bush.

So, here's the deal, Mr. President-elect. Get your peeps to do the following:

• Throw Mrs. Pelosi overboard and make the more moderate and sensible Steny Hoyer Speaker of the House. Mrs. Pelosi has got on the last nerve of the electorate. Hoyer is at least a bit of a mensch.
• Tell the world that Hillary has earned leadership of the Senate, and more quietly set aside the inept Mr. Reid.

We also reflect on the remarks made by the estimable Tavis Smiley on NBC near the evening's beginning. Acknowledging that Obama couldn't talk about race as he campaigned, he insisted that he must when elected, and soon. Otherwise, he risks leaving too many Americans, most of them people of pallor, with the notion that his election means that racial issues are officially in the past. And such is not the case.

President-elect Obama, we implore you to use your impressive gifts for communication to help all Americans understand the experience of people of color in our Republic. Take up the noble task carried out by Washington, DuBois, Wright, and Ellison of describing the human experiences of those who have been routinely dehumanized. Tell it as one who, not the descendant of plantation slaves but of free Africans, is both an insider and an outsider to the black community in the United States. Challenge that community to become the engine of its own transformation. Challenge the majority culture to listen to the experience of those who live alongside them. Appeal to the better angels of everyone's nature to make racism and its devastating effects genuinely and not just prospectively a matter of the past. Your election can be about more than marginal tax rates if you do.

We promise more helpful advice in days to follow. Keep reading, Mr. President-Elect!

SWNID Names the Obama Cabinet

Scrambling to stay ahead of the news cycle and to do something useful for the Republic, we hereby offer Barack Obama some well-deserved time off by naming his cabinet for him. He and we all will be better off as a result.

Obama pledges to be bipartisan and transformational in approach. So we're keeping that in the SWNIDish mind as we make our nominations. Gentle readers must note well that these people we think Obama ought to nominate, not that we predict he will.

Secretary of State: Obama named Indiana Senator Richard Lugar as one to whom he listens a lot on foreign policy. We say, put the old guy in charge of Foggy Bottom. He's nothing if not a realist and straight shooter.

Secretary of the Treasury: Paul Volcker is the obvious choice. The savior of the American economy in the years bridging Carter's Malaise in America and Reagan's Morning in America, Volcker will resist the urge to inflate the currency and beggar our neighbors.

Secretary of Defense: There's hardly a living Democrat able to take on this gravid task. So Obama ought to show his smarts and his magnanimity to reach out to a quasi-Democrat who opposed him in the election. Joe Lieberman is the man for the Pentagon. And Obama can justify it to his more partisan supporters by quietly noting that Lieberman's elevation will mean the appointment of a more faithful Democrat to his seat for the remainder of his term.

Attorney General: Obama needs someone with prosecutorial experience who will be clearly tough on terrorism. That's none other than America's Mayor, Rudy Giuliani.

Secretary of the Interior: It would be fun to humiliate Al Gore by offering this to him. But he just might take it. We suggest Mark Tercek, president of the Nature Conservancy, one of the few sane environmental groups out there. Tercek is a former exec with Goldman Sachs, a better background than the Sierra Club or the Senate.

Secretary of Agriculture: The most important agricultural agenda is eliminating subsidies, which will boost trade, global development, food supplies and productivity. Ron Paul is right on this issue. Give him a job.

Secretary of Commerce: Robert Rubin should return to Treasury and succeed Paul Volcker after the old man has had about eighteen months. In the meantime, let him run commerce. He's the last of the Democratic fiscal conservatives with national stature.

Secretary of Health and Human Services: We want a thoughtful, informed, experienced individual who knows how to communicate as the Obama administration tries to turn the medical world upside down. How about TV doctor Tim Johnson, famous for his many appearances on Good Morning America?

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development: This portfolio needs an innovative thinker, someone who understands the economics of the underclass and the dynamics of economic change for them. It calls for Brown University Professor Glenn Loury.

Secretary of Transportation: There's an easy one. The future of American transportation is the efficient, flexible bus. We nominate Megabus president Dale Moser.

Secretary of Labor: Since Obama is all about the card check and other boosts to organized labor, he needs a labor secretary who can keep big labor from overrunning American productivity. This job calls for a skilled consensus builder and negotiator. Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory was an early Obama supporter and has all those qualities. We say make him the surprise choice for Labor.

Secretary of Energy: Did you know that America's largest ethanol company just filed for bankruptcy? Or that the other companies have stock trading at $1 or below? Green fuels are a bust when one ignores fundamental economics, like the way falling oil prices can torpedo investment in new energy sources. Someone with the political savvy to manage all this and communicate it to the public is desperately needed in this job. That person is Sarah Palin, of course.

Secretary of Education: No more coddling of teachers unions and ineffective public school districts. The department of ed. needs a no-nonsense demander of results. We nominate DC Chancellor of Schools and Teach for America Alumna Michelle Rhee.

Secretary of Veterans Affairs: Let's see if money can be put where the mouth is and if past sins can be atoned. We nominate John Kerry.

Secretary of Homeland Security: The Dems need a wise hand on this. Sam Nunn is just the guy, and will be ready to step into Defense should the need arise.

Postscript: Obama is commonly compared to another man from Illinois. If he can assemble a cabinet as diverse as this Team of Rivals, he will have surpassed his saintly forebear.

Where Has This Guy Been?

We thank gentle reader Denebah for sending us to this rant of refreshment:




Where has this guy been? He needs a radio program or a TV program or something.

The SWNID Voter's Guide for 2008

Having spent every available minute examining candidates and issues in detail, we now unveil at the eleventh hour the definitive guide to every contested part of tomorrow's ballot, at least if you vote in the SWNIDish precinct. To vote right and vote smart, vote with SWNID as follows:

POTUS and Sidekick: The election of Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be historic and entertaining respectively. We look for a turn to the left on all major issues, with quick reactions from the center and right that will once again demonstrate that Democratic party unity is an oxymoron. In those limited cases where Obama manages to do something (look for marginal tax rates to rise, trade deals to go sour, and military spending to be limited), the economic and geopolitical impact will be negative. We also regret that Obama looks unable to speak to the issue of race, where he once seemed to have the greatest potential as an agent of change. To reserve a place at the "I told you so" table, vote for McCain and Palin. But have the courtesy to remove your campaign paraphernalia, unlike the dinosaurs who still have their Kerry-Edwards gear on their cars.

US Representative, District 1: SWNID was ready a few weeks ago to vote against the venerable Steve Chabot because of his two votes against the financial bailout. Having heard him explain his vote--he wanted to pass legislation that would have rewritten upside-down mortgages as the root of the problem--we are reconciled to the principled conservative gentleman from Cheviot. Steve Driehaus is one of the many fiscally and socially conservative candidates that Democrats are running this year, but a dependable vote on all things conservative is hard to top. Chabot gets our vote, and we expect him to prevail.

Ohio Attorney General: Both major party candidates are well qualified and have good records of public service. We'll actually give the nod to Richard Cordray, the Democrat. We think that the clueless Ted Strickland is best served when his smarter friends, like Cordray and Board of Regents Chancellor Eric Fingerhut.

Ohio State Representative, District 3: Dale Mallory is most definitely the weakest link in the distinguished Mallory political clan. His first term in Columbus has been utterly undistinguished. But his opponent is the persistent Republican placeholder candidate Theo Barnes, who is amazingly on record endorsing the mandatory sick leave amendment that even its sponsors have withdrawn. Vote Mallory, simply because there's no real choice and Mallory is at least well connected.

Ohio Supreme Court Justice: Incumbents Maureen O'Connor and Evelyn Stratton are part of the conservative bloc of the Ohio Supremes. Their opponents, Joseph Russo and Peter Sikora, are connected to organized labor interests. Keeping Ohio open for business, which it barely is at present, requires conservative justices.

Judge, Court of Common Pleas: SWNID has little use for that mercurial fixture of Hamilton County Republican politics, Pat DeWine. His opponent, Norma Davis, is endorsed by loads of labor unions with little stake in common pleas judges except for general political gain. We give a reluctant nod to DeWine.

Judge, Court of Common Pleas: Fred Nelson has a gold-plated legal resume. Jerry Metz has the endorsement of the Democratic Party and lots of unions. Vote for Fred, who is superior in every way.

