Wolf Blitzer's interview with Sarah Palin is unremarkable, a typical interview with a politician. But that makes it exceptional, inasmuch as Palin was judged to be significantly below typical.
Palin, it seems, does have a political future. Her discourse is cliche-ridden but fluent and coherent, about what we've come to expect from national leaders.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Hillary at Foggy Bottom
WaPo reports buzz that Hillary is now on the not-so-short list for Secretary of State.
Apparently the Obamanoids aren't happy with Kerry, Richardson, Hagel, or Nunn as alternatives. They're obviously right on that, except for Nunn. We assume this means that Lugar said no or did something to offend The One.
Hillary would be better than anyone except Nunn on this list, though Nunn would be better for Defense if BO doesn't want Gates to stay. But we think she still belongs as Majority Leader. That keeps her close, but not so close that Bill will lurk nearby.
Bill has no ticket to the Senate. But he does in an executive-branch department. He'll be the unwelcome guest at every event if Hillary runs State. He'll have to stay mostly sidelined if she's in the Senate.
Apparently the Obamanoids aren't happy with Kerry, Richardson, Hagel, or Nunn as alternatives. They're obviously right on that, except for Nunn. We assume this means that Lugar said no or did something to offend The One.
Hillary would be better than anyone except Nunn on this list, though Nunn would be better for Defense if BO doesn't want Gates to stay. But we think she still belongs as Majority Leader. That keeps her close, but not so close that Bill will lurk nearby.
Bill has no ticket to the Senate. But he does in an executive-branch department. He'll be the unwelcome guest at every event if Hillary runs State. He'll have to stay mostly sidelined if she's in the Senate.
Bush the Brave, SWNID the Digressive
Greg Sheridan, foreign editor for The Australian, offers a fine column praising Dubya's genuine accomplishments.
We find much to affirm in Sheridan's analysis. Right now, political opinion is about as volatile as commodities or securities. Which means it's not at a point of accurate valuation. Saying Bush is a jerk is like saying stocks are worthless. That's just how they're valued at the moment.
Among other points, Sheridan notes that Bush's persona was part of his offense:
Funny, but this reminds us of how we felt about Clinton, who always seemed to us like the guy at the high school football game who wanted to talk to our girlfriend too much. Not that we actually had a girlfriend then. Not that we're still bitter about that. Uh, never mind.
OK, Clinton was like the guy who always turned in his paper late but talked the teacher into giving him full credit anyway. And he manipulated his girlfriend into writing it. And she was the one we really wanted to date. Not that we're still bitter. Uh, never mind again.
Back to the point:
We think a guy who crushed an international terrorist organization and overthrew two brutally totalitarian dictatorships deserves some credit, even if he mangles the language and smirks a lot. We also think that Bush was extremely correct on three massive issues where Congress wouldn't budge--immigration, Social Security and health insurance reform--as we have elaborated SWNIDishly for some three years. We expect future generations to ask why folks didn't do what Bush said.
By the way, we are ready to bet $1 with the first willing gambler that Osama Bin Laden will either be dead of natural causes or still at large in 2012 and again in 2016.
We find much to affirm in Sheridan's analysis. Right now, political opinion is about as volatile as commodities or securities. Which means it's not at a point of accurate valuation. Saying Bush is a jerk is like saying stocks are worthless. That's just how they're valued at the moment.
Among other points, Sheridan notes that Bush's persona was part of his offense:
His stubbornness, which is courage if you look at it a different way, was amplified for foreign audiences a thousand times by the Texan accent. In rejecting elite American opinion, he too often looked as though he was rejecting international opinion. In dismissing The New York Times, he seemed to dismiss Europe.
Funny, but this reminds us of how we felt about Clinton, who always seemed to us like the guy at the high school football game who wanted to talk to our girlfriend too much. Not that we actually had a girlfriend then. Not that we're still bitter about that. Uh, never mind.
OK, Clinton was like the guy who always turned in his paper late but talked the teacher into giving him full credit anyway. And he manipulated his girlfriend into writing it. And she was the one we really wanted to date. Not that we're still bitter. Uh, never mind again.
Back to the point:
We think a guy who crushed an international terrorist organization and overthrew two brutally totalitarian dictatorships deserves some credit, even if he mangles the language and smirks a lot. We also think that Bush was extremely correct on three massive issues where Congress wouldn't budge--immigration, Social Security and health insurance reform--as we have elaborated SWNIDishly for some three years. We expect future generations to ask why folks didn't do what Bush said.
By the way, we are ready to bet $1 with the first willing gambler that Osama Bin Laden will either be dead of natural causes or still at large in 2012 and again in 2016.
Memo to the President-Elect: Things That There's No Such Thing As
Our President-Elect promised his daughters a dog if he won the election and moved the family to Washington. After the election, he said the dog would have to be "hypoallergenic," as daughter Malia is allergic to dogs.
Well, doctors say there's no such thing, per an AP story today. Some dogs don't shed much, but all dogs provoke allergic reactions in some measure in people who are allergic.
So there's the first campaign promise that is crushed by harsh realities. Too bad it was a promise to the Obama children. "Yes we can!" is now "Subject to reality check."
We invite gentle readers to suggest other things that don't exist, the non-existence of which will impede progress toward the Obamanoid Utopia.
We start with the obvious one:
Free Lunch
Well, doctors say there's no such thing, per an AP story today. Some dogs don't shed much, but all dogs provoke allergic reactions in some measure in people who are allergic.
So there's the first campaign promise that is crushed by harsh realities. Too bad it was a promise to the Obama children. "Yes we can!" is now "Subject to reality check."
We invite gentle readers to suggest other things that don't exist, the non-existence of which will impede progress toward the Obamanoid Utopia.
We start with the obvious one:
Free Lunch
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Will Obama Outlaw Bankruptcy?
The SWNIDish view of the coming Big Three Bailout is aptly expressed by the sagacious Holman Jenkins at WSJ. We tantalize with a quotation:
On the side we note and interpret the convergence of two seemingly unrelated elements of all this. One is that Obama leaked to the press (via surrogates, no doubt, but doubtless from him, as he was the only person in the room with Bush) that Bush asked for support for free trade with Colombia in exchange for support for the Big Three Bailout. The other is that Caterpillar is an example of a company that has reorganized under financial difficulty, managed to keep a UAW workforce, and is very profitable in manufacturing. As it happens, Caterpillar is one of the companies that would stand to profit most from free trade with Colombia, along with its UAW workforce.
