The First Debate

We cracked open a bottle of wine, put out some cheese and fresh-baked pumpernickel bread and sat down for an evening with the candidates. Overall I thought it was a good debate, which to me is a back-and-forth discussion of the issues. I want the participants to tell me, the viewer, what they are going to do about Iran, Afghanistan, Oil, The Economy; but more importantly, show me that they know what they are talking about. So for me, the winner is the one who accomplishes that.

To that extent, I'd have to say that Obama won. Obviously, I'm biased. But I'm also capable of independent thought. A part of me was watching this debate through the eyes of someone not predisposed to vote either way. That part of me saw Obama as Presidential and McCain as Senatorial. By that I mean that I can see Barack sitting in the Oval Office, taking advice, and making a command decision; whereas I can see McCain sitting at a conference table giving advice and working to achieve consensus or at least get what he wants. Nothing I have seen from McCain says 'Leader' in any way; at best it says 'Manager' and one you don't want to cross.

Wanda on Politics

Wanda Sykes on the tonight show. Very funny stuff.

Compensation Caps

Hank Paulson has been adamant that there can be no cap on the executive compensation for any company participating in the bailout. His reasoning? Because they might not participate. Now on the face of it, this seems absolutely laughable. You don't want to take the handout from the man on the street, because he insists you agree to kick your habit? Okay, that's less money we need to handout to the Wall Street beggars.

But that's actually not the reason. The reason is that he wants to hold auctions for the toxic securities, and the more companies that participate, the better chance of setting a fair market value on them. His worry is that companies who are not in dire straights, but do have these securities will opt to take their chances. That diminishes the number of companies participating and leaves this toxic waste out there.

How about this idea: Regulations that limit the compensation of any employee of a publicly traded corporation to a multiple of the lowest compensated employee of that corporation? Compensation would include salary (in any form), stock (in any form), or any other remuneration which the corporation reports. IE., if the multiple is set at, say, 100, then if the salary of the lowest paid employee is $35,000 then the CEO could receive $3,500,000. If the CEO wants options on 100,000 shares of stock, then the janitor needs to receive 1,000.

That removes the disincentive to participate in Paulson's We-Pay-Cash-For-Your-Unwanteds" nonsense.

The best approach is probably to put the regulations in place as fast as possible (this is an emergency, remember?). Then slow walk the Bailout until after the election or when Paulson's head explodes, whichever comes first.

Section 8

For those of you not horrified enough with the Economic Patriot Act, I offer for your consideration Section 8 of said legislation. It reads, in its entirety:

"Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

WOW.

No, more than "WOW".

Holy Fucking Shit!

So, we're saying that Henry Paulson can do whatever he wants with $700,000,000,000.00. Whatever. He. Wants.

If he decides that the best bailout plan is to buy Fiji and move his family there, so be it. Sure, we might be pissed, but we're prevented, BY LAW, from doing anything about it.

But he wouldn't do something like that. Really? Why Not? In the world of corporate capitalism there is no "Right" or "Wrong"; there is "Legal" and "Illegal". We're about to make it Legal for a captain of American capitalism to do whatever he wants with almost a Trillion dollars of our money!

The Economic Patriot Act

There's a Great Emergency!! We Must Act Immediately!! Quick, sign this bill into law granting unprecedented, unsupervised, and possibly unconstitutional, powers to the executive branch! Don't read it, just sign! Sign Now!

Haven't we seen this movie before?

For most people, getting hoodwinked like this once is a learning experience. For Congress? Not so much. They're about to fall for this yet again, and we'll watch our life savings, as we watched our freedoms, melt away.

Now, I realize that things are seriously screwed up on Wall Street. And it is imperative that our government do what is necessary to keep the U.S. economy afloat and society intact. But is this the only solution? I don't think so. Is it the best? Only if you subscribe to the antiquated notion that if you take care of American business then it will take care of American society. But these aren't 'American' businesses - they are transnationals who happen to be based here. They aren't about American workers, they are about profit.

So, what are the alternatives? How about...

• Banks issue equity (stocks) that the Fed buys. The banks then have a better balance between cash and debt and are more willing to loan money again. Thus addressing the problem that credit is currently frozen in the markets.
• The US takes that $1 trillion dollars that is currently up for grabs in Paulson's Cash-For-Trash giveaway, and uses it to purchase 1/2 interest in any home that is owner-occupied and in foreclosure. The owner's mortgage is immediately cut in half, so they can make their payments. If and when the house is sold, the US receives it's half of the proceeds, potentially breaking even over the long haul. This puts the brakes on the number of foreclosures and allows property values to stabilize. Thus addressing the housing-bubble implosion.

