Unbelievable—John McCain runs away and begs for the imminent presidential debate to be delayed, citing the need to address the financial crisis, as if he actually matters and has a plan other than to do whatever the Bush administration orders.
I smell fear.
I was sent a great suggestion: if McCain is going to be curled up in a foetal position somewhere, perhaps they should have the vice-presidential debate instead. She's ready, right?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Under the fold:
Ex-Cheney aide: Bush won't hit Iran:
US President George W. Bush will not attack Iran to halt its nuclear weapons program before his term ends in January, David Wurmser, a key national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney up until last year, has told The Jerusalem Post.…
Under the fold....
What Makes People Vote Republican?:
Not everyone who votes Republican has been 'duped'. Conservative ideals appeal to some because they reflect heartfelt visions of a 'good society.
The Religious Right's Religious Right:
One of the fascinating things about the Palin story to me…
Note to GOP - ACORN Was Defrauded and You Know It:
1. The GOP during the 70's, 80's and 90's employed a number of methods to register voters to insure the people they were registering were indeed Republican.
One method was to go through a neighborhood and register everyone who wasn't registered.…
Its Not Just Palin -- Its The Message.:
The brilliance of the McCain strategy and messaging is that it includes a trap for Obama. To push back on the McCain claim of "country first" and "the original mavericks who will shake up Washington" the Obama campaign's attack of "four more years of George…
he can't chew gum and walk at the same time. so whatelse is new???
He's passed his sell-by date, actual decomposition any time now.
Doesn't McCain admit he knows nothing about the economy? What can he really do to help other than to provide bi-partisan rhetoric (which means coerce democrats to vote with Dubya)?
Maybe he will go ahead and do the debate but just demand that nobody ask questions about the economy, since that would hurt America and kill puppies.
I smell blood in the water from this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ccmRuCpFjY
Probably because she's protected from "witches"
Well, the people want the debate. Only 10% think that the debate should be delayed, 50% think it should go on as scheduled, and 36% think it should be held with a focus on the economy. Yeah, that's right McCain - you'll have to talk and it may well be focused on the subject you most want to avoid.
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportUC.aspx?g=54d651a7-a62b-4420-…
CNN poll says 94% are opposed to the bailout.
We just might dodge this bullet after all. The right thing to do is let the banks take their losses, fail if they can't handle it, and let the market reprice the houses and the mortgages.
The crash is probably inevitable. The choices we make now will determine whether it's a bad couple of years or a bad couple of decades.
-jcr
I think McCain was also suggesting they "postpone" the vice presidential debate as well.
McCain is such a gutless, bottom-feeding, lying sack-o-shit, it's amazing that people are so willing to take that idiot seriously enough to vote him into office. He's an old version of Eddie Haskell.
It may be fear. I'm not sure. It is, however, certainly a gimmick. McCain saw his moribund campaign revived by his selection of Sarah Palin because it appealed to the dominant paleolithic segment of the GOP, who became willing to take a chance on him because they hoped he would die in office and make Palin the neocon goddess in the White House. Now that it's turned out that Palin's charisma doesn't extend beyond the party's hardcore, McCain thinks he has to resort to another rabbit out of the hat. Maybe bogus statesmanship will work! Hey, let's stop campaigning for the good of our nation because of the financial crisis! (And not because I'm beginning to tank!) Yeah.
Osama Bin Ladin must be giggling in a cave some where right now, he has almost accomplished his mission, bankrupt the USA. Bush fell for it hook line and sinker....very sad.
I'm convinced that McCain is the nominee because the Powers that Be in the Republican party wanted someone expendable to run this time. What's amazing is that he was ever even with Obama in the polls.
-jcr
Oh I really wish they'd put the fundagelically-frenzied hockey mom on. That might have the same effect as when McCarthy got on TV and dropped off the radar once the American public saw how truly insane he was.
I'm coming around to the opinion that this election is a psychology grad's Ph.D thesis experiment. You couldn't write an election like this and be taken seriously, it's far too wacky to be real.
Yeah, he totally planned that sub-prime mortgage thing... dumbass.
I don't know. I think Bush would have bankrupted America without the Sept. 11th attacks. It would have been a lot more difficult for him since people would have been able to question his irrational and illogical antics without having to deal with being branded "un-umer'kin."
I'm envisioning an editorial cartoon where a young McCain begs his VC captors to hold off torturing him for a few weeks so he can get some work done.
He and Palin have to talk it over with their god to decide what to do. First the prayer breakfast (with crackers), then the big meeting at a place and time to be disclosed later, and later, and later, and later.
Well, if the debate then finally takes place, I hope McCain will tell us what the hell he DID to "address" the financial crisis. If whatever he plans is so urgent, important and far-reaching, he will certainly want to tell us afterwards?
It's sad. Few politicians enjoyed the kind of respect he used to have. But about 6 months from now, he's going to realize that he's turned his dearly-paid war experiences into a punchline, and that whatever professional or social value he's derived from being a war hero (which has basically been his career for the last 30 years) has been entirely spent in this campaign. And chickening out of the debate is part of that process.
McCain makes another unwise snap decision - probably trying to stop the V.P. debate from happening.
It's fun to watch his campaign implode.
Another thing that strikes me about this gimmick/stunt/delusion/last desperate act is that it is incredibly arrogant--"Oh, it's not just that I think I ought to be present for debate and voting, it's that this problem literally cannot be solved unless I, John McCain, personally get involved in every single step of the process while completely ignoring this election that I'm involved in." Yeah, uh-huh. I'm liking the Obama reaction, for once--"Presidents have to deal with more than one thing at a time"? Uh YEAH they do.
Better yet, have McCain send Palin out to debate Obama.
It's a gimmick, that's for sure. No doubt he and his handlers think it will make him look decisive and self-sacrificing. Instead it makes him look like a coward who's using an excuse to get out of the debates.
I love Obama's response:
"I think that it is going to be part of the president's job to deal with more than one thing at once."
Oh, snap!
McCain and Palin's campaign has imploded.
McCain seems clueless about what is going on and what to do about it. He also has baggage since The Theothuglicans caused the crisis in the first place. He is really just looking too old for all this excitement.
Palin has been in the deep freeze. Apparently the campaign is afraid that she might screw up in public without her handlers. She has little background or education considering the office she aspires to. She also seems good at babbling kooky nonsense about witches, the second coming, creationism, and gods birth control for kids which seems to be shotgun pointed at the groom to be. In terms of anything relevant and intelligent, forget it.
It's interesting to me that the poll reports 56% of Republicans want the debate to be held as scheduled, versus 51% of Democrats. Perhaps much of his own supporters don't agree with the delay?
John McCain as president will ask each American and each other person in the world, as rational people, to postpone presenting him with any new problem until he can find a way to manage each pre-existing problem.
What will he do when any of over-7 billion people refuse to acquiesce to this polite request?
Man, if will be fun to see how pissed off you guys will be come 11/05/08.
McCain 52%
nObama 45%
Part of it is probably that he's using it as an excuse not just for him, but for Palin. His campaign has already suggested that the Presidential debate be rescheduled for... the same day the VP debate was supposed to happen, with that one conveniently delayed until further notice. Yeah, because there are no other days open except for that one.
McCain: Ready to lead? "Uhm, Osama, could you stop terrorism in Afghanistan until we're done with Irak? Hey, Kim-Jong Il, could you delay your nuclear program until we've dealt with Iran? Economy crisis AND a Hurricane? Gimme a break!"
Where the heck do you get your stats?
First off, the popular vote is still Obama's, and secondly, it's electoral votes that count - like the way Obama's been winning Colorado with his ground effort.
You'd think you'd know something about it, it's YOUR country, not mine.
The big story in the campaign is the economy, and The Greatest Financial Crisis since the depression.
The culture wars creationism and birth control nonsense aren't even a close second.
The bailout is more like looking busy to look busy. It is obvious Paulson has no idea what is going on or what to do. The chances of it working are pretty low unless they actually sit down and think things through for a while.
And BTW, the crisis is manufactured fear just like the Iraq war and everything else. This admin. waits until it is too late and then claims the wolves are at the door. Well they are but a crisis that took 8 years to develop isn't going to get much worse in a week or two. They are just conning people who have heard the wolf, wolf, wolf, cry once too often.
Hey, maybe the guy has to go reschedule some of his mortgages.
@ Eric Atkinson #27:
Obama 194%
McCain 64%
That's right, buddy, numbers don't lie. You only need to make them up. Just ask God.
"Man, if will be fun to see how pissed off you guys will be come 11/05/08.
McCain 52%
nObama 45%"
ROFL! The only way McCain could screw up his campaign any worse now would be to have a picture taken of him making out with Kim Jong-il under a burning American flag.
It's always a little funny when the cock-sucking neo-con trolls share their wet dreams with the general population.
It's sad. I usually expect commenters here to be well informed as well as witty. However, from the comments above it seems that none of the commenters are aware that the debate scheduled for Friday is supposed to be exclusively about foreign policy. This is the one where McCain is *supposed* to have all the expertise and experience, so why should he be so anxious to duck it?
McCain may be the first person to become a lame duck before the election.
Obama should be going for the jugular right now, putting the last nail in McCain's coffin (only metaphorically...for the moment!)
That MSNBC report makes Obama seem too accommodating to me. If Obama softballs this, McCain could regain his footing and then I don't think he'll return Obama's gentlemanly gestures.
It's the hackneyed old trick...
Obama punches McCain in the face, McCain melodramatically falls to the ground. "Please, let's stop fighting, we can be friends on this" McCain pleads. Obama, being a typically empathic liberal, bends down to help him up. McCain grabs a handful of sand, tossing it in Obama's eyes and temporarily blinding him. McCain then trounces him while he's disabled.
Like I said, if Democrats are serious about winning for once, they need to beat the crap out of McCain while he's off balance.
Someone here at work just used the term "lipstick on a pig" to describe one of the systems we are meant to be building. Nice to see the meme propagating. That expression is something to be thankful to McCain for.
Hey Eppie...52/45 is how I think it will turn out.
Your silly comment seems to indicate the vote has taken place, it has not. I am well versed in american electoral processes. I don't need the euro trash version.
Don't confuse polls with reality.
That's why God invented drugs... dulls the pain
RCP National Average From Yahoo politics today
McCain (R) Obama (D)
44.1% 47.8%
Virtually all the national polls show Obama in the lead with McCain dropping fast.
Atkinson is either delusional or lying.
Hey Dan...you sound sort of ...gay.
Your arbitrary guess as to the final poll results in a waste of time. As the last week showed, things can change rapidly (McCain went from 2% ahead to 10% behind).
I agree with Jeremy @36. The Dems need to hammer away at these lying, vicious, corrupt right wing thugs. Get them on the ground, stomp on their throats and rock back and forth for about six weeks.
The right wing has trashed this country and we need to make it clear that we are mad as hell, and so on.
Hey Dan, I think Eric is coming on to you...
@ #36 -- Hey, John McCain has limited mobility in his arms. Fighting metaphors are unfair and/or unnecessarily hilarious.
. . . I'm not trying to make a point here; I just like pointing out that John McCain has limited mobility in his arms. Due to having been in a fighter pilot crash, being tortured, and, oh yeah, arthritis.