Will Obama, Pelosi and the UAW do the reasonable thing in all this? The leak suggests not.
Our President-Elect appears to be set to "rule" in precisely the way that his thin but consistent legislative record suggests.
The media have been terrible in explaining how the homegrown car companies landed in their present fix, when other U.S. manufacturers (Boeing, GE, Caterpillar) manage to survive and thrive in global competition. Critics beat up Detroit for building SUVs and pickups (which earn profits) and scrimping on fuel-sippers (which don't). They call for management's head (fine -- but irrelevant).
These pre-mortems miss the point. Critics might more justifiably flay the Big Three for failing long ago to seek a showdown with the UAW to break its labor monopoly. In truth, though, politicians have repeatedly intervened to prevent the crisis that would finally settle matters.
The issue at hand is the future of the UAW, not the future of automobile manufacturing in the United States. Nonunion shops like Honda, Nissan, Toyota, BMW and Daimler (minus Chrysler) are doing fine making and selling cars in the US despite miserable sales.
Once upon a time, businesses facing economic hardship were reorgainzed by the courts in a process known as bankruptcy. Chapter 11 would give GM, Ford and Chrysler the opportunity to void their UAW contracts and compete for labor like everyone else. The Dems will instead seek to keep the courts, normally their preferred forum for political change, far from this issue to protect their Big Labor patrons.On the side we note and interpret the convergence of two seemingly unrelated elements of all this. One is that Obama leaked to the press (via surrogates, no doubt, but doubtless from him, as he was the only person in the room with Bush) that Bush asked for support for free trade with Colombia in exchange for support for the Big Three Bailout. The other is that Caterpillar is an example of a company that has reorganized under financial difficulty, managed to keep a UAW workforce, and is very profitable in manufacturing. As it happens, Caterpillar is one of the companies that would stand to profit most from free trade with Colombia, along with its UAW workforce.
Will Obama, Pelosi and the UAW do the reasonable thing in all this? The leak suggests not.
Our President-Elect appears to be set to "rule" in precisely the way that his thin but consistent legislative record suggests.
P. J. on the Present Mess
It's not coherent or substantive, but it is a lot of fun. P. J. O'Rourke has sobered up to write a rant on the multiple crises of the moment. Hat tip to Son of SWNID for directing our attention to it.
We remind gentle readers inclined to rant in response that, among other things, the esteemed Mr. O'Rourke still stubbornly refuses to acknowledge that any part of the conservative coalition except the libertarian part is legitimately "conservative." Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, George Will and SWNID disagree.
But not as much as we disagree with the ascendant Ruling Party of our shaky Republic.
We remind gentle readers inclined to rant in response that, among other things, the esteemed Mr. O'Rourke still stubbornly refuses to acknowledge that any part of the conservative coalition except the libertarian part is legitimately "conservative." Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, George Will and SWNID disagree.
But not as much as we disagree with the ascendant Ruling Party of our shaky Republic.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Expectations, Arrogance, Messianism and All That
Close on the heels of the election results, an anonymous commenter on this blog claimed that the Republic would now be governed rather than ruled.
Yesterday, Valerie Jarrett, an old Obama friend and now co-chair of his transition team, used "rule" as the verb to refer to Obama's upcoming actions as POTUS.
We hope that such minor embarrassments will help the triumphant mute their smug disparagement of the outgoing administration's smugness.
Yesterday, Valerie Jarrett, an old Obama friend and now co-chair of his transition team, used "rule" as the verb to refer to Obama's upcoming actions as POTUS.
We hope that such minor embarrassments will help the triumphant mute their smug disparagement of the outgoing administration's smugness.
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Another Unintended Consequence of the Election
We can't resist:
Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are
Coming soon: Obama Win Causes Religious Right to Obsess over Coming Obama-Induced Crises, Onset of Tribulation
Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are
Coming soon: Obama Win Causes Religious Right to Obsess over Coming Obama-Induced Crises, Onset of Tribulation
Whither the Big Three? And the Prius?
As US automakers seek $50 billion from Uncle Sugar and, because two of them are also European auto makers, a similar pile of Euros from the EU, we consider why they're in a pickle when everyone's car sales are down, including the Japanese, Korean and European manufacturers who don't seem to need a handout.
Many journalists will parrot the party line that Japanese and other manufacturers got ahead of their US competition in the manufacture of fuel-efficient cars. We think the problem lies elsewhere.
First, there's the matter of what the Big Three owe present, future and former employees thanks to two generations of labor contracts negotiated with the UAW. They're on the hook for pensions and health insurance for retirees, aside from current employees' wages and benefits. Labor costs for the Big Three are substantially higher than for Japanese, Korean and European manufacturers who operate stateside.
Second, there's the matter of CAFE standards. These require that the Big Three divide their entire "fleet" of manufactured cars into two groups, domestic and foreign. Their domestic fleet must then meet certain overall standards for fuel efficiency. With their high domestic labor costs, the Big Three can only make money on big, expensive cars if they're made in the US. But they have to make and sell small, cheap cars at a loss to be allowed to sell the ones that are profitable and meet CAFE standards. Worse, if they import cheap, efficient cars from their overseas plants, they don't count against CAFE standards for the domestic fleet. That last bit, by the way, was the demand of the UAW: it has no effect whatsoever on actual, overall fuel efficiency.
We think that the Big Three have made some dumb business decisions along the way also. They have that in common with other businesses. Ford, for instance, built unreliable cars and then muddled their marketing on top of it. But one can easily misunderestimate the degree to which the government from which the Big Three now seek a bailout is responsible for the mess that they're in.
But given the exchange of political parties just completed over the last two years, we expect that whatever proceeds to become an expensive compounding of existing problems. CAFE will get more strict. Discussion will focus on saving "well-paying" jobs, which is to say jobs on terms acceptable to the UAW, whether economically viable or not. CAFE will get stricter. All this will be rhetorically supported with talk about the failure of the Republicans to regulate properly, the Golden Age of American Manufacturing when everyone who worked belonged to an AFL-CIO affiliated union plus the Teamsters and the gap between rich and poor was narrower, and how the executives and their massive salaries and bonuses are the true bad guys.
The question is how long folks will believe that story.
