Contributors

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Food Stamps and Moral Hazards

Last week John Stewart tore into Fox News over their persecution of food stamp recipients. His basic point was that the $3 billion worth of food stamp fraud that Fox News was up in arms about is less than the $4 billion dollars in special gifts that oil companies receive from the federal government and Fox News called "peanuts."

Still, welfare fraud and foodstamp fraud are real. So let's look at some examples of this abuse.

The original welfare queen that Ronald Reagan made famous actually existed. Her name (at least one of her names) was Linda Taylor. She was not the typical black woman that everyone pictured when Reagan blew the racist dogwhistle. She was listed officially as white, though she could pass for pretty much any race with all the wigs and makeup she used. She also committed a huge number of other crimes including various frauds, kidnapings and possibly murder.

Welfare fraud was basically the only crime they could pin on her, in much the same way that Al Capone was finally jailed for tax evasion. So Taylor is not representative of welfare or food stamp recipients.

But she is typical of welfare and food stamp cheats. We have a few recent examples here in Minnesota.

Run-of-the-mill food stamp fraud consists of store owners letting recipients use food stamps to buy non-food items, or "entrepreneurs" buying food stamp cards for 50% of face value. Three people were arrested earlier this month in St. Paul for buying food with such cards and exporting it to Liberia.  Who would do such a weird thing?

Noni Snider, Walter Cooper, and Nyla Newbergh: they ran an export business. They were caught because their purchases of mass quantities of soda and noodles at Walmart and Sam's Club raised suspicions. Yes, these small businessmen -- otherwise referred to as job creators and makers by Republican -- are committing food stamp fraud. And based on their names and the suburbs where they live, my guess is that they are white and middle class (my search fu has sadly failed to uncover any perp photos).

In fact, most food stamp fraud is committed or enabled by small business owners, typically store owners: see here in Washington, here in Baltimore,  here in Buffalo, here is Texas (and that's just the last couple of weeks -- it seems like store owners commit food stamp fraud more frequently than gun owners shoot themselves).

The real problem here isn't the poor people committing the fraud, it's richer people ripping off poorer people by giving them only 50 cents on the dollar for their food stamp cards and tempting them with things food stamps aren't supposed to buy.

Now my dad would chime in here and say, "See, food stamps are bad because they encourage waste and fraud. We shouldn't have these programs." Yes, it appears that since small businessmen are so easily tempted into committing fraud we should stop helping poor people.

Food stamps and welfare, the right would say, create a moral hazard by encouraging fraud. But the exact same thing can be said about any number of Defense Department programs, which have cost the American taxpayers hundreds of billions -- if not trillions -- of dollars in waste and fraud, especially during times of war. Remember the planeloads of cash flown into Iraq that just disappeared? That alone was $6.6 billion -- more than twice the food stamp fraud that Fox News abhors, most of it going to corrupt American contractors rather than buying off Iraqi terrorists.  Or the infamous Joint Strike Fighter program, seven years late and $163 billion over budget. Or the $2.7 billion dollars wasted on an Army intelligence program that just doesn't work. Or Reagan's Star Wars program. Or any of hundreds of other weapons and software programs that cost billions but never saw the light of day, all billed to the Defense Department not by lazy welfare recipients, but by highly paid CEOs working for Fortune 500 defense contractors.

In this way the Defense Department creates a moral hazard, by tempting wealthy industrialists into conning the government into weapons programs that will never work. Avoiding war profiteers was one of the main reasons the founding fathers opposed a standing army. The Iraq War was fought in large part because the defense industry -- represented by Don Rumsfeld, Newt Gingrich and Richard Perle on the Defense Policy Board -- wanted the war. The DoD moral hazard is far worse than the food stamp moral hazard, because American troops are inevitably killed and maimed when we start foolhardy wars. And because there is so much more money at stake.

The Chisholms: Typical Welfare Fraudsters
But back to welfare and food stamp fraud. Just the other day Colin and Andrea Chisholm, a Minnesota couple living in Deephaven (a high-priced suburb), were charged. They have an oceanside home and an 83-foot yacht in Florida, $3 million in banks there, an expensive house in Deephaven, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in banks in Minnesota. Because they're rich, they're not in custody: they probably winter in Florida, and by now have taken up residence in the Caymans to avoid prosecution. Their fraud was discovered by Medica when they claimed public assistance for massages at The Marsh, one the most expensive health clubs in the Twin Cities.

This time, however, I have a photo of these welfare cheats. They're upstanding white folks who dress in suits and drive expensive cars. The right's narrative about all welfare fraud being committed by despicable, lazy, poor black people just isn't adding up.

The fact is, rich people like the Chisholms are in a far better position to commit fraud of any sort. They own property and claim residency in multiple states, making it easy to commit all kinds of frauds, including voter fraud by using absentee ballots (that's how real voter fraud occurs -- no one in their right mind would try impersonating someone else; too easy to get caught). They have the money and the wherewithal to get the necessary documents to commit the fraud. And they can skip the country when the law catches on.

The worst poor people can do is sell their food stamp cards at half face value to some rich white woman at the homeless shelter or an exploitative store owner to buy a bottle of Ripple

And most importantly, the wealthy have the motivation: the envy and the greed that seems to drive so many of them to squeeze every penny out of the system by any means possible. According to the right, poor people just don't have the intelligence, gumption, energy or drive to commit real fraud. You need to think like an entrepreneurial small businessman to rip off the government.

Could it be that conservatives always think everyone else is gaming the system and committing fraud because they are?

Friday, March 21, 2014

The Smoking Gun From The Big Bang

I'm feeling extra science-y today so I simply must point out the recent news about the Big Bang Theory. 

Reaching back across 13.8 billion years to the first sliver of cosmic time with telescopes at the South Pole, a team of astronomers led by John M. Kovac of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics detected ripples in the fabric of space-time — so-called gravitational waves — the signature of a universe being wrenched violently apart when it was roughly a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second old. They are the long-sought smoking-gun evidence of inflation, proof, Dr. Kovac and his colleagues say, that Dr. Guth was correct.

Congratulations to Dr. Guth for achieving his life's work!

Time for Israel to Put Up or Shut Up

Re: One State Solution.

I cannot imagine a one-state solution ever happening in Israel. It would mean doom for the Jewish state.

Think about it. All their laws would have to be changed to give all Jews, Muslims and Christians (6-10% of Palestinian Arabs are Christians) equal rights. No more special treatment for Orthodox rabbis and haredim (who seem to already be losing their special status).

Politically it would be suicide. Even with the current boundaries with a two-state solution demographics indicate that Arab Israelis will outnumber non-Arab Israelis in a few decades. With a single state that happens the day the two countries are unified. Bibi Netanyahu would be bounced out of office within two weeks when all the Arab members of the Knesset call for a non-confidence vote.

But Israel has to do one or the other. The status quo of oppressing all Palestinians in the Occupied Territories because some small number of them are terrorists is indefensible. Israelis will counter with arguments that there is a great animosity against them by all Palestinians, but they cannot use that as an excuse because they cause that animosity by denying Palestinians basic human and economic rights, by sealing up the Palestinians in economically isolated ghettos. This invites comparisons to certain mid-20th century dictators, but it's considered bad form to name names.

The situation in Israel and Palestine is now analogous to South Africa and its homelands during apartheid. Like apartheid, this occupation cannot stand forever.

There is a third option, and that's the one I fear Israel will exercise: ethnic cleansing. They did it in 1940s, killing or driving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into exile in a Palestinian diaspora. They have been slowly swallowing chunks of Palestine since 1967, building giant walls splitting up villages and stealing land from farmers, many of whom now live on the opposite side of an impenetrable barrier from their olive groves.

So the Palestinians should call Israel's bluff: either finalize a two-state solution, or absorb Palestine into a greater Israel and give all Muslims and Christians in Israel and the occupied territories the same rights that Israelis enjoy. That's the kind of religious pluralism that Americans have, despite Republicans blather.

Israel has to put up or shut up. Are they a real democracy, or a religious dictatorship who destroys anyone who won't bend a knee to their god?

The situation is that much more ironic because the Palestinians' plight so closely mirrors that of the Jews, both in the Biblical past and the 20th century.

What We Know About Climate Change

A recent report from American Association for the Advancement of Science, spearheaded by Nobel Prize Winner Mario J Molina, clearly illustrates the threat posed by climate change. It targets a more general audience of Americans who need to understand that the danger posed is very real and could affect their children and grandchildren unless action is taken now.

This is a good report to share with people who don't want to be drowned in the science of climate change. For that, you can always visit this site. This new report is more of a summation of where we are at and what can be done.  I'm hoping this can be the beginning of a greater awareness about climate change and a move away from the caveman-ish "let's wait until we are on fire before we do something" mentality.

We Have Your Dog!

 This is from a few weeks ago but I had to put it up. Apparently, the Taliban are holding hostage....one of our dogs. Egads!!

Are we sure it's one of ours?:)

Eat As Many Cheeseburgers As You Want?

The good thing about science is that it's true whether you believe it or not and now that this study is out, I'm waiting for the health nuts of the world to blow a massive bowel.

The new research, published on Monday in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine, did not find that people who ate higher levels of saturated fat had more heart disease than those who ate less. Nor did it find less disease in those eating higher amounts of unsaturated fat, including monounsaturated fat like olive oil or polyunsaturated fat like corn oil. “My take on this would be that it’s not saturated fat that we should worry about” in our diets, said Dr. Rajiv Chowdhury, the lead author of the new study and a cardiovascular epidemiologist in the department of public health and primary care at Cambridge University.

It's never been one particular ingredient but several of them combined with each person's unique genetic code. Honestly, it's this code that really dictates what sort of illnesses and longevity we will have.

Thursday, March 20, 2014

One State Solution

I'm very impressed with this recent piece in the Times regarding the gradual loss of a two state solution in Israel. Tareq Abbas is right. The time is now for a one state solution and for civil rights/political power to be given to the Palestinian people. If Israel is truly a democracy, they should allow it. I think they will find that much of their problems with extremist violence will go away if the Palestinian people have a voice.



The Hairy and Macho Conservatives

There are days when I truly adore the sarcasm of Roger Simon. 

Action! Strength! Might! Muscle! That is what we need. 

Obama should stop going around in that silly windbreaker with the presidential seal on the front. Instead, the front of his jacket should have a mushroom cloud and the words: “You mess with the bull and you get the horns.” But he won’t do that. He worries about things like a thermonuclear exchange and how it would end all mankind. 

Wuss.

America....fuck yeah!!

In looking at the collection of comments from conservatives seen in this piece, I must again point out their emotional age.

12. Years. Old.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Channeling Frank Underwood

I haven't seen the Netflix show "House of Cards" but Dean Obeidallah is right. It's time for the Democrats to channel their inner Frank Underwood (minus the murdering, of course). Republicans are ruthless and aren't taking any prisoners this year. They loathe the president and want to fucking bury him for his last two years in office. Cue Machiavelli...

Democrats need to understand this fundamental fact and rise to the occasion. As Obeidallah notes, they need to get voters to turnout by pushing ballot initiatives like the minimum wage and legalizing pot. Of course, the far right base might help them by picking more Todd Akins. And it certainly helps the Democrats' chances with statements like this from GOP chairman, Reince Priebus.

We’re in for a tsunami-type election in 2014...it’s going to be a very big win!

Oh, really?


The True Size of Africa

Dedicate to Geography nerds everywhere...




The Gun Free Zone Myth

I was at a conference at my daughter's junior high and began chatting with a few of her teachers, some of whom I know personally and consider friends. We ended up back in one of the group offices and I caught sight of a postcard on a desk belonging to an English teacher at the school, Mr. Nelson. It was displayed so that only he could see it which I thought kind of odd since there really is no privacy in staff offices. One of the teachers recognized that I noticed it and rolled her eyes.

"Scary, huh? Can you believe people think like this?"

Of course I could given my experience with gun blog commenters. The caption read "Gun Free Zone" and the photo was the one below.



















My first thought was why he would want to look at this all day? What kind of a major fucknut is that loopy about guns that they need to stare at this? And why would he position it so only he could see it? Perhaps not to offend anyone but it also seemed sort of secretive which lends to my theory that the Gun Cult are really a bunch of cowards.

I'm not sure what I'm going to do about this but I know I don't like the idea of someone with this mentality teaching in my daughter's school district. The staff says Mr. Nelson is a good guy and I've met him once and he seemed alright, I suppose,but quiet. Recall as well that the idea that Hitler banned guns and that's why the Holocaust happened is total bullshit.

Fear, paranoia, hate, anger, shit your pants, rinse, repeat...

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

A Downton Abbey Economy

Looks like Lawrence Summers is saying the same things I have been saying about inequality. He's even echoing the realization that the Right opines for aristocracy as he correctly notes in the title of the piece. His conclusion is excellent.

It is ironic that those who profess the most enthusiasm for market forces are least enthusiastic about curbing tax benefits for the wealthy. Sooner or later inequality will have to be addressed. Much better that it be done by letting free markets operate and then working to improve the result. Policies that aim instead to thwart market forces rarely work, and usually fall victim to the law of unintended consequences.

Yep.

How Often Have European Borders Changed?

Watch

Succeed By Helping People

Adam Grant from the Atlantic has a great piece up about how people succeed professionally by helping others in the workplace. While the short term benefits seem slim (especially if you are a woman), the long term benefits become apparent very quickly in the form of higher sales and revenue. Why?

When I wrote the book, I attributed the long-term success of givers to two major forces: relationships and motivation. From a relationship perspective, givers build deeper and broader connections. When a salesperson truly cares about you, trust forms, and you’re more likely to buy, come back for repeat business, and refer new customers. From a motivation perspective, helping others enriches the meaning and purpose of our own lives, showing us that our contributions matter and energizing us to work harder, longer, and smarter. When medical students focus on helping others, they’re able to weather the slings and arrows of long hours and devastating health outcomes: they know their colleagues and patients are depending on them.

Even more important than this is the fact that people that help out more are reflective and learn. Taking on more duties and picking up the slack for other workers translates into a larger skill set and the perception of being indispensable.

Perhaps all of this means that nice guys actually do finish first!

Monday, March 17, 2014

What Is the Point of Relationships?

10 great answers.

My favorite?

7. Embrace attraction to others. It’s there. Communicate, be clear (with everyone, including yourself), and enjoy your fabulous human existence.

I've never understood antisocial behavior. I'd rather be hanging out with people than doing just about anything else.




Crimean Precedents: George W. Bush, Georgia and the South's Secession

Yesterday Crimea held a vote to secede from Ukraine. It was approved by more than 95%, though most non-Russians boycotted the referendum. The Republican response was to blame President Obama for being weak:
“Our administration is creating an air of permissiveness,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said on Fox News Sunday. “We do need to show long-term resolve. The comment that Secretary Kerry made is not helpful and again it shows a wishy washiness.”
But many of the Republicans who are criticizing the president are Southern conservatives from states  that have endlessly advocated secession from the United States in the last few years, particularly Texas. They are from states that actually did secede from the Union 154 years ago, starting a bloody civil war pitting slave-holding states against the more industrial north. Surely they must believe the people of Crimea have the right of self-determination, including secession from Ukraine.