Judge, Court of Common Pleas: This is a tight one. Jody Luebbers is currently on this bench. She has a good record, good experience, a magic name in Cincinnati and the endorsement of the Democrats. Russell Mock is a municipal judge with a good record, good experience, no magic name and the endorsement of the sheriff and county prosecutor. We'll give the nod to the prosecutor's man.

Issue 1: This initiative will provide an earlier filing deadline for ballot issues. Vote yes to curtail the brinkmanship that's played with signatures for ballot initiatives.

Issue 2: This initiative will allow Ohio to issue bonds to pay for environmental projects, including brownfield cleanup. That's a necessary thing for an industrial state, and an appropriate thing for which to borrow money. Vote yes.

Issue 3: This constitutional amendment will guarantee property owners reasonable use of the water that runs under and next to their properties. Such measures are necessary in a time when state and local governments are happy to appropriate land for almost any conceivable use. Vote yes.

Issue 4: This would have been the amendment to mandate paid sick leave for full-time employees. What would have been better named the Send Jobs to Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia and Pennsylvania Act was withdrawn by supporters when Ted Strickland flipped from supporting to opposing the idiotic bill. So it's gone from the ballot. But note well: supporters said they had a pledge from Obama for a federal mandate for paid sick leave. We figure this will be among the many broken promises of the first one hundred days, but from little acorns . . . .

Issue 5: This is one of three mighty important ballot matters. Issue 5 will limit the terms of so-called payday loans. The loan companies complain that customers should be free to enter into contracts in which they are charged outrageous rates of interest, claiming that these rates are still better than bounced checks or credit card overages. We say that usury is usury and vulnerable people need protection from it. Vote yes. (Sorry, libertarians, we think government has a role in promoting virtue.)

Issue 6: Here's the second biggie. This noisy issue will establish a noisy casino near quiet Wilmington, Ohio. Forget all the noise about jobs being created. They'll simply be shifted from one casino to another, like it matters that it's in Wilmington instead of Rising Sun, Indiana. Gambling adds zero to domestic product. It transfers wealth instead of creating it. It is generally accompained by other vices when it arrives in a community. Always vote against gambling. Always. Even though we're already awash in it. No, no, a thousand times a thousand times no.

Issue 7: This initiative will limit the use of robotic cameras at intersections. We say vote no. Cameras take pictures of everyone, but only the bad guys suffer as a consequence.

Issue 8: This is the third big issue, on proportional representation on Cincinnati City Council. Brought up every so often by nostalgic members of Cincinnati's antiquated Charter Party, PR would use complicated mathematical algorithms to assign ranked votes to candidates for city council. The result, supporters say, is that candidates with a relatively small but dedicated constituency could be elected to council. We ask rhetorically, "And that is somehow a good thing?" For an example of PR, study the Israeli Knesset, certainly one of the most fractious political bodies in the world. Improvement for Cincinnati City Council will come when the charter is ammended so that a small number of members are elected at large and a larger number are elected from districts. Vote no on PR.

What to do in other precincts nationwide: Plug your address and zip into the SmartVoter ballot-bot and find who and what are on your ballot.

What to do Tuesday evening: Go to bed when they call Pennsylvania for Obama. McCain needs PA if he's going to thread the needle. Alternately, if North Carolina goes blue, go to bed. You'll need your sleep going into the next eight years. If Driehaus wins Ohio 1, watch out in the House. If McConnell loses KY, watch out in the Senate. But we think nevertheless that grassroots politics will make no majority safe for overreaching Democratic liberals. So go to bed.

What to do forever: Don't vote early unless you can't vote on election day. Stuff changes sometimes, so think gray until you have to make the decision. And don't sweat politics. What really matters transcends politics. All the political blather on this blog is little more than entertaining conversation around the water cooler.

Still with the Polls: A McCain Surge? Or Time to Think about January?

Zogby has McCain within the margin of error on the three-day tracking poll and outpolling Obama on Halloween* by 1%.

While we still stoically expect an Obama victory, we can yet imagine the opposite, especially if Tuesday looks like a classic TV episode about another historic election.

If the likely happens and Obama rules in 2009, we note that liberals are unlikely to get what they want. Not only do budgetary constraints work against their agenda, so does the reshaping of the Democratic caucus. Obama is certainly on the left of his party, but many new Democratic Congressmen will be "Blue Dogs," fiscally and socially conservative Dems, who may number over 60 in the House. These will be enough to stand in the way of anything radical and, in their view, irresponsible. Obama may face the possibility of alternative budgets or legislation passed by a coalition of Republicans and Blue Dogs, much like the previous Democratic President who had majorities in both houses.

Meanwhile, pundits now read the entrails as indicating the Dems will fall short of a 60-seat supermajority in the Senate. Even if they get one, those Dems vulnerable to challenges from the right in 2010 will be cautious.

Chins up, conservative brethren! The Republic will endure.

_______________
*Because Democrats stay out later collecting giveaways and can't answer their phones?

More Fiction Club Additions

As the political season comes to its climax, SWNID finds it timely to retreat into some good books.

Today we reap a large harvest from recent reading.

First, in our pursuit of the perfect satirical novel, we add three lightly delightful reads: Alexander McCall Smith's Professor Dr Moritz-Maria von Igelfeld Entertainments, entitled Portuguese Irregular Verbs, The Finer Points of Sausage Dogs, and In the Villa of Reduced Circumstances. Through the experiences of the protagonist, a hopelessly eccentric and self-absorbed scholar of the philology of romance languages, Smith manages to ridicule academics, just about every major European country, the United States and Latin America.

Second, in our very selective indulgence in contemporary "literary fiction" (whatever that marketing term actually means), we enthusiastically endorse The Kite Runner. All the classic elements of a classic story are here: love, family, country, betrayal, weakness, tragedy and redemption. We kept expecting the book to turn to the maudlin, but it managed (as did Dickens?) to make the turn away from sappiness at just the right point.

We haven't seen the movie, and in keeping with our general advice and practice, we recommend against seeing the movie until one has read the book. Great books are seldom made into great movies, though many great movies have been based on average books. By reading before viewing, the memory of the movie's images don't interfere with the reading imagination.

We also read Atonement awhile back. A masterfully written book, we find it disappointing morally (so we simply skipped the movie). N.B. that doesn't mean we are disappointed that the characters acted immorally; if so, we'd be disappointed in the Bible, which most definitely doesn't disappoint us at all. We are disappointed that the narrator offers something as "atonement" that most certainly is not that thing, even in weak form. The Kite Runner addresses similar themes with more courage, and in our reading connects at a deep level to the true story of atonement that we cherish.

VDH on the Coming American Resurgence

Those blue about the economy can find the antidote in Victor Davis Hanson's enumeration of why Americans are better off than their global neighbors.

For those who think he must be a jingoist to write such, we note that Hanson hardly fits the bill. A classicist by training, he simply observes the realities of history, culture and economics.

Spinning the GDP

Driving to work today, SWNID heard reports that the quarterly GDP report was coming this morning and was expected to show a drop between 0.5% and 1%.

The annoucement is that GDP dropped for the quarter at a rate of 0.3%. That means things are 40-70% better than feared.

Here's how the AP story interprets the event (emphasis and de-emphasis inserted):

The economy jolted into reverse during the third quarter as consumers cut back on their spending by the biggest amount in 28 years, the strongest signal yet the country has hurtled into recession. . . .

While the third-quarter's contraction wasn't as deep as the 0.5 percent annualized decline analysts expected, the poor showing underscored the terrible toll of the housing, credit and financial crises.

Not denying the epochal events in the world of finance in the last several months, we nevertheless note that MSM reports have been anticipating an economic recession now for at least a year and have been repeatedly disappointed that figures still don't show two consecutive quarters of economic contraction. The apocalyptic imagery attached to this better-than-expected report is hardly a surprise, then.

Of course, the current quarter could reveal additional contraction, even deeper than the previous quarter's. Or the current quarter could have a shallower contraction. In either case, we'd meet the classic definition of a recession at last! We will surely be told as much if such transpires. On the other hand, the GDP could recover to grow slightly. In that case we will surely be told that the recovery is weak and that it doesn't benefit everyone.