These are two of the ideas I've seen floated around, and they both seem safer for the US taxpayer than "Patriot Act II: Show Me The Money".

McCain Invents The Blackberry

Briefly saw a headline stating that McCain had invented the blackberry. Okay leaving aside the fact that the weren't 'invented' they were bred, this is patently false, since we had blackberries growing wild all over the place when I was growing up. This is obviously a childish swipe at McCain's age that we Democrats should not be engaging in. We have the upper hand on the issues, there's no need to wade into the gutter.

UPDATE: Apparently the article was referring to the PDA/Cell Phone. Okay, leaving aside the fact that it was patented by the Canadian company RIM, this is just ludicrous on the face of it. Ask yourself, which of the following quotes can you more easily imagine coming from John McCain:

1) "I envision a hand-held device that offers the next step in the convergence of computers and cell phones, running both GSM and Bluetooth protocols"

2) "I like pie"

In keeping with the obvious Al Gore references, I'm waiting for word to leak out that John McCain was the real life inspiration of Jean Valjean.

The Palin Bait-and-Switch

I think everyone accepts the idea that Sarah Palin was put on the ticket for Political, rather than Policy, reasons. John McCain believes that she will help him win this election, and he is obviously willing to do anything to make that happen. But will he really keep her around? Why? Would it not make more sense for her to make a graceful exit sometime between Nov 5th and Jan 20th? Granted, it will piss the living bejesus out of the Xian wingnuts, but so what? They are only necessary on election day. When it comes to running the country, do you really think McCain wants their input on anything? And if he's not planning on surviving to a second term would he really care if he burnt this bridge?

Look for Trigger or Bristol or one of that brood to suddenly need Momma Pitbull at home. She can bow out and Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman can step in. The neocon cabal will go along with this because the Palin brand won't be tainted, and she can re-emerge in 2012 better prepared to be sold to the sheep. Or mooses.

On Faith and Science

We are inquisitive creatures, we humans. We want to know how things work, what's over the horizon, why are we here, what's for dinner. So many questions. The answers we find come from two complementary yet competitive areas: Science and Faith, the Yin and Yang of human understanding.

Science explains the explainable, Faith the unexplainable. But there is no fixed line between explainable and not; rather we have a shifting grey area. In earlier times we may have believed that the lights in the night sky were the glowing eyes of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but eventually science stepped in and introduced the concept of stars. But stars raise their own questions, are there other planets circling those stars? Are their other beings on them? What are they having for dinner?

And the grey area between science and faith continued to shift.

Science accepts and probably forces this shifting. It builds upon itself, constantly probing and refuting it's own precepts. Faith does not have this luxury. By it's very nature it cannot shift or bend. Explanations are Articles Of Faith. They are because they are, and they are not open to negotiation.

Sept 11

I think it is a testament to the good taste and restraint of the Republican Party that they have refrained from using the obvious 9/11 talking point: that if they had been in command of the White House on that fateful day they would have prevented the attacks.

Oh, wait, never mind.

Politics or Policy?

I'd like to imagine that there was a time in our political system when there was at least balance between Politics and Policy. That politics was the effort required to show off the proposed policies of the candidate so that the voters could make the best choice. Obviously, each candidate believes (in my little dream world) that their policies are vastly superior to those of their opponent, and it's just a matter of informing the electorate.

Whether or not there ever was such a time, it is obviously not the case now. Some time ago, maybe around the advent of television and mass marketing, we slid from informing to the electorate to conning them. Tell the suckers we'll give 'em whatever they want, as long as they vote for us. Politics became estranged from policy. Do what it takes to get elected, so that you can implement your policies.

I wonder if we've slid down to a new level. Dan Quayle was the first blip. Is this guy really ready to run the country? Well, he's been in Washington for awhile, the Soviet Union is defeated, what the heck. Then George the Lesser, sure he's a C student, but he's just so darn folksy. And, hey, America is on top of the world economically, we're loved everywhere, what the hell. Now we're offered Caribou Barbie, a self-described pit-bull, who couldn't even graduate from my alma mater. But America's reputation is ruined, the economy is in the toilet, the planet's ecology is wrecked, and we're fighting wars against concepts. What the Fuck?!?

Have we just given up all pretense of policy? Is politics all there is? Are the Republicans really that cynical? Or are we that stupid? Ask yourself this:

If John McCain were already president and needed to choose his second-in-command; someone to help him run the most powerful nation on earth during one of the most complex times in it's history. Is this the person he would choose? Why? Ask yourself the same thing about Barack Obama.