To this day, Southern Republicans display the Confederate flag, proudly honoring ancestors who defected from the United States to perpetuate slavery. Slavery apologists like Andrew Napolitano still complain bitterly about the "illegal" acts Lincoln committed to hold the nation together. They still talk about states' rights and nullifying federal law with state legislation.

What happened in Crimea yesterday is nearly identical to what happened in the American South in 1860. A majority of Crimeans voted to secede from Ukraine, against the wishes the majority of the country, and ignoring the rights of a minority population (Tatars, Ukrainians and others) who have historically fared quite poorly under direct Russian rule in the past. Ethnic Russian Crimeans have decided to ally themselves with a tyrant who denies basic human rights to significant segments of the population (gays, Muslims and all political opponents).

It was the same in the Antebellum South. A majority of whites voted to secede from the Union in order to continue denying basic human rights to millions of slaves -- people who were bought and sold and whipped like cattle, who had no right to vote, but who were nonetheless included in population counts to give the South more power in the House of Representatives.

Republicans are up in arms about the terrible message of weakness the president is sending by "doing nothing" about Russia's takeover of Crimea. But this is just a replay of what happened in 2008, when George Bush was president and Russia took Southern Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia in a brief war that coincided with the Summer Olympics. Russia sent tanks into Georgia and attacked the city of Gori. More than 70 people died, most of them civilians.

In contrast, the Crimean secession has been completely bloodless (so far).

Some believe the Georgia conflict as directly leading to the Crimean secession. But Republicans -- except for John McCain, who seems to live only to demand we bomb one country after the next, including Syria, Egypt, Libya, Georgia, Crimea and on and on -- at that time had no interest in invading yet another country right in the middle of a presidential campaign and a severe recession, with a military that was exhausted from fighting a ginned-up war in Iraq and an endless guerilla war in Afghanistan, the country where the Soviet Union's back was broken in the 1980's.

Thus it was George Bush who set the precedent that the United States will do nothing when former Russian republics splinter in ethnic conflicts. The situation in Crimea is far more orderly and peaceful than what happened in Georgia under Bush's watch, and if it ends here the United States has no interest whatsoever in starting an armed conflict.

According to Republicans, states like Texas and Bob Corker's Tennessee have the right to secede from the Union whenever they want to, and the president and Congress can't say boo about it. But they also think that the citizens of Crimea don't have the right to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia, the country they had already been part of just 60 years ago. Republicans have called Obama's economic sanctions inadequate, and if that's true, then they must believe the situation calls for American military action against the Russia in Crimea.

This is tantamount to claiming that when the South seceded from the Union, the North should have invited Mexico to help the Union regain control of the rebels.

Of course Republicans don't really believe this. They don't really believe that Southern states have the right to secede from the Union. They don't believe we should intervene military in Crimea. They know it would be politically fooldhardy and suicidal. But that doesn't stop them from throwing verbal hand grenades and red meat to racists in their ranks to whip them up and get them to turn out at election time.

These are the depths to which the Republican Party has sunk. Their entire political strategy is to foam at the mouth about anything the president does, even when his Republican predecessors have set reasonable precedents that guide Obama's actions. They don't care about a coherent foreign or domestic policy. Everything is about the game of politics; nothing matters except winning the next election, showdowns on the Senate floor, incessant votes on the ACA that will never go anywhere, even if the strategy involves torching the Constitution, the Union, and the economy.

The Republican strategy now consists of goading the president into taking some kind of military action in Crimea in order to avoid appearing weak, in the hopes that the situation will blow up in his face and give them the 2014 midterms. And if he does nothing, then they will call him weak and spineless and bitch about his mom jeans, and hope that gives them the 2014 midterms.

They don't seem to care how broken and divided they leave the country, as long as they wind up sitting atop the pile of smoking rubble in the end.

Republics of Russia Itching to Secede?
But back to Russia: Republicans are saying Putin has "won," but this victory may be short-lived. The Crimea vote sets a precedent that many autonomous republics in the Russian Federation would like to emulate. Dagestan and Chechnya have ethnic Muslim populations who want to escape from Putin's oppression.

There are 21 autonomous republics in Russia.  If Crimea can simply hold a vote and leave Ukraine, why not Chechnya? Why not Tatarstan? Why not Khakassia? Why not Chuvashia, or Karelia, or Udmurtia?

In the end, this may incite the separatists in Russia to further action. Instead of heralding a Greater Russia, Putin may well be initiating a complete breakup of the Russian Federation, wracked by terrorism and civil war.

Where in the World is Flight 370?

Like many on this planet, I am completely mystified as to what exactly happened to Malaysian Flight #370. People love mysteries and this one is incredibly puzzling. The last communication was at 1:19am on March 8th with the message, "All right, good night." Shortly after this, the plane's transponder was switched off and it vanished. Some radar pings are pointing to possible directions it went but so far investigators have turned up nothing.

The Christian Science Monitor is reporting that the timing of events reveals meticulous planning. If this was a deliberate act, what's the end game? It seems too secretive to be a terrorist attack and no one has come forward to claim responsibility. At this point it seems likely that one or both of the pilots were involved in the plane's disappearance.

So what exactly to Flight #370? Every day that passes seems to add more fuel to wild speculation. As always, the alien theory is my favorite but the Stargate one shows real creativity!

Happy St Patrick's Day!


Sunday, March 16, 2014

Birthday Reflection

Today I turn 47 years old and I have to say that, despite how much I gripe on here, I am pretty fucking happy. I have two beautiful children and a wife who makes me feel like a teenager with puppy love. I have a ton of friends who amaze me every day and live in a city that offers all that I require and more.

In terms of politics, sex and religion (the three main focal points of this site), everything seems to be heading in the right direction. I can't say that I'm fully satisfied with how we are tackling the political issues of the day but there has been marked progress and you can see it happening incrementally. Our economy is improving, we are still militarily strong, immigration will be reformed in the next few years, education is improving, climate change will be addressed, gay marriage and pot will be legal across all of the country, and the gun debate will finally be put to rest.  Thanks to people like Pope Francis and moderate leaders of other faiths, we actually seem to be evolving spiritually and leaving antiquated notions of religion behind. So, too, are we loosening up about sex and realizing that being more relaxed and open about it is much more healthy.

If I could pick one area that we should really focus on, it would be mental health. We need to remove the stigma that is associated with caring for our brains and emotional well being. Improving the mental health of our citizens would solve most of our problems. Despite the constant drone of bad news and my occasional bitching, we really are doing quite well. Simply compare our standard of living today to 20 years ago. Or 50. Or 200.

Awesome, right?


Saturday, March 15, 2014

Interesting Historical Photos

I was completely blown away by this list of historical photos. I think my favorite is the one below.


















Look to the left between the two trees. It's right before the iconic photo was taken.

Tax Breaks=15 jobs

Here's a great example of the gift of jobs that tax breaks bring.

15 jobs. Wow. That'll sure make a dent in Detroit's problems!






Friday, March 14, 2014

Mocking Poor People? Enter Jon Stewart!

Stewart does a great job here showing how the logical fallacy of misleading vividness is the foundation for most arguments from the Right. He also reminds us who the real recipients are of welfare in this country:)



Thursday, March 13, 2014

Good Words (from Rand Paul!)

I think Republicans will not win again in my lifetime … unless they become a new GOP, a new Republican Party. And it has to be a transformation. Not a little tweaking at the edges.

(Senator Rand Paul, Kentucky, on the chances of Republicans winning the White House in future elections). 

Perhaps now that a conservative is saying it this bluntly, people will start to listen.

The Biopolar Republican

Greg Walden, the Republican Representative from Oregon's 2nd district and the man in charge of keeping the GOP in charge of the house, is a great example of just how bipolar the Republican Party is these days. On Tuesday morning, before the special election in Florida's 13th district, he said, "Whether we win it or lose it, the special elections aren’t too predictive for either side going forward.

"If there’s any advantage of a special election,” Walden added, “it’s that you can test messages, and you can test strategies, and you can test sort of your theories on voter turnout and I.D. So, I mean, that’s kind of the takeaway . . . from a special, far more than is it indicative of what’s going to happen 239 days from now."

After David Jolly won, however, he had this to say.

"David proved that Pinellas County voters are tired of the devastating policies of this administration. Tonight, one of Nancy Pelosi’s most prized candidates was ultimately brought down because of her unwavering support for Obamacare, and that should be a loud warning for other Democrats running coast to coast."

Wow. That's quite a switch. Which should we believe? As Dana Milbank noted, he was right the first time.  And, as I predicted on Tuesday, things are playing out as expected.

The Democrats need to stop wringing their hands and recognize reality. They need to get voters to to turn out. If they do that, they will hold the Senate. They don't have much of a chance of flipping the House so the best they can do is try not to lose too many seats. Of course, as I type this, everything could change if the GOP puts up more candidates like Paul Broun. I've learned to never underestimate just how full on moonbat the Right gets in elections these days.

But it's really all about turnout. If the president's election machine (Organizing For America) can get people to the polls, the Democrats will be in good shape this fall and have no reason to panic right now. 


Good Words


Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Between Two Ferns Lies Regret

Much ado has been made about President Obama's recent appearance on "Between Two Ferns" a Funny or Die interview show hosted by Zack Galifianakis. Critics have said it was undignified and beneath the president. Yet the one who comes off as a real douchebag is Zack Galifianakis, not Barack Obama. I get the whole concept of the show is supposed to be a roast type atmosphere but you can be critical of the president (as Jon Stewart has been when he has interviewed him) without demeaning the office. And that's just what Galifianakis did.

I like Zack Galifianakis and will always continue to see his films as he is a very funny guy. But this was a real career blemish that's going to stick with him for a while. Here is the full piece.



Good Words

On Monday, state Rep. Pat Garofalo apologized for a controversial Twitter comment, saying, “I don’t have a racist bone in my body.” We often do not see our own racism. We think our thoughts are just facts. We believe that our thoughts and comments are innocent, harmless and just an explanation away from being nonjudgmental or nonprejudiced. 

As long as we continue to hold negative beliefs about a group of people, as a whole, we will continue to be racist, spread untruths, deny opportunities, exclude. If you agreed, smiled or nodded at Garofalo’s tweet, I challenge you to question your beliefs. The trouble with racism is that the racist is often blind to the truth. 

(Letter of the Day, March 12, 2014, Minneapolis Star Tribune)

An excellent summation of the intransigence of the anti-race baiters.

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

FL-13 Special Election

The special election being held today in Florida's 13th Congressional District is being touted as a "bellwether" for the 2014 mid term elections and a referendum on the ACA. Haven't we seen this movie before?

Here is what I predict will happen. If Alex Sink wins, there will be a little bluster and chest thumping from Democrats about how this means the public has embraced the ACA and the GOP should finally just shut up about it. They will also say that this means the 2014 elections aren't a slam dunk for the Republicans. This will all be quickly forgotten as the president won this district in 2008 and 2012 and Sink is expected to win.

If David Jolly wins, the right wing blogsphere will explode with howls of "I told you sos" and high pitched and overly excited voices about how this spells doom for the president in the fall. The left wing media will hand wring themselves to death and pray every night to their Rachel Maddow doll that somehow, some way, things won't be so bad this November and the president will save the day.

All of this prognostication (on both sides) when there aren't even candidates officially set yet in nearly all of the elections. Wow!

Another ACA "Horror Story" Shown To Be A Lie

Dexter cancer patient who called health care 'unaffordable' will save more than $1K.

I wonder how more of these are going to unravel in the next few months. I still contend that some vulnerable Democrats may want to rethink their strategy on running away from the ACA. Stamp it to your foreheads, dudes!!

Democrats and Republicans Are The Same?

U.S. Senate Democrats pulling all-nighter on climate change

Uh...really?

Words of Wisdom

I've discovered recently that arguing politics with someone who is unhappy with themselves and their life is not a good idea. It doesn't matter where they lie on the political spectrum. If they are angry, they blame the government for their problems rather than looking inward.

Usually these folks have a lot of spare time on their hands (for one reason or another) and so is born the Cottage Industry of hating the president...

Monday, March 10, 2014

Will We Like The New Doctor?


Jesus Will Return With The AR-15 Assault Rifle

Family Research Council's Executive Vice President Jerry Boykin said at a recent event that when Jesus comes back, he will most assuredly be packing!

The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 is says when he comes back, he’s coming back as what? A warrior. A might warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe … I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies ’cause he’s coming back as a warrior carrying a sword. And I believe now – I’ve checked this out – I believe that sword he’ll be carrying when he comes back is an AR-15.

You can add Mr. Boykin to the list of those who don't understand the concept of hyperbole.

Of course, he went on...

Now I want you to think about this: where did the Second Amendment come from? … From the Founding Fathers, it’s in the Constitution. Well, yeah, I know that. But where did the whole concept come from? It came from Jesus when he said to his disciples ‘now, if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.’ I know, everybody says that was a metaphor. IT WAS NOT A METAPHOR! He was saying in building my kingdom, you’re going to have to fight at times. 

You won’t build my kingdom with a sword, but you’re going to have to defend yourself. And that was the beginning of the Second Amendment, that’s where the whole thing came from. I can’t prove that historically, and David [Barton] will counsel me when this is over, but I know that’s where it came from. And the sword today is an AR-15, so if you don’t have one, go get one. You’re supposed to have one. It’s biblical.

Right....

The Long Game in Ukraine

Critics of the president's policy towards Russia are failing to recognize (see: willfully ignorant) that Putin has already lost the war. The March 16th vote may bring a secession of Crimea to Russia but the Ukraine will end up firmly in the European camp and stay that way.

“Yanukovych freed Ukraine and Putin is uniting it,” said Iegor Soboliev, a 37-year-old ethnic Russian who heads a government commission to vet officials of the former regime. “Ukraine is functioning not through its government but through the self-organization of its people and their sense of human decency.”

I realize the cottage industry of Obama haters are adolescent in going for the quick one but they might want to consider how foolish they are going to look in a few months. It never ceases to amaze me how they don't get the term "The Long Game."

Sunday, March 09, 2014

CPAC 2014 Comment

I've had more than a few emails requesting comments about this year's CPAC convention. If they had said something new there, I might have a post in me but it's just the same old shit. The photo below sums it all up quite nicely.






















Old white men...guns...fear...shit your pants...freedom...rinse...repeat...

Saturday, March 08, 2014

Kevin Baker Hits The Big Time

It's been a few weeks since I poked my head in at Kevin Baker's site. I think it's only fair that I check in once in awhile as I know for a fact that he reads my site every day. The first post I saw was this one. It seems that Kevin has finally arrived. Check out the video below.




You know you've hit the Big Time when Colbert makes you look like an absolute fool. I am curious as to what Kevin would have done differently in terms of the Ukraine issue. It sure is awfully easy to be a critic...

Of course, the insecurity is still at an all time high with this post. Kevin, dear, why are you so unsure of yourself? You do realize that I have teenagers in my life who do virtually the same thing when they show me long and antagonistic text conversations to feel better about themselves and their side of the argument. What are you afraid of?

So Much For Freedom of Speech

Louisiana, MoveOn group tangle over political billboard

Guns Don't Kill People...

...Goodwill does! 

What is James Madison's Worst Nightmare?

Rich Yeselson's piece on Republican obstructionism is a must read. The chief author of the Constitution would indeed be disgusted.

Gene Sperling A Go Go

Two noteworthy lines from former NEC director Gene Sperling at his recent Monitor breakfast.

On the ACA.

"I find it unusual that the president goes out of his way ... to have a smoother transition to new policies with less disruption for small businesses and Republicans are complaining."

Yeah, why are they complaining?

On the differences between serving in the Clinton administration and the Obama administration.

"In the Clinton administration, what was often most difficult was having [to deal with] a unified and strong opposition.... This time around, you learn the challenges of having a divided opposition…."

The latter might seem like it would be easier but if you think about it, it's really not.

Friday, March 07, 2014

The Long-Term Solution to the Russia Problem

There are all kinds of people critiquing the president's response to Russia's annexation of the Crimea. Republicans are blustering about it, but what do they expect Obama to do? Target Russians ships in the Black Sea port with cruise missiles? Send Americans troops into Simferopol and take the parliament building? Drop nuclear bombs on Moscow?

As I mentioned previously, in the short term economic sanctions are the only way to make Russia pay.  However, some people believe that Putin is actually losing: the situation in Ukraine is a sign of his weakness, not his strength. In Ukraine Putin is only succeeding in uniting ethnic Russian and Ukrainians against a dictator, and that may be inspiring Russians in Russia to defy Putin's tyranny.

But if they're wrong, and Russia keeps pulling this sort of crap, what about the long term? How do we prevent Russia — and countries like Iran — from throwing their weight around?

Russia is inherently unstable. Its people are unhappy. In the conversion to capitalism the vast majority of Russians have been left out in the cold. They don't live in a democracy. Their elections are rigged, even though Putin would probably still win if they were fair because Russians love strong men and long for stability, and they think he can provide that. Putin throws people in jail for criticizing his government. He lords over an oligarchy of corrupt officials who use their control over state assets to make themselves and their buddies wealthy.

But Russia has power today for one reason alone: oil and gas. It's like the Middle East. If the Middle East had no oil, they'd be an insignificant backwater that no one cares about, instead of the center of a never-ending conflict that keeps drawing us in.

The New York Times advocates using exports of American natural gas to undermine Russia's economic stranglehold over Europe. We need to go much further than that.

Since oil and gas are fungible commodities that can be bought and sold the world over, our dependence on fossil fuels enables the bad actors of the world. Countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, Iraq have power over us because they have oil.

If we want to undercut their influence, we need to reduce the importance of fossil fuels. Not simply by producing more oil and gas ourselves — because no matter how much we produce, we'll never be able to fuel the entire world. The best we can do is knock the price down a bit. And those bad actors will simply crank up production to make up for the loss. The price of oil will go down more. China and India will buy up the cheaper oil, build more infrastructure, make their people a little richer, start buying a lot more oil, and then the price goes up again. Then Russia starts using fracking technology and suddenly they have a lot more oil and gas to sell.

No, we need to develop other sources of renewable energy. Not just electricity production from solar and wind, but other alternatives such as fuel production plants that produce methane from bacteria or liquid fuels from algae. Energy production systems that we can build and license to other countries that will free them from dependence on the Middle East and Russia. These efforts have long been undermined by energy companies in the United States; that should stop right now.

As long as we have a fossil-fuel based economy, the oil barons of the world will have outsized influence over the rest of is. Oil is currently the ultimate power, and ultimate power corrupts ultimately.

Good (?) Words

“We fear for the safety of our families. It’s why neighborhood streets that were once filled with bicycles and skateboards and laughter in the air, now sit empty and silent … [For] the things we care about most, we feel profound loss. We’re sad, not because we fear something is going wrong, but because we know something already has gone wrong. That’s why more Americans are buying firearms and ammunition.

The greatest freedom is to have the ability to have all the rifles, shotguns and handguns we want.”

(Wayne LaPierre, at the CPAC Conference, March 6, 2014)

My oh my…Appeal to Fear much?

I don't get it. I thought violence was going down. So why is the Gun Cult still afraid? And why are they lying? Neighborhood streets are not empty and silent and are, in fact, filled with bicycles and skateboards and laughter in the air. What a bunch of hysterical old ladies!

Responsible Gun Owner

Man Shoots Himself In The Head While Demonstrating Gun Safety.

Hmph. I wonder if he was one of those responsible gun owners who want to patrol our nation's schools.

Not around my fucking kids. Ever.

Getting the Other Guys to Fight Each Other

The wealthy are in a high dudgeon today. They don't feel like they get enough respect. They claim their detractors are inciting envy, waging class warfare and hating people for their hard work and success.

But this is simply false. It's not envy. It's anger against injustice. Anger that the same guys who almost drove this country into a depression are making out like bandits. Anger that bonehead CEOs get paid millions of dollars each year, screw up, get fired, get a golden parachute, and then go work for some other company and repeat the process.

They're angry that every time companies have problems, the answer is always to lay off some employees, cut the salaries of the rest and make the survivors work harder, longer and for less money. Then they gloat to the board about how much they increased productivity! And then the board — composed of other CEOs just like them — gives them more stock incentives and pay raises for doing such a bang-up job.

People don't dislike the Koch brothers because they're rich, but because they spend billions of dollars pretending that climate change isn't real, buying off regulators so they can fill the air and water with pollution and toxic chemicals, trying to buy national elections and even trying to stage coups in little towns across America.

But when you listen to conservative commentators and news outlets, you hear a constant din of sneering hatred for the poor. Check out the selection of clips in this Daily Show segment to see what I mean. And that's just Fox News. Talk radio is far worse.

Then there are the usurious payday lenders that are waging all-out war on the poor, charging 200% interest. In some states (Missouri, Oklahoma) they use the court system to harass borrowers, and even get them arrested. And you thought the bad old days of indentured servitude were over.

An article in the New York Times by a former hedge fund manager paints a stark picture of the mindset of the 1%.
IN my last year on Wall Street my bonus was $3.6 million — and I was angry because it wasn’t big enough. I was 30 years old, had no children to raise, no debts to pay, no philanthropic goal in mind. I wanted more money for exactly the same reason an alcoholic needs another drink: I was addicted.
It is self-evident that wealthy are the ones possessed by envy and greed. Like that hedge fund manager, their obsession with class and status motivates them and drives their every decision: where they work, what they do, what clothes they wear, what cars they buy, what houses they own, who their friends are.

There are exceptions, of course. Bill Gates doesn't seem to be driven by those base drives. Nor does Warren Buffett. Not every rich person is an envious scumbag. The ones who started real businesses and actually built something themselves are frequently more humble and down-to-earth. It's the hedge fund managers, investment bankers, traders and hired-gun CEOs who never really accomplished anything real on their own who seem to be most driven by envy and greed.

But you couldn't tell that by listening to Fox News and talk radio.

Why the constant drumbeat against the poor in the conservative media, by people who claim to be Christian? Why do fictitious nickel-and-dime food stamp fraud stories get such prominent play, while stories about corporate malfeasance involving billions of dollars are only barely mentioned in the financial segments on TV?

The reason conservative media outlets are doing this is because they're afraid of a revolution in the ranks. The people they count on for votes are much more like the poor people that they sneer at than the millionaire Fox News hosts doing the sneering.

They paint the poor as living luxurious lives — recycling completely unsubstantiated rumors about people using food stamps to buy sea food and lottery tickets and going to casinos — to generate anger and envy in their viewers. And "the poor," by implication in the conservative media, are always black and Hispanic.

Because if the message that the 1% are undeserving, greedy, envious douche bags whose special treatment should end starts to gain traction with Southern white Americans — many of whom are themselves poor and on food stamps and various forms of public assistance — the Republican party is toast.

That's why the full-court press against the poor. The best way to to keep two guys from ganging up on you is to get them to fight each other.