We do thank the AP for noting that the GDP declined 1.4% in the third quarter of 2001. We recall a different kind of crisis then, though one also largely related to finance because of who happened to be the tenants of the World Trade Center. The journalists did leave it to the reader to do the math and realize that this contraction is a little more than a fifth the size of the previous one.

The end of any business cycle is contraction, of course. But as long as the business cycle is portrayed as the direct outcome of Presidential politics, one can expect that recessions will be excitedly anticipated in the political season.

Yet we caution more carnivorous conservative brethren not to attribute such tendentiousness entirely to the media's leftishness. What journalists want more than anything is a story. Readers don't read dull stories. But if the reader is the victim in the story, the story is always exciting. "Attention Worrywarts and Whiners: You're Not as Bad Off as You Think"* is simply not as compelling as "World Ending: Virtuous, Shrinking Middle Class Hardest Hit." Or at least not as self-serving.

_______________
*Attention commenters: yes, we know that real people suffer real economic hardship in recessions. Even our cold, reptilian heart responds to such things. We simply note that not as many are suffering as in the past, nor as much overall, and that what many experience is not worthy to be called suffering.

Politics, Power, Human Nature and Next Tuesday

We thank gentle reader and honorary co-blogger JB in CA for pointing us to the thoughtful column by humorist Kurt Luchs posted today at First Things. In sum, enraptured backers of political candidates offering "change" should consider well the lesson of history and of The Lord of the Rings: that humans do poorly when they assume power.

Sadly, the party of limited government doesn't seem to be listening to the message well, either. Still, one can at least make a choice between the candidate of a party that has at some points acknowledged the limits of humans to change things politically, versus the one for which no promise is too great, as in "I think health care is a right."

When Great Minds Agree, Who Are We to Argue?

We find ourselves almost persuaded by the following bit of incisive analysis from highly qualified political analysts:

See more Ron Howard videos at Funny or Die

Obama's Redistributive Instincts: Prelude to an Administration

As our Republic considers the specter of buyer's remorse after November 4, voters contemplate what an Obama presidency with a Reid/Pelosi Congress might mean for its future.

One contribution is an archived 2001 interview from WBEZ, a Chicago NPR affiliate, in which then-state legislator Barack Obama speaks to the question of redistributive economic policies as the unfinished work of the civil rights movement. We invite gentle readers to turn away from the screen below, which annoyingly offers comments on what is obvious from listening, and merely listen:



Another indicator is Rep. Barney Frank's comment that he expects to finance increased infrastructure spending and unemployment benefits with a 25% cut in military spending.

Another is an opinion article in today's WSJ (still arriving free on the SWNID driveway: is this a preview of socialism under Obama--free newspapers for Republicans?), part of a series comparing the two candidates' positions, that details Obama's labor policies, which would give the United States its most onerously anti-growth labor laws in its history.

An analytical article in the same paper notes that historically the only means to "close the gap between the rich and the middle class" is to go through a prolonged recession. We know which party is aiming to do that, and which is depending on higher taxes on those soon-to-be-less-rich folk to finance what John Kerry calls "New Deal II."

And Democratic Party ads continue to promote trade protectionism as a means of economic growth. Mr. Smoot and Mr. Hawley, call your publicists.

As the Big Three automobile manufacturers--the last relics of the post-Depression, post-WWII economy in which highly unionized American manufacturers managed profitability because the rest of the world's manufacturing capacity was either destroyed by war or didn't exist yet--break under the burden of their uncompetitive obligations to workers and retirees, the revitalized liberal wing of the Democratic Party salivates at the opportunity to finish the work that FDR started.

There has arisen a generation that knows not the 1970s, when policies like these had what we hoped was their last appearance. But the experience of the United States in that regard is nothing as compared to our European--and especially British--cousins, whose miserable experiences we seem determined to imitate. To impoverish a nation, one need merely remove the natural incentives to be productive and soften the natural disincentives to be unproductive.

A personal correspondent recently complained to us that when elected, the Democrats will once again save the country and once again get no credit for it. We say that credit should be given where it's due. We duly credit Johnson and Carter for the economic impact of their policies: stagflation. We duly credit Nixon's wage and price controls for their miserable contribution as well. We duly credit Clinton for acceding to political and economic reality under a Republican Congress by reducing capital gains taxes, passing NAFTA and welfare reform, and restraining government spending. We credit Reagan with having changed the debate, though it now seems not once for all, and so changing the economic direction of the country for some 25 years, a move of which everyone in the world is currently a beneficiary, if not for long.

And we will credit the once-and-future Democrats for whatever they will do, and the American electorate for noticing and responding . . . if not in this election, then perhaps in the next.

But back to Obama. His notion of redistribution as the endgame of civil rights strikes us not just as self-defeating but also as completely paternalistic. Do people of color, long the objects of discrimination in our Republic, suffer from a shortage of redistribution or a shortage of opportunity? Not a member of the minority community, we still find it condescending that Obama, himself not the descendant of plantation slaves who have experienced the worst of American racism, implies that the minority community is largely incapable of attaining equality by any means besides redistribution.

Battle of the Neutestamentlers: Tom Wright v. Bart Ehrman on Evil

We've stumbled across an audio file, rather low fidelity but apparently understandable, of a recent debate on evil and the existence of God between SWNIDish hero N. T. Wright and SWNIDish villain Bart Ehrman.

We haven't listened yet, but the thing can't help but be worth listening to, and so we commend it to gentle readers/listeners.

On the side, does it say something about the present state of theological scholarship that the two figures deemed appropriate to talk about the problem of evil from a theological perspective are primarily scholars of the New Testament and not systematic theologians?

Landslide or Dead Heat? Pick Your Poll

NBC/WSJ has Obama up by ten percent among registered voters.

Meanwhile, AP/GfK has Obama up by one percent among likely voters.

Take your pick, knowing that models of likely voters tend to be more accurate than surveys of registered voters yet understanding that the surge in registrations and enthusiasm for Obama among marginalized groups this year may change who turns out. On the art and science of polling, check out Michael Barone's public seminar on the subject.*

We'll make this observation: it wouldn't be this close again for the Dems if they could manage to nominate a for-real moderate-to-conservative. They have plenty of them at the local level, but they can't get through the gauntlet of far-left interests that hold the Democrats' purse.

Both Obama and McCain were going to change politics this year. Instead, politics changed them, and we've got what looks like the third iteration of Bush v. Gore.

_____________
*P.S. We thank Rupert Murdock and his minions at WSJ for continuing to leave a copy on our driveway each day this week even though our subscription ran out last week. We consider it a public service to keep SWNID informed. But $249 per year is way too much to spend on dead trees, so don't think you're getting us back at that price.

Joe the Plumber: Birth of a 15-Minute Political Celebrity

Here's the original exchange that gave birth to the "Joe the Plumber" phenomenon in yesterday's debate:




We give Obama props for persistence in trying to make his case to Joe. But not for speaking accurately or clearly. He's stylishly blowing thick smoke.

First, his "tax cut for 95% of Americans" will be considerably less than the tax cut that they have already received under Bush. There's no actual legislation on this, of course, but it's estimated at hundreds of dollars a year for middle-income earners, not thousands. Much would depend on particular behaviors, like enrolling in college or buying a fuel-efficient car. To say that Joe would have got richer quicker under Obama is to grossly overestimate the effect of such a small reduction. How many years of a $500 tax cut does it take to buy a plumbing business, and would you even want to if you know that Uncle Sugar would take 40% of your profits?

Second, Joe had him when he said that Obama should favor a flat tax. Obama responded not to a flat tax, which means applying the same tax rate to all income, but to what Huckabee and others called the "fair tax," which is a consumption tax (i.e. a federal sales tax) rather than a tax on income.

In fact, Obama's plan is to move farther away from a flat tax toward an tax system that relies even more on revenue from the very highest earners. As it stands, about 40% of tax returns are filed by people who owe no federal income tax at all (the Bush tax cuts put SWNID in that blessed category for a short season of bliss, but alas, they also propelled the household into a level of prosperity at which we resumed federal income tax payments). The next 20% pay only 4% of federal income taxes. That leaves 96% of federal income taxes paid by 40% of Americans, and 40% of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers.

It's pretty tough to imagine a scenario in which the well-off should pay more than that, let alone calling such an arrangement fair. It's also easy to see how such tax rates would discourage the investment that drives a modern economy. But when nearly half the country pays nothing, it's also easy to see why people don't see government spending as something that concerns them. It's not their money that's being wasted.

