Some neat quotes

I had no idea what else to do with these but I heard both of these yesterday and thought they were neat:

Voting is like driving: Choose R to go backwards, choose D to go forwards

Rosa sat so Martin could walk
Martin walked so Barack could run
Barack runs so our children can fly

mmmm, makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

A thought, do you think more people watched the Barack infomercial or the World Series last night? Probably Barack since he was on more stations (including the one the WS came on). Anyway I thought both were great. Congrats to the Phillies and especially Cole Hamels.

My thoughts on the possibility of an assasination

So there has been a lot of rabble rousing this campaign, which seems especially dangerous since most of it is against our first viable African American candidate.

Now news comes that the ATF has foiled a plot to kill Barack Obama. But if you read this plan it was much more of an idea and a fantasy than a 'plot.' The guys were neo nazis who had stolen guns from family and intended to use those to rob a gun store, kill 88 african americans at a school (beheading 14 of them), and then get in a car dressed in white suits and top hats drive very quickly at Obama while firing at him from out the windows. Let me just say:
They had gotten to about step 1 of their 4 step plan (and probably didn't even have their top hats yet)

Clinton and the bushes have had grenades and planes try to kill them and people fire at the white house but the last president to have a person shoot physically at him with a gun was Reagan. I just don't see an assasination happening. Crappy attempts like this, sure. I guess I would say that we just don't have a culture that breeds assasination like we did in the 1960s. Maybe it's just my optimism but I am not nearly afraid of this as most others seem to be.

Belated endorsement note

Al-Qaida endorses McCain

Colin Powell endorses Obama



I think Obama wins this round.

But on a serious note, I'm surprised this came out from Al-Qaida supporters. Any person who pays attention knows that Al-Qaida likes Republicans in power. Bush hasn't gone after Bin Laden or Al-Qaida and instead attacked one of the most secularly run countries in the middle east (basically killing a bunch of the least threatening Muslims). This drives up recruiting for them and puts them in no real danger.

That being said, I think Bin Laden handled this better in 2004 with reverse psychology by addressing Americans and saying he supported Kerry, knowing that people would vote for Bush. These Al-Qaida supporters essentially gave away the whole mind set.

For those who haven't heard Powell's endorsement it is awesome. He finally offers the proper answer to the charge "Obama is a muslim." After noting that he is not he says 'well what if he is?' and goes on to say that a person's religion shouldn't matter and that American Muslim boys and girls at home shouldn't be made to believe that they aren't allowed to be president.

For those who claim Powell had to endorse Obama because he's black I think that is absolutely ridiculous. Are they going to stop inviting him to black conventions? Being a republican probably did that enough.
He's a military man, a republican, a former member of this administration, and has known John McCain for over 20 years. That's like saying Bill Richardson had to endorse Obama over Hillary because they're both minorities. Many more reasons for him to go the other way

Belated congratulations

to Paul Krugman for winning the Nobel Prize in Economics. I can't think of a man more deserving than Krugman. He's incredibly intelligent and probably the best progressive economist there is. I can only pray that Krugman gets a high level job in an Obama administration but I realize that is probably too much to ask. Heaven forbid a progressive actually work his way into government.

Anyway, I find it cool too because Krugman got his Ph.D from MIT and also taught here for some time.

Congrats Paul!

Debate results

The only consistent, reliable ways to say who "won" the debate this season have been CBS and CNN polls of voters watching the debate. It completely dictates the spin. Reception to Obama was lukewarm directly after the debate but changed to being 'how Obama beat McCain.' Instead of being 'flat' Obama became 'cool.' Neat political trick huh?

Anyway here are the numbers
CBS
Who won the debate?
Obama 53
McCain 22

Shares your values

Obama, Before the debate: 54
Obama, After the debate: 63

McCain, Before the debate: 53
McCain, After the debate: 56

CNN
Who won the debate?
McCain 31
Obama 58

Favorable/Unfavorable

Obama, before debate: 63/35
Obama, after debate: 66/33

McCain, before debate: 51/45
McCain, after debate: 49/49

Game over. Nice knowing you John. Now let's see how many electoral votes Obama can rack up and how wide a popular vote gap Obama can get. Here comes a mandate baby

Live blogging the debate

BREAKING NEWS: Nothing changes. CNN and CBS snap polls are worth watching but pundits are lying sacks of crap

Congratulations John McCain! You just set the world record for using the word autism in a debate!