Kneejeking Obama

Here are two great pieces which more than adequately address the knee jerk criticism of the president.

Who’s the Villain Here?

Blaming Obama First

I don't get it. Half of their base is libertarian now and doesn't give two shits about Ukraine. Ah well, any excuse to bring up Benghazi...

Thursday, March 06, 2014

Is The Ukraine Situation A Fight We Can't Win and Russian Can't Lose?

John A. Mazis posits this question in a recent column in the Strib and while I don't agree with everything he writes, he does have a voice that needs to be heard.

While President Vladimir Putin is not a democratic leader, he is elected (voting irregularities notwithstanding) and is still popular in Russia. His reasons for intervening in Crimea, and maybe elsewhere in Ukraine, are grounded in concrete security concerns as well as in history. His intervention aims at securing the safety of Ukraine’s sizable Russian minority and safeguarding his country’s dominance by keeping the West from encroaching on Russia’s traditional sphere of influence.

This is the heart of the matter, really. Ukraine wants to be part of Europe, not Russia. Pro-Russian forces within the country and in Russia. This is more of a European issue than a United States issue. Of course, President Obama is being measured for his manliness right now by some (not all, thankfully) in the Republican Party in how he responds to this crisis. I think that the barometer should be placed firmly on how the EU, particularly Germany, responds. They are the ones on the hot seat, not the president.

Wall Street Journal: Affordable Care Act Effects Account for Most of Income, Spending Increases

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Affordable Care Act is already boosting household income and spending.

The Commerce Department reported Monday that consumer spending rose a better-than-expected 0.4% and personal incomes climbed 0.3% in January. The new health-care law accounted for a big chunk of the increase on both fronts. On the incomes side, the law’s expanded coverage boosted Medicaid benefits by an estimated $19.2 billion, according to Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. The ACA also offered several refundable tax credits, including health insurance premium subsidies, which added up to $14.7 billion. Taken together, the Obamacare provisions are responsible for about three-quarters of January’s overall rise in Americans’ incomes. 

Wow. 

Wednesday, March 05, 2014

Two Close Shaves in Two Days

951 Gaspra
Today an asteroid passed by the earth closer than the moon, at a distance of about 217,000 miles. You read about them every once in a while, but these things zipping by every day! Tomorrow a rock between 7 and 30 yards across will come within 50,000 miles.

NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory tracks these Near Earth Objects (NEOs) on a web page anyone can access. Over the next two months more than 80 asteroids will pass by Earth with an average of 40 lunar diameters (9 million miles) at closest approach. That's two or three a day.

Most of them aren't that close -- 9 million miles is a tenth of the distance between the earth and the sun. But that's a lot of junk floating around in space near us.

All of these are too small and dim to be seen with the naked eye. But that doesn't mean they aren't potentially dangerous: five of these 81 asteroids may be as much as a mile across. A strike by an asteroid of that size on earth could kill a lot of people and drastically change the weather.

These asteroids are still being discovered by the hundreds each year. As of March 3rd, JPL was tracking 10,665 NEOs. Even though these asteroids aren't currently on a collision course with earth, we need to keep an eye on them because their orbits can be perturbed by interactions with other asteroids and big planets like Jupiter, which has a tendency to yank asteroids out of the asteroid belt and send them careening across the solar system.

So, no Armageddon this week. But keep your eyes on the skies.

The Minimum Wage, Corporate Welfare and Kids

The Minnesota legislature is currently debating a bill that would increase the minimum wage to $9.50. Recently the president increased the minimum wage for federal contractors to $10.10.

The problem is that the current minimum wage isn't a living wage — especially if you have a family to support. Many minimum wage earners have to turn to the government safety net — public housing assistance, food stamps, Medicaid, home heating assistance, earned income tax credit, etc. — to be able to survive.

By not paying their employees enough to live on, companies are getting subsidies from the government to keep their costs down, and therefore increase their profits. This is corporate welfare, at the taxpayers' expense.

The minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation; in adjusted dollars it pays far less than when it was first introduced. If the minimum wage had kept pace with worker productivity, it would be $18. The United States has one of the lowest minimum wages among developed economies: $7.25, compared to $9.25 in Japan, $9.57 in the UK, $9.76 in Canada, etc., up to $15.75 in Australia (in 2011, some of these have increased since then).

Opponents of an increase to the minimum wage are slowly yielding to logic, but they still want an exception: a lower minimum wage for workers under 18.

Yes, they want child slaves.

They justify this in a number of ways. "Kids don't have any responsibilities, they don't have to pay any rent, buy food or support children." Or, "Kids don't really need money. They just need a little pocket change to pay their cellphone bills and buy a t-shirt every once in a while." Or, "Kids are so unreliable, I have to train them to get to work on time, they're not worth that much."

The reality is that there are plenty of kids who do have real responsibilities. They have to help their parents — often single moms — pay the rent, buy their own and their siblings' food. But those aren't rich suburban white kids, so they fall beyond the ken of the people who oppose the minimum wage increases.

When I was in school I "lent" my dad money — the real estate market was a bear in the seventies — so I can attest to the fact that kids really do give their parents money, even white kids.

I don't mean to denigrate suburban white kids — they need money too. Have you looked at the cost of college these days? College students are frequently saddled with onerous amounts of debt after four years of tuition — colleges are really expensive these days. The more money they can save before they go to college, the less they'll have to borrow.

The silliest canard is "I have to train them to get to work on time." The average 16-year-old has been going to school for a decade, and has been getting up at 6:00 AM, turned in hundreds of homework assignments on deadline. Many have participated in hundreds of team practices and critical matches, where the success of their team hinged on their actions. They have been dealing with the whims and demands of parents, teachers and coaches their whole lives. It's preposterous that employers think they are teaching these kids anything they haven't been exposed to a thousand times before.

It's a fact: a lot of kids are unreliable. Just like a hell of a lot of adults.  They know what they're supposed to, and when they're supposed to do it. If they can't do the job on time or to your satisfaction, just fire them. Why should the good workers get paid less just because you have problems with the bad workers? Firing them may be the best lesson you can give them.

But if you can pay workers peanuts and invest nothing in them, you don't really care how bad they are, just as long as you can get a minimum amount of effort out of them. Yes, raising the minimum wage will result in some job losses: bad employees who aren't worth what they're being paid will be fired. You will get more work out of your good employees because they'll be more motivated. These are good things: unemployment is still too high, and there are plenty of people who need jobs and are willing to work hard.

Businesses that have good employees making a higher minimum wage will either have to cut their own profits or executive compensation packages (I'm looking at you, Walmart), or raise prices. Companies will have to charge prices for products that reflect the cost of producing them in an economy where everyone can afford to live on what they get paid, instead of depending on the government to step in and prop them up.

Some small number of businesses will fail, because their owners aren't competent to compete without screwing over their employees, or because they're selling products that no one is willing to buy for what it costs to make them — that is, they have a failed business model.

In either case, what's the problem? Those companies are just the corporate version of bad employees.

Obama A Go Go

I've heard a lot of President Obama rage of late. Hatred of this president become a cottage industry. It ranges from the usual conservative rag about how he is commie bent on being an totalitarian dictator to somewhat bizarre liberal mouthfoam regarding how is a magic puppet who dances for an evil cabal of wealthy corporatists who seek to depopulate the earth. Honestly, I have trouble telling who is left and who is right. They all sound the same when their blood gets up.

Yet, if you look at this actual record, you see what you see with most presidents. A list of impressive accomplishments, mistakes, and projects in the works.

In looking at the first link from Washington Monthly, I simply don't understand how anyone on the left can accuse him of being a puppet. He's pissed off a lot of people with these policies so I can see why some on the establishment Right don't like him. But the left? One would think they would be happy. The second link shows his mistakes as well his achievements. Again, not perfect but part of some grand conspiracy? Where is the evidence?

Tuesday, March 04, 2014

Do Rapists Only Pretend to Be Drunk?

When there are accusations of rape, alcohol is frequently involved. Because of that, many rape cases are never reported, many never go to trial, and many prosecutions fail because the cases devolve into he-said she-said arguments. Defense attorneys claim that both perpetrator and victim were drunk, everything was consensual, no one's at fault and there was no crime.

Even if they believe the woman's accusation, judgmental jurors may decide to punish the woman for going into bars and getting drunk in the first place, or for being a "tease." Women jurors may be the least likely to believe the victim.

But a study conducted by the universities of Toronto and Washington seems to counter some of that narrative:
Young women are often the targets of aggression when they're out in bars, but the problem isn't that guys are too drunk to know better.

Instead, men are preying on women who have had too much to drink.
That is, the perpetrators of sexual assaults may be cynically pretending they were drunk as an excuse for crimes they commit while in full possession of their faculties.
Men may perceive intoxicated women either as more amenable to advances or as easier targets who are less able to rebuff them because they don't have their wits about them, the researchers say.
I believe the intent may be even more sinister: if their victims press charges, they know that intoxicated women are less likely to be believed, and that people will think they deserved whatever happened to them.

I admit I have no personal experience with this; my personal anecdotes about alcohol involve my paternal uncles dying of various diseases caused by alcoholism, the disintegration of my sister-in-law's marriage from alcohol and prescription drug abuse, and my wife's cousin who went to prison after shooting his brother in a drunken fight. I don't drink and I don't frequent bars. They're too loud, too dark, and for most of my life they were smokey. Drunk people get into nasty arguments and brawls. And they kill people by the thousands on the highway.

All I have are the statistics from the National Institute of Health, which indicate that a quarter of all American women have been sexually assaulted, half of all sexual assaults involve alcohol, and 80% occur in social situations.

I am in no way blaming the victims here, but if you're a woman who wants to reduce your chance of being raped, the single best precaution you can take is to not drink in public or on dates. Not only do you keep your wits about you, it deprives rapists of their best excuse, and warns them immediately that you're not easy: they will just seek easier prey. That may mean you won't get as many dates, but you don't want to go out with those guys anyway.

There's a theory that farming was developed not to grow grain for food, but to produce beer, which allowed the development of civilization. If so, it's about the only good thing that came from booze.

Calling Out The Inflation Obsessives

Paul Krugman's recent piece on the inflation obsessives is absolutely correct. Worth of highlighting...

What accounts for inflation obsession? One answer is that obsessives failed to distinguish between underlying inflation and short-term fluctuations in the headline number, which are mainly driven by volatile energy and food prices. Gasoline prices, in particular, strongly influence inflation in any given year, and dire warnings are heard whenever prices rise at the pump; yet such blips say nothing at all about future inflation. 

They should know this but they seemingly don't.

They also failed to understand that printing money in a depressed economy isn’t inflationary. I could have told them that, and in fact I did. But maybe there was some excuse for not grasping this point in 2008 or early 2009. 

It's nothing really but willful ignorance.  It's fundamental economic fact.

The point, however, is that inflation obsession has persisted, year after year, even as events have refuted its supposed justifications. And this tells us that something more than bad analysis is at work. At a fundamental level, it’s political. This is fairly obvious if you look at who the inflation obsessives are. While a few conservatives believe that the Fed should be doing more, not less, they have little if any real influence. The overall picture is that most conservatives are inflation obsessives, and nearly all inflation obsessives are conservative. 

It's also emotional and rooted in profound insecurity. Why are they like this?

In part it reflects the belief that the government should never seek to mitigate economic pain, because the private sector always knows best. Back in the 1930s, Austrian economists like Friedrich Hayek and Joseph Schumpeter inveighed against any effort to fight the depression with easy money; to do so, warned Schumpeter, would be to leave “the work of depressions undone.” Modern conservatives are generally less open about the harshness of their view, but it’s pretty much the same. 

The flip side of this antigovernment attitude is the conviction that any attempt to boost the economy, whether fiscal or monetary, must produce disastrous results — Zimbabwe, here we come! And this conviction is so strong that it persists no matter how wrong it has been, year after year. 

It's truly bizarre. The continue to be wrong...clearly...and yet they continue to assert they are right. I suppose that's the bubble for you:)

Krugman doesn't paint a very rosy picture of the Fed either. At least it's rooted in fact and not moutfoaming moonbattery. 

Are GOP Governors In Trouble?

Unless they go full on moonbat, the GOP has a good chance of making considerable gains in the Senate. But what about the Governor races? Take a look at some of the polls.

It looks like most Democratic challengers beat Tom Corbett in Pennsylvania. Wendy Davis is going to make a serious run in Texas, especially with Abbott running around with Ted Nugent (someone please give him more chances to open his mouth!). Kasich is going to have a tough fight in Ohio. Rick Scott is going to lose. Period. And Snyder is going to struggle in Michigan.

2010 was the year when the states went red in terms of state government. It looks like that's going to change in 2014.

Monday, March 03, 2014

Fannie Mae Pays Back With Interest, US Makes Profit

Fannie Mae has paid back the United States government all of the $116.1 billion dollars it borrowed after posting an eighth straight quarterly profit. Earnings were at $84 billion dollars, the highest ever for the firm. The total amount paid ended up being $121.1 billion dollars.

“Obviously, it’s good news for taxpayers that Fannie Mae is profitable,” Chief Executive Officer Timothy J. Mayopoulos said on a call with reporters.

“For the last five years, the employees of Fannie Mae have come to work with the goal of reaching this accomplishment for the taxpayers,” said Mayopoulos, 54. “I’m very proud of what our employees have achieved and I’m very, very happy for the taxpayers.”

I seem to recall shrieks of doom and rolling in boiling pits of sewage over Fannie Mae. Hmm....

Ukraine and Private Sector Foreign Policy

There are a lot of histrionics over Ukraine now, as Russia's invasion is complete. A couple of points to put the situation into perspective.

The Crimea, which is the focal point of Russian action, has long been a flashpoint. The Crimean War was fought by Russia on the pretext of saving Orthodox Christians. Famous for Florence Nightingale and the Charge of the Light Brigade, the Crimean War pitted Russia against an alliance composed of the Ottoman Empire, Britain, France and Sardinia. The war ran from 1853 to 1856.

After the Russian Revolution and the bloody Civil War that followed in which White Army fighters were massacred after they surrendered, the Crimea was made an autonomous republic and part of Russia. Stalin deported the indigenous Crimean Tatars in 1944 to central Asia for supposedly collaborating with the Nazis, along with Armenians, Bulgarians and Greeks.

In 1954 the Supreme Soviet transferred the Crimean Oblast (area) from the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic (RSFSR) to the Ukrainian SSR. This was  a symbolic gesture on the 300th anniversary of Ukraine becoming part of Russia. Ukraine is viewed the birthplace of Russia, Rurik's Kievan Rus'.

Today Russia's Black Sea fleet is based in Sevastopol. This warm-water port has long been coveted by Russia, with Peter the Great (Putin's idol) failing twice to seize it. In 2010 Russia extended its lease on the port with Ukraine until 2042.  The population of Crimea is dominated by Russians, with many retired military officers living there, and many holding dual passports. It's warmer there, and a lot of regular Russians also retire there; if Sochi is the Russian Miami, the Crimea is the Russian version of the Florida panhandle.

With its own autonomous parliament, Crimea is for all intents and purposes a separate Russian enclave. Probably all the Russians in Crimea are in favor Russian troops coming in. They have swallowed Putin's line that western Ukraine is a puppet of Europe and America.

Putin's justification for acting in Crimea is the protection of Russian Christians. This plays into the historical context leading back for centuries. If he were to cite an American analog to justify his actions, he would point to Ronald Reagan's invasion of Grenada in 1983, when Reagan claimed that American students were in danger.

The recently deposed president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich, is an authoritarian tyrant who was stealing the country blind. In addition to his gigantic mansion near Kiev, where reporters have found incredible opulence and many incriminating documents, he was building a huge palace on the Black Sea. Yanukovich has been "privatizing" state assets and selling them to himself, his family and his cronies.

Some of the people who tossed Yanukovich out are louts just like him, only they're Ukranian rather than Russian, and they're only slightly less corrupt. The people who were protesting in the streets aren't happy to see those clowns come into power, but then anyone is better than Putin.

Putin could well be biting off more than he can chew. He already has a problem with Muslim terrorists. Now he's antagonizing Ukranians, many of whom live in Russia. Russia's anti-gay laws are just one symptom of his increasing intolerance and arrogance. He seems to think he's the second coming of Peter the Great.

Given these facts, castigating President Obama for "doing nothing" is short-sighted. There's nothing to do, militarily. Crimea has been a Russian colony for a century, part of Ukraine in name only. There's absolutely no justification for us to take any kind of military action, if Crimea is the end.

However, if Russia moves on the rest of Ukraine, that's a different story. At that point it will become extremely serious. To prevent that, the international community needs to show the Russians that they aren't going to sit idly by. We have to hit the Russians where it hurts: the wallet.

Western governments should immediately put economic sanctions on Russian accounts, and not let up until Russia leaves Crimea. At the same time we should also act as guarantors for the safety of Russians in Crimea and affirm Russia's right to the Sevastopol lease.

Why are economic sanctions any kind of threat?

Since Putin's ascension, corrupt oligarchs who have profited by sweet-heart oil and gas contracts and  "privatization" of state assets have been sending billions of dollars into western banks and offshore tax havens. They've bought hundreds of billions of dollars worth of real estate and businesses in London, Paris and New York. American and British bankers have been kowtowing to Russian tycoons for years; many New Yorkers have come to hate the rich Russians who have bought up apartments and condos and driven real estate prices into the stratosphere.

As much as two-thirds of the money leaving Russia is derived from criminal enterprises, by the Kremlin's own analysis. American hawks complain that economic sanctions are toothless against Iran and North Korea, but those countries have relatively weak ties to western economies. The Russian oligarchs have sunk all their ill-gotten gains in the west because they don't trust that Putin will let them keep it: if they look at him sideways he'll throw them into jail and take all their money -- which has already happened to a couple of tycoons who crossed him.

Western countries thus have the capability to destroy the oligarchs who prop up Putin. Instead of carping about what the president should do, American and British business communities should start applying some moral judgments about who they do business with.

Since two out of every three dollars coming out of Russia is from a criminal enterprise, American bankers with Russian customers have to know they're dealing with crooks. Now is the time for them to practice a little private sector foreign policy and and let regulatory agencies know of any suspicious activities they might have noticed.

If Putin's pals start hemorrhaging cash they may not be so sanguine about military adventures in Ukraine.

Sunday, March 02, 2014

Nominee For Best Picture: Gravity

Gravity is still the best film of the year. The images and story of one woman's struggle for survival still haunt me months after seeing it. Hands down, the performance of Sandra Bullock's career and that's saying a lot considering her tun in The Blind Side. And I am just a giant geek for space stuff!

I hope it wins tonight!!


Nominee For Best Picture: Nebraska

I found many familiar people and scenes in Alexander Payne's Nebraska. For those of us who live in the upper midwest, the sight of men staring blankly at a TV set and eventually falling asleep is commonplace. Bruce Dern is so fucking good as Woody, a man convinced he has won a publisher's sweepstakes prize of one million dollars.

Nominee For Best Picture: Philomena

Did the Catholic Church engage in slavery in Ireland in the 1950s? Yes they did and the results were devastating to single women who were simply exploring their sexuality. Phiolmena is both charming and sad as Judi Dench plays Phiolmena Lee (based on a real woman) searching for her son who was given up for adoption by evil nuns. It's worth it just to see Steve Coogan thunder away at a nun in wheelchair.


Nominee For Best Picture: Dallas Buyers Club

Dallas Buyer's Club should be the Tea Party pick of this year's nominees as it is most decidedly anti-government. But with good reason as the federal government's response to the AIDS epidemic in the early years (in particular, the FDA) was abominable. Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto are brilliant.

Nominee For Best Picture: Wolf of Wall Street

I am the most open person about sex that I know and have no filter whatsoever between my mouth and brain when it comes to carnal matters. But I blushed several times when I saw Wolf of Wall Street. Leo's performance is exhausting to watch and after 3 hours, I felt as though I'd ran a marathon. He's my fave for Best Actor.


Nominee For Best Picture: American Hustle

I think David O. Russell has followed in the footsteps of Martin Scorsese and decided to make a career of telling right to the very core American stories. While American Hustle touches on the Abscam operation in the late 70s and early 80s, it's really a story about how desperate and fucked up we are as a nation. All of the actors in this film are simply outstanding!

Saturday, March 01, 2014

Nominee For Best Picture: Her

Can you be in love with someone who doesn't have a body? Can you have sex with them? If we create an artificial intelligence that evolves, have we become God? These are the questions I asked myself after I saw Her. 

I don't have any clear answers as of yet.

 

Nominee For Best Picture: 12 Years A Slave

I found people's reaction to 12 Years A Slave to be both sad and amusing. They were shocked (!) at how awful slavery really was and couldn't believe that plantation owners were that harsh. The film certainly doesn't pull any punches but it's pretty much what I expected. How quickly people forget their own history...


Nominee For Best Picture: Captain Phillips

I enjoyed Captain Phillips a great deal and thought that Tom Hanks was great as he always is. The last 45 minutes of the film did an excellent job of capturing the tedium of hostage situations. But what was very wonderful about this film was how they showed the life of an average Somali near the coast and the near constant pressure they are under in their daily lives from barbarians. It was a very balanced film and not so pro-American hoo rah.

Looney Liberal Night

I love my really liberal friends but last night drove me absolutely bonkers. Hanging out in downtown Minneapolis for a birthday party for one of them, I was regaled with mouthfoaming about how all corporations are evil puppet masters who have hijacked Barack Obama's mind and soul, manipulating him into doing their nefarious bidding. Apparently, the Federal Reserve is behind it all.

Great.

After I took far more than I should, I posited that they don't sound any different than those moonbats on the far right and their evil government conspiracy theories. That made them very upset, offering several "Wow. Just wows" at my "naivete" at "how the world really works." One woman kept asking me over and over again if I knew just what the Federal Reserve really was. I replied that I did. When she asked for an explanation and I gave her one, she rolled her eyes and accused me of being "blind." Her boyfriend then described to me his theory that Barack Obama was taken aside after about a month in office and given his orders.

"Just look at the difference in his face after a few weeks in office. He went from young looking to ashen. Yeah, they told how it was."

"Who is they?" I asked.

"Ah, c'mon Mark, you know!!"

I still don't.

I tried to explain to them that I had been through all this in the 1990s, listening regularly to Art Bell and Coast to Coast. I still listen to it today but realize with the wisdom of my years that most of this stuff is just fictional garbage. More frustrating is the sad fact that people on the Right view all liberals as being this way. We are most decidedly not.

The whole night really kinda sucked because I was, once again, given a shining example of how when the left goes too far, they end up sounding like right wingers. Chem trails, the Bilderbergers, Monsanto, and a whole host of other moustache twirlers are all comin' to gin us!