James Madison's quote here sure sounds nice. But it is so clearly not true.
Religion, for one, is defined as the victory of willful, blissful ignorance over knowledge.
And democracy means that when the majority are ignorant, they will govern over (rule, actually) knowledge every day and thrice on Sundays (see above).
Sorry.
If All Is Lost, Then What Is There To Discuss?
The following is a response that I wrote to a very pessimistic comment on another blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time to crawl into a hole with internet access and live a hermit's life until death. If all is lost, then nothing can be done.
So why keep moaning about it?
"That (the US) was a nation whose economy hit a brick wall in the form of the Depression."
Same today. Except this isn't nearly as severe as the depression of the 1930's. Not yet, at least.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time to crawl into a hole with internet access and live a hermit's life until death. If all is lost, then nothing can be done.
So why keep moaning about it?
"That (the US) was a nation whose economy hit a brick wall in the form of the Depression."
Same today. Except this isn't nearly as severe as the depression of the 1930's. Not yet, at least.
Please Read This Before Killing Your Rich Uncle
A few days ago, I wrote about the temporary expiration of the Estate Tax.
Only 6 Months Left To Kill Your Rich Uncle
Since then, it has come to my attention that, for the first time ever, a US billionaire has died without his estate being subject to the tax.
Death, But No Taxes
Only 6 Months Left To Kill Your Rich Uncle
Since then, it has come to my attention that, for the first time ever, a US billionaire has died without his estate being subject to the tax.
Death, But No Taxes
Rush Limbaugh Is STILL A Big Fat Asshole
I've said it before...
I just had to say it again. Instead of spending life in a Florida prison like most Floridians caught with large quantities of illegal drugs, he got married again and paid Elton John a cool million to sing at his wedding.
You have to wonder a bit about his choice of entertainment. We know how Mr Giant Gasbag feels about gay people and gay marriage. So he hires perhaps the most well known gay man on the planet to sing at his wedding?
I just had to say it again. Instead of spending life in a Florida prison like most Floridians caught with large quantities of illegal drugs, he got married again and paid Elton John a cool million to sing at his wedding.
You have to wonder a bit about his choice of entertainment. We know how Mr Giant Gasbag feels about gay people and gay marriage. So he hires perhaps the most well known gay man on the planet to sing at his wedding?
Our Sociopath and War Criminal Former President
I could not find a transcript of the comments made last week by our recent sociopath/war criminal president bush the lesser, but the link does cover some of the more surprising aspects of them, with one notable addition that was not widely covered.
First, Andrew Sullivan, on "Real Time with Bill Maher", when discussing bush's smug comments about torturing KSM, said, eloquently, that anyone who would torture someone and then brag about it is a "monster". I cannot improve on that characterization.
But the other notable and non-covered comment made by the little shithead was that his greatest regret about his 8-year illegitimacy was that he failed to privatize SSI. Now, think about this. His greatest regret was that he failed to move SSI moneys from secure investments to the stock market (presumably on issues like Merryl, Lehman, WaMu and Bear Stearns) and/or other "securities" (such as any of thousands of toxic CDOs).
How would one calculate the odds that he and his treasury/fed cohorts would have treated the SSI funds as they did the stocks of those now defunct banks (or any of a few hundred other now-defunct issues) or would he/they have filled the tub with cash to keep THAT afloat as they did for goldman, citi, boa and aig? I'd guess 99% the former and 1% the latter. But I'm a cynic.
on edit: I recently also came across THIS
What this shows is that not only were they torturing, but they had several Dr. Mengele clones experimenting on the victims' capacities for enduring abuse as well. Andrew Sullivan's characterization becomes even more apt.
First, Andrew Sullivan, on "Real Time with Bill Maher", when discussing bush's smug comments about torturing KSM, said, eloquently, that anyone who would torture someone and then brag about it is a "monster". I cannot improve on that characterization.
But the other notable and non-covered comment made by the little shithead was that his greatest regret about his 8-year illegitimacy was that he failed to privatize SSI. Now, think about this. His greatest regret was that he failed to move SSI moneys from secure investments to the stock market (presumably on issues like Merryl, Lehman, WaMu and Bear Stearns) and/or other "securities" (such as any of thousands of toxic CDOs).
How would one calculate the odds that he and his treasury/fed cohorts would have treated the SSI funds as they did the stocks of those now defunct banks (or any of a few hundred other now-defunct issues) or would he/they have filled the tub with cash to keep THAT afloat as they did for goldman, citi, boa and aig? I'd guess 99% the former and 1% the latter. But I'm a cynic.
on edit: I recently also came across THIS
What this shows is that not only were they torturing, but they had several Dr. Mengele clones experimenting on the victims' capacities for enduring abuse as well. Andrew Sullivan's characterization becomes even more apt.
Only Six Months Left To Kill Your Rich Uncle...
Republicans hate taxes.
I mean, really, nobody likes paying taxes, but some people can deal with it a little better than others.
Some people can even keep themselves from getting too tightly wound about a tax that they'll never even have to pay.
But not Republicans.
I mean, really, nobody likes paying taxes, but some people can deal with it a little better than others.
Some people can even keep themselves from getting too tightly wound about a tax that they'll never even have to pay.
But not Republicans.
Howdy, Folks!
I've never had my very own blog before. At least not since they've been called blogs, anyway. I used to have a couple of different sites on GeoCities, though. Remember GeoCities? I had a site for my travel photos, and one for kinky porn pics. Those were the days, eh?
Never started any sort of political site, but I've always contributed to newsgroups/discussion boards/blogs as the internet has evolved. For years, I always just commented on articles, and responded to the comments of others. I guess I'm reactive by nature. Which doesn't make me a reactionary. At least I hope not.
My name is Dave, but I've been commenting on various sites as JMadison since about 1996 or so. I chose James Madison as an avatar of sorts because, to me, he has always represented the best qualities of both liberal pragmatism and fierce civil libertarianism. He believed in strong government, but also believed that a powerful government needed to have equally powerful limitations.
Never started any sort of political site, but I've always contributed to newsgroups/discussion boards/blogs as the internet has evolved. For years, I always just commented on articles, and responded to the comments of others. I guess I'm reactive by nature. Which doesn't make me a reactionary. At least I hope not.
My name is Dave, but I've been commenting on various sites as JMadison since about 1996 or so. I chose James Madison as an avatar of sorts because, to me, he has always represented the best qualities of both liberal pragmatism and fierce civil libertarianism. He believed in strong government, but also believed that a powerful government needed to have equally powerful limitations.
Heavy Hitters
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, May 22, 2010.
I hear it all of the time. "The CorporationsTM" own both political parties. They buy the elections, all of which are apparently rigged (why does anyone have to waste money on campaign ads for a rigged election, anyway?).
Campaign contributions are a matter of public record, but the various records are scattered far and wide. Fortunately, our friends over at Open Secrets do a pretty good job of aggregating the numbers from all of the various sources.
They maintain a list of 100 organizations and corporations that they call "Heavy Hitters". These are the 100 biggest campaign contributors. They also keep tabs on how much each one gives to each party and their candidates.
For 2010 (and the rankings are about the same for the last few election cycles), these are the top 10 donors to the Democratic Party and their candidates:
1. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ($2.2M)
2. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees ($1.8M)
3. American Association For Justice ($1.8M)
4. Teamsters Union ($1.5M)
5. American Federation of Teachers ($1.4M)
6. Machinists and Aerospace Worker's Union ($1.3M)
7. Laborer's Union ($1.3M)
8. AT&T ($1.2M)
9. Carpenter's and Joiner's Union ($1.1M)
10. United Food and Commercial Worker's Union ($1.1M)
I hear it all of the time. "The CorporationsTM" own both political parties. They buy the elections, all of which are apparently rigged (why does anyone have to waste money on campaign ads for a rigged election, anyway?).
Campaign contributions are a matter of public record, but the various records are scattered far and wide. Fortunately, our friends over at Open Secrets do a pretty good job of aggregating the numbers from all of the various sources.
They maintain a list of 100 organizations and corporations that they call "Heavy Hitters". These are the 100 biggest campaign contributors. They also keep tabs on how much each one gives to each party and their candidates.
For 2010 (and the rankings are about the same for the last few election cycles), these are the top 10 donors to the Democratic Party and their candidates:
1. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ($2.2M)
2. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees ($1.8M)
3. American Association For Justice ($1.8M)
4. Teamsters Union ($1.5M)
5. American Federation of Teachers ($1.4M)
6. Machinists and Aerospace Worker's Union ($1.3M)
7. Laborer's Union ($1.3M)
8. AT&T ($1.2M)
9. Carpenter's and Joiner's Union ($1.1M)
10. United Food and Commercial Worker's Union ($1.1M)
The 47% Myth: Just Who Pays Income Tax, Anyway?
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, April 26, 2010.
"47% of all US households pay no income tax". That's the current buzz in the conservative/libertarian/teabag blogosphere right now. Or maybe it's 47% of workers, or 47% of the population, or...well, a lot of people don't pay any income tax. Various versions of this are flying around, all based on a report last month by the Tax Foundation.
I am told by a libertarian friend of mine, that the Tax Foundation is a non-partisan think tank funded by the "liberal-leaning" Brookings Institute. I suppose that Brookings is "liberal leaning" by the same standard that Ron Paul is, perhaps.
What they really said was that, in 2008, a record number of tax returns were filed that had no income tax liability, about 36.3%. They used preliminary numbers from the IRS, since 2007 is the latest year that we have final numbers for.
So, with all the hubbub out there about all of these tax deadbeats (never mind that almost all of these people pay payroll tax, which Congress has been using as general revenue since the 1930's), I decided to take a peek behind the numbers.
"47% of all US households pay no income tax". That's the current buzz in the conservative/libertarian/teabag blogosphere right now. Or maybe it's 47% of workers, or 47% of the population, or...well, a lot of people don't pay any income tax. Various versions of this are flying around, all based on a report last month by the Tax Foundation.