There may be another tale developing that will be revealing. More or less simultaneously, the tax credit for buying a Toyota Prius and other Toyota and Lexus hybrids has run out. It will soon run out on Honda's hybrid too. Meanwhile, gasoline is below $2. The economic incentive for buying such vehicles has officially evaporated and will perhaps leave both manufacturers with a lot of unwanted cars to sell and a lot of manufacturing capacity that needs to be retooled. Such things happen in freer markets. But in more regulated markets, they happen with greater frequency and severity.
Many journalists will parrot the party line that Japanese and other manufacturers got ahead of their US competition in the manufacture of fuel-efficient cars. We think the problem lies elsewhere.
First, there's the matter of what the Big Three owe present, future and former employees thanks to two generations of labor contracts negotiated with the UAW. They're on the hook for pensions and health insurance for retirees, aside from current employees' wages and benefits. Labor costs for the Big Three are substantially higher than for Japanese, Korean and European manufacturers who operate stateside.
Second, there's the matter of CAFE standards. These require that the Big Three divide their entire "fleet" of manufactured cars into two groups, domestic and foreign. Their domestic fleet must then meet certain overall standards for fuel efficiency. With their high domestic labor costs, the Big Three can only make money on big, expensive cars if they're made in the US. But they have to make and sell small, cheap cars at a loss to be allowed to sell the ones that are profitable and meet CAFE standards. Worse, if they import cheap, efficient cars from their overseas plants, they don't count against CAFE standards for the domestic fleet. That last bit, by the way, was the demand of the UAW: it has no effect whatsoever on actual, overall fuel efficiency.
We think that the Big Three have made some dumb business decisions along the way also. They have that in common with other businesses. Ford, for instance, built unreliable cars and then muddled their marketing on top of it. But one can easily misunderestimate the degree to which the government from which the Big Three now seek a bailout is responsible for the mess that they're in.
But given the exchange of political parties just completed over the last two years, we expect that whatever proceeds to become an expensive compounding of existing problems. CAFE will get more strict. Discussion will focus on saving "well-paying" jobs, which is to say jobs on terms acceptable to the UAW, whether economically viable or not. CAFE will get stricter. All this will be rhetorically supported with talk about the failure of the Republicans to regulate properly, the Golden Age of American Manufacturing when everyone who worked belonged to an AFL-CIO affiliated union plus the Teamsters and the gap between rich and poor was narrower, and how the executives and their massive salaries and bonuses are the true bad guys.
The question is how long folks will believe that story.
There may be another tale developing that will be revealing. More or less simultaneously, the tax credit for buying a Toyota Prius and other Toyota and Lexus hybrids has run out. It will soon run out on Honda's hybrid too. Meanwhile, gasoline is below $2. The economic incentive for buying such vehicles has officially evaporated and will perhaps leave both manufacturers with a lot of unwanted cars to sell and a lot of manufacturing capacity that needs to be retooled. Such things happen in freer markets. But in more regulated markets, they happen with greater frequency and severity.
Gore: Obama Victory Proves Internet (My Invention) to Be True Messiah
Is Obama the Messiah?
No, says prophet Al Gore. The Internet is.
Gore says that the Obama victory shows that people can work together on the Internet to make "a collectively intelligent decision." And so the next project for collective intelligence is to address climate change, of course.
Um, has anyone told Mr. Gore what the predominant uses of the Internet are? Consider the following list and ask whether these are indications of collective intelligence:
Still, we want to take up Gore's challenge. So here's our contribution to the collectively intelligent decision on climate change.
What should we do about climate change? Adapt!
No, says prophet Al Gore. The Internet is.
Gore says that the Obama victory shows that people can work together on the Internet to make "a collectively intelligent decision." And so the next project for collective intelligence is to address climate change, of course.
Um, has anyone told Mr. Gore what the predominant uses of the Internet are? Consider the following list and ask whether these are indications of collective intelligence:
- celebrity gossip
- sports fantasy leagues
- social networking
- porn
- gambling
- blogs like this one
Still, we want to take up Gore's challenge. So here's our contribution to the collectively intelligent decision on climate change.
What should we do about climate change? Adapt!
Oxford Lists Top 10 Irritating Phrases.
At the end of the day, I personally should of absolutely acknowledged that at this moment in time, lots of people, with all due respect, use irritating phrases 24/7, while those who don't are fairly unique. It's not rocket science after all.
Background here.
Background here.
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Crouch on Hopefulness
Maybe the best essay we've seen so far on being a Christian in a fiscal crises is Andy Crouch's "Why I Am Hopeful."
A quotation:
But that's not even the heart of the thing. We urge reading the whole essay.
A quotation:
And this is why I can't share the sense of satisfaction I sense in some of my "prophetic" friends. I believe the first step in culture making is not creating (let alone condemning, critiquing, or consuming) but cultivating: keeping what is already good in culture, good. American Christians, on the right and the left, have been painfully bad at cultivating. We want to jump to "transformation" and "impact" (words generally used on the right) or to "resistance" and "revolution" (favored words of the left). We often seem incapable of seeing ourselves first as gardeners: people whose first cultural calling is to keep good what is, by the common grace of God, already good. A gardener does not pull out weeds because she hates weeds; she pulls out weeds because she loves the garden, and because (hopefully) there are more vegetables or flowers in it than weeds. This kind of love of the garden—loving our broken, beautiful cultures for what they are at their best—is the precondition, I am coming to believe, for any serious cultural creativity or influence. When weeds infest the garden, the gardener does not take the opportunity to decry the corruption of the garden as a whole. She gets patiently, discerningly, to work keeping the garden good.
But that's not even the heart of the thing. We urge reading the whole essay.
A Barometer for the New Administration
Wal-Mart, not surprisingly, is doing well. Cautious shoppers are looking for bargains. Wal-Mart does well in moderately bad times.
Wal-Mart also does well in good times, as the less well off do better and shop more or move up from Family Dollar.
Meanwhile, the President-Elect and his Congressional Majority (a name for a rock band?) are on record as supporting card check, i.e. allowing unions to organize workplaces with an open petition of employees as opposed to a secret ballot.
If card check passes, Wal-Mart will be the first target for organized labor, and its biggest prize.
If a year from now Wal-Mart is not doing so well, it will mean one of two things: either the economy is so totally in the tank that no one is buying anything or Wal-Mart's workforce has been organized via card check. In the latter case, the economy will be headed to the tank.
We suggest monitoring Wal-Mart's stock price as a means of assessing the economy's prospects and the new administration's success. It closed today at $13.34, up $0.70 or 5.5%, on a day when the market as a whole took another cold bath.
Wal-Mart also does well in good times, as the less well off do better and shop more or move up from Family Dollar.
Meanwhile, the President-Elect and his Congressional Majority (a name for a rock band?) are on record as supporting card check, i.e. allowing unions to organize workplaces with an open petition of employees as opposed to a secret ballot.
If card check passes, Wal-Mart will be the first target for organized labor, and its biggest prize.
If a year from now Wal-Mart is not doing so well, it will mean one of two things: either the economy is so totally in the tank that no one is buying anything or Wal-Mart's workforce has been organized via card check. In the latter case, the economy will be headed to the tank.
We suggest monitoring Wal-Mart's stock price as a means of assessing the economy's prospects and the new administration's success. It closed today at $13.34, up $0.70 or 5.5%, on a day when the market as a whole took another cold bath.
SWNID Predicts: This Will Not Work
MGM has announced that the Farrelly brothers have contracted to make a Three Stooges movie, with yet-to-be-named A-list actors playing the diminutive slapstickers.
We venture the prediction that this movie will not work.
The true, classic Stooges (Moe Howard, Larry Fine and Curly Howard) perfected their routines with countless hours of live performance in vaudeville. So in Hollywood studios given miserable scripts and lousy direction, they nevertheless created timeless comedy classics, at least as far as the world's 12-year-old boys are concerned.
No amount of talented writing, clever direction or high-tech special effects can replace the woodshedding that enabled the original Stooges to knock heads and gouge eyes with comic perfection.
We preemptively urge all gentle readers to stay away from this upcoming abomination.
We venture the prediction that this movie will not work.
The true, classic Stooges (Moe Howard, Larry Fine and Curly Howard) perfected their routines with countless hours of live performance in vaudeville. So in Hollywood studios given miserable scripts and lousy direction, they nevertheless created timeless comedy classics, at least as far as the world's 12-year-old boys are concerned.
No amount of talented writing, clever direction or high-tech special effects can replace the woodshedding that enabled the original Stooges to knock heads and gouge eyes with comic perfection.
We preemptively urge all gentle readers to stay away from this upcoming abomination.
Transition Day One: What Kind of Democrat Will Rule?
One day into the presidential transition, we see two developments that disquiet us.
One is the announcement of Henry Waxman (D-Beverly Hills [no kidding!]) that he wants to give up his chair of the House Governmental Oversight Committee (a.k.a. the Democrats' show-trial committee) to challenge John Dingell (D-Detroit [again, no kidding: can one imagine a more class-oriented political battle?]) for the chair of the House Energy Committee. Waxman's move is easy to interpret. With the Democrats in control of the government, there will be no show trials (that this obviates the threat of hearings about Bush administration misdeeds is at least mild comfort to a Republic that would like to look forward instead of backward), so Waxman wants another platform. His move to Energy means that he intends to make oil company profits and carbon emissions the subject of his media events for the foreseeable future. If he gets his way, assume that America's energy future will consist of bicycles, rickshaws and composted sewage.
The second development, not a surprise at all, is Obama's invitation to Rahm Emanuel to be his chief of staff. No one represents the dark side of the present Democratic Party better than Rahm-bo. He's the shrewdest operative among the Clintonistas, a brilliant fundraiser and a ruthless enforcer. The question is whether he will be Obama's Luca Brasi or Pelosi's . . . or both.
The latter is the worst outcome, as it means that Obama will work for his party's left. He doesn't have to, of course. He financed his campaign with grassroots donations, so he can tell MoveOn where to GetOff. Whether he will remains to be seen, and Emanuel's disposition in the matter will be an ambiguous indicator until things really start to roll.
Emanuel is presently ruminating his decision. Publicly he says he will base the decision on his commitment to his family, the constituency that elected him again to Congress, and his commitment to public service. We don't doubt that he's really asking himself which route advances his own bid for power. At which end of Pennsylvania Avenue he judges the balance of power to lie will tell much about the next eight years.
The question that lies before us is whether our future is center-left or just left. So far, the signals are at best ambiguous, like Obama's entire campaign.
One is the announcement of Henry Waxman (D-Beverly Hills [no kidding!]) that he wants to give up his chair of the House Governmental Oversight Committee (a.k.a. the Democrats' show-trial committee) to challenge John Dingell (D-Detroit [again, no kidding: can one imagine a more class-oriented political battle?]) for the chair of the House Energy Committee. Waxman's move is easy to interpret. With the Democrats in control of the government, there will be no show trials (that this obviates the threat of hearings about Bush administration misdeeds is at least mild comfort to a Republic that would like to look forward instead of backward), so Waxman wants another platform. His move to Energy means that he intends to make oil company profits and carbon emissions the subject of his media events for the foreseeable future. If he gets his way, assume that America's energy future will consist of bicycles, rickshaws and composted sewage.
The second development, not a surprise at all, is Obama's invitation to Rahm Emanuel to be his chief of staff. No one represents the dark side of the present Democratic Party better than Rahm-bo. He's the shrewdest operative among the Clintonistas, a brilliant fundraiser and a ruthless enforcer. The question is whether he will be Obama's Luca Brasi or Pelosi's . . . or both.
The latter is the worst outcome, as it means that Obama will work for his party's left. He doesn't have to, of course. He financed his campaign with grassroots donations, so he can tell MoveOn where to GetOff. Whether he will remains to be seen, and Emanuel's disposition in the matter will be an ambiguous indicator until things really start to roll.
Emanuel is presently ruminating his decision. Publicly he says he will base the decision on his commitment to his family, the constituency that elected him again to Congress, and his commitment to public service. We don't doubt that he's really asking himself which route advances his own bid for power. At which end of Pennsylvania Avenue he judges the balance of power to lie will tell much about the next eight years.
The question that lies before us is whether our future is center-left or just left. So far, the signals are at best ambiguous, like Obama's entire campaign.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Whither GOP?
Thinking about the future of the defeated Republican Party makes the SWNIDish head hurt. But we're trying to do it as a public service.
First, we affirm all that is affirmed by the founder of Crunchy Conservatism, Rod Dreher. His commentary on NPR today says just about all that SWNID would say, with two exceptions.
Exception One: The GOP must also stop doing things that antagonize the growing number of voters who aren't persons of pallor. Hammering on immigration, legal or otherwise, is wrong on many counts, including informed self interest and basic human morality, in our view. But it's also killing the Rs at the ballot box. The same may be said for the kind of subtle racism that still infects Republican rhetoric forty years after Nixon invented the Southern Strategy. No more talk about "real Americans," OK?
Exception Two: Dubya has been a massive drag on the party politically for the last three years. But it's time, or it will be eventually, to recognize him not as an inept president but as a president who presided with an impressive record of successes in extremely difficult times.
We're thinking about this Future of Republicanism thing. We ruminate on expressions like "opportunity," "responsibility," "self-determination," "economic enfranchisement," "environmental realism," "efficiency," "human dignity," "global democracy," and "international vigilance" as objects of hope versus fear. Governor Jindal will need a thoughtful platform and a clear way to speak about it when he runs against President Obama in 2012.
First, we affirm all that is affirmed by the founder of Crunchy Conservatism, Rod Dreher. His commentary on NPR today says just about all that SWNID would say, with two exceptions.
Exception One: The GOP must also stop doing things that antagonize the growing number of voters who aren't persons of pallor. Hammering on immigration, legal or otherwise, is wrong on many counts, including informed self interest and basic human morality, in our view. But it's also killing the Rs at the ballot box. The same may be said for the kind of subtle racism that still infects Republican rhetoric forty years after Nixon invented the Southern Strategy. No more talk about "real Americans," OK?
Exception Two: Dubya has been a massive drag on the party politically for the last three years. But it's time, or it will be eventually, to recognize him not as an inept president but as a president who presided with an impressive record of successes in extremely difficult times.
We're thinking about this Future of Republicanism thing. We ruminate on expressions like "opportunity," "responsibility," "self-determination," "economic enfranchisement," "environmental realism," "efficiency," "human dignity," "global democracy," and "international vigilance" as objects of hope versus fear. Governor Jindal will need a thoughtful platform and a clear way to speak about it when he runs against President Obama in 2012.
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":
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
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:
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!
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.
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.
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.
Where has this guy been? He needs a radio program or a TV program or something.
Monday, November 03, 2008
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.
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.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
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?
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.
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.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
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.
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):
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.
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.
Monday, October 27, 2008
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."
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.
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.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
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?
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?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
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.
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.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
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.
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.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
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.
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.
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.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Further Political Developments
With just over three weeks to go before the election, could this development change the outcome?
Thursday, October 09, 2008
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.
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.
And Now, the SWNIDobel Prizes
As Nobel season comes to a close, we award the first-ever SWNIDobel Prizes.
What is a SWNIDobel Prize? It is recognition granted by SWNID in the same fields as the Nobel Prizes. The selection committee consists of SWNID and his multiple personalities. The criteria for selection are that (a) the recipient must be alive (like the Nobel Prize); (b) the recipient must have had a direct impact on the life of SWNID and those like SWNID; (c) the recipient must not have won a Nobel Prize and be extremely unlikely ever to win such; (d) information about the recipient must be available on the internet, so that SWNID doesn't have to spend time in research.
Winners receive notable mention on this blog, with all the rights, honors and privileges that pertain thereto.
And so, without further ado, the SWNIDobel Prizes for 2008:
Physics: John Lasseter, Creative Director of Pixar. We honor Lasseter for physics not because of his technical command of computerized animation but because he has extended the delightful tradition of imaginary physics that has enriched animation for generations, but at the same time ridiculed it with the occasional imposition of realistic physics in his narratives (e.g., "falling with style").
Chemistry: Dr. John Franz, inventor of Roundup. There's no chemical in our garage that we treasure more than this scourge of all plant life. Thanks, Dr. Franz, for helping us keep the grass out of the sidewalk cracks!
Physiology or Medicine: Howard Schultz, founder of Starbucks. We medicate ourself every morning with a homebrew derived from his addictive but necessary product.
Economics: Luther George Simjian, John Shepherd-Barron, James Goodfellow, Don Wetzel, John D. White and Jairus Larson who independently claim credit for the invention of the ATM machine, by which SWNID and millions like him are never far from some negotiable banknotes.
Literature: Mort Drucker, the brilliant cartoonist whose spot-on caricatures of public figures made Mad the formative influence on SWNIDish sarcasm.
Peace: General David Petraeus, whose transformation of strategy in Iraq has saved countless thousands from dictatorial tyrrany and genocidal insurgency.
What is a SWNIDobel Prize? It is recognition granted by SWNID in the same fields as the Nobel Prizes. The selection committee consists of SWNID and his multiple personalities. The criteria for selection are that (a) the recipient must be alive (like the Nobel Prize); (b) the recipient must have had a direct impact on the life of SWNID and those like SWNID; (c) the recipient must not have won a Nobel Prize and be extremely unlikely ever to win such; (d) information about the recipient must be available on the internet, so that SWNID doesn't have to spend time in research.
Winners receive notable mention on this blog, with all the rights, honors and privileges that pertain thereto.
And so, without further ado, the SWNIDobel Prizes for 2008:
Physics: John Lasseter, Creative Director of Pixar. We honor Lasseter for physics not because of his technical command of computerized animation but because he has extended the delightful tradition of imaginary physics that has enriched animation for generations, but at the same time ridiculed it with the occasional imposition of realistic physics in his narratives (e.g., "falling with style").
Chemistry: Dr. John Franz, inventor of Roundup. There's no chemical in our garage that we treasure more than this scourge of all plant life. Thanks, Dr. Franz, for helping us keep the grass out of the sidewalk cracks!
Physiology or Medicine: Howard Schultz, founder of Starbucks. We medicate ourself every morning with a homebrew derived from his addictive but necessary product.
Economics: Luther George Simjian, John Shepherd-Barron, James Goodfellow, Don Wetzel, John D. White and Jairus Larson who independently claim credit for the invention of the ATM machine, by which SWNID and millions like him are never far from some negotiable banknotes.
Literature: Mort Drucker, the brilliant cartoonist whose spot-on caricatures of public figures made Mad the formative influence on SWNIDish sarcasm.
Peace: General David Petraeus, whose transformation of strategy in Iraq has saved countless thousands from dictatorial tyrrany and genocidal insurgency.
Addition to SWNID Fiction Club
We draw attention to the latest addition to the SWNID Fiction Club, a book that we read and deeply appreciated some time ago but only recalled as a club selection when today prompted by a note on Facebook.
It is Mr. Ives' Christmas by Oscar Hijuelos. Meeting mixed reviews when published, the book has made a deep impression on many readers who see in it the story of faith in profound darkness. We think the book may be impossible to appreciate for those not tuned to such frequencies.
It is Mr. Ives' Christmas by Oscar Hijuelos. Meeting mixed reviews when published, the book has made a deep impression on many readers who see in it the story of faith in profound darkness. We think the book may be impossible to appreciate for those not tuned to such frequencies.
Hall-of-Mirrors-Style Infinite Regression in College Rankings
Attention, gentle readers: there now exists a means of ranking the rankings of institutions of higher education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy now offers the Rankings Systems Clearinghouse, a means of explaining the myriad college rankings and their significance to make them (using that most opaque of overused metaphors) "transparent."
SWNID now plans to seek a grant to develop a meta-meta-ranking system to rank the rankers of ranks.
SWNID now plans to seek a grant to develop a meta-meta-ranking system to rank the rankers of ranks.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
More Telegraphic SWNIDisms for Trying Times
Today SWNID thinks that:
- McCain probably helped himself in last night's debate, as he came across as the more accomplished and experienced person for uncertain times. His response to the final question--What don't you know and how will you learn about it?--epitomized that, as by contrast Obama made a self-depreciating joke and then reverted to a stump speech. McCain didn't "attack" Obama, even when he had obvious chances to do so. We assume he's leaving that to advertising and Palin, while he strives to look experienced and POTUS-like.
- We actually think that the "town hall" questioners in last night's debate asked some thoughtful, penetrating questions. As a result, the body politic was spared the wholesale quantities of populist rhetoric that have infected the campaigns recently. So three cheers for Joe Lunchbucket (we can't bring ourselves to say "Sixpack").
- Tom Brokaw asked a superb question when he asked the candidates their "doctrine" (a fine, theological word) about intervention to prevent genocide. Asking whether health care was a privilege, a right or a responsibility was pretty good too, especially because he included the tertium quid, so wisely embraced by McCain in contrast to Obama. Brokaw laid a couple of eggs too, but only the most rabidly partisan could see him as a dishonest broker by the end of the evening.
- Palin probably helped the ticket last Thursday, as polls since then show McCain closing the gap yet again and she continues to gather large crowds. She is perhaps misunderestimated in the way of other popular conservatives (Reagan, Dubya), though, as the saying goes, time will tell. Meanwhile and against the tides of media opinion, even the likes of Camille Paglia confesses that she's impressed with the Governor of Alaska.
- We find ourself feeling old as we tell the younger folk of our acquaintance that we have lived through financial and economic events of similar or greater import to those of recent days. "I've worked for a bank for five years, and I've never seen anything like this," was a remark made to us. We tried not to laugh condescendingly but instead summoned 1987 and 1977-82, which in turn prompted us to give thanks that we can do that with a full set of teeth and head of hair that's mostly not gray.
- Boston Red Sox fans have been completely transformed from doughty supporters of a benighted but plucky franchise to spoiled, condescending triumphalists. Success has spoiled them. "Red Sox Nation" today is a foul odor in the SWNIDish nostrils, and we grew up idolizing Carl Yazstremski, for goodness sake. We now feel for the Boston franchise what we once felt only for that team in the Bronx.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Monday, October 06, 2008
Cincinnati Public: Best in Class
Ohio State Report Card performance measures show that for last year, Cincinnati Public Schools were as good as it gets among urban districts in Ohio.
Expecting the usual knee-jerk responses from confirmed opponents of all public schools including especially CPS, we stress the following:
Expecting the usual knee-jerk responses from confirmed opponents of all public schools including especially CPS, we stress the following:
- The Ohio State Report Card is not the best measure imaginable for a school district's performance. It is at least arguably more reliable than anecdotes and dicta about "what everyone knows."
- SWNID has never been an apologist for CPS as a whole, just an eager advocate for those who live in Greater Cincinnati to realize that the district has pockets of consistent excellence that make it entirely possible to live in the city and provide a fine education for one's offspring without paying tuition.
- SWNID does not ascribe moral virtue to those who choose to live in the city and navigate its educational and social labyrinths for the sake of its economic and cultural benefits. We simply find it a wise choice for a cheaper, more interesting lifestyle, one made more accessible by the ready availability of good public schools.
- Similarly, we don't ascribe moral turpitude to those who have moved to the 'burbs for the schools. Your choices keep the urban core of the city affordable for people like us, so ironically enough, we have you to thank.
- Urban education is a problem for everyone in our Republic, even those who eschew urbanity. What will we do with the many humans who live in cities if we don't educate them effectively? Revert to a sweatshop economy? Radical dismantling of public education might be an expedient worthy of consideration, but waiting around for it to happen without a transition plan is hardly a thoughtful way to address the problem and its implications.
Faux Economist SWNID Yields to Real Economist Samuelson, Faux Politician SWNID Criticizes Real Politician McCain
Robert Samuelson, dean of America's economics journalists, today offers historical and economic perspective on the lingering finance crisis (or growing financial crisis, depending on your perspective).
His point: things could get very bad, but at present there are many reasons to think that they aren't that bad and won't turn out to be.
Meanwhile, SWNID decries the McCain campaign's craven concession to the Democrats of the metanarrative about the financial crisis. Listening to McCain ads, the longest of which was ably delivered though sadly not factually and tactically corrected by Sarah Palin last Thursday night, one would think it a matter of settled common sense that the financial crisis is entirely the consequence of the government's failure to regulate greedy Wall Street capitalists and predatory lenders.
Such a perspective is hardly accurate or complete enough to be deemed "true" in any true sense of the word. Worse, it cedes the discussion to a kind of "bipartisan" consensus in the completely wrong direction of making the American economy more hostile to business development. Such a political scenario reminds us entirely of the way that the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations (different only in the degree to which they applied the approach, not in the approach itself) approached the Depression in ways that kept things depressed: with government intervention that never improved the business climate.
Whacking personae who don't represent a significant portion of the electorate ("Wall Street," "speculators," "the wealthiest 1%") may be the kind of thing that focus groups respond to, but it isn't a platform from which to govern effectively.
His point: things could get very bad, but at present there are many reasons to think that they aren't that bad and won't turn out to be.
Meanwhile, SWNID decries the McCain campaign's craven concession to the Democrats of the metanarrative about the financial crisis. Listening to McCain ads, the longest of which was ably delivered though sadly not factually and tactically corrected by Sarah Palin last Thursday night, one would think it a matter of settled common sense that the financial crisis is entirely the consequence of the government's failure to regulate greedy Wall Street capitalists and predatory lenders.
Such a perspective is hardly accurate or complete enough to be deemed "true" in any true sense of the word. Worse, it cedes the discussion to a kind of "bipartisan" consensus in the completely wrong direction of making the American economy more hostile to business development. Such a political scenario reminds us entirely of the way that the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations (different only in the degree to which they applied the approach, not in the approach itself) approached the Depression in ways that kept things depressed: with government intervention that never improved the business climate.
Whacking personae who don't represent a significant portion of the electorate ("Wall Street," "speculators," "the wealthiest 1%") may be the kind of thing that focus groups respond to, but it isn't a platform from which to govern effectively.
Friday, October 03, 2008
SWNID Endorses Sensible Campaign
Citizens of Chicago enjoy many fine amenities. They also labor under a political regime distinguished by its inconsistency and corruption.
Whether the subject of this post is a matter of the former or latter is immaterial. But the fact is this: the Chicago Public Library insists that it cannot restrict access to pornography on public terminals in its libraries. As a consequence, patrons and librarians in Chicago's libraries are commonly subject to an assault of obscene images as computers are used commonly to access porn, even by registered sex offenders.
We commend the efforts of our friend and former student Amanda Maglish Bratschie to bring attention to this situation and galvanize the public to bring needed change to a valued public institution.
Gentle readers can learn more at her web site.
So whatever happened to the librarian who made people behave themselves in the library?
Whether the subject of this post is a matter of the former or latter is immaterial. But the fact is this: the Chicago Public Library insists that it cannot restrict access to pornography on public terminals in its libraries. As a consequence, patrons and librarians in Chicago's libraries are commonly subject to an assault of obscene images as computers are used commonly to access porn, even by registered sex offenders.
We commend the efforts of our friend and former student Amanda Maglish Bratschie to bring attention to this situation and galvanize the public to bring needed change to a valued public institution.
Gentle readers can learn more at her web site.
So whatever happened to the librarian who made people behave themselves in the library?
Thursday, October 02, 2008
And as to Political Blame
Jonah Goldberg nicely summarizes the MSM's post mortem analysis of the first bailout bill: even though the House is controlled by the Ds, it's the fault of the Rs that the bill didn't pass.
The Speaker didn't whip it, she let 16 committee chairs vote against it, and she blames the Rs. The left's only objection was that the bill didn't contain enough spending on their favorite causes, all unrelated to stabilizing the financial system. And the resulting larger deficits would be the fault of Rs too, presumably for not raising taxes to 110%.
We think that the Rs who voted no on "principle" are uninformed, but at least they had something resembling principle.
The Speaker didn't whip it, she let 16 committee chairs vote against it, and she blames the Rs. The left's only objection was that the bill didn't contain enough spending on their favorite causes, all unrelated to stabilizing the financial system. And the resulting larger deficits would be the fault of Rs too, presumably for not raising taxes to 110%.
We think that the Rs who voted no on "principle" are uninformed, but at least they had something resembling principle.
"Cheap politicians are actually very expensive and the same principle applies to CEOs."
So writes Thomas Sowell. His column on the stupidity of regulating corporate CEOs' pay is genuinely amazing, both in style just as much as substance.
We can't begin to select the bits to quote from this piece, but here is one, commenting on the fact that the "golden parachutes" that so offend the public are for corporations a cheap, quick way to get an ineffective executive replaced:
Brilliant! Read the whole thing, or you're never allowed to read this blog again.
We can't begin to select the bits to quote from this piece, but here is one, commenting on the fact that the "golden parachutes" that so offend the public are for corporations a cheap, quick way to get an ineffective executive replaced:
But what about the “social justice” of it all?
Such questions seem to carry great weight with people who act as if they are God on Judgment Day. But one of the little overlooked differences between themselves and God on Judgment Day is that God does not have to worry about what is going to happen the day after Judgment Day.
Brilliant! Read the whole thing, or you're never allowed to read this blog again.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
For Jazz Neophytes
We just wrote the following to a student asking for recommendations of jazz artists. We share it, lightly edited to conform to the style of the blog, for the benefit of gentle readers needing a respite from politics and economics:
There are so many great artists to recommend! We'd recommend exploring at this web site as a way to begin. Ken Burns's PBS documentary on jazz is not necessarily the definitive word, but you won't listen to any bad music by listening to what he recommends.
Here are some of the great names of jazz who comprise much of our personal playlist:
Louis Armstrong
Duke Ellington
Count Basie
Benny Goodman
Lester Young
Art Tatum
Charlie Parker
Dizzy Gillespie
Miles Davis
Clifford Brown
Charles Mingus
Thelonius Monk
John Coltrane
Herbie Hancock
Wayne Shorter
Stan Getz
Art Blakey
Oscar Peterson
Chick Corea
Winton Marsalis
Branford Marsalis
We recently gave a friend the one-disc version of the two-disc set described here. We could definitely recommend this as a fine collection of great performances with very accessible grooves.
Note that we eschew the subgenre labeled "smooth jazz," which is comprised largely of repetitive R&B-style licks without a lot of substance. "Smooth jazz" is for people who don't want to listen to the music. If unobtrusive background sounds are what you seek, you may be out of luck with all our recommendations, which tend to cause the listener to tap feet, snap fingers, sigh contentedly and occasionally exclaim, "Oh, yeah!" or "Go, man!" In that unfortunate case, go for the contemptible wallpaper music of Dave Koz, Kenny G and other extinguishers of the flame. Then there's the "New Age" school of Windham Hill Records, with such pabulum as George Winston. This is "music" for people who find smooth jazz too challenging, the aural equivalent to Zoloft and warm milk.
Your hipster professor,
SWNID
There are so many great artists to recommend! We'd recommend exploring at this web site as a way to begin. Ken Burns's PBS documentary on jazz is not necessarily the definitive word, but you won't listen to any bad music by listening to what he recommends.
Here are some of the great names of jazz who comprise much of our personal playlist:
Louis Armstrong
Duke Ellington
Count Basie
Benny Goodman
Lester Young
Art Tatum
Charlie Parker
Dizzy Gillespie
Miles Davis
Clifford Brown
Charles Mingus
Thelonius Monk
John Coltrane
Herbie Hancock
Wayne Shorter
Stan Getz
Art Blakey
Oscar Peterson
Chick Corea
Winton Marsalis
Branford Marsalis
We recently gave a friend the one-disc version of the two-disc set described here. We could definitely recommend this as a fine collection of great performances with very accessible grooves.
Note that we eschew the subgenre labeled "smooth jazz," which is comprised largely of repetitive R&B-style licks without a lot of substance. "Smooth jazz" is for people who don't want to listen to the music. If unobtrusive background sounds are what you seek, you may be out of luck with all our recommendations, which tend to cause the listener to tap feet, snap fingers, sigh contentedly and occasionally exclaim, "Oh, yeah!" or "Go, man!" In that unfortunate case, go for the contemptible wallpaper music of Dave Koz, Kenny G and other extinguishers of the flame. Then there's the "New Age" school of Windham Hill Records, with such pabulum as George Winston. This is "music" for people who find smooth jazz too challenging, the aural equivalent to Zoloft and warm milk.
Your hipster professor,
SWNID
Recommended "Viewing"
SWNID extremely recommends, passing along a recommendation of WODGC, the bloggingheads.tv offering of political dialogue between John McWhorter and Glenn Loury. The two accomplished public intellectuals speak honestly and unaffectedly about developments in the presidential election.
There's not much to see in this stuff, which looks like it was put together with web cams. But there's plenty to listen to, and it can be speeded up to 1.4x real time for busy folk.
We've been intrigued by Loury since reading his One by One from the Inside Out. These dialogues remind us that we need to get caught up on his more recent books.
There's not much to see in this stuff, which looks like it was put together with web cams. But there's plenty to listen to, and it can be speeded up to 1.4x real time for busy folk.
We've been intrigued by Loury since reading his One by One from the Inside Out. These dialogues remind us that we need to get caught up on his more recent books.
Today's Take Two
As the American Ship of State continues to list from side to side, we offer two observations on what may be a fateful morning.
First, we delegate analysis of Monday's debacle to the formidable David Brooks, whom we quote at some length for understanding of matters political and economic:
Second, the Senate, where cooler heads sometimes prevail thanks to that body's now-somewhat-diluted-constitutional differences with the House, will vote shortly on a revised bailout bill. the Gray Lady, quoting its usual courageous band of anonymous sources, says that the bill will contain: "tax breaks for businesses and alternative energy and higher government insurance for bank deposits."
We SWNIDishly observe that this is the way our federal legislature works: when something needed doesn't get votes, like a Christmas tree it gets decorated with colorful geegaws that will induce our lawmakers to do the right thing. Hence . . .
OK, three observations. We are LOL* over Harry Reid's rhetoric, as quoted by our Newspaper of Record:
It has been SWNIDishly determined, in our judgment that when a politician combines the divine passive and the royal plural in the same sentence, that politician proves simultaneously his enthusiasm for his own importance and his unwillingness to accept blame.
________________
*This is our first and last use of the popular acronym-cliche. Reid deserves such contempt.
First, we delegate analysis of Monday's debacle to the formidable David Brooks, whom we quote at some length for understanding of matters political and economic:
We add that House Republicans will indeed get most of the blame, not because Democrats did nothing blameworthy but because the public intuitively expects so little from Andrew Jackson's heirs.House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.
Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century. With this vote, they’ve taken responsibility for this economy, and they will be held accountable. The short-term blows will fall on John McCain, the long-term stress on the existence of the G.O.P. as we know it.
I’ve spoken with several House Republicans over the past few days and most admirably believe in free-market principles. What’s sad is that they still think it’s 1984. They still think the biggest threat comes from socialism and Walter Mondale liberalism. They seem not to have noticed how global capital flows have transformed our political economy.
We’re living in an age when a vast excess of capital sloshes around the world fueling cycles of bubble and bust. When the capital floods into a sector or economy, it washes away sober business practices, and habits of discipline and self-denial. Then the money managers panic and it sloshes out, punishing the just and unjust alike.
What we need in this situation is authority. Not heavy-handed government regulation, but the steady and powerful hand of some public institutions that can guard against the corrupting influences of sloppy money and then prevent destructive contagions when the credit dries up.
Second, the Senate, where cooler heads sometimes prevail thanks to that body's now-somewhat-diluted-constitutional differences with the House, will vote shortly on a revised bailout bill. the Gray Lady, quoting its usual courageous band of anonymous sources, says that the bill will contain: "tax breaks for businesses and alternative energy and higher government insurance for bank deposits."
We SWNIDishly observe that this is the way our federal legislature works: when something needed doesn't get votes, like a Christmas tree it gets decorated with colorful geegaws that will induce our lawmakers to do the right thing. Hence . . .
- Tax breaks for businesses are generally a good thing these days, especially in a global economy in which American business taxes are higher than everyone's save the Japan's. This issue, however has nothing to do in the short term with the financial crisis, which requires getting enough confidence back in the banking system that banks will lend to each other. Deeper in the article, the Times notes that individual tax breaks are included as well. These are also welcome but just as irrelevant to the crisis. Given their placement in the article, they're apparently not of much interest to the Times's reporters and editors.
- Alternative energy is so stylish and gives its advocates such a strong sense of their moral superiority and foresightedness. But it couldn't have less to do with the present issue if it were a statement about the likelihood of life on other planets. Claims that these measures will create "tens of thousands of jobs" don't even deserve comment.
- Higher government insurance for bank deposits actually makes sense, as this is a measure that will convince nervous depositors not to withdraw their money from commercial banks in what could become a disastrous run on banks like the one that FDR had to fix. The FDIC's $100,000 limit hasn't been revised upward in as long as most self-conscious life forms can remember.
- Notably missing in this list, but thanks to the Times's crack reporting perhaps a part of the bill, is revision of mark-to-market accounting rules that put the (highly regulated, by the way) banking industry in a precarious capital situation that has precipitated banks' lack of confidence in each other, freezing inter-bank lending and drying up credit liquidity. That would be the most helpful addition to the House's failed bill, but either the Senate doesn't have the wherewithal to realize that or the Times doesn't have the wherewithal to recognize its significance.
OK, three observations. We are LOL* over Harry Reid's rhetoric, as quoted by our Newspaper of Record:
It has been determined, in our judgment, this is the best thing to move forward.
It has been SWNIDishly determined, in our judgment that when a politician combines the divine passive and the royal plural in the same sentence, that politician proves simultaneously his enthusiasm for his own importance and his unwillingness to accept blame.
________________
*This is our first and last use of the popular acronym-cliche. Reid deserves such contempt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)