Of course, Obama makes all this work by offering a "tax cut" to people who don't pay taxes, that is, by giving them a tax credit that produces a refund even if they don't pay taxes. So his higher marginal rate on the rich is nothing more than redistribution of income from the rich to others. We've got a lot of that now, in the form of various public assistance programs and the Earned Income Credit. Do we need to make such handouts an entitlement for a considerable number of America's middle class?

Further, Obama is disingenuous in saying that most American small businesses earn less than $250k/year. He's never said whether that figure represents gross or net, for example, at least that we've heard. But beyond that, he's never indicated how he counts small businesses. Perhaps businesses aren't "small" above $260k per year, so he's only counting those in between. Perhaps he counts every S Corporation and Schedule C filer, most of which are sole proprietorships that don't create jobs, as a "small business." If so, then the SWNID household has two small businesses. Very small, with no employees and little income, yet paying taxes. At any rate, his numbers are opaque. Deeply so.

But back to Joe and Barack. The whole episode demonstrates that Obama's gift is not in formulating policy or even explaining it but in filibustering his way through tough spots. He's not explaining his point or even acknowledging others' points. He's bluffing, effectively.

It's effective because this is what people want to hear. They've been messed over by the rich, who take too much that ought to belong to the Sainted Middle Class. Time to get the torches and pitchforks, storm the castle, tar and feather the nobles and take their loot.

Another Reason to Take Megabus, Vote Republican

Chicago may raise to a whopping 33% its tax on parking in the Loop.

That's another reason why out-of-towners visiting Chicago for business or pleasure should take Megabus, which is often cheaper for a round trip than a day of parking. For internal transport, the CTA remains safe and reliable, not to mention easy and cheap if one purchases a visitor's pass in advance.

It's also a reason not to vote for Obama, a product of the Democratic Party machine that has ruled Chicago since the retreat of the glaciers.

Mayor Daley wants the new tax to cover a budget shortfall, but the truth is that Chicago's budget is loaded with special interest money, pet projects of alderman, political quid pro quos, and unchecked corruption. Given the political platform of Chicago's favorite son, we fear that our Federal Republic could end up in similar straits under an Obama administration, which is to say in a worse way than it is now.

Nature and Same-Sex Unions

Today's Gray Lady amazingly includes an even-handed article on people who make a case against same-sex marriage by invoking biology rather than dogma.

SWNID approves, since today's Christians in the public forum ought to be able to argue their case at least as well as Paul did.

More Economic Analysis from It's a Wonderful Life

Having invoked the Frank-Capra-and-Jimmy-Stewart classic ourself more than once recently, we defer to the estimable Ross Douthat who offers an especially timely application of It's a Wonderful Life to understand the present financial crisis.

Douthat is one of those renegade conservatives that some call "crunchy." So he expects a future in which the pursuit of universal home ownership will be restrained but not forgotten, with its object more in New Urbanism than suburban sprawl.

Further Political Developments

With just over three weeks to go before the election, could this development change the outcome?

After Another Dismal Day for Stocks

A glance at a logarithmic graph of the Dow Jones Industrial Average since its inception in 1928 can provide some perspective on recent losses.

The logarithmic scale of the graph linked above is helpful in showing the change in the index as a percentage of its value rather than as units of the index. With that in mind, the present selloff, though certainly sobering, does not look unprecedented.

Actually, much worse for the country was the period from the mid 1960s until the early 1980s when stocks hardly moved at all. Thoughtful folk like SWNID will attribute that prolonged economic stasis to the misguided economic policies of the time, especially to high marginal tax rates that discouraged productive investment and sent money into tax shelters.

With the present selloff, one also observes that since 1999, the market is similarly in prolonged stasis. We attribute that to the prolonged rise in stock values from 1982 to 1999. The market then was overbought and has corrected. Now, we suspect, it is oversold.

In the longer term, the graph shows that the present is hardly like the worst of the past. In fact, its rather like a lot of the past, all of which was followed by better times. Investment bargain hunters will do well in times like these, as will those who use dollar-cost averaging to make steady progress over time.