I am told by a libertarian friend of mine, that the Tax Foundation is a non-partisan think tank funded by the "liberal-leaning" Brookings Institute. I suppose that Brookings is "liberal leaning" by the same standard that Ron Paul is, perhaps.
What they really said was that, in 2008, a record number of tax returns were filed that had no income tax liability, about 36.3%. They used preliminary numbers from the IRS, since 2007 is the latest year that we have final numbers for.
So, with all the hubbub out there about all of these tax deadbeats (never mind that almost all of these people pay payroll tax, which Congress has been using as general revenue since the 1930's), I decided to take a peek behind the numbers.
Obama's "Pot Policy"
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, February 23, 2010
"And now JMadison will tell us all again how great ob'wa's new pot policy is..."
OK, so I will. That cavalier and dismissive comment was made by another Chimpster in response to David Sirota's overwrought and sometimes erroneous column entitled "Obama's Military and DEA Rogues Gone Wild".
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/26897
I'm really a big fan of Sirota's, but in this case, he isn't telling the whole story.
First off, the Chimpster who made the comment at the beginning of this screed is making a molehill out of a mountain. There are thousands, maybe millions of us here in this country for whom medical cannabis ("pot" has replaced "marijuana" as the "prohibition word" to demonize cannabis) is a very large and serious issue, indeed.
"And now JMadison will tell us all again how great ob'wa's new pot policy is..."
OK, so I will. That cavalier and dismissive comment was made by another Chimpster in response to David Sirota's overwrought and sometimes erroneous column entitled "Obama's Military and DEA Rogues Gone Wild".
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/26897
I'm really a big fan of Sirota's, but in this case, he isn't telling the whole story.
First off, the Chimpster who made the comment at the beginning of this screed is making a molehill out of a mountain. There are thousands, maybe millions of us here in this country for whom medical cannabis ("pot" has replaced "marijuana" as the "prohibition word" to demonize cannabis) is a very large and serious issue, indeed.
It Does Matter
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, February 1, 2010
It does matter who is in the White House.
It does matter which party he belongs to.
I hear otherwise every day here. "Republicans and Democrats are no different". "Bought and paid for by the same corporate masters".
The only problem with those assertions is that they are wrong. It is hard to analyze the differences between parties and politicians much of the time, since there is so much going on. Yes, campaign contributions come from big business as well as from individual donors. Yes, one party ends up incorporating proposals from the other party to get bills passed.
But the two parties are different. Yes, they are. You may not like either of them, and that's fine. Go out and start one of your own, or just stay at home and bitch about it while doing nothing. Fine.
But, if both parties are bought and paid for by the same corporate masters, then why don't Democratic Presidents give them their money's worth? Why do the Republicans consistently deliver for big business, but Democrats frequently turn around and stab their masters in the back?
It does matter who is in the White House.
It does matter which party he belongs to.
I hear otherwise every day here. "Republicans and Democrats are no different". "Bought and paid for by the same corporate masters".
The only problem with those assertions is that they are wrong. It is hard to analyze the differences between parties and politicians much of the time, since there is so much going on. Yes, campaign contributions come from big business as well as from individual donors. Yes, one party ends up incorporating proposals from the other party to get bills passed.
But the two parties are different. Yes, they are. You may not like either of them, and that's fine. Go out and start one of your own, or just stay at home and bitch about it while doing nothing. Fine.
But, if both parties are bought and paid for by the same corporate masters, then why don't Democratic Presidents give them their money's worth? Why do the Republicans consistently deliver for big business, but Democrats frequently turn around and stab their masters in the back?
Nuclear Proliferation Done Right
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, October 2, 2009.
I've sharpened my policy proposal in regards to nuclear weapon proliferation.
As some of you know, I've long been an advocate of the "nukes for everybody" policy. Since no nuclear armed nation has ever attacked another nuclear armed nation, then the obvious solution for world peace is for every country on earth to have at least one or two thermonuclear warheads.
I proposed that every nation be given two nuclear warheads, but with no delivery system. That detail would be left up to each individual nation. The US would easily be able to supply the warheads.
I realize now that my original proposal was inadequate and ineffective, though.
I've sharpened my policy proposal in regards to nuclear weapon proliferation.
As some of you know, I've long been an advocate of the "nukes for everybody" policy. Since no nuclear armed nation has ever attacked another nuclear armed nation, then the obvious solution for world peace is for every country on earth to have at least one or two thermonuclear warheads.
I proposed that every nation be given two nuclear warheads, but with no delivery system. That detail would be left up to each individual nation. The US would easily be able to supply the warheads.
I realize now that my original proposal was inadequate and ineffective, though.
FDR--Corporate Stooge Or Outright Fascist?
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, October 2, 2009.
So much talk on these pages equating Barack Obama with fascists, and "bowing to his corporate masters".
So, what Presidents have served liberal causes better? FDR is frequently mentioned. But let's suppose, for a minute, that the internet was fully functional in 1933, and this blog was called "The Scowling Vacuum Cleaner", in dishonor of Herbert Hoover.
It's October 1933. People here (at SCV) are howling about FDR. "He only cares about his rich friends and his masters in the banking industry", opines one poster. "He hasn't done anything to help the working class or the poor" says another. Yet another complains that he passed a stimulus bill, but it wasn't enough.
Why are we saying all of these bad things about FDR in October 1933?
So much talk on these pages equating Barack Obama with fascists, and "bowing to his corporate masters".
So, what Presidents have served liberal causes better? FDR is frequently mentioned. But let's suppose, for a minute, that the internet was fully functional in 1933, and this blog was called "The Scowling Vacuum Cleaner", in dishonor of Herbert Hoover.
It's October 1933. People here (at SCV) are howling about FDR. "He only cares about his rich friends and his masters in the banking industry", opines one poster. "He hasn't done anything to help the working class or the poor" says another. Yet another complains that he passed a stimulus bill, but it wasn't enough.
Why are we saying all of these bad things about FDR in October 1933?
TR, FDR, And You Can't Ever Get All You Want
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, September 24, 2009
President Obama is getting a shitstorm of criticism from both the right and the left. To the right, he's a socialist. To the left, he's practically the reincarnation of Benito Mussolini.
Someone here recently remarked that people are disappointed because they thought that he would be the reincarnation of FDR. I like TR better, but what the heck?
What about those Roosevelts, though? How did they get so much accomplished? Did they get any of it done at all in the first year of their first terms?
President Obama is getting a shitstorm of criticism from both the right and the left. To the right, he's a socialist. To the left, he's practically the reincarnation of Benito Mussolini.
Someone here recently remarked that people are disappointed because they thought that he would be the reincarnation of FDR. I like TR better, but what the heck?
What about those Roosevelts, though? How did they get so much accomplished? Did they get any of it done at all in the first year of their first terms?
Beyond The 50% Myth: Paying For Single Payer
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, July 31st, 2009.
In the first 2 installments, I examined tax burdens borne by both typical and upper income Americans, and compared increased taxes to existing health care costs. I then promised to look at how much taxes would need to be raised to pay for a single payer system.
I know this comes a bit later than promised. Real life sometimes gets in the way. Also, I had originally planned to do this based on some rough "back of the envelope" calculations. Turns out nobody makes an envelope that big.
In the first 2 installments, I examined tax burdens borne by both typical and upper income Americans, and compared increased taxes to existing health care costs. I then promised to look at how much taxes would need to be raised to pay for a single payer system.
I know this comes a bit later than promised. Real life sometimes gets in the way. Also, I had originally planned to do this based on some rough "back of the envelope" calculations. Turns out nobody makes an envelope that big.
The 50% Myth (Part 2): Taxes, Single Payer, and The Typical American
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, July 20, 2009.
This is part 2 of a series of articles that I am writing about taxes, single payer health insurance, and the hand wringing of American conservatives that the lowest tax burden in the developed world might increase if we get any sort of health care reform.
In part 1, I dispelled the "50% myth"--the assertion of many whining crybaby semi-anarchist libertarian/conservatives that combined taxes in the US consume more than 50% of most people's income. Of course, some have refused to believe the facts without actually refuting any of my calculations.
This is part 2 of a series of articles that I am writing about taxes, single payer health insurance, and the hand wringing of American conservatives that the lowest tax burden in the developed world might increase if we get any sort of health care reform.
In part 1, I dispelled the "50% myth"--the assertion of many whining crybaby semi-anarchist libertarian/conservatives that combined taxes in the US consume more than 50% of most people's income. Of course, some have refused to believe the facts without actually refuting any of my calculations.
The 50% Myth: Taxes, Conservatives, And Single Payer Health Insurance
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, July 17, 2009.
I recently had an exchange here with a conservative who brought up what we call in the tax business "the 50% myth". In other words, taxes are so high here that they suck up more than 50% of your income between state, local and Federal taxes.
I've taken this one on before. Truth is, you could get kinda close, but not 50%.
Let's take the example of Mr and Misses example:
I recently had an exchange here with a conservative who brought up what we call in the tax business "the 50% myth". In other words, taxes are so high here that they suck up more than 50% of your income between state, local and Federal taxes.
I've taken this one on before. Truth is, you could get kinda close, but not 50%.
Let's take the example of Mr and Misses example:
The Torture Nobody Talks About
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, June 29, 2009.
It irritates me sometimes. Really, it does.
All of the shrill screeching on this and other progressive sites calling for Cheney, W, and others, to be sent to the Hague for trial for sanctioning the torture of inmates at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, etc. Not that these aren't egregious crimes. But the priority is misplaced.
A few hundred, maybe a few thousand, inmates were/are tortured at these facilities. But it truly pales in comparison to what goes on in this country, every day of every year. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are tortured, starved, and otherwise abused on a daily basis in American prisons, especially state prisons (although there is plenty of abuse at Federal prisons as well). County jails even figure into the picture.
It irritates me sometimes. Really, it does.
