debasement of semantics
DEBT DEFAULT

This whole "default" deal is a debasement of simple semantics. All the Politicians, Washington Insiders, and the Media all use the word Default. The say that Default would be epically bad for the U.S. That is true. But also irrelevant and an intentionally distracting masquerade. There is ZERO chance the government will Default on debt if the debt ceiling is not raised Oct 17th. It a moot point. Its like saying that if the sun didn't rise in the morning it would be bad. Well no shiii...! That is completely inapplicable because the sun will rise in the morning.

Default is when you don't pay your credit card bill or home mortgage. A credit line increase denial is not Default. This congress should deny a credit line increase. Keep the debt ceiling at $16Trillion.

The Treasury brings in $250B a month in taxes and interest payments on debt are only $20B a month. How could we default? The reason everyone tows that line is they will use it as cover for when they will inevitably raise the debt ceiling. They will tell their constituents that they had to, there was no other choice, or else the world as we know it would promptly end.

panic now if you have not yet

STATE OF CONSERVATISM

Oh no - the GOP has lost two in a row, time to re-write the Party platform, re-brand. Yes conservatism has died yet again (see also 1964, 1976, 1992 ) Now they need to moderate their message, open up the borders, bring the troops home and start spreading the wealth. America is in a state of decline - we only need to manage the downfall and welcome the East to the new throne. This is beginning to read like a script for groundhog day.

It is groundhog day. Life will always repeat until it is gotten right - right? Alot of op/eders need to sit back, relax, read up on history and take in reality for a change. Perception is what drives the masses, but reality provides feedback loops to them as well. If the Dems positions are correct (rather than just hype/hope) then it will be evidenced in real world experience. Why meet them halfway if they are whole heartily wrong? Why should the objective of the Party be to be in power? If "progress" is going to be made would it not be better to be the Party out of power when it happens? A virtuous principled opposition is more noble than a moderate me-too Party. Unreformed entitlements, government forced sub-prime lending are/were bipartisan ticking time bombs with universal health and carbon taxes to be added to the list. Why join in our Nation's destruction? When reality comes around it will collect the false prophets into the dust bin. There were these other years 1980 and 1994. Yes we can 2010!

don't ask don't tell

ENDORSMENTS

The latest ex Busher to jump ship in hopes of avoiding the upcoming Nuremberg trials is Colin Powell. With everyone rushing to the port side, capsizing may occur - right now its just a list (lisp?) Don't ask don't tell military strategy was negotiated by Powell and seen as a setback for then President Clinton. Now with the already Anointed Barrack, who has pledged to allow openly gay people to serve in the military, one wonders what capacity and influence Powell will have or if his views have changed on the matter. Powell actually has asked and told quite a bit. He personally went to Langley before the UN Security Council presentation. He asked a lot of questions and personally prepared his report. Then he told the world what it largely already suspected. In hindsight, all of the worlds intelligence proved to be wrong. Now he is seeking rehabilitation - he will get it. The new global test of acceptability is Bush hatred. You can win Nobel Prizes for Peace and Economics if you're the anti-thesis of Bush these days.

~

When the Bulls or Lakers win championships their respective citizens celebrate - what civilized society calls rioting. One wonders with the impending Victory of the Anointed if similar will occur in the spirit of the Palestinians engaged in festivities after 9-11?

UPDATE: All was calm on the western front - the fears of chaos were wrong.

sex ed for vise presidents

SCHOOL ISSUES

Well it appears that Sarah Palin did not fake her pregnancy to cover for her 17 year old daughter. Unless her daughter is pregnant again. I don't know how the math works out, but the last baby was in April and now she is supposedly five months pregnant..... You know how those small town families are - clingy.

In regards over Palin's support for abstinence sex education - the pundits are missing two points.

A: Much is made of Palin's stance on sex education in the schools but I have not heard if her daughter actually attended an abstinence only school. If the argument is made that kids need sex education in school to counter their wacky religious parents, then can't it be said that a program is needed for former vise presidential candidates too? John Edwards should look into that.

B: This is yet another issue that should be decided by the family unit, not government. Parents should get to choose which school they send their kids to, and schools should compete for students by offering diverse curriculums. Almost all school controversies will go away if this were the case.

In regards to Palin's perfectly beautiful baby son Trek, lets hope, as seems to be the case, that Palin uses the issue to promote acceptance and not "science" funding for the "cure". Also she should make it a campaign issue, that most doctors recommend abortion to parents of prenatally detected health issues. That would contrast with Obama's present vote on infanticide - neglecting babies born alive after a failed abortion on Illinois legislative committee (but that type of decision is above his pay grade.) Say what you want about Bush, but a promotion of a Culture of Life will stand on the correct side of history. Similar from the Palin family: "Trig is beautiful and already adored by us. We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives.
We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed"

obama endorsement

ELECTION 08

Me the editor(s) of this blog formerly endorse Illinois Senator Barrak Obama for President of the United States. As you may have heard: the war in Iraq is lost, transatlantic relations are in taters, the Bush economy is in the worst recession since the 1930's, and ocean levels are rising. Mr. Obama has a long established record for bringing about change, restoring hope in the future and transcending race, politics, and reason. Given the hyper-hyperventilation of the present times, only one candidate is uniquely qualified to quell, whats left of civilization and earth post-Bush. It is this editors view that McCain would be an unprecedented third term for the failed Bush/Rove policies. Senator Obama pledges to raise taxes on the Rich, "redeploy" from Iraq, and expand healthcare to all. Also, Global warming will be stopped in its tracks with no new oil drilling, and windfall profit taxes on oil companies will help bring down the cost of gasoline.

Amid the New Politics fad, brings Ross Douthart and Reihan Salam's excellent new book about how to re-brand the GOP. You see, what Sam's Club republicans really want is a New Deal government intervening in their lives so they don't screw it up (government has a near perfect track record). The secret to electoral success is to become Socialist Lite. It could have just as easily been written by the editors of The New Republic. Given the impending (dogmatic) trouncing of Conservatism (it dies forever every 15 years) this book should be read as a satire. Clearly it is not a serious roadmap relevant to reality - perception and emotion do not make it true.

Just as the current sky is falling crisis plays out in Humanities imagination, that common foe of utopia is lurking around the corner: REALITY. The Camelot/Great Society fizzled to stagflation reality. Humans are ultimately stupid, myself included. Somehow the scientific method has failed in the social sciences. Markets/evolution are anti- scientific method and therefore wise - transferring information. But that does not stop people with the Audacity of Hope to wish in the impossible. Time is always on the side of the Realists providing the feedback loops that reveal true Knowledge and correct ignorance. The present illusionary fantasy can be brought to its knees only by the election of the Obama messiah, and thus the world will learn how to breath again.

why is slate stupid

COMMENTARY

A reply to Jacob Leibenluft and this article in Slate Magazine on why Missouri gas is the lowest average price in the nation. Well Missouri gas supposedly is cheaper because of a State law requiring a 10% ethanol blend (E10) with regular gasoline. If this were true then why wouldn't more gas stations in other states sell this blend voluntarily to have a lower fuel price than the competition? Also we are informed in the article that Missouri does not have any oil refineries. But OIL Barges going up and down the Mississippi and Missouri rivers are also part of keeping GAS prices low. So how does just the presence of this OIL keep prices down without REFINERIES that convert OIL to GAS? The fact is Ethanol is highly subsidised - 50 cents a gallon in direct tax subsidies but also tax credits for new cars and business modifications. These are market distortions. Witness food prices increasing world wide partly blamed on corn-for-fuel instead of corn-for-food and livestock feed. Also ethanol has only 70% of the energy that gasoline has per gallon. So E10 would get 3% less miles per gallon. In the new Progressive Missouri at cheaper $3.90/gal E10 in a 30 mpg car you would pay $13.39 to go 100 miles. Compare this to $13.33 with gasoline at nationally higher $4/gal. That's a cost of 6 cents more for the cheaper priced ethanol blend. Evidently the self titled Slate "explainer: Answers to your questions about the news" needs to explain why they can't explain simple math and basic economics. Maybe Slant Magazine would be a more apt title.

condeming consensus

THE MEDIA

Well - its official now. Bush is the worst president in the history of civilization. Every one who leaves the administration writes a critical tell all - probably hedging for a plea bargain at the upcoming Nuremberg Trials no doubt. Weather it is Move On or, NYT op/ed's dem talking points, leftist documentaries, third world dictators, and now former insiders, the rhetoric is interestingly similar (a single truth and a blow to deconstructivist?!?) Could they all be reading from the same (post modern) script? Is the Media Establishment, and the Political Establishment all walking in lockstep as an overcompensation for their being "hoodwinked" before the war? How did this president get reelected by a majority of the popular vote - a first since 1988? How did John Kerry loose when it was known before the election there was not any WMD? (Oh yeah he was swiftboated) Ah..... , Groupthink! (Say it to the tune of Freak Out - the disco song) It feels so wonderfully uplifting to form a consensus, reasonably wondering where it is that the heard wanders. Oh look! On the horizon - the Messiah - I think I'm going to faint!! He can see dead people (addressing fallen soldiers in the audience on Memorial day). Quayle can't spell Idaho's major agricultural product. Obama thinks there are 57 US States!! I'm sure the heard of independent minds is all over that.

who will tell mr friedman

COMMENTATY

A reply to Thomas L. Friedman's Who will tell the people?.

Kennedy Airport is an interesting thing Mr Friedman brought up. So it is degrading because of Iraq/Bush and not because it is managed by the port authority of NewYork/New Jersey. Not because of the Democratic city council of NYC, not because of the Democratic controlled legislatures of New York and New Jersey, nor their Democrat governors, not because of the Labor Unions of New York City. And the election of Barrack Obama a politician from the notorious Chicago Political Machine will fix all this?!

Great powers are defined by the size and growth potential of their economies, not by their lavish tax payer spending on "infrastructure" and "science research." (Castro and Chavez tried/trying that socialist approach) And the U.S. military is funded on just a fraction of total GDP and yet it surpasses the rest of the world combined. The US already spends more on infrastructure via discretionary spending than it does on military.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2006.png

Friedman is just reciting the stereotypical Liberal Anti-American Mantra. The last time I checked people are lining up around the world to live here and very few Americans are leaving! That measure is not measured by Friedman, nor does he point out that other countries peg their currency to the US dollar to artificially boost their exports to us. They do this by buying US Treasuries, which leads to the so called foreign debt.

Notice how big Purposes is identified by Friedman as important in addition to big profits in the last paragraph and how that undercuts his opening. In the opening he decries international Nation Building and implies the losses to the treasury to pay for Iraq. Then he cites a German Rail station midway. This is logically incoherent. If the US did not occupy Germany after ww2, if the US did not force elections on the defeated third reicht, if the US did not invest in European Defense during the Cold war, would that pristine rail-station be there today? If we pull out of Iraq now how would they get that pristine rail station that Mr Friedman thinks defines national greatness? (A logical argument could have been made before the war - Given that the war did happen what is best to do now) Also how is spreading Democracy not a big Purpose. That would seem to be more important than human cloning of stem cells or what ever Mr Friedman fears is being exiled to Asia and India.

One last note from the text: "the Asian values of our parents’ generation — work hard, study, save, invest, live within your means — have given way to subprime values: You can have the American dream — a house — with no money down and no payments for two years.”

Any simple analysis reveals that the Republican message is work hard, study, save, invest, live within your means. It is the Democrats who say “You can have the American dream — a house — with no money down and no payments for two years.” with their refusal to increase personal responsibility through reform welfare, social security, health-care. It is Democrats who tell voters they can have it all and they will only tax the Rich.

Yet Mr. Friedman has declared who he is going to vote for.

maverick for whom

PRIMARIES

All right, All right - McCain is not ideal. He buys the global warming bonanza, incumbent campaign protection, thinks bloody non-state murderers deserve Geneva rights, and has voted against tax cuts. He is a Teddy Roosevelt progressive. OK. But on the defining issues of the day and into the early 21st century he is correct (global warming will hopefully fizzle away within the next decade or two). He is correct in fighting IslamoFascism (water-boarding aside) and correct on entitlement reform. Who is better qualified to deal with foes Iran and North Korea not to mention pseudo friends Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Ok, his gang of 14 participation was humbling to the GOP but also a Machiavellian move. He proved to be a soothsayer in early opposition to Rumsfield. He has called for a troop increase in Iraq from the getgo, so on foreign issues he will be solid. Domestically, presidents lasting impact is mostly budgetary and judicial. On budget he is a deficit hawk as opposed to an anti-tax stalwart. Both have their merits. On judicial there may be his one wild card - we need more of Clarence Thomas and less of Steven Breyer. But who among all those claiming they will not vote or worse, those claiming to vote Dem, will not be affected if the nominees are the Clintons? In the fall debates with Hilary waxing on about universal (coercion) coverage, and McCain's response - who will leave our Senator from Goldwater's seat alone in his defenses? Of course if its Barrack all bets are off.

the hip city

METROPOLITAN

The hip city has quite a buzz about it. It is the place where people want to live - or at least like the idea that they live there. They may not participate in all the aspects of the hip city that make it hip - yet they pleasure in reciting facts of its hipness to others - living in blandness yet fainting grittiness. All of the hip cities bonds get passed to subsidise progressiveness. This ever increasing tax burden makes the hip city less habitual (habitable) for those poor folks that provide all the grittiness. Before one knows it, with all the smart growth, the loft apartments, the light rail and all - the hip city has outstripped its hipness. It becomes a mecca for wanta-be hipsters, all authentics have long departed with the restraints on growth and affordability. This takes quite a while to accomplish and all the city ratings are too high at the peak of the moment, that the silent coup is long past when the music stops.

sports fanatics saved souls

SPORTS LIBERALISM

Troy Smith could not have won the Heisman trophy without Maurice Clarett. They never played on the field in the same year - but came in on the same recruiting class of 2002 at The Ohio State University. Clarett played as a true freshman Autumn of '02 winning the national championship. Then he filed a fraudulent insurance claim summer '03, and was suspended from the team. After only one year in college, he sued the NFL to let him in the draft early, was denied, then drafted a year later but released after pre-season. He committed armed robbery Winter '06 in Columbus (where a few people might recognize him) in the midst of signing to play in Europe. Then, Summer '06, he refused to pull over to police who found he was driving with a bullet proof vest and had three concealed handguns. He then struck a deal to go to prison for 3-1/2 years and a consolidation of charges against him. Somehow college athletics could not save Clarett from the streets, much to the dismay of sports-fanatics. But they were able to capitalize on Smith who also had a tough childhood. Smith was involved in a few campus disturbances and received money from boosters - resulting in missing a bowl game and not starting a critical home game against Texas. But Smith repented and grew up with the help of his head coach - sports writers and Heisman voters went ecstatic. After loosing Clarett to the dark side, the sports-fanatics found redemption in Smith. That is what they believe in after all - the power of sports to change peoples lives for the better. Sports healed the Nation after Sept 11th. Football healed New Orleans, and football is now healing Virginia Tech. Aren't we all happier now?

last of the great society

HIPPIES

This is the last gasp for the summer of love - their present positions in the media, government bureaucracy and academia are at a pinnacle and will only recede in the coming decades. This is their Tet offensive - apparitionaly winning, but they may end up on the wrong side of history. Back in the late sixties/ early seventies communism was still expanding, the west was beginning a decline, and the future was murky. Flower people set out to form a society without rules or even money, and the so called great society balloon was launched amid anti-war, anti-capitalist, anti-west delusions. US economic opulence in the 50's and early 60's allowed a generation of listlessness and ignorant protest. Of coarse the whole thing went up in smoke when reality set in (obviously a Nixon/Kissinger dirty trick). True historians never look at events of the past quarter century because they are still too biased, like uncured cement. It is very easy to write a book beating up on the current administrations faults. They are not unprecedented nor unique in the history of our nation nor humankind. Only time will tell if Bush is judged as a Wilson/Johnson or a Lincoln/Trueman, except to those with the superior vision, the present flower children's fantasy, which says he is the worst ever.

law and order

FRED THOMPSON

What's not to like about Fred Thompson? Well he supports campaign finance reform (incumbent protection reform), but that is about it for now. He actually sounds like a politician who believes in the Constitutions provisions for federalism/states rights. Economics and national defense - so far so good. Entitlement reform will hopefully be a major focus in the GOP primaries. Giuliani is weak on saying that the Constitution supports taxpayer funding of abortions. McCain is a progressive Republican in the mold of Teddy Roosevelt (mold being that undesirable stuff on bread i.e. your wallet). Romney is a lifetime hunter (twice) and can easily shoot himself in the foot. What is it about Tennessee which has more political talent per capita than any other state - political talent as defined by politicians making an impact on the national scene, not true talent, so yes Algore counts.

nevermind

POP CULTURE

Grunge only comes around during an economic downturn. Large teams of unemployed young people start wearing torn up clothes, sloppy hair, and an anti-consumerism attitude. Curt Cobain was the anti-Guns and Roses just as The Clash were the anti-Pink Floyd. Although grunge is always present, it cannot be sustained on a large scale once economic prosperity takes hold. Stagflation punks were defeated by the Regan/Volcker boom. Seattle's band battalion was defeated in silicon valley by the tech boom. Luckily the post 911 slump lasted only two quarters and spawned only a short lived Ozborns rebirth and Ashley Simpson (In her original punk incarnation pushing Kelly out of the picture). Watching Linklater's Slackers is downright painful. I'll take Paris Hilton to London Calling any day - the economic prosperity that is.

war of the parties

POLITICAL PARTIES

The Democrat party base stands on three legs: (1)Organized labor consists of government workers and unionized low-skilled labor, these are the Marxists. (2)Ethnic minorities consists of individuals who want transfer payments via state fiat power discriminatorily by race. (3)Liberal arts elites is a broad category to encompass well educated progressives' issues (white non manual laborers who own apple computers, listen to U2, believe in magical stem cells, and worry about recycling). Each of the Democrat legs is the antithesis of one Republican leg while sharing common ground with another Republican leg - the so called swing voters. The Republican party base stands on three legs: (1)Social conservatives are white evangelicals and orthodox Catholics. They are the antithesis of liberal arts elites and accepted by ethnic minorities on life and gay issues. (2)Nationalists are pro gun, pro defense, pro Anglo Saxon tradition. Their antithesis are ethnic minorities but syphon off organized labor voters. (3)Economic libertarians are the pro business, limited government types (in theory if not practice). They are the antithesis of organized labor but share some common ground with liberal arts elites based on their common education (at least at one point the DLC was free trade). Overall there is more overlap among the Republican base legs than the Democrat base legs. Most of the Republican base support at least two of the legs which make the legs coordinated. Where as the Democrat base legs can all walk in different directions. Minor party supporters are idealistically irrelevant - if anything effecting results to the opposite of their objectives. Then there are undecided voters - not very ideological - they go wherever the wind might be blowing on a particular day.

why not rudolph giuliani

POLITICS

Whats not to like about Rudy? Well guns for one - but that is about it for now. We'll have to wait and see how he comes out on the other issues. In some respects he is a Churchillian figure -somewhat seedy personal life but great leadership and governing principles. So who would you trust more on Judicial appointments, McCain or Giuliani ? (something Bush has even gotten right with a little help of course.) McCain is a progressive Republican in the style of T.R. He appears headed down the global warming bonanza, wobbly on tax cuts, and has already gutted the constitutions 1st amendment to prevent an "appearance of corruption" in Sandra Day O'Connor speak. He has an appetite for grandstanding and seeks out media approval. His maverickness is manifesting itself more as the progressive media general consensus as of late. He is a big government conservative, and worth mentioning that most foreign policy neo-cons backed him in 2000. Romney is a non starter. Who knows what his true convictions are if he even knows. The preferred ticket as of now: Giuliani / Gingrich.