McCain's stock answer to education should be: If everyone in this country had a good education, republican politicians would be out of a job. What happens when republicans leave political office? They go to the private sector and screw the people so anyone who wants to improve education wants to screw the people.

Why is abortion the only issue to get Republicans to say "I'm a federalist"? Constitutional Amendment defining marriage ring a bell republicans?

This just in: McCain doesn't understand healthcare

If Obama had said Wal Mart after saying he would penalize large businesses that can afford to pay for health care for their employees he wins this debate with the country right there.

I think McCain just wants Obama to travel a lot. I don't see why but it's always nice to get travel suggestions

I disagree with Obama's view of free trade. If we make shitty expensive cars and South Korea has better cheaper cars we shouldn't be able to sell ours

Oh, McCain says storing and disposing of nuclear waste is no problem. Good, I was worried about that.

Yeah, why do we need to spend to pay for things? Can't we just deregulate, lower taxes and hope for the best? Seriously, McCain just is not intelligent.

I just shit my pants when McCain said women look up to Palin

Ooooo, McCain, ask him about Jeremiah Wright! What about the fact that he's a secret Muslim terrorist? Wow

What is McCain talking about!? What has been yelled at Obama rallies? EXAMPLES! Why are you letting the kooks who scream shit at your rallies off the hook? You say it happens at all rallies and your supporters are the most patriotic? Is that supposed to make us feel better?

Ooooo, how's McCain going to defend all the evil shit that he hasn't repudiated after it's been said (and widely reported) at his events (and Palins)

This is probably McCain's best debate yet but no one is really scoring any points (cause they're only spouting talking points). That being said, I wish Jim Lehrer was moderating this debate because he was...competent

McCain, shut up about the town halls. You've lost all of the debates (including the town hall). Just cause you want free publicity (cause no one wants to give you money) don't pretend that you are moral in any way

You know what I like about Obama. He answers every charge. Palin and McCain pretty much say "Let me answer the things I want to and ignore the others because they're tough or unsavory"

I like McCain's line about "I'm not Bush" but unfortunately he's so close to Bush that Obama will be able to nail him on that.

Can we just educate the public on earmark spending. How many times does Obama have to say that we need to cut back on stupid spending but earmark spending is not a significant amount of our government spending. You know what is? The war (and more broadly the military and arming our overarmed nation)
Wow, Bob actually called McCain out on his "Iknow how to" stupid lines

Pay as you go? Obama just say no! Demand stimulus and New Deal 2.0 dude!

If Joe the Plumber makes more than $250,000 a year, his taxes should go up.

McCain trying to make Obama sound like a socialist. Might work with the American people because many of them have an irrational fear of anything that sounds like socialism/marxism/communism. Little does he know that we're on the verge of a class year already
Talking points...yawn
Both of them are looking at the camera, not each other...lame.

Here we go again

Jack Cafferty HATES Sarah Palin

In the world of cable news Fox are the republicans, MSNBC are the democrats, and CNN are the "independents" who are accused of bias from both sides and, while inept and balanced when it is not always fair to be so, probably represent the undecideds better that either of the other two. That being said, Jack Cafferty's repeated lashings of Sarah Palin is probably just one in a string of many reasons that McCain is Effed. Here is the play by play.

Cafferty berates the Palin choice from the outset:


Cafferty is stunned by incoherence and ignorance of Palin's answer to Couric's question about the bailout and says she should "scare the hell out of you". "There is no excuse for this":


Cafferty asks how anyone can talk Palin seriously. Also suggests she's committing political suicide by essentially...talking:


Cafferty asks if Palin should be removed and says McCain used bad judgement by picking her:


Cafferty reads emails from left, right, and center saying how unqualified she is:


Ouch! would you like some ointment for that burn?

You know you're on the wrong side when...

you have to calm down your supporters by assuring them that your African American opponent isn't an Arab


you get booed for saying you admire your opponent, telling your supporters he's a decent person who you don't need to be scared of being president and that it's just ideological differences, and when you tell people to be respectful


Maybe instead of fanning these flames and accusing your opponent of treason the week before and then saying essentially you were talking politics or "kidding" you should just not do that in the first place. Obviously some of your supporters aren't smart enough to tell the difference.

A dangerous perception and more on the Nobel Peace Prize

So I was thinking more about Martti Ahtisaari winning the Nobel Peace Prize and noting that, in addition to being president of Finland, Ahtisaari was a diplomat and peacemaker before and after being president.

That got me thinking...being a diplomat is some pretty freaking important foreign policy experience and would seem to stress the peaceful/negotiation side. What is it with our country that "general" or "war hero" are taken to be foreign policy experience. It is to some extent but it is a very confrontational form of foreign policy experience and seems to speak volumes of our view of how we deal with other nations.

Why can't we have a president like this guy?

Former Finnish president and peace mediating "go-to guy" Martti Ahtisaari won the Nobel Peace Prize today. Congrats to him and it makes you wish that leaders of America were viewed as impartial and good peace mediators.

Wouldn't that be a cool place to be in the world?

Funniest clip ever

This is probably inappropriate because swing votes are who we need to sway but there is so much truth to this

McCain doesn't understand the war on terror

During this debate it became painfully clear that McCain doesn't like answering questions and doesn't understand wars that aren't with specific countries (if there was any doubt left)

Example: Obama said if we knew al Qaeda (bin Laden and top member of al Qaeda actually) were in Pakistan and Pakistan couldn't or refused to act then we should to kill them.

McCain implied that this was attacking Pakistan and that it was crazy but then saying that he would get bin Laden no matter what.

That begs the question: WHAT IF HE STAYS IN PAKISTAN AND PAKISTAN CAN'T OR REFUSES TO ACT?!

McCain doesn't seem to understand that al Qaeda isn't a country, it's a group that can move to different places. McCain really is better suited to Cold War type wars

Debate live blogging

Ok, I'm going to take a break for a while

9:29 PM: Everyone got drunk, what do you do?
Obama calls earmark hawkery not as significant as McCain makes them out to be
McCain claims Obama will raise taxes
9:24 PM: What sacrifices will people have to make to keep the American Dream alive?
McCain parrots Obama about looking at all programs and eliminating those that don't work. Holy shit, McCain talks about reducing defense spending. Now suggests spending freeze on everything except veterans benefits and defense.
Obama talks about clean coal and safe storage of nuclear energy. He also called people to serve instead of just shop.
9:23 PM: Brokaw makes joke about going overtime
9:20 PM: Brokaw asks to prioritize the following: Healthcare, Energy, Entitlement programs (social security, etc.)
McCain evades the question by saying we can work on them all at once.
Obama prioritizes (like he says families have to): 1st Energy, 2nd Healthcare, 3rd Education (apparently entitlement programs can go eff themselves)
9:15 PM: How can we trust either party when they both got us into this?
Obama explains how government budgets are slightly different than personal budgets and then points out that the economy was awesome under Clinton and sucky under Bush
McCain talks about bipartisanship. I think he's missing the point. Does it do any good to be bipartisan if both parties suck? Ok, now he's talking about cutting spending (blah blah blah, earmarks). This is more in line.
9:07 PM: Is it just me or is this essentially the same question about how the bailout helps average Americans?
McCain rails on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (and Obama's 'cronies' although I don't know who they would be)
Obama explains the bailout in a fairly teacherly fashion. I like it. Now he's correcting McCain and saying this is a deregulation problem and that McCain is a deregulator.
9:05 PM: Asked about Secretary of Treasury. Says Warren Buffet (doesn't make sense) and Ann Whitman from Ebay
Obama says Buffet would be a good idea (no he wouldn't because he is such a private investor who has gamed the system that he couldn't be trusted)
9:01 PM: First question about bailing out everyday Americans
Obama's answer rails on Bush deregulation and talks about infrastructure, health care, job creation, and ways to keep people in their homes
McCain's answer talks about taxes and energy independence. Not a bad slant except for McCain's is a tax cut for the wealthy and a hike for the lower and middle class. He makes a good point about renegotiating home loans at new market prices
8:58 PM: Candidates have seen the questions

We're getting ready for another debate. this one in Nashville in a town hall format with questions only from people in the hall and on the internet. I usually hate these because they pander to "Lipstick on a pig" and "Lapel flag pin" bull crap. Let's hope this one is better.

Enviroment and Globalization

Another interesting discussion in my globalization class today. Something I have thought about a fair amount: Europe and America developed economically by exploiting workers (slaves, women, children, low wages, long hours, unsafe working conditions) and raping the environment.

This brings up questions with developing countries today. Many of our low skilled laborer jobs are moving to developing countries (as they historically do) but also to questionable labor standards (obviously by our standards) but possibly more importantly to lower environmental standards.

Many authors have pointed out that even low worker standards are much higher than they used to be and that low standards in factories are still better than the options of working on a farm or as a prostitute. While this is not ideal progress it still is some progress.

The bigger economic issue is that the environment is in a really bad place right now and it is LARGELY due to American industrialization and individualism since we become more developed. Even if China and India weren't developing and using more energy and polluting more than they used to Americans would/should still cut back on their energy consumption and pollution drastically. The argument that I have heard (and heard widely reiterated in my globalization class) is that it is unfair to put American environmental standards into our trade agreements with others because since we polluted to develop it would be hypocritical of us to not allow other countries to develop by being horrible polluters.

The problem with this is that the world can't afford to let this happen. I agree it is a dick move for us to ruin the world by polluting too much and then hindering others growth by telling them not to develop as unfettered as we did. My solution wouldn't be to allow everyone to pollute as much as they want but to have America subsidize other countries clean efforts to not make the developing countries bear the entire brunt of the costlier development. If we are able to do this and keep strict environmental regulations then I think that the world community should also be able to enforce strict regulations on America's pollution levels to cap them and then bring them down with harsh fines for failure to comply.

I think this is the only way to save the environment and expand the international economy responsibly because two wrongs do not make a right. We need to both atone for our atrocious wrong and prevent others from making the same mistakes.

Culture shock (and fun with globalization)

I thought being at Bowdoin was culture shock to me because I was acutely aware that I was one of the least wealthy people there. I felt that I had an entirely different perspective and frame of reference. In hindsight I must say that at least most people that I met there seemed inquisitive and open minded and not openly malicious in any way. I may have still had a chip on my shoulder at times but most people's priorities (or at least the ones I surrounded myself with) had their priorities in the right place.

Fast forward to today. I'm now taking a class in the political science department that is simply called "Globalization." I could certainly expect that there would be a fair number of economically minded folk in the class but I assumed, also, that there would be some social science minded people who brought a balancing perspective to the class.

Today we talked in class about why most economists think that free trade and globalization are a very good thing and why public opinion has been against them and is only growing more opposed to them. Most seemed to be either puzzled by or dismissive of the fact. I didn't think it was too hard to figure out (hell we've been reading about it) that American workers are becoming more skilled in general so it does not benefit our economy to doing mass amounts of unskilled labor when other countries can be doing that while we are doing more technical tasks. Low skill workers are the ones losing their jobs and a lot of them can't easily transistion to other jobs and our country is shitty about job retraining programs. And since healthcare is tied to jobs in America, unemployment is much more perilous here than in the rest of the developed world.

Basically, globalization is good for our 'economy' but bad for a fair amount of our people. And those who haven't lost their jobs may either fear that they will or know someone who has. Add this to the fact that our jobs are rapidly transitioning from manufacturing to service (often a hard transition to make) and that many manufacturing jobs were unionized and provided good pay and good benefits and most lower level service jobs (think Wal Mart) have shitty pay and few benefits.

I think it was put very well by one of my classmates that the benefits of globalization (lower prices) are distributed evenly to everyone whereas the losses are more concentrated (job loss of mostly lower and middle class).

I don't know. Maybe I'm a marxist but there was an overwhelming feel of "yeah, I wonder why they don't get it." I agree that globalization is a good idea and, if done properly, will be very good for our country and others but we have to acknowledge that we're bad at it right now.

We set up these falls (in our country and in others) by creating artificial markets and protecting industries and distort the markets. Instead of protecting everyone by trying futilely to make sure that no one loses their current job, we need to make it easier to find new jobs, get trained for career shifts, and make unemployment not so devasting and stigmatized. I think most developed countries have done a better job of this than we have. Also underemployment is a huge problem in our country (although I've found it hard to find numbers on this for other countries)

Debate blogging part 2

10:26 PM: Haha, Palin tries to jab the media for being big meanies
10:12 PM: WOW! Palin has to look down every second to read her talking points and it's caught on camera
10:10 PM: HOT BUTTON: Palin suggests VP should have more power over the senate
10:08 PM: Palin claims referring to Bush and past (ie track record) is apparently unfair. Palin says teachers rewards are in heaven. How about you reward them on earth you dipshit?
10:06 PM: Despite Palin's stupid "we're mavericks" rhetoric I actually like her McCain and I disagree sometimes and giving the example of ANWR
10:05 PM: Aw yeah, Biden throws it back and says this is the most important election since FDR
10:03 PM: advice to Palin: don't say 'pundits will show who did and said what' come with your own proof dummy

Live blogging the debate

Ok, gonna start a new live blog thread cause this one's getting long

10:00 PM: Palin: 'Oh golly gee willickers I'm such a Joe Sixpack Washington outsider'
9:53 PM: HAHAHAHA. Palin basically says "we can have nuclear weapons cause we're the good guys and ours deter others from violence. They can't have them cause they're bad guys." I wonder if the guys on the other side think the same way in reverse
9:51 PM: Palin is essentially saying about Bush's massive fuck ups: Whoopsy Daisy, our bad, no biggie
9:47 PM: Biden understands issues. Palin is a parrot.
9:40 PM: Palin isn't blatantly looking stupid in this debate by her lack of prep but she is sounding stupid because she sounds like an uninformed talking point parrot
9:35 PM: It's painfully clear from this and the Couric interview that Palin doesn't understand questions worded in English
9:33 PM: Biden's answer on homosexuality may not be popular but I can't wait to hear Sarah Palin.
9:31 PM: Dear Sarah Palin, Natural Gas isn't "clean and green" Sincerely, anyone with a brain
9:29 PM: THANK GOD SOMEONE (BIDEN) FINALLY POINTED OUT THAT YOU WOULD BE SHITTY AT DEALING WITH GLOBAL WARMING IF YOU DON'T THINK PEOPLE ARE A MAJOR CAUSE
9:27 PM: Palin evades the causes of global warming and loses any intelligent person by doing so
9:24 PM: Palin deflects question about court refinancing of mortgages to talk about what she already planned to talk about. Her debate is too much like a talking point speech
9:23 PM: Biden is very teacherly when it comes to skewing someone's voting record in regards to tax breaks to big corporations. He also turns Palin against McCain with windfall profits tax on big oil.
9:22 PM: Biden is really hammering the $4B tax cut to ExxonMobil
9:20 PM: Palin just referred to two companies and a monopoly (I don't get it. Doesn't monopoly mean one?)
9:19 PM: Biden calls corporate tax havens unpatriotic
9:16 PM: Biden pwns McCain's bs, corporate, inadequate healthcare and slips in a bridge to no one jab (which gets a chuckle)
9:15 PM: Palin doesn't seem to understand what she's saying but she's been briefed pretty well. She knows all of her points.
9:13 PM: Biden defending middle class and calling it a values issue
9:11 PM: Palin admitted she's not going to answer the questions/charges posed to her directly by Biden. You gotta like Biden here. Answering charges then going on the attack.
9:10 PM: Biden smacking Palin in the mouth on her lies. Tell it Joe! Tell it!
9:08 PM: Biden is really pinning this deregulation stuff on McCain. that's exactly what he needs to do. This is what's wrong, this is why it's McCain's fault. Biden slips in a story about a guy named Joey. Nice connection without being too hokey (cough Palin)
9:06 PM: Biden is being respectful and looking at Palin. Meanwhile Palin is delivering her stupid Joe Sixpack lines
9:05 PM: Palin had a nice moment when she looked at Biden but she looks less personable by being robotic and speaking with a blank stare at the screen
9:04 PM: There you go Biden. Don't let Palin's bs about McCain slide
9:01 PM: Palin's answer is ok but I think she should have challenged Biden's answer instead of going off on her own
9:00 PM: Well spun by Biden. Bailout is not the best or worst of congress. Just evidence of the shitty position Bush's policies put us in
8:59 PM: Seems cordial. Sarah Palin asked if she could call Biden 'Joe'
8:57 PM: Let's get it on!

Talk about Obama being a blank slate...

People used to say about Obama in the primaries that he didn't really put views forth and that he just talked about hope and people would project their beliefs on him.

Well Sarah Palin's recent trouble naming what she reads to get her news suggests that she just reads whatever people put in front of her. Take a look


So maybe we just need to start to control what is being put in front of her to keep her from being crazy.

Also she must be a fast reader. She reads "all of them"

American nonproliferation hypocrisy

I love how much we push nuclear nonproliferation in this country. Don't get me wrong I think it is a great idea especially when it focuses on disarmament but I can't blame Pakistan and other countries that are not big fans of nonproliferation and disarmament for being suspicious.

We have lots of nukes (and are big Israel fans) and now that our side has them we all of a sudden think that no one should continue to make them. I think our stance would be less hypocritical if our nonproliferation talk were proceeded by disarmament. It's probably too risky to do unilaterally but I think real nonproliferation can only happen with disarmament and we have no right to demand it from others until we start disarming in a massive way ourselves.

I feel like I have more to say on the topic but this was the gist.

Good and bad aspects of the Senate bailout passed

So first of all, for those who hadn't heard the Senate passed their version of the bailout 74-25 tonight. The house will vote on it Friday.

You many not have noticed though because it's called the "Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007." Nope, not joking. This was bundled with a bunch of other bills that were up for consideration to make it seem more appealing. So here's what they were bundled with:

• Tax credits for renewable energy
• Requiring group health care to include mental health and addiction treatment
• Alternative minimum tax extension/protection
• Temporarily raising FDIC from $100k to $250k

Couple notes: Obama, Biden, and McCain all voted for this so the vote itself is a wash (economy still favoring Obama).
Here's a question: shouldn't McCain be opposed to this because this $700B bailout was hidden/attached to a bill that had nothing to do with it?

Even though a lot of great progressive economists (Krugman, Stiglitz, and Kuttner) now favor the bailout I still have my apprehensions and applaud the 24 senators who voted against it (yeah Sanders and Feingold). I especially applaud those who think there is a different way or that we are being pushed into the bailout without exploring how necessary the bailout is or better alternatives. This gives Feingold the only senate trio (against War in Iraq, Patriot Act, and Bailout) although I will say that Sanders was in the house not the senate.

Bill Clinton the rollercoaster

So Bill Clinton was at his first rally for Obama today at the University of Central Florida. Initially I thought Clinton seemed to be avoiding talking about Obama by talking about his own history and Joe Biden but he ended on a fairly strong note and seemed to have delivered a very good speech. If he keeps this up I think he'll be an effective surrogate although I'm glad Obama may not need him because he has been fairly erratic.

I say he may not need Bill because of recent polling which shows Obama's national lead anywhere between 5 and 10 percent which could rival Bill Clinton's 5.3 percent victory in 1992. And with a strong performance in Indiana and Missouri (RCP and fivethirtyeight.com show Obama ahead in CO, FL, VA, NH, NC, OH, and NV) Obama could win 375 EVs which would best Clinton's 370 mark in 1992.