All of the shrill screeching on this and other progressive sites calling for Cheney, W, and others, to be sent to the Hague for trial for sanctioning the torture of inmates at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, etc. Not that these aren't egregious crimes. But the priority is misplaced.
A few hundred, maybe a few thousand, inmates were/are tortured at these facilities. But it truly pales in comparison to what goes on in this country, every day of every year. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are tortured, starved, and otherwise abused on a daily basis in American prisons, especially state prisons (although there is plenty of abuse at Federal prisons as well). County jails even figure into the picture.
The National Mood Through History
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, March 9, 2009.
I made the contention on another thread that the United States is not, and never really has been, a liberal country. It was founded largely by wealthy libertarians. Conservatives have occupied the Oval Office more often than not.
American Presidents are not dictators (although several have certainly tested those waters), but who we elect says a lot about the national mood. So let's take a stroll down our national memory lane. I've divided the 44 Presidents (actually 43 men, since Grover Cleveland counts as both 22 and 24) into four groups:
Authoritarian--sometimes bordering on fascist, these men were representative of, and pursued the policies of, the far right of their day.
Conservative--basically, right-leaning centrists.
Pragmatists--left-leaning centrists.
Liberals--idealists who actively promoted agendas that went counter to the conservative interests of their day. I can't say that we've ever actually had a far left President.
Here they are. Feel free to disagree. That's what Democracy is all about, right?
I made the contention on another thread that the United States is not, and never really has been, a liberal country. It was founded largely by wealthy libertarians. Conservatives have occupied the Oval Office more often than not.
American Presidents are not dictators (although several have certainly tested those waters), but who we elect says a lot about the national mood. So let's take a stroll down our national memory lane. I've divided the 44 Presidents (actually 43 men, since Grover Cleveland counts as both 22 and 24) into four groups:
Authoritarian--sometimes bordering on fascist, these men were representative of, and pursued the policies of, the far right of their day.
Conservative--basically, right-leaning centrists.
Pragmatists--left-leaning centrists.
Liberals--idealists who actively promoted agendas that went counter to the conservative interests of their day. I can't say that we've ever actually had a far left President.
Here they are. Feel free to disagree. That's what Democracy is all about, right?
Conservative Terror
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, January 27, 2009. How quaint to remember when the President had actually promised to close Gitmo, which is apparently still in business.
I've been wanting to write this for a while, but I keep forgetting or putting it on the back burner. But Obama's announcement that Guantanamo will be closing has brought all of the rhetoric to a head once again.
Republicans and al-Qaeda (also known as "wingnuts" and "tairists") are on the same side, and have the same goals. They've also accomplished a lot.
"Terrorism" is a tactic that has the goal (as the name implies) of scaring people. Scaring them into acquiescence.
Conservatism depends on the same thing. People generally won't vote for conservative policies, and against their own interests, unless they are scared.
I've been wanting to write this for a while, but I keep forgetting or putting it on the back burner. But Obama's announcement that Guantanamo will be closing has brought all of the rhetoric to a head once again.
Republicans and al-Qaeda (also known as "wingnuts" and "tairists") are on the same side, and have the same goals. They've also accomplished a lot.
"Terrorism" is a tactic that has the goal (as the name implies) of scaring people. Scaring them into acquiescence.
Conservatism depends on the same thing. People generally won't vote for conservative policies, and against their own interests, unless they are scared.
Atheist Illegal Immigrants Threaten Israeli Security
First posted at The Smirking Chimp November 12, 2008. Contains references to Dr Gerry Lower's rants on "fundamentalist atheists", as well as to a thread created by some new-ager at the time who wanted us to surround President Obama in protective energy. Kind of like The Green Lantern or something like that. For a while, I used the Green Lantern Oath as a signature line:
In brightest day
In darkest night
No evil shall escape my sight
To those who worship evil's might
Beware my power
GREEN LANTERN'S LIGHT!
In brightest day
In darkest night
No evil shall escape my sight
To those who worship evil's might
Beware my power
GREEN LANTERN'S LIGHT!
People think that Mexican immigrants come here illegally to pick grapes, swing paintbrushes and use social services indiscriminately. But that's not the whole story.
Many of them are atheists, and are fleeing their Catholic dominated country to come here. They plan on building fundamentalist atheist temples. They have the labor, they just need the materials. They're working on it.
Many of them are also openly critical of Israeli policies, thus threatening Israel's security.
I know that this is only the tip of the iceberg. They have many other plans, as well, and none of it can be any good.
Worst of all, when we try to surround Barack Obama with protective energy, they won't help.
John McCain, Tax And Spend Conservative
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, October 1, 2008.
Nobody in the developed world pays less tax than Americans. Nobody complains about it more, either.
Maybe all taxes should be abolished. The conservatives and libertarians would learn a lot the first time their house was burned down by a homeless unemployed firefighter.
But I digress.
If John McCain is elected, the Income and Estate taxes could go up dramatically. Really. No shit.
How, you ask?
Nobody in the developed world pays less tax than Americans. Nobody complains about it more, either.
Maybe all taxes should be abolished. The conservatives and libertarians would learn a lot the first time their house was burned down by a homeless unemployed firefighter.
But I digress.
If John McCain is elected, the Income and Estate taxes could go up dramatically. Really. No shit.
How, you ask?
For Once, Don't Blame The Democrats
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, September 23, 2008.
The current economic crisis is not the fault of Democrats who helped pass the Gramm-Leach-Billey act (which actually had the redeeming feature of imposing privacy rules on the financial industry). It's not Bill Clinton's fault for signing it. It's not the fault of Congress at all. This is not a matter of adequate laws and regulations not being in place.
It is, as far as government intervention (or lack thereof) goes, strictly George Bush's mess.
It's not the fault of people who borrowed money that they couldn't repay. It's not even the fault of the lenders who made the bad loans. Even the Fed is largely blameless, although fingers can be pointed at the Fed for making money too cheap, and lenders for making irresponsible loans.
No, the crux of the problem seems to be lack of enforcement of existing laws and regulations, and the thieves who took advantage of the situation.
The current economic crisis is not the fault of Democrats who helped pass the Gramm-Leach-Billey act (which actually had the redeeming feature of imposing privacy rules on the financial industry). It's not Bill Clinton's fault for signing it. It's not the fault of Congress at all. This is not a matter of adequate laws and regulations not being in place.
It is, as far as government intervention (or lack thereof) goes, strictly George Bush's mess.
It's not the fault of people who borrowed money that they couldn't repay. It's not even the fault of the lenders who made the bad loans. Even the Fed is largely blameless, although fingers can be pointed at the Fed for making money too cheap, and lenders for making irresponsible loans.
No, the crux of the problem seems to be lack of enforcement of existing laws and regulations, and the thieves who took advantage of the situation.
Armaggedon Time? Or Just Another Brick In The Wall?
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, September 15, 2008.
If you haven't heard the news yet, Merrill Lynch went under yesterday, their assets to be purchased by Bank Of America. Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, the largest bankruptcy filing ever.
The broader markets have lost over 3% of their value today. Money is running to US Treasuries, which is not a smart move, in my opinion. Running up prices on UST's will only make it easier for the Treasury to borrow even more money, and default there is looking more likely all the time.
In the investment industry, this is much more significant news than even the Bear Stearns failure earlier this year. Merrill Lynch was supposed to be the one wirehouse (what we call a broker-dealer that can clear its own trades) that was just too big to fail. They were supposed to be picking over the carcasses of their smaller competitors, not having their incinerated remains ingested by BOA.
The snowball keeps rolling downhill. It's not rolling as fast, or picking up as much mass, as some of the economic doomsayers around here have been predicting for some years now, but things are steadily deteriorating. Next up, look for an insurance crisis. AIG is the world's largest insurance company, and they have serious balance sheet problems.
If you haven't heard the news yet, Merrill Lynch went under yesterday, their assets to be purchased by Bank Of America. Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, the largest bankruptcy filing ever.
The broader markets have lost over 3% of their value today. Money is running to US Treasuries, which is not a smart move, in my opinion. Running up prices on UST's will only make it easier for the Treasury to borrow even more money, and default there is looking more likely all the time.
In the investment industry, this is much more significant news than even the Bear Stearns failure earlier this year. Merrill Lynch was supposed to be the one wirehouse (what we call a broker-dealer that can clear its own trades) that was just too big to fail. They were supposed to be picking over the carcasses of their smaller competitors, not having their incinerated remains ingested by BOA.
The snowball keeps rolling downhill. It's not rolling as fast, or picking up as much mass, as some of the economic doomsayers around here have been predicting for some years now, but things are steadily deteriorating. Next up, look for an insurance crisis. AIG is the world's largest insurance company, and they have serious balance sheet problems.
What We're Up Against
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, August 26, 2008.
While the Chimp is the only political blog that I spend much time on anymore, I do participate in a few non-political blogs/discussion groups. A few days ago, the moderator of one of these posted a "What Is Your Vent" thread, which predictably became quite political.
One of the posters there, let's call him "ST", started ranting about Obama. I've known ST online for years, and he has never come off as a wingnut before. Conservative, yes, extreme, no. But there he was, suddenly spouting off right wing talking points about Obama. A few excerpts (emphasis and typos are preserved from the original):
While the Chimp is the only political blog that I spend much time on anymore, I do participate in a few non-political blogs/discussion groups. A few days ago, the moderator of one of these posted a "What Is Your Vent" thread, which predictably became quite political.
One of the posters there, let's call him "ST", started ranting about Obama. I've known ST online for years, and he has never come off as a wingnut before. Conservative, yes, extreme, no. But there he was, suddenly spouting off right wing talking points about Obama. A few excerpts (emphasis and typos are preserved from the original):
"MY vent is how stupid people can be.
So many back Obama, and ignore his blatant lying , changing of his story (just until he gets elected) and his dislike for America.
All they see is that he is Black,which he isn't. He's half black. "
2nd Letter To Senator Obama
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, August 12, 2008.
I meant to write this earlier, but I seem to keep using my blogging time for arguing with certain people about subjects like how many Pelosis can dance on a pinhead, etc.
My, how things have changed! The Obama lovefest that was going on in June, when I wrote the original letter, is now officially over. Many of those who were rabidly defending him 2 months ago are now declaring Senator Obama to be the second coming of Satan, Bill Clinton, or both!
--Sigh--
I meant to write this earlier, but I seem to keep using my blogging time for arguing with certain people about subjects like how many Pelosis can dance on a pinhead, etc.
My, how things have changed! The Obama lovefest that was going on in June, when I wrote the original letter, is now officially over. Many of those who were rabidly defending him 2 months ago are now declaring Senator Obama to be the second coming of Satan, Bill Clinton, or both!
--Sigh--
Letter To Senator Barack Obama
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, June 6, 2008.
Preface: Following is a letter that I am sending to Senator Obama's Senate office address (he lists no contact address that I can find on his website). I will probably write more letters to him in the next few weeks concerning other issues.
I would have written pretty much the same letter to Senator Clinton if she was the Democratic nominee. Had my first choice (John Edwards) secured the nomination, these letters would not be necessary, and I would currently be working his phone banks.
All policy quotes are taken, in context, from the Obama campaign's "Blueprint For Change" publication, which can be found here:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf
Preface: Following is a letter that I am sending to Senator Obama's Senate office address (he lists no contact address that I can find on his website). I will probably write more letters to him in the next few weeks concerning other issues.
I would have written pretty much the same letter to Senator Clinton if she was the Democratic nominee. Had my first choice (John Edwards) secured the nomination, these letters would not be necessary, and I would currently be working his phone banks.
All policy quotes are taken, in context, from the Obama campaign's "Blueprint For Change" publication, which can be found here:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf
Presidential Trivia
First posted at The Smirking Chimp, January 8, 2008
Here's a little fun. Too much NH coverage today. My head is spinning. How about a trivia quiz? Make your guesses and post your answers now, and I'll provide the answers later.
Who was the first President to have articles of impeachment against him presented for a vote in the House?
Who was the first President to propose (and offer a very detailed proposal at that) universal health insurance, and an "old age pension"?
Which 3 Presidents refused to declare a religious affiliation of any kind?
Who was the first President to wear trousers while in office?
Who was the first President to die in office?
Who was the first person under the age of 50 to serve as President?
Who was the last President to wear facial hair (besides sideburns)?
Who was the only President that made his living as a tradesman?
Who was the only President to have ever been arrested while in office?
What Christian denomination have the most Presidents been members of?
OK. That's 10 questions. If anyone is at all interested, I'll post another 10 sometime.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Answers:
Here's a little fun. Too much NH coverage today. My head is spinning. How about a trivia quiz? Make your guesses and post your answers now, and I'll provide the answers later.
Who was the first President to have articles of impeachment against him presented for a vote in the House?
Who was the first President to propose (and offer a very detailed proposal at that) universal health insurance, and an "old age pension"?
Which 3 Presidents refused to declare a religious affiliation of any kind?
Who was the first President to wear trousers while in office?
Who was the first President to die in office?
Who was the first person under the age of 50 to serve as President?
Who was the last President to wear facial hair (besides sideburns)?
Who was the only President that made his living as a tradesman?
Who was the only President to have ever been arrested while in office?
What Christian denomination have the most Presidents been members of?
OK. That's 10 questions. If anyone is at all interested, I'll post another 10 sometime.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Answers:
More Fox News Idiocy
First posted at The Smirking Chimp on December 19, 2007.
I don't usually repost the work of others, but I just sort of happened upon this little gem this morning. I had never even heard of this idiot Greg Gutfeld before, but apparently he has a daily segment on FAUX News.
I don't usually repost the work of others, but I just sort of happened upon this little gem this morning. I had never even heard of this idiot Greg Gutfeld before, but apparently he has a daily segment on FAUX News.
Death, Taxes, And The Next President
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
The Master Plan
First posted at The Smirking Chimp on November 26, 2007
When people go bankrupt, they either "restructure" their debt (meaning they still get to pay most or all of it back, just on longer terms), or they liquidate. In other words, everything but the clothes on your back is sold or confiscated by your creditors.
The US is in way too deep to do a restructuring. We can barely even afford to continue paying interest on our national debt, and it's only a matter of time before Treasury securities start going into default. Time to liquidate.
When people go bankrupt, they either "restructure" their debt (meaning they still get to pay most or all of it back, just on longer terms), or they liquidate. In other words, everything but the clothes on your back is sold or confiscated by your creditors.
The US is in way too deep to do a restructuring. We can barely even afford to continue paying interest on our national debt, and it's only a matter of time before Treasury securities start going into default. Time to liquidate.
The Real Distraction
First posted at The Smirking Chimp on September 15, 2007
I hear the same thing here, day after day, time after time. The People of America don't care about anything of substance, because the media keeps bombarding them with American Idol, Britney, Lindsay, missing white girls, etc.
Yet this has always been the case. You could have made the same arguments (and many at the time did) during the Vietnam era concerning the Ed Sullivan Show, Liz and Dick and Burt, even "Is Paul Dead?".
I hear the same thing here, day after day, time after time. The People of America don't care about anything of substance, because the media keeps bombarding them with American Idol, Britney, Lindsay, missing white girls, etc.
Yet this has always been the case. You could have made the same arguments (and many at the time did) during the Vietnam era concerning the Ed Sullivan Show, Liz and Dick and Burt, even "Is Paul Dead?".
One Party, Two Party, Three Party, Four
First posted at The Smirking Chimp on August 25, 2007.
...five party, six party, seven party...more?
There has been a lot of talk here about alternative ("third) parties lately. I just want to share my thoughts on this, as something of a veteran of third party politics.
I want to provide some advice, based on personal experience, to those who would get behind or even start an alternative party. Or, for that matter, would like to help individuals run who are not affiliated with a party at all. Strategy is important, and so is perseverance. If any of these alternatives are to succeed, it will take a lot of work, and a lot of time.
THINK LOCALLY, ACT LOCALLY
...five party, six party, seven party...more?
There has been a lot of talk here about alternative ("third) parties lately. I just want to share my thoughts on this, as something of a veteran of third party politics.
I want to provide some advice, based on personal experience, to those who would get behind or even start an alternative party. Or, for that matter, would like to help individuals run who are not affiliated with a party at all. Strategy is important, and so is perseverance. If any of these alternatives are to succeed, it will take a lot of work, and a lot of time.
THINK LOCALLY, ACT LOCALLY
How Will The Derivatives Bust Affect The Economy?
First posted at the Smirking Chimp on August 11, 2007. Apparently, as "economists" go I am at least as qualified as Ben Stein. Certainly more prescient.
Here is a quote from a current National Review Article by Jerry Bowyer:
"Ben Stein said it well this past Saturday on Fox's Cavuto on Business: The sub-prime mortgage problem is grossly overstated; the sector is just too small."
Note that his source of wisdom here is Ben Stein. BEN STEIN! Actor, game show host, financial guru...you don't actually need any credentials to be a commentator in the financial press.
This article is disingenuous at best.
Here is a quote from a current National Review Article by Jerry Bowyer:
"Ben Stein said it well this past Saturday on Fox's Cavuto on Business: The sub-prime mortgage problem is grossly overstated; the sector is just too small."
Note that his source of wisdom here is Ben Stein. BEN STEIN! Actor, game show host, financial guru...you don't actually need any credentials to be a commentator in the financial press.
This article is disingenuous at best.
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Asshole
First posted at The Smirking Chimp on October 28, 2006
Not that it's anything new, but Michael Moore has been proven right again! I realize that the news is a few days old, but I haven't seen any other threads regarding this.
Michael J Fox has been doing campaign spots for Democratic candidates that support Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. In case you didn't know, he has Parkinson's Disease (PD), so he does have skin in the game (as do I). His symptoms have progressed to level 3 or so, so most of the time, he has a bad resting tremor. In the spots, his arms are moving, his trunk is twisting, and his head is nodding gently but constantly. All very fluid. In other words, a classic resting tremor.
Not that it's anything new, but Michael Moore has been proven right again! I realize that the news is a few days old, but I haven't seen any other threads regarding this.
Michael J Fox has been doing campaign spots for Democratic candidates that support Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. In case you didn't know, he has Parkinson's Disease (PD), so he does have skin in the game (as do I). His symptoms have progressed to level 3 or so, so most of the time, he has a bad resting tremor. In the spots, his arms are moving, his trunk is twisting, and his head is nodding gently but constantly. All very fluid. In other words, a classic resting tremor.
Safety Rant
First posted at The Smirking Chimp on September 21, 2006
I get really sick of all of this "are we safe yet?" shit. From Katie Couric to my next door neighbor, I keep hearing this same stupid question.
Time to face reality. You are not "safe". Then again, you never were, anyway. Safety is an illusion. Safety is a mirage on the horizon. It's an unattainable goal.
What is "safe"? Does it mean "free from all danger"? If it does, then it's impossible to achieve. Sure, some choices and conditions are "safer" than others, but none are actually "safe".
You are always in danger. You are in danger, right now, of being electrocuted by your computer. You are in danger of a meteor striking you and killing you. You are even in danger of being killed in a terror attack. All of these dangers are extremely remote (except maybe for the electrocution by computer part). Therefore, they shouldn't be much of a factor in you daily decision making process.
The POB (Powers That Be) are using and abusing the concept of "safe" to keep folks afraid and compliant. The new restrictions at airports actually ARE a damned nuisance, and will never stand a better chance of stopping a terror attack than the old system. It DOES matter if someone listens to my calls, whether I have something to hide or not (and really, who doesn't?). Etc, etc...
Soccer moms and NASCAR dads need to wake up. Your children are extremely unlikely to be killed in a terror attack. On the other hand, you need to pay more attention to how they cross the street.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