@38
You seem to be quite fond of the phrase "euro trash". It might interest you that in most European states elections are far more democratic. In the US, through your silly system, more than half of the population can be against a candidate yet still he will be president. And if you don't live in a swing state, your vote doesn't make ANY difference. Great, isn't it?
In most European countries, every vote counts the same, not depending on the particular region of the country you're from. That is true democracy.
But go ahead, indulge in your dreams of a neocon theocracy and pray for rapture to come before the home of the brave turns into an asylum.
If I was running Obama's campaign, I sure as hell wouldn't be joining McCain in suspending campaign operations and advertising. Now is the time to dump a disproportionate amount of money into slamming McCain on the economy...and especially publicizing his staffers being former bank lobbyists.
Okay, I think I found out Bush III's strategy here...make it so painfully obvious that Obama is going to win that none of his supporters even bother to show up on Election Day.
For those of you that are a bit slow...52/45 is what I think the election results will be in the popular vote. If it were to turn out that way that would indicate the electroral college would certainly go McCains way.
Eric Atkinson:
a) I don't care how YOU think it'll turn out. Opinions are like assholes.
b) you state percentages - of what? Popular vote? Like that matters. 538, buddy - that's the important bit.
c) polls don't determine things, but they're a hell of a lot better than your guess is - and running scenarios based on probabilities of states falling certain ways is the best way to test this kind of system - Monte Carlo methods. I bootstrap survey data regularly.
d) don't call me Eppie - I'm certainly not some friend of yours.
Oh, and really classy, with the euro trash comment. Not that it matters much, but wrong continent. Look north. I'm up here in soviet Canuckistan.
Ummm. Chez. Maybe because McCain isn't really that sharp on foreign policy. I mean just this week he was befuddled by a question about the Prime Minister of Spain. Apparently McCain thinks Spain is in Latin America. Not so sharp. McCain is showing his age. TOOT the surge worked/is working... that's his big foreign policy success? Less death and no move towards better governing in Iraq. yeah... real big success.
McCain is trying to look presidential. But no one is running to McCain for advice. He's trying to insert himself to make himself look more influential.
And he's steadily slipping in the polls. Also the American public isn't hanging this on the Democrats... everyone knows that the GOP likes to do Wall Streets bidding and now they're taking a hit with the American public. One which they deserve.
(D) None of the above
Public and media opinion trajectory will likely swing wildly throughout the intervention process, and the direction it will settle in is not entirely clear given the volatility of this process. The democratic campaign seems to be confident in a strategy of intelligent consideration of the situation, booooring. The republican campaign seems to be waiting to reveal what they were really going to do all along after the chips fall. The "will have been going to make no mistake", aka, "we've been going to be right all these years" strategy.
While y'all throw petty jabs at an old man and his hot sidekick, may I suggest you take a deep hard look inside yourself and ask how will you be if you suddenly find yourself living in a deep recession?
Housing prices in major markets are not finished dropping, ARM's are coming due for a large chunk of homeowners who got on the refinance wagon, and the second wave of home abandonment is coming this spring.
People are going to realize they owe 50,000 or 100,000 more on their mortgages than the homes are worth and bolyt on their mortgages, meaning the exodus still hasn't happened like it is going to and we are nowhere near the bottom of this.
700 Billion will triple by the time this is done.
I got this newsletter in my inbox--
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Dear Friends,
Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.
The events of the past week are no exception.
The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."
That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.
The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!
• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.
• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.
• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.
There goes your country.
Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.
Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.
Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.
The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?
When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?
Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.
In liberty,
Ron Paul
OT (Sorry.)
Has anybody else noticed that nobody has yet mentioned that the credit-liquidity "crisis" just might be the result of the government fighting two wars on "borrowed money"?
If the real problem is the lack of available credit (in the form of cash) to the business/investment sector, then why has no one made the connection between our present way of waging war (on credit) and the world economy?
When business has to compete with government for resources, who generally wins? In other words, the financial sector can't afford to compete against the government when it comes to borrowing at high interest rates because the government can out-bid them. (As Cheney once responded to taxpayer concerns, "So?")
Wait. Look at all those bad home mortgages out there.
Uh. Treasury's bailout must surely include some of Defense's debt. Hey, this is the way to run a country. Why didn't we think of this before?
@41
Hi Erik,
That was a really great way of constructing a disparaging comment. I love when people use my sexual orientation as an insult. Crawl back in your hole.
And in fairness, #34, cock-sucking isn't considered a bad thing by all of us, so maybe you can think of other personal characteristics that might actually be disagreeable.
Well this has gotten utterly lost but for what it's worth I meant @ #36 Jeremy . . .
I hate unthreaded discussions. They're so messy.
"Hey Dan...you sound sort of ...gay."
Is that an insult? I guess it is if you're homophobic and nervous about your own sexuality.
Who cares if he's gay? Who cares if he sounds gay? It's not a bad thing just because you or some fairy in the sky think it is.
Huh. The voting machines were running Vista, eh?
BHO has to be careful about bashing McCain about the economy. so many democrats used Fanny May/ Fanny Mac. as a cash cow.
Quiet_
Obama got half of Ron Paul's votes. But They're working on a patch.
Let's play Jeopardy!
A: Breaking Eric Atkinson's withered little heart.
Q: What's another good reason to hope for an Obama victory?
Also an antivirus (xkcd).
Eric, if we're going to talk polling data, look at some of the aggregators like pollster.com and fivethirtyeight.com. They currently show Obama rather far ahead in the electoral vote and ahead in the popular vote.
You know these fat dorks that give comments on rugby games albeit never having actually played themselves? They think they now everything because, well, they have seen so many of them on TV.
That's precisely what McCain's foreign policy experience is...
I don't think this campaign can surprise me anymore. Joe Biden could show up at the Vice Presidential debates without pants, and it wouldn't even phase me.
wow. Everybody turn on their tv (no seriously) and watch cspan. Is THIS what McCain wants to call off the debate for. I mean... maybe I'm mistaken... maybe the Senate is hacking away at our economic futures, but the Republican from Alabama is presenting a painting to his colleague and telling the story about the painting...
and it's live.
I think maybe spending bills have to be introduced in the Senate. I may be wrong. I don't know. But the distinguished fellow from Alabama doesn't seem to concerned.
Doubt Eric will be interested. He'd rather tell you how he thinks it will turn out, and possibly imply that you're a gay European.
i hate to be a cricket but it's simply a political try to put politics in the background. McCain is just sad and by trying to be a hero here all he does is make it seem like he's a old man who can only deal with one thing at once.
Watch David Letterman tonight to see an irate host who will not deal with a lame man like mccain (by selecting replacement guest= keith olbermann) what a bittersweet reward.
wow. Everybody turn on their tv (no seriously) and watch cspan. Is THIS what McCain wants to call off the debate for? I mean... maybe I'm mistaken... maybe the Senate is hacking away at our economic futures as we speak, but the Republican from Alabama is presenting a dainty painting to his colleague and telling the story about the dainty painting...
and it's live.
I think maybe spending bills have to be introduced in the Senate. I may be wrong. I don't know. But the distinguished fellow from Alabama doesn't seem too concerned.
Because with the country's economy in crisis -- a crisis that's been in process for weeks and months, a crisis that was in fact created by seven years of his party's failed economic policies -- what's really going to help is for the GOP Prexy candidate to pull an all-nighter.
Yeah, that should do it.
Hell, I wrote most of my senior thesis in a week of Vivarin-fuelled all-nighters. McCain should be able to fix the worst U.S. economy since the Great Depression the same way. (Okay, so I got a C-. What's your point? )
It will not break my heart if BHO wins. I'l have to work harder to migrate the the damage he might do. But I would'nt be rioting in the street or moving to the great white north like some leftards might.
He ran away from David Letterman too :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjkCrfylq-E&eurl=http://www.crooksandlia…
eh. sorry for the repeat.
*yawn*
Eric leaves another puppy puddle on the floor.
Again... You have nothing other than your own tortured wet dreams upon which to base this gibberish you call a thought.
Aside from that, the fact that you say I "sound gay" as though it's some sort of insult is unbelievably telling of what an intellectual infant you really are. Really, man. Unlike you, I haven't any problems with gay people. In fact, I've met many I have come to admire. The fact that a chattering, pathetic little homophobe such as you would seek to insult me in such a way as that is hilarious.
So, Eric. I may sound gay, but you sound like an inbred, little redneck, with no more than a third grade education who parrots the typical duplicitous (or outright dishonest) talking points fed to his little nugget by whatever oxy-addled talking head he listens to.
And you have the nerve to call people here "slow?"
HA!
McCain suspends his campaign... Right. Just saw a really sleazy NRA sponsored attack ad on Obama on CNN. What a pile of bullshit.
trish..I'm more of a cat...we use the sandbox.
Hello, Barack? Kan I haz a time out?
His campaign has already suggested that the Presidential debate be rescheduled for... the same day the VP debate was supposed to happen, with that one conveniently delayed until further notice.
Right. Right. Stop it. Stop it! This campaign is getting too silly. All of you! Out! I'll handle this...
(Camera zooms in on The Colonel)
Now, I've noticed a tendency for this campaign to get rather silly. Now I do my best to keep things moving along, but I'm not having things getting silly. That stunt with the big-haired Jesus zombie smalltown mayor with the suddenly pregnant teenage daughter was silly and that last one about McCain passing on the debate in order to actually show up for a senate vote was even sillier. Now, nobody likes a good laugh more than I do...except perhaps my wife and some of her friends... oh yes and Bob Dole. Come to think of it most people like a good laugh more than I do. But that's beside the point. Now, let's have a good clean healthy outdoor sketch. Get some air into your lungs. Ten, nine, eight and all that...
(Cut to footage of woman in blindingly red dress shooting wolves from helicopter...)
Oh, never mind.
Dan please..such anger..time for your Geodon.
Anyone care to dispute the NRA ad?
Anyone?
So McCain is actually telling us that he can't handle a debate and dealing with the economy at the same time, and he still wants people to vote for him?! What would happen if he was president and he had to hold meetings with foreign heads of state in the same week that a natural disaster occurred, or the economy tanked, or terrorists attacked? He's actually telling us now that he can't handle two major things at once. Its like walking into a job interview and saying, "I don't think I can handle this job if things get too busy". Un-fucking-believable.
If anything I like the idea that it be held on Wall Street about economics. Then again, we have plenty of time for that since this mess won't go away too quickly.
Poll
A) McCain is chicken
B) McCain doesn't want to be President anymore
C) We are all f---ed
d) All of the above
ROFL @ #78 -- Channeling Graham I see ;)
I think that with McCain bowing out of this debate, Obama should bring Nader into the debates. Obama debating Nader would be infinitely more entertaining than Obama chumming around with Jim Lehrer.
I'l have to work harder to migrate the the damage he might do.
?
there's so much wrong with that sentence I can't really figure where to start, but did you perchance mean "mitigate", thou artless doghearted coxcomb?
and what, exactly, in your tininess would you do to mitigate your fantasies, praytell?
at first i thought you a moron, now I see you're just bugfuck nuts!
my killfile is getting rather large since Crackergate.
It will not break my heart if BHO wins. I'l have to work harder to migrate the the damage he might do. But I would'nt be rioting in the street or moving to the great white north like some leftards might.
E-e-e-r-r-i-c stutters when he types.
"[M]igrate the damage"? You're leaving? I'm good for a twenty toward that travel fund. Anybody else?
I can't wait for the VP debate. It's going to be carnage. Sheer carnage.
Somebody help a bruther out. How do you copy and paste a previous comment and indent it?
Boy I fucked that one up didn't I.
MITIGATE.
Sure..I'll take the money.
I'm good for a twenty toward that travel fund. Anybody else?
fuck that! There's too many "erics" around here to have a prayer of getting them all to leave, no matter how much money one throws at it.
instead, send ME the money so I can get the fuck outta here that much sooner!
Hey, if other atheists can start pools to garner legal funds, seems we should be able to start a pool for travel funds for those of us who want to get off this merry-go-round.
this whole financial fracass/fake bank panic has fubared my long-term funding plans to migrate to NZ for at least a few months.
I blame Eric.
Hey, Eric, if you send me 100.00 towards my move to NZ, I'll send you a postcard when I get there.
surely one less liberal would be worth a hundred bucks to you, right?
But will you go?
The Cheerful Nihilist: Wrap it in blockquote tags. Use <blockquote>The quoted stuff!!</blockquote>
How do you copy and paste a previous comment and indent it?
enclose it with [blockquote] text [/blockquote], where you substitute the angle brackets for the square brackets.
I win!
yes, yes you do.
:P
Use blockquote tags - < blockquote> and </blockquote>
Ha-ha. That got placed in an interesting place. Ich, I'd try hitchhiking there since the costs would be lower, but given there's so much water 'twixt there and here, I'd suggest Eric try it instead.
(Am I wrong in thinking that you could swim there?)
I don't know why I feel the need to feed the troll, but...
"Anyone care to dispute the NRA ad?
Anyone?"
Why don't you stop wasting our time and look it up yourself on factcheck-dot-org, you ignorant asshat.
Ah, the smell of desperation.
And what, take the time to rebut a hysterical, overblown 527 ad with no particular relationship to the real issues with facts, reason and logic? That would be a waste of time for one of two reasons: either the ad is 100% on the facts, with a good-faith rendering of Obama's likely actions on issues of gun control, or see above about hysterical, overblown, etc, all of which are not worth acknowledging with actual intellectual work. Three guesses as to the correct answer.
Man, the trollery is way less entertaining than usual. Eric, do you suppose you could do some witnessing or something? That would get the ball rolling, I think.
I don't think Eric is interested in facts nearly as much as he's just looking for attention --good or bad.
DON'T FEED THE TROLL!
Is it me or did America just adopt a fondness for socialism?
I didn't even see the NRA ad, but they're crazy if they insinuate that any politician would do something to intentionally piss off that lobby. Strong gun control talk is another empty political promise.
(Am I wrong in thinking that you could swim there?)
*looks across entire Pacific Ocean between CA and NZ*
no, not at all. I'm sure I could make it.
In fact, I'll go out and buy a new swimsuit tomorrow.
thanks for the tip; it'll save me a buttload of cash on planefare!
;)
Someone pointed out to me today that we had a presidential campaign and election in the middle of the Civil War.
I don't see why we can't manage it now.
Dear #89.
I don't want you to leave...we have too much in common.
I just want the damn gov. to leave my money and my guns alone. NO IRS,no ATFE, no DEA, no FCC, and no HSS. I'm not fool enought to think that McCain will be a good choice, just a better choice.
Like this if I were to refer to Eric? Thanks all for the help.
Is it me or did America just adopt a fondness for socialism?
only as far as risk is concerned.
profits are still privatized, as always. We do likes our richies to be rich, after all; I think it somehow gives us a sense that all is right with the world.
trish? - You are no friend of mine to call me by a familiar name, snot nosed little son of a shit stain. You best get a grip boy, kitties that try to play with cougars get eaten.
Peddle your homophobic crap somewhere else.
Did anybody else read this as "RON PAUL 2008!!! WHOOOOO!"?
NO IRS,no ATFE, no DEA, no FCC, and no HSS.
just you and your and your own private commune army cult.
right?
I'm surprised you didn't work "cold, dead, fingers" in there somewhere.
@ troll.
Libertarianism is funny. yeah. Geez. That Department of Health and Human Services. Bastards really. *shakes fist* They have the nerve to find homes for little girls when their step dad's molest them. And... how dare they provide meals for seniors with Alzheimer's. Sluts and whores. The whole department.
""[M]igrate the damage"? You're leaving? I'm good for a twenty toward that travel fund. Anybody else?"
I throw in another twenty as long as he doesn't even fucking THINK about coming to Australia.
Folks,
If you go to www.cnn.com, there is...yup..a (yes, nonscientific) poll.
John McCain's request to delay campaigning and this week's debate is:
An effort to help the economy 24% 52400
A political gimmick 71% 155067
Something else 5% 11761
Total Votes: 219228 .
Results look not too shabby at the moment, but still...have fun.
Did anybody else read this as "RON PAUL 2008!!! WHOOOOO!"?
LOL
I keep trying to envision one of those: "what would the love child of Ross Perot and Ron Paul look like?" things.
Has that been done on the Late Show yet?
Start paddling, Ichthyic. I'll go down to the beach with a torch to guide you in.
Take your meds trish....and get those lithium levels checked.
@ Ick #106
Are the profits privatized? I've heard talk on npr of a set up in which the tax payers (aka the government) would be able to recoup the "investment" and maybe even make little profit. I don't know if there's any way to do that without something that would at least resemble socialism.
Damn but you folks are quick!
Ya just hauled off and snuck or sneaked, depending on your relationship to a hillbilly, all those comments in while I was doing a slow boil over that snot nose.
Obama needs to do a WWF mat pounding with McIdiot, he has him down, no mercy. McCain is showing his dotage.
Dear #111
Not a chance Bruce.
Eric - back already from looking up those "facts" on the NRA ad? Wow... some speed reader you are. And nothing to say about it... hmmm... I wonder what that means.
Dear #97
Yea, I read the "factcheck.org" response to the the NRA ad.
Just a bunch of platitudes from the BHO camp.
Yeah, because the facts are totally partisan.
Eric - So, you simpering little coward, you ran away from my question on the other thread - which are you, Acts 1:8 or John 3:16?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Uh-oh. P-Zed, is your computer set to British? Andy Schlafly will not be pleased.
Mr Atkinson, I do believe you are trying to be obnoxious. Stop now. I've got another travel weekend ahead of me, and I like to preemptively terminate the trolls before they get out of hand.
Interesting...
First, if you'll notice, the site is a non-affiliated site that rips both campaigns apart equally, so your claims that it came from the Obama camp are just more hollow shit from an ignorant micd.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Please point out a single inaccuracy listed in the factcheck review of the NRA ad.
And if you can't, then let's agree that you'll just admit to being and idiot talking out his ass and move on.
Trish...I will tell you that I'm an atheist.
Hey I'm gonna try this blockquote thingy, luddite that I am.
Hey, it works, and my first blockquote was just for Eric.
The owner of this site has commanded to stop. So I shall.
I hope no one else acts obnoxious while PZ is gone on his trip.
Carry on.
Lol. McCain canceled on Letterman. Just in case no one has seen the video...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/24/john-mccain-cancels-lette_n_12…
Eric - You are a fraud, a liar and a fool.
You try to evade my question by stating that you are an atheist because you have no idea what the two biblical references I cited are, or what they mean.
You can't even hold your own in the childish world of the bible. I'm done with you.
Poor Eric... PZ simply told you to stop being intentionally obnoxious. You don't need to be obnoxious to answer my simple question.
Or maybe you do. Oh well, either way I have my answer.
Yeah, because the facts are totally partisan.
"Reality has a well-known Liberal Bias."
-- Stephen Colbert
Leave it to our resident slut to sum Eric up so eloquently: Fucktard.
I've heard talk on npr of a set up in which the tax payers (aka the government) would be able to recoup the "investment" and maybe even make little profit.
you mean like when they set up that corporation to sell off bad bank assets after the S and L scandals in the late 80's?
LOL
Yes, that was quite the joke on us taxpayers alrighty.
no, if you look at the result of that "effort", this would essentially amount to the same song and dance.
the level of control the taxpayers would have over limiting their own risk would be the same.
which is to say, little to none.
OTOH, we've been having a great old time eating up the losses incured by that fracas in the 80s, and we're going to be completely stuffed after this latest BBQ.
FactCheck flubs Obama gun fact check: FactCheck.org is an excellent project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. It a non-partisan organization which provides factual evaluations of the claims of and about political figures. I have cited it in my own writing, and will continue to do so. However, that FactCheck has a well-deserved reputation for accuracy and good judgment does not mean that its work is infallible, as the VC has pointed out previously. The Encyclopedia Britannica also has a well-deserved reputation for accuracy and impartiality, but the Britannica sometimes contains errors or overstatements.
FactCheck's September 22, 2008, report on the National Rifle Association's advertising critical claims that the NRA "distorts Obama's position on gun control beyond recognition." FactCheck itself, though, has overstated its claims, and made several errors.
(show)
The NRA's advertising points to various positions which Obama has taken over the years. Not one of these positions (with a single very dubious exception, discussed below) has been subsequently repudiated by Obama.
Much of FactCheck's critique of the NRA is the mere recitation of vague platitudes by Obama claiming that he supports of the Second Amendment.
FactCheck fails to recognize that Obama's platitudes and the NRA's charges could be simultaneously true. For example, John McCain might sincerely say, "I strongly support First Amendment rights." A group critical of McCain might take out advertising which says "McCain sponsoroed the most comprehensive restriction of political speech in American history, and he is an opponent of your First Amendment rights." All the statement are true: McCain sponsored the McCain-Feingold act, which outlaws a great deal of speech related to federal elections; people who are strong First Amendment advocates can therefore conclude that McCain is a very serious threat to First Amendment rights. McCain, however, is doubtless sincere in his belief that the political speech restrictions are consistent with his support for First Amendment rights. His First Amendment is simply much smaller than the First Amendment which free speech groups like the ACLU support. FactCheck would be incorrect if it declared that the free speech group was making "false" charges which "distorted" McCain's views.
Likewise, the NRA is not distorting Obama's record when they accurately point out his advocacy for draconian gun controls, even if Obama offers generic platitudes about Second Amendment rights. Obama may sincerely believe that the various measures he has promoted are consistent with the Second Amendment; the NRA disagrees, and it is not factually inaccurate for the NRA to say so.
On some of the charges, FactCheck appears not to have studied Obama's words carefully. For example, one NRA claim is that Obama wants to "Ban the Manufacture, Sale and Possession of Handguns." FactCheck accurately reports that Obama did endorse such a position in his 1996 Illinois State Senate race. (FactCheck also supplies the details of Obama's 2008 claim that the questionnaire was filled out by an aide without Obama's knowledge, even though Obama's handwriting is on the cover of the questionnaire.) But FactCheck asserts that the NRA is lying because of Obama's response to the same question in 2003: "While a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable, I believe reasonable restrictions on the sale and possession of handguns are necessary to protect the public safety."
The 2003 response hardly means that Obama does not favor a handgun ban. He simply said he recognized it as politically impracticable. A candidate can simultaneously support something, and consider it "politically impracticable." For example, in a 1997 Connecticut Law Review article, Glenn Reynolds and I wrote in favor the historic and textual interpretation of the Congressional power over interstate commerce: that it applies to commercial activities conducted across state lines, and to the regulation of activities which are "necessary and proper" for regulating interstate commerce. Thus, I think that laws about who can possess guns (e.g., persons convicted of particular crimes, children, alcoholics, etc.) should be matters of state law, not federal law. (With the caveats that state laws cannot violate the Second Amendment, and that other federal powers might be legtimately used in certain situations; for example, congressional power over immigration might be an appropriate basis for a federal restriction on gun possession by illegal aliens.)
If I were running for Congress in 2008, and somebody asked "Do you favor repealing federal laws about the mere intrastate possession of guns?" I would probably explain that a complete repeal is "not politically practicable," and would say that I would work instead for marginal improvements in the laws.
Now suppose my opponent puts out a brochure which says "Kopel favors repeal of federal laws on gun possession." Is the opponent distorting my position beyond recognition? Well, probably not.
A good FactCheck article would point out the difference between my 1997 position and my current statement on what is "politically practicable." But my very choice of the words "politically practicable" indicates that if political circumstances changed, so that a broad repeal were politically practicable, then I would support it.
Conversely, if I (or, Obama or McCain) were asked "Do you think that the federal government should require journalists to get a government license?" the response would not be "Licensing journalists is not politically practicable, but there are other steps the government could take to improve media quality."
So Obama's 2003 acknowledgement that handgun prohibition was not "politically practicable" (at least for a U.S. Senate term that would begin in 2005) is consistent with support for handgun prohibition.
FactCheck concludes the section by citing Obama's claim at an April 2008 debate "I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns." The claim is, to say the least, highly dubious in light of the evidence about his 1996 questionnaire, and FactCheck should not have treated this dubious claim as the final word on the subject. FactCheck failed to report that during the Potomac Primaries a few weeks earlier, Obama had said that he supported the D.C. handgun ban, and considered it consistent with the Second Amendment
FactCheck also overlooked the Obama campaign's statement when the Supreme Court granted cert. in the D.C. handgun case: "Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional" and that "local communities" should have the ability "to enact common sense laws." (Chicago Tribune, Nov. 20, 2007.)
On the day the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, Obama campaign announced that he agreed with the Court's decision because it affirmed an individual right. (The full quote is reproduced in another section of the FactCheck report.) Notably, Obama did not say that he agreed with the Court's interpretation that the handgun ban was a violation of the individual right. Asked about the November 2007 statement supporting the D.C. ban, the campaign called the statement "inartful." Not an inaccurate expression of Obama's views--just "inartful."
In sum, FactCheck's label of "False" for the NRA's statement that Obama supports laws to "Ban the Manufacture, Sale and Possession of Handguns" was based on sloppy reading of some of Obama's statements, and failure to report other statements explicitly in favor of handgun prohibition.
A similar error is repeated for "Mandate a Government-Issued License to Purchase a Firearm", which FactCheck calls "Misleading." FactCheck quotes a Jan. 15, 2008, interview with the late Tim Russert:
NBC's Tim Russert, Jan. 15: Senator Obama, when you were in the state senate, you talked about licensing and registering gun owners. Would you do that as president?
Obama: I don't think that we can get that done.
Obama then went on to list some things which thought could be done. The phrase "I don't think we can get that done" has the same import as "not politically practicable." It does not convey opposition to the idea.
The NRA claims that Obama's position includes: "Ban use of Firearms for Home Self-Defense." FactCheck says this is "False." FactCheck discusses Obama's opposition to an Illinois bill to prevent localities with handgun bans from punishing a person who used a handgun in lawful self-defense on his or her own property. Obama's statements in opposition to the bill (which are not quoted by FactCheck) explained that he was worried that the bill would erode local handgun bans. (At the time, Chicago and five of its suburbs banned handguns.)
FactCheck writes: "Letting the owner of an unregistered firearm escape the penalty for failing to register is one thing, but it's another thing entirely to make it a crime to use any firearm - registered or not - in self-defense." Well, if you ban a person from having a handgun at all, you are certainly banning them from using it for self-defense in the home.
Moreover, the Washington, D.C., gun law--which Obama supported--forbade the use of any firearm in the home for self-defense. (Including a registered rifle, a registered shotgun, or a pre-1976 registered handgun legally possessed under the grandfather clause). The Supreme Court later declared the self-defense ban to be unconstitutional.
Another NRA claim which FactCheck says is "False" is: "Ban Rifle Ammunition Commonly Used for Hunting and Sport Shooting." As FactCheck reports, the issue involves Obama's support for legislation to expand the federal definition of armor-piercing ammunition. Almost all rifle ammunition used for hunting deer or larger animals will penetrate a bullet-resistant vest; such vests are designed to stop handgun ammunition, not rifle ammunition. (In part because rifles have longer barrels, their bullets generally have greater velocity, and hence greater kinetic energy, than handgun bullets.)
Obama supported a bill to give the Attorney General the administrative authority to ban any rifle ammunition which can penetrate the type of vests commonly used by police.
FactCheck accurately quoted a limitation in the bill: it would apply only to ammunition which is "designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability." The "marketed" prong is easy, since rifle ammunition makers do not tout such capability in their advertising.
However, the "designed" language is broad enough to allow bans on anything. Almost every automobile in the United States is "designed" to drive over 100 miles per hour. The speedometers show this capability, and even if they did not, every automobile manufacturer is fully aware that its autos can be driven at very fast, unsafe speeds. The auto engines are "designed" to have a certain amount of power, and this "design" is based on the full knowledge that that auto can be driven over 100 mph. Among the definitions of "design" in Black's Law Dictionary is "The pattern or configuration of elements in something, such as a work of art."
Just as the deliberate configuration of the elements of every automobile can be accurately said to be "designed" to drive over 100 mph, so every deer-hunting round can be said to be "designed" to penetrate body armor. Notably, the ammunition ban language did not say "designed and intended."
FactCheck does quote Senator Kennedy, the sponsor of the bill, saying that he did not want to ban hunting ammunition. Nevertheless, the plain language of the bill, and not Senator Kennedy's floor statements, were what would be enacted into law. If there were ever a judicial challenge to ban on particular rifle ammunition ban, a court might well find that the language of the statute, along with judicial deference to agency interpretation of the statute, meant that there was no need to look to legislative history.
FactCheck give NRA a "Partly True" for: "Expand the Clinton Semi-Auto Weapons Ban to Include Millions More Firearms." FactCheck agrees that Obama has declared his support for "assault weapon" bans, because he think that "assault weapons" are guns which belong only on "foreign battlefields." But FactCheck adds: "We're not sure where the NRA gets its claim that 'millions' of additional weapons would be covered." The answer is straightforward, in the Illinois legislature, Obama for SB 1195, which defines "assault weapons" much more broadly than the 1994 federal law. It included double-barrel and break-open shotguns in 28 gauge caliber and larger; and also banned .50 caliber rifles.
The FactCheck gives the NRA a rating of "Uncertain" to "Increase Federal Taxes on Guns and Ammunition by 500 Percent" and "Close Down 90 Percent of Gun Shops in America." Both these statements, FactCheck correctly reports, come from a newspaper report of Obama's 1999 description his gun control plan. (Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999.) (At the time, he was running for the U.S. House of Representativs.) FactCheck notes that Obama has not pushed for these proposals since his election to the Senate, and adds, "We asked the Obama campaign about his position on an ammunition tax but have received no response."
"Uncertain" is an awfully generous label, Obama-wise. Obama clearly announced he supported the particular policies. He has never said that he has changed his mind on those policies. His campaign was specifically offered a chance by FactCheck to say whether Obama had changed his mind, and the campaign refused.
Just because Obama is not pushing for something in Congress does not make the NRA's claim uncertain. FactCheck gives NRA a "True" for "Pass Federal Laws Eliminating Your Right-to-Carry." Illinois and Wisconsin are the only two states which do not have procedures for issuing concealed handgun carry permits. (40 states issue under mostly objective standards, while 8 states give nearly limitless discretion to the issuing authority.) In the 2004 U.S. Senate campaign, Obama said he favored a national ban on concealed carry permits. Like the carry ban, the bans on gun stores and the 500% firearm and ammunition tax proposals do not become less true simply because Obama is not pushing them at present.
The NRA gets a "Mostly True" for "Restore Voting Rights for Five Million Criminals Including Those Who Have been Convicted of Using a Gun to Commit a Violent Crime." FactCheck points to the relevant bill co-sponsored by Obama, and cites the Sentencing Project for the fact that 5.3 million felons who have served their sentences cannot vote. The Sentencing Project pointed out that most felony convictions are not for violent or gun crimes. So the NRA claim is "Entirely True." The NRA never asserted that most felony convictions are for violent gun crimes.
"Unsupported" is how FactCheck describes: "Appoint Judges to the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Judiciary Who Share His Views on the Second Amendment." FactCheck's reasoning is that "the NRA can point to no statement by Obama calling for a Second-Amendment test for his judicial appointees, and we could find none."
That Obama has not announced a litmus test does not mean that it is unrealistic to expect him to appoint Justices who share his views on Second Amendment and on other matters of constitutional law. It would be reasonably expected that Obama appointees would take a similar approach of nominal support for the individual right, but finding that hardly any gun controls short of complete prohibition violate that right.
One final NRA claim does not get a FactCheck rating, but it does get a response that might as well as come from the Obama press office. That is: "Obama would be the most anti-gun president in American history."
FactCheck supplies Obama's quote from Heller decision day, beginning with "I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms..", and promising, "As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne."
Well, that Obama has "always believed" in the individual Second Amendment right did not prevent him from proposing a national ban on concealed carry, a ban on 90% of gun stores, a 500% tax increase on firearms and ammunition--as the FactCheck article itself reports. If a candidate proposed banning 90% of bookstores and a huge tax increase on books, it might be justifiable to predict that he would be "the most anti-book president in American history"--notwithstanding his proclaimed belief in the individual First Amendment right.
FactCheck calls the NRA prediction, "a pretty tall statement. We don't know how George Washington, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson might have felt about armor-piercing ammunition or assault weapons."
Fortunately, there haven't been many anti-gun Presidents, in U.S. history; and only the Clinton administration invested a large portion of its politcal capital in gun control. So President Obama would not have much competition in the "most anti-gun" contest.
We know that Washington and Jefferson were avid gun collectors, and that Jefferson recommended daily hunting as the best form of exercise. We also know that Jefferson instituted a government program to supply guns, at federal expense, to people who couldn't own one. We know that neither Washington, nor Adams, nor Jefferson ever proposed banning a type of gun simply because it was useful on "battlefields."
As far as we know, Obama has never fired a gun, or even held a gun in his hands. We do know that no President in American history has, in his pre-presidential career, endorsed so many sweeping prohibitions and other severe controls on American gun ownership.
The September 22, 2008, FactCheck on the NRA criticism of Obama is marred by the omission of crucial facts, one-sided and misleading presentations of issues, and thinly-concealed political advocacy. According to FactCheck, the NRA refused to answer FactCheck's request for explanations of its claims. If so, the refusal provides a partial explanation of why so many crucial facts were missing. Whatever the reasons behind the problems in the September 22 report, FactCheck should publish a substantially revised edition.
(hide)
Leave it to our resident slut to sum Eric up so eloquently: Fucktard.
frankly I prefer to reserve that term specifically for Kent Hovind. There being such a lovely song constructed around it and all...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfYENNup27k
such catchy tune.
Eric simply isn't worthy.
So we now have two fucktards called Eric trolling here.
I dunno. I'm not so pessimistic. Maybe because I was in Germany for most of the 80's... and was like... whoa young. Maybe it's because I have wet dreams about America turning into the liberal paradise that I would like to think Europe is.
The more I think about it, the more I've come to the conclusion that John McCain should not be compared to George Bush. John McCain should be compared to Ross Perot.
Remember the absurdly unqualified person Perot chose for his running mate - remind you of someone.
Remember Perot impulsively quit the race, and then decided to get back in again. Isn't this eerily similar to what happened today with the campaign suspension.
And remember the multiple rants spasming out of Perot's mouth like Bush spying on his daughters wedding if I remember correctly. Isn't this just like the multiple incoherent rantings coming out of McCain's mouth almost every day.
So maybe McCain is really trying to be the reincarnation or resurrection of Ross Perot.
Think about it!!!
Cut and paste from http://volokh.com/#
wow. on a scale from one to ten... I'm not reading all of that.
I bet McCain's fear of debates will help Obama a lot.
The Prediction Markets for 2008 Electoral College predicts Obama will win.
Top article on volokh.com: "If Someone Has Sex with a Sheep, Must He Register as a Sex Offender?"
Can someone enlighten my cluelessness: Where does this debate take place, and for how long, that it can no longer fit in his schedule?
Really, Eric? volokh.com?
[sarcasm] Nope. You're not being obnoxious. Not at all. [/sarcasm]
Ichthyic - Oh thanks! There went the sangria out my nose.
Eric: Concise and succinct, a sure sign of a focused mind. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you don't publish in scientific journals.
Thank you Eric
we now know the real truth!..
There REALLY IS no limit to the size of the comment you can post here.
That's the most cogent thing you've posted yet today, Eric. Moronic and tedious (on top of bigoted and barely literate) earn you a one way ticket to the killfile, and merciful Eric-shaped holes.
*Patricia*, I absolutely love that you referred to yourself as a Cougar--mrrraowwwww!
@Fran
try here...
http://www.debates.org/pages/news_111907.html
Eric:
Non-sequitur. Unless you couldn't parse this for yourself, Washington, Jefferson, and Adams never had to consider the relevance of the right to bear arms in relation to such modern weapons as automatic assault rifles and the like.
Unlike you (obviously), I have seen what unrestricted proliferation of firearms does to a society, and it is not pretty. And since it it equally obvious that you have no sense of historical perspective, the right to bear arms - in the founding father sense that you have invoked - dealt with the right of the citizens to bear arms legally and safely. No founding father would have endorsed your hands-off policy towards the acquisition of weapons where a legitimate need for such did not exist. There is a difference between violating your second amendment rights and enacting responsible legislation in order to ensure that public safety is maintained as well.
pcarini - If someone has sex with a sheep, must he register as a sex offender?
Not if he, or she lives in the state of Washington.
However, "At least 30 states have laws outlawing bestiality." http://www.komotv.com/news/archive/4158101.html
*Note - this article is disgusting and not for the faint of heart.*
Danio - Awww, ya know how us ol' strumpets get... *toothy grin*
As important as it is for McCain to head to DC to save the economy, he knew what his priorities should be and so he made time to meet with Lady Lynn de Rothschild and sit down for an interview with Katie Couric.
As important as it is for McCain to head to DC to save the economy, he knew what his priorities should be and so he made time to meet with Lady Lynn de Rothschild and sit down for an interview with Katie Couric.
...btw I believe the guy who wrote that little diddy for Hovind also said this quotable bit:
"Jesus was my copilot, but then we crashed and I had to eat him."
Remember the Baba troll, back at the cracker threads?
Maybe "Eric Atkinson" and he are clones.
Same smug vacuity.
Posted by: Clayton | September 25, 2008 12:26 AM
Indeed, though it did provide me with more than a few laughs watching Letterman rail against his suspect behavior. While he was lacing it with humor, you could definitely tell that he was genuinely pissed that McCain blew him off with an obvious lie.
I couldn't help but be struck by something President Bush said today in his address regarding 20th century economic regulations in a 21st century world.
It would seem to me that we have exhausted socioeconomic benefits of conservatism and we need to move on to something more conducive to a global economy. Am I crazy for thinking that?
It seems as if DC didn't actually need McCain's esteemed presence to move forward on this issue. This kind of blows his "the country needs me, so I need out of the debate" gambit right out of the water.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE48O0E620080925
It seems as if DC didn't actually need McCain's esteemed presence to move forward on this issue.
shocker!
:p
I sure hope this means that the banks will untie their panties soon.
"Am I crazy for thinking that?"
No, but you're liable to be deported from Idaho for it.
I for one don't think this is because McCain is afraid of debating; he can question dodge with the best of them. On the contrary, I think this might be a fairly slick political move.
"Look! I'm putting my own campaign needs behind the importance of saving the economy, while Obama just wants to argue!"
He is not only delaying the debate which he would lose, he's advertising.
People will fall for it - they always do.
Man, I really hope McCain loses. But you have to admit, the Republicans are really master politicians. They can win elections like nobody's business despite being completely unqualified to run the country. It's awe inspiring.
It's awe inspiring.
no, THIS is awe inspiring...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzvvfnqo63w&feature=related
Did you run out of Ritalin Eric?
It does seem a good move on that count, this way he's showing his willingness to work towards bipartisan support and show he can handle the country in a time of crisis.
BBC program, one of the people interviewed nails the 'bailout' as a fraud; starting around 6:00 in this as broadcast today
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/bizdaily/bizdaily_2008…
Posted by: Buzz Buzz | September 25, 2008 1:01 AM
Very true. While their incompetence at governance compared to their efficiency in winning elections is awe inspiring in a sense, it is also downright scary. And it is very much like the abilities of their cronies, too. After my time in Iraq, I can say that it is strikingly similar to the ability of Halliburton and KBR to be awarded the contracts to support our armed forces, while at the same time being so incompetent at actually executing those contracts that their shoddy work gets those same soldiers killed.
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 25, 2008 12:48 AM
Nah... Why would they, when they can just wait and have the government do the untying for them??
Nah... Why would they, when they can just wait and have the government do the untying for them??
well, so long as someone's doing some untying...
The anticipation is killing me.
I would love to see the vp debate instead...I'll probably fall asleep listening to McCain talk anyway. No, I'd much rather hear about how living by Russia is somehow like having foriegn policy experience, or how you can be an advocate of special needs children without supporting stem-cell research, and the multitude of other issues that Joe Biden should have no problem destroying her on.
and the multitude of other issues that Joe Biden should have no problem destroying her on.
I wonder if she will claim she has as much experience as Jack Kennedy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-7gpgXNWYI
And now McCain is on David Letterman's shit list for blowing him off. McCain is starting to come off as very thin-skinned and easily flustered.
McCain is starting to come off as very thin-skinned and easily flustered.
"Get off my [White House] lawn, you damn crazy kids!"
I'll probably fall asleep listening to McCain talk anyway
can he be any worse than Chimpy McGrin?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rkb_wkfjyo&NR=1
#17 Nick
It's metaphorical *atmospheric* foreign policy experience!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/opinion/24dowd.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&or…
LOL
that's a great line.
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 25, 2008 1:19 AM
Believe me, I'm with ya on that. But I'd much rather see the banks suffer in their own knotted-up panties than have to pay for the work myself, especially when I won't see any return on my investment.
P.S. - Have we beaten this metaphor to death yet?? ;)
No, but if you pay extra you can whip it...
(too late to come up w/ some "majority whip" line)
Since most of you kids seem to have too much time on yer hands...
Perhaps a little activism?
Capitol Hill Switchboard: (202) 224-3121
"Dear Senator/Representative: You MUST reject the Paulson/Bernanke plan for bailing out and propping up reckless banks at taxpayer expense. This is madness to ask us, the taxpayers, to cover the liabilities of Wall Street. We are tired of being fleeced. If you vote to support this plan, I will do everything in my power to remove you from office before you can give away any more of our money to failed businessmen.
Thank you, [Your name]"
Excellent, underwear humour. This is where I'm qualified enough to come back into the thread.
Pantalets.
And someone who can think outside the box--
I'magainst the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.
Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to everyone in America as a "We Deserve It Dividend."
To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.
Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up..
So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00
My plan is to give $425,0 00 to every person 18+ as a We Deserve It Dividend.
Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.
Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college - it'll be there
Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car - create jobs.
Invest in the market - capital drives growth.
Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves.
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else
Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it ... instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( "vote buy" ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President.
If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U S Citizen18+.
As for AIG - liquidate it. Sell off its parts! Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.
Sure it's a crazy idea that can "never work."
But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!?
Now there's a fashion trend that needs to make a comeback.
Out of curiosity exactly what time is that which is displayed on the comments? I mean what time zone in the US? It saying 1.36 am and I know Patricia in Oregon is up drinking Sangria and wrestling chooks at that time normally but surely the rest of you must be in a more civilised time slot?
At first I was inclined to take McCain's move at face value, but it doesn't seem to stack up. If he wanted to arrange a moratorium, as somebody else pointed out to me. he could have taked to the debate organizers and Obama's campaign first and they could have made a joint announcement of the postponement.
This really does smell of fear.
Scott from Oregon,
85 billion amongst 200 million is only $425 per person.
Wow, talk about bad maths skills. I guess they really are thinking outside the box...
Since most of you kids seem to have too much time on yer hands...
*looks at watch*
nope, seems my watch sez I have no time left for you.
As stated I'm only qualified in underwear discussion but even I can see the oopsie in the math there.
Bride of Shrek - You see how this goes, we engage in serious under garment, and naughty bits topics, and the hoard runs to politics.
Boning, double stitched split crotches, and lacing gets left in the dust.
It's sad.
Out of curiosity exactly what time is that which is displayed on the comments?
looks like EST to me.
exactly 3 hours ahead of PST.
It can be expressed in terms of underwear.
If there are 85 billion pairs of underwear to go between 200 million people: that would mean that each person gets 425,000 pairs of underwear... wait a minute, something is wrong here
Warning...lengthy, wandering comment ahead!
Hmmm...there was a comment from John C. Randolph early on, #7...
If I recall correctly from previous comments, you are a libertarian, or thereabouts, correct? I have much in common with the social aspects of libertarianism, and a little in common with the economic aspects...I will admit, I like public education, roads, and a few modest social programs, generally on the state level instead of national.
I usually think that your comments are high on condescending overtones and low on substance, but I think we are in agreement on this one! And it's not because I hate rich people, it's because I despise completely irresponsible people. Especially when poor, ignorant irresponsible people get to learn their lessons the hard way, but irresponsible investors and ceo's still get to keep what they've looted while once again screwing the people who trusted them.
I have a pretty good grasp of my local and state economies, but national policy is not my strong area. I'm going to assume for dramatic purposes that the worst that could happen here is even worse, in all ways, than the great depression. Mass homelessness. Mass layoffs. Drastic reduction in hyper-inflated property values. Extreme lack of affordable consumer goods.
I'm all for it. Because I am a healthy, hardworking, but unambitious wage earner in California. My sister could lose her house if it gets really rough-she has a nice fixed rate, but also works in the housing industry. I rent. But my parents own their house, a modest 3-bedroom on a 3/4 acre lot in a small town, surrounded by farms that will still be necessary and profitable until somebody nukes them, or an extreme drought occurs. Absolute worst case scenario for me, I spend my last few hundred bucks on a couple of guns, a few chickens, some vegetable seeds, maybe a fishing pole for the weekends, move one county east, and help feed our unemployed asses for a few years. Who knows, if things get bad enough, by the time I'm forty I might be doing something I never even dreamed of...buying a house in California.
As stated I'm only qualified in underwear discussion
Ok...
Where does the phrase "Panties tied in knots" or even "panties in a bunch" actually come from?
do you now, or have you ever, tied your panties in a knot(s) when anxious about something?
ever known any woman to do so?
I just have to know where that phrase came from.
;)
The time displayed is, oddly enough, Eastern Daylight Time (GMT -4, at least for a couple more weeks). This isn't PZ's time in MN, which would be Central time (-5). I'm commenting from UT (Mountain DT, -6), and Patricia would be either MDT or Pacific DT (-7).
The timezone combined with my being a night person keeps me on late enough to overlap w/ the Aussies and Kiwis, but there's usually an hour or so where I can shit up the threads pretty much uninterrupted.
Thanks for clearing that up Ichthyic, I've always been curious.
Patricia, I know honey, I find it incredibly depressing that no one ever wants to have a good old fashioned undergarment discussion anymore. Its like they think there are more important matters to hand than the relative merits of the age old crotchless v. thong knicker debate or, more contraversially that good old icebreaker, "studs- a turn on or just (literally) a pain in the arse".
Bride of Shrek - It is 11:15 pm here in Oregon.
This isn't PZ's time in MN
these blogs are hosted on the same server that hosts Seed, which is likely located in NY.
Who knows, if things get bad enough, by the time I'm forty I might be doing something I never even dreamed of...buying a house in California.
I live in Riveside County, where the housing values have dropped 40% in the last year.
no kidding.
It's also my understanding that over 50% of the houses currently on the market here are foreclosures.
I see nice 3 bed, 2 bath houses (foreclosures) going for under 100K.
Firefox has an add-on called Foxclocks that allows you to add a clock for a specific time zone on the bottom of your browser window. I have New York time (which is what this site seems to be on) and local time in mine so I know when it is here and there.
Handy stuff.
Ichthyic
Ask and I shall deliver my learned friend
http://www.theblog.ca/panties-knot
Bride of Shrek, PhD (Knickerology)
man I love this. I'm sitting here, sipping a gin and tonic, talking about politics and panties, and listening to Nick Cave sing "Red Right Hand".
the original source is The Basil Brush Show??
wow, how obscure!
I propose that we should the offsets altogether and use GMT. I, for one, am not asshurt about the prime meridian being in Greenwich, not to mention 0:00 seems like a fine time to start the morning (here). Who decided that noon has to be when the sun is up, anyway?
I also wish we'd get our act together in the states and standardize on celsius for temperatures and metric for everything else.
In fact, the first presidential candidate who really pushes this, I'm all for (not necessarily, but I wanted to pretend to be on topic, at least)
This might seem a bit OT, but in the debate over McCain's true motives behind this request - and whether or not we should believe him - this issue is quite pertinent.
I came across an article on Salon.com about the McCain campaign's tactics that disgusts me.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/24/mccain_letters/
I won't post my thoughts on this issue here, as I don't want to morph into an Eric that loads the page with novel-length comments, but I just finished enumerating them in a post on my blog. If you care to take a gander, I'd be interested in what you guys think.
*And I apologize in advance for running the risk of seeming like a self-promoter...that is definitely not my intent!!
Ichthyic
Nick Cave- my estimation of you went even further up my friend. We will definately be getting together for a few bevvies when you hit Antipodean shores.
For all of you USians who haven't heard the great Mr Cave (or indeed his band The Bad Seeds) - get thee to an iPod!
Bride of Shrek - The worthless churls that aren't interested in a discussion of under garments, are well, worthless churls!
Boning, hoops and lacing offer endless topics of discussion.
We might get some science in the frackis with corset pressure.
I can't say - I'm a hillbilly.
pcarini
..for that matter who decided WE were the Southern hemisphere. From space its all just a big globe. I champion the complete renaming of Earth to acknowledge that we, Australian citizens, are sick of jokes and double entendres about being "down under" ( unhelped admittedly by the fact we have an island state that looks uncannily like a woman's pubic patch) and now wish to claim that WE are the northern hemisphere after all. Suck it "North" America!
Ichthyic:
I agree with Bride of Shrek on that one... My eclectic taste in music led me to one of my favorite covers ever, done by Mr. Cave (Louis Armstrong's What a Wonderful World), and as such you have endeared me to you even further!
Be careful - any more antics like that and I just might propose... ;)
As far as double entendres go, I'd rather be from down under than be a yank. As far as The Bush being shaped like, well, the bush, I'm only playing along if we agree that China looks like a tit.
On topic, McCain also looks like a tit.
we, Australian citizens, are sick of jokes and double entendres about being "down under"
yeah, I know, all you pushy broads like to be on top.
:P
wait, come to think of it, that's what I like you to do too.
I agree with Bride of Shrek on that one... My eclectic taste in music led me to one of my favorite covers ever, done by Mr. Cave (Louis Armstrong's What a Wonderful World)
Nick's a recent re-discovery for me. I had some of his music way back when vinyl was still popular, had totally forgotten about him (*smacks self in head*), and just happened to be listening to NPR the other day when they decided to play a couple of his recent albums.
It didn't take me long to grab every album of his since 1984 and add them to my collection (if you want to know where I got them all, just shoot me an email fisheyephotosAThotmailDOTcom).
Some music just screams "late night listening" to me, and this ranks highly on that list.
I came across an article on Salon.com about the McCain campaign's tactics that disgusts me.
not that it takes away from the shared disgust factor, but I would imagine that to be a tactic utilized by many candidates for office over the years.
there's a reason I don't like working the hill any more (or indeed, even state level politics); the way most of these people think, most of the time, tends to make me physically ill.
Broken Soldier OM and Ichthyic OM
If you lads haven't heard it, one of my favourites is "The Ship Song"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKlaV-9Vzsk&feature=related
Insanely beautiful lyrics and I think he sounds a little Leonard Cohen-ish in it ( who I also adore).
I think we've completely managed to deraill this thread but I can think of no worthier reason than discussion of knickers and Nick Cave so cest la vie.
I- Nick often goes to NZ and, like here, tends to play in pubs and clubs with a small intimate atmosphere. It's not hard to get tickets and I've seen him a few times (so close you could touch him). A must see playing live!
... the way most of these people think, most of the time, tends to make me physically ill.
Salespeople of all stripes have this affect on me. Recently an acquaintance of a friend told me that he does viral marketing for some company or another. After that, everything he said was suspect...
Salespeople of all stripes have this affect on me.
Ack.. apparently my brain having shut off several hours back is affecting my proper selection of homophones, effectively making me look stupid.
Amazing, I come here to read the dirt on the shady McCain campaign, and I come away with...
1/ Finally figuring out that the comments are stamped with the time in New York
2/ A burning desire to get home and dig out my old 'Let Love In' cd and rip it to MP3
3/ A sudden need to know - 'Can crotchless panties be daywear, and what is the etiquette in purchasing a high quality set for one's partner?'
hmmm...
Nick often goes to NZ and, like here, tends to play in pubs and clubs with a small intimate atmosphere.
synchronicity!
I will very much enjoy that experience, then.
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 25, 2008 3:03 AM
I'm admittedly ignorant on a lot of the secretive tactics of campaign politics, but I would hope that while such fake editorials and similar tactics are undoubtedly prominent, I'd like to think that the more upstanding candidates (if there are such animals) would steer clear of the exploitation of the pain resulting from such traumatic wartime sacrifices.
I'm an Obama supporter, but if it comes out that his campaign mirrored that tactic, he'd quickly lose my vote.
Nah - that was The Police.
2/ A burning desire to get home and dig out my old 'Let Love In' cd and rip it to MP3
I'm on my tenth consecutive listening of "Red Right Hand" at the moment.
Damn, I just love the imagery that song dusts up in my head.
...well, one more and I think I'm gonna kick it for tonight.
Posted by: pcarini | September 25, 2008 3:15 AM
Don't be so hard on yourself! Temporarily remiss in grammar, maybe. Stupid is an adjective I'd reserve for the Erics of the world.
I still remember the thrill of Aussie pride when I first heard 'Red Right Hand' used as mood music in an episode of 'The X-Files' - long, long, ago :)
Poll question from Fox News:
Should the presidential candidates hold their first debate Friday, even if Congress is still negotiating economic bailout legislation?
Yes 54%
No 46%
http://elections.foxnews.com/
Not hard on myself, as much as an example of the proper usage. That one does bother me when I see other people do it, though, so I can't give myself a pass on it.
Completely switching gears - I'll have to check out Nick Cave. I've heard of him, of course, but I can't say I'm familiar with any of his songs (that I know of). I've mostly been alternating between Frank Zappa and Leonard Cohen, which has to be about as odd a musical juxtaposition as you can get.
I'd like to think that the more upstanding candidates (if there are such animals)
it's all relative. In my experience, they don't view these tactics as impinging on their moral standing.
seriously.
they tend to boil it down into a bunch of rationalizations typically of the form:
"Since I'm better than the other guy, I have to win in order to prove it, and if he's gonna pull this shit, then I have to as well"
eventually, when one does this often enough, it no longer seems like "selling out" at all. It just becomes de rigeur.
There were so many things like that when I worked with the politicians at the state and federal level, I think they just get to a point where it becomes simply "part of the career"; like manipulating large groups of people you really disagree with simply in order to build grass roots support you can swing like a bat on the playing field. I saw that quite a lot.
For my part, it becomes just one of the many things I dislike about politics, and what it does to people, and so it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Obama has his own set of ghost writers.
do a google on "ghost writers" and see just how common it is.
If you'll pardon the brief excursion, when I think about things like this I tend to think back to a line towards the end of the movie "The Mission", where the new Portuguese rulers in eighteenth-century South America order an attack on a Catholic community of Guarani people and the Jesuit priests who are protecting the tribe from enslavement. After the massacre, Cardinal Altamirano, a papal envoy who failed to convince the Jesuits to withdraw from their remote mission, con-fronts a government official:
Altamirano: And you have the effrontery to tell me that this slaughter was necessary?
Hontar: I did what I had to do. Given the legitimate purpose, which you sanctioned...I would have to say, yes. In truth, yes. You had no alternative, Your Eminence. We must work in the world. The world is thus.
Altamirano: No, Señor Hontar. Thus have we made the world...thus have I made it.
That scene has popped into my head for the last 20 years, whenever I think about the mess politicians have made of the career of being a politician.
When I was a kid, it was fading, but there were still kids who thought they would want to grow up to be president.
I can't find any anymore, and the proportion of college students I speak with these days that think they might like a career in politics is considerably smaller than it was 20 years ago, too.
The cynicism is well founded, but in the end, it's a catch 22.
I still remember the thrill of Aussie pride when I first heard 'Red Right Hand' used as mood music in an episode of 'The X-Files' - long, long, ago
I was always surprised they didn't do some kind of trailer for one of the "Hellboy" movies using that as the background music.
The entire McCain campaign seems to have been one big refusal after another to be transparent and open with the American people. From Palin's refusal to grant interviews for so long (and barely granting them even now) to this ridiculous ploy to "delay the debate".
What's ironic is that Palin ran for the Alaskan governorship under a banner of bringing transparency and honesty to it... and then proceeded to conduct affairs with great secrecy (e.g. hiring tons of close friends, using personal email accounts to conduct state affairs (for the express purpose of concealment), etc.).
This just seems like "more of the same", and I find it astonishing that there are so many people who can't/don't see right through it.
To McCain/Palin: STFU already with the excuses, and start acting like grown-ups, you idiots! Talk to us (the American people), instead of conducting your own reality TV show, and expecting us to vote-in the most entertaining performance in the end. That's not how a leader should be selected, nor how a country should be run.
Ahhh...Nick Cave
My first memorable taste of Nick was hearing the song "Shivers" off the Door Door album by The Boys Next Door. Was living in Melbourne around '82 and went out bought the album (vinyl) the next day. I still have it.
Why do the Sen. Obama supporters automatically assume that this is either childishness or cowardice? At this point, it is not clear what to think about it (except that the problem surely will not be fixed in time for the election and that Sen. McCain is a bit naive if he thinks that he will march to Washington and fix it up).
Did not Sen. Obama make a similar announcement regarding no-show Hurricane Gustav or Ike? Houston (and the rest of the Gulf Coast), we have a bigger problem, now. If Sen. Obama had suggested it, would we all think it very noble of him? And of course, Sen. McCain would be the low-life who cheated on his wife and rejected Sen. Obama's hiatus invitation, right?
Posted by: pcarini | September 25, 2008 3:41 AM
Touche, my friend. I agree. Though I'd add that those we usually redress for this kind of mistake truly don't realize that their usage was a mistake at all. You, on the other hand, did, which - to me, at least - makes all the difference in the world.
For the fans..
The Boys Next Door - Shivers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toFF3OvBR94
By the way, only vaguely caught the end of it but on PM (ABC radio)there was a bit about, it was the Dems called on the Repugs for a bi-partisan stand on this bail out deal and McCain was trying to claim credit for it. Probably old news.
Unbelievable--John McCain runs away and begs for the imminent presidential debate to be delayed, citing the need to address the financial crisis, as if he actually matters and has a plan other than to do whatever the Bush administration orders.
The question is, does PZ's Dems have any alternative plan to fix the crisis, if not, thats unbelievable, well not really...lol
I'll tell ya what they should do to solve the mess, and that's not to spend 700 billion dollars even if the all the CEO's get no raises or bonuses...I would give them a loan, say 200 billion each which must be paid back and must have assets to back up the loan, otherwise no loan...
If there is a default on the loan, all assets would be taken over by the government and sold which will send a strong message to those who like to take their investing too far...They would think twice before doing that again...They didn't learn from the savings and loan bailout of the 80s and they are not going to learn.
Also, I would go after any state like my home state who were giving mortgages backed up by the state government for illegal immigrants. The defaults that occurred in that area is not fair to taxpayers to pay for mortgages for people who are not suppose to be here. The state shouldn't be giving out those mortgages to illegals, period.
Thus spake The Cheerful Nihilist @#87:
I know this has already been answered, but here is a short guide to formatting comments that covers the half-dozen or so things people usually ask about (quoting, italics, links, etc.)
I have never seen Letterman as irate as when he eviscerated McCain on Live TV last night,as linked to upthreat.That was just fantastic.
McCain has no position on any of the relevant committees that are already debating this crisis now,its just a desperate stunt,like the Palin thing was.You wonder whats next.
You wonder whats next.
Maybe he'll give up this insanity and run for president of AARP instead?
g'nite.
This is extremely suspicious:
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/590-FLASH-Fed-Speaking-Out-…
It seems that the Fed on the one hand is claiming that they must have the bailout or we'll have a wave of bank failures due to a lack of liquidity, and on the other hand, they're reducing the liquidity in the market deliberately.
The discussion is somewhat technical, but not too hard to follow if you're generally familiar with financial markets.
-jcr
Ichthyic, brokenSoldier, BoSOM, pcarini,
I just listened to Nick Cave murdering Wonderful World on YouTube (two versions, both with Shane McGowan), and I've come to the conclusion that he's a very honest man. You see, unlike most modern performers, he is obviously not using Auto-Tune to cover up his poor relative pitch. I can't listen to him without wanting to ram something pointy in my ear every few bars: the boy is flat.
"Yeah, he totally planned that sub-prime mortgage thing... dumbass."
OBL's plan from day one was to enmesh the USA in pointless, expensive wars by playing on the knee-jerk fear and stupidity of americans. It has worked a treat. The fact that the mortgage scam was the first thing to collapse is incidental: the collapes was always going to come one way or another. No nation can spend half its GDP on guns forever.
Another poll.
Chicago Tribune
"Do you agree with John McCain's proposal to delay Friday's debate?"
7828 total responses
Yes (1486 responses) 19.0%
No (6342 responses) 81.0%
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-mccain-economics-poll,0,366001,p…
Wowbagger #188,
"Scott from Oregon,
85 billion amongst 200 million is only $425 per person."
He is using libertarian math. The free market and Ron Paul's smile make each dollar 1000x more valuable.
Whatever. I thought it was a decent idea for the two Senators to concentrate on this crisis and the bailout package being debated in the Senate, at least for the weekend. After all isn't this what we pay them gobs of money to do?
Besides, this is $700 billion of our money (seven hundred freakin' billion), I'd like to be to be taken a little more seriously then a football for the candidates to kick around for positioning in the polls.
Personally I'd be more concerned where the government is going to dig up that money from, it isn't going to be pixie dust and leprechaun gold, although at this point maybe I wish there was such things, at least it wouldn't be more mortgaging our posterior's future.
this is $700 billion of our money (seven hundred freakin' billion), I'd like to be to be taken a little more seriously then a football for the candidates to kick around for positioning in the polls.
First time for everything, I suppose.
I'd be more concerned where the government is going to dig up that money from
It will be created from thin air, by editing a database record in a Federal Reserve computer. The congress authorizes the treasury to create t-bills (notes that pay interest), and the Fed "buys" them from the treasury by adding a number to a bank account.
-jcr
Sara,
I don't assume that it is either, just a political stunt, just pure and simple showboating.
Do you really think there is any comparison between this financial crisis (which is a long protracted process) and a hurricane (which is a 2 to 3 day event) ? That you even make this comment shows that you understand very little of what is happening with this credit crisis. BTW, they BOTH agreed to delay the campaign during the hurricanes.
Well, he didn't suggest it, so what's this kind of ridiculous hypothetical ?
Has anybody else noticed that nobody has yet mentioned that the credit-liquidity "crisis" just might be the result of the government fighting two wars on "borrowed money"? - The Cheerful Nihilist
Actually I have, several times, though not on this thread. Classic case of "imperial overstretch" to use Paul Kennedy's term. The comment about Osama by Realist Golfer@10 wasn't so far off the mark. The neocons always planned to invade Iraq - having to go into Afghanistan after 9/11 was an annoying distraction. They persuaded themselves they could fight both wars at once, because Iraq was supposed to start paying off, politically and economically, quite fast. When it didn't, the only option was to stoke up the existing credit-fuelled boom even further rather than reining it in.
BMcP @ 243
Don't worry - they'll borrow it from China which already owns half the USofA. Either that or the Bin Laden family.
"So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00"
And with that parting shot, Scott from Oregon finally disappeared up his own rectum.
A little shameless self-promotion: My opinion of the bailout.
Craig Ferguson really ripped into McCain and the bailout last night on the Late Late Show. He said "we're suspending our comedy show to do a show about the economy. because 'OH NO!' rich people are losing their money!" "In America we don't suspend the democratic process".
Health grounds for McCain to pull out?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/25/whats-up-with-john-mccain_n_12…
If he does, what happens?
Red Right Hand was the main theme to Hellboy.
I think neither of them should be campaigning. They /should/ be doing their jobs by representing their constituents. I know that's how how things work, but I live in the utopia inside my head.
Argh! I dislike them both.
My wife has an unbelievably accurate nose when it comes to people and politics. She was on to Bush's fascist leanings back in the old millennium.
She believes very strongly that Bush/Cheney will not give up their power, and will suspend the elections entirely, using an excuse of crisis.
She views McCain's suspension of his campaign as Act Two in a choreographed coup, with Act One being Treasury Secretary Paulsen's attempt to assume complete Executive control of all aspects of the bailout.
Call her crazy, but she has been right about this cast of characters from day one.
Can I believe my eyes.
It is walking into a job interview and saying "I don't think I can handle this job if things get too busy". Literally.
They won't, because the answers Obama and Letterman gave -- it's in the job description to do more than one thing at once, and where's Palin? -- are just too obvious. It's clear that McCain wanted to portray himself as the great hero who puts country above campaign; it's also clear that this strategy is Pfailing.
And they really feed into the weaknesses of the ticket, namely, that McCain is too old and Palin too inexperienced.
Just an epic fail on the part of McAncient.
I have never seen anything like this, ever.
And, you know, about our President... If this was Japan, Germany, France, Italy, the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Norway... Okay, name any country (EXCEPT China), and if the PM/President of that country had done to his or her nation's economy in just 8 years, he or she would be resigning in disgrace today.
I saw genuine fear in Bush's eyes last night. He is scared.
Good. Stupid little bastard should be scared. Because he fucked up.
My take: For the last 3 years, millions of Americans have lost their homes, lost everything, because of the greedy practices foisted on them by the same companies Bush now proposes we bail out. Where was Bush when people were simply asking for interest rates to not reset? Where was he when working people just needed $100 or $200 a month of relief?
That failure has led to the crisis we now see on Wall Street. And now he wants to help them?
Forget it. Bush, we're headed for a recession with or without this bailout. IF we do this, it must be tied to common people getting some relief on their mortgages. I'm not asking companies to lose money; I'm asking them to stop the greed that has led to this.
I'll reiterate what I said earlier: Impeach Bush now. If that means he resigns on Jan 15 instead of handing over the reigns on Jan 20, then so be it. The idiot does not deserve a pension.
The only issue that I have with that idea is that we would then have Cheney even more directly in charge than he is now. Once he actually ascends to the highest office, I could see him holing up in the Lincoln Bedroom with a shotgun come January 20th, daring the new administration to come dig him out.
""My take: For the last 3 years, millions of Americans have lost their homes, lost everything, because of the greedy practices foisted on them by the same companies Bush now proposes we bail out. ""
You fail to consider the greed demonstrated by Americans who accepted the house/ATM paradigm. Americans were scrambling to "get in on it", quitting their productive jobs for easy real estate cash.
I see my email forward had three zeroes unaccounted for... Ah well... wishful thinking is rampant in America... My bad. Late night while multi-tasking and all...
America needs to drop the hubris and contract. It won't kill us. Back to basics and ingenuity.
As a few famous ad execs once said--
"Is it in you?"
"Just do it."
I still think Barney Frank got the best one-liner of 'em all:
"It's the longest Hail Mary pass in the history of either football or Marys."
Yeah, a lot of Americans DID take advantage of loans that were available. And who made those loans available? The banks that are now pleading for money today; that's who.
Actually, it's a pretty smart idea (and I don't believe for a minute that it was McCain's). By stepping forward w/ his proposal, he appears "presidential" and puts the heat on Obama. Obama's reply of "I'm going to continue the campaign, but I'm here if you need me" only adds to that feeling of presidential - ness. Then he (Obama) agrees to go to DC, but McCain still did it first, so he still looks presidential. All in all, it's not a bad political move, an unfortunate consequence of the way presidential elections work. Sadly, image is everything.
I think Scott from Oregon just messed up because there is some confusion on how many zero's a billion has...
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,000,000,000_(number) )
If you divide 1,000,000,000,000 by 200,000,000 you get...425,000 *gasp* (at least I think so...)
Hey, if his plan was actually possible it would be pretty good...I think...not that I know anything about economy...well, other than that, for me personally, it's a bad idea to spend money I don't have (and also cannot reliably expect to have in the near future)
Regarding #242
Not disagreeing with the substance of what you wrote, but $85 billion divided among 200 million people is indeed $425 per person. If it's divided by 300 million (the actual population of the U.S.), the per-person share falls to $283. What's "libertarian" about the math itself?
cureholder@263,
Follow the comments back: Scott from Oregon@184 posted it with the result being $425,000 each. This was "libertarian" maths, in the sense of totally divorced from reality.
"Yeah, a lot of Americans DID take advantage of loans that were available. And who made those loans available? The banks that are now pleading for money today; that's who."
No doubt. So let the system crumble some and lose those bad debts to the ethers. It won't hurt as much as they are claiming, and it will teach Americans to buy what they can afford, not what they can get "credit" for.
The root cause of all of this is the federal reserve, number one.
Number two is the credit mentality of the sytem. From Washington owing the world 10 trillion dollars to your average American, owing 30 grand on credit cards...
Live above your means for awhile and your are going to have to live below your means to make up for it.
The gig is up.
Time to start selling the junk you've accumulated in your garage while fueling the "consumer" economy to the Asians who have worked hard and saved money...
"This was "libertarian" maths, in the sense of totally divorced from reality."
Ummmm, actually, it was some funny guy's math who was trying to make a point. I just passed it on because the thread was full of kids being stupid (at least I hope they were kids).
Calling it "libertarian" just makes you look dumb. The fact you feel a need to debase other people and use what you think to be "fine ridicule", just shows the underlying personality issues you don't want to discuss.
If you feel like telling us why you need to feel superior to others, I am all ears.
You see this type of behavior in those with small penises mostly. It's a way of compensating...
I take heart from the fact that every single poll I have seen on the issue had the people that thought it was a cheap political stunt in front by a large margin,even on the Fox website.
And if enough people have seen McCains evisceration by Letterman,and Jon Stewart,then maybe there is hope that he has shot himself in the foot with that one.
Btw,is it only my clinical observation,or is that lump on his left cheek growing slowly but steadily?
>>>It IS walking into a job interview and saying "I don't think I can handle this job if things get too busy". LITERALLY
<<<
Um, not it's not.
Everyone here knows I can't stand either McCain or Obama. But this analogy is so flawed it's unbelievable.
What McCain did (whether for political posturing or other reasons) is POSTPONE a job interview because he was too busy at his CURRENT job. The best real life analogy is the idea of postponing your start date at a new job so you can wrap up your current one (i.e., giving two week' notice, or whatever).
The idea that not being able to interview on a particular night for a new job because you still have your current job makes you "too busy" to do that new job if you're hired is simply nonsensical. The old job goes away if you're hired at the new one. McCain would resign from the Senate if elected to the Presidency. The analogy simply doesn't hold.
I think McCain's move was stupid and cowardly and ill-advised and dishonest, but it's not at all like this analogy describes, literally or otherwise.
BTW, just as a rule of thumb that often comes in handy for me, because the population of the U.S. (300+ million) is roughly one-third of a billion (1,000 million), government per-person spending can be quickly calculated as roughly $3 per billion dollars spent.
Of course, just under half of the people in the U.S. actually pay taxes, so you can double the per-person rate to get the per-taxpayer rate. Every billion dollars thus becomes roughly $6 per taxpayer.
By this method, you can quickly calculate that $85 billion is roughly $255 per person ($3 x 85 = $255). $700 billion is roughly $2,100 per person.
You'll be off by a little bit, but you can avoid that off-by-a-factor-of-1,000 problem.
Seems that I missed all the Nick Cave talk last night. Just want to point out, on the off chance that one is not aware of it, that Cave had an one off release with a Bad Seeds side project called Grinderman. No Pussy Blues is one of the most ferociously funny songs I know of. Let's just say there is a reason why the cover of their CD is of a masturbating monkey.
McCain. Hmph. Sad cheap stunt.
Hey, if we keep discussing the math of billions interminably, Wowbagger really COULD be "infinitely prolonged." :)
Check out these comments from former BofA call-center employees:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/09/25/money.pushers/index.html
I believe them. Things are falling apart for the predators; the predators now need a bailout; and McCain made one of the most misguided attempts in presidential campaign history to look good.
If McCain can't trust Palin to handle the campaign for 48 hours, we can't trust her to be vice president. Even though it really wouldn't have been 48 hours, and even though she really wouldn't have been running it.
The woman who would be veep? I sure hope not.
//Hey, if we keep discussing the math of billions interminably//
Jon Stewart had a segment from CNN last night,where they calculated that the 700 billion would be enough to buy every American 2000 McDonalds apple pies.
There you go.
Calling it "libertarian" just makes you look dumb. - Scott from Oregon
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, not nearly as dumb as posting it shows you to be. Anyone with more than a handful of braincells would have thought "Hey, this can't be right." As they would of most "libertarian" nostrums.
Oh, I can out-eclectic that. Last 5 CDs I played in my car were Miles Daves (live in Sweden, 1960), Beethoven's 9th Symphony, Grateful Dead (Winterland 12/29/77), Poncho Sanchez, and Apollo Sunshine.
Scott from Oregon
When you blow basic counting, you should not take too many shots at others intellects lest both the Pots and Pans will be knocking at your door.
http://xkcd.com/202/
A nice bit of exposition...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et1N26fFapg&feature=related
A good comment (if I say so myself) on the subject here.
I'll take the opportunity to ask because I've always wondered. In an eclectathon, does the quality of the music count? Can musical entries be rejected for pure suckiness?
I just want to have the rules straight.
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,
now that others have "noticed", I propose that Scott from Oregon be the first tossed in the dungeon for repeated misuse of a vocal filler (a very poor one, at that) in written form.
I liken it to watching someone pick their nose while they think about what to say next, but in written form.
The rules for [insert upside-down question mark here]Quien es mas Eclectic? are fluid. At the moment: Yes, musical suckiness can detract, but it's only my personal tastes that count.
So essentially it's standard Svenclectathon 2008 rules. Thanks ;)
Back to topic now.
Oh, we've "noticed" all right!
Blah, blah, blah...
Don't forget "sycophant" or some variation thereof, and "the mind reels/boggles".
Yes it does. Including the Dead just kills everything. Oh, how I hate the Dead.
Being eclectic is great, I get bored other wise. I am the person who follows up Ute Lemper with some Jesus Lizard or some Neko Case with some My Bloody Valentine. But sometimes it does not work. I made one mix tape the contained some John Cage pieces for prepared piano, some Johnny Cash and some early seventies era R&B. Loved everything I put on it but it was just too jarring to listen to.
Patricia, are you claiming Jeff's old job. Is there anyway you can do it with more slut style? Not that Jeff was not slutty in his own foodie way.
*sticks blotter-festooned tongue out at Janine for hating on the Grateful Dead*
*joins Sven*
Sven and SC, pile on me. I can take it. I can understand to a certain extant the appeal of the Dead for those that around at the beginning of their. But, dammit, dealing with Deadhead my age and younger (A generation or more removed from the sixties.) was a pain in the ass. Their view of the sixties tented to be just as myopic and ill informed as any neocom. They tended to focus on the drugs and ignore the conflicts that spawned from that time.
Besides, the Dead bored me to tears. I would rather have been at a MC5 show. I find it more fun to kick out the jams than to be riding that train.
This just in my in box...
(I hope the math is right on this one...)
Ummmm,
Dear Friends:
The financial meltdown the economists of the Austrian School predicted has arrived.
We are in this crisis because of an excess of artificially created credit at the hands of the Federal Reserve System. The solution being proposed? More artificial credit by the Federal Reserve. No liquidation of bad debt and malinvestment is to be allowed. By doing more of the same, we will only continue and intensify the distortions in our economy - all the capital misallocation, all the malinvestment - and prevent the market's attempt to re-establish rational pricing of houses and other assets.
Last night the president addressed the nation about the financial crisis. There is no point in going through his remarks line by line, since I'd only be repeating what I've been saying over and over - not just for the past several days, but for years and even decades.
Still, at least a few observations are necessary.
The president assures us that his administration "is working with Congress to address the root cause behind much of the instability in our markets." Care to take a guess at whether the Federal Reserve and its money creation spree were even mentioned?
We are told that "low interest rates" led to excessive borrowing, but we are not told how these low interest rates came about. They were a deliberate policy of the Federal Reserve. As always, artificially low interest rates distort the market. Entrepreneurs engage in malinvestments - investments that do not make sense in light of current resource availability, that occur in more temporally remote stages of the capital structure than the pattern of consumer demand can support, and that would not have been made at all if the interest rate had been permitted to tell the truth instead of being toyed with by the Fed.
Not a word about any of that, of course, because Americans might then discover how the great wise men in Washington caused this great debacle. Better to keep scapegoating the mortgage industry or "wildcat capitalism" (as if we actually have a pure free market!).
Speaking about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the president said: "Because these companies were chartered by Congress, many believed they were guaranteed by the federal government. This allowed them to borrow enormous sums of money, fuel the market for questionable investments, and put our financial system at risk."
Doesn't that prove the foolishness of chartering Fannie and Freddie in the first place? Doesn't that suggest that maybe, just maybe, government may have contributed to this mess? And of course, by bailing out Fannie and Freddie, hasn't the federal government shown that the "many" who "believed they were guaranteed by the federal government" were in fact correct?
Then come the scare tactics. If we don't give dictatorial powers to the Treasury Secretary "the stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet." Left unsaid, naturally, is that with the bailout and all the money and credit that must be produced out of thin air to fund it, the value of your retirement account will drop anyway, because the value of the dollar will suffer a precipitous decline. As for home prices, they are obviously much too high, and supply and demand cannot equilibrate if government insists on propping them up.
It's the same destructive strategy that government tried during the Great Depression: prop up prices at all costs. The Depression went on for over a decade. On the other hand, when liquidation was allowed to occur in the equally devastating downturn of 1921, the economy recovered within less than a year.
The president also tells us that Senators McCain and Obama will join him at the White House today in order to figure out how to get the bipartisan bailout passed. The two senators would do their country much more good if they stayed on the campaign trail debating who the bigger celebrity is, or whatever it is that occupies their attention these days.
F.A. Hayek won the Nobel Prize for showing how central banks' manipulation of interest rates creates the boom-bust cycle with which we are sadly familiar. In 1932, in the depths of the Great Depression, he described the foolish policies being pursued in his day - and which are being proposed, just as destructively, in our own:
Instead of furthering the inevitable liquidation of the maladjustments brought about by the boom during the last three years, all conceivable means have been used to prevent that readjustment from taking place; and one of these means, which has been repeatedly tried though without success, from the earliest to the most recent stages of depression, has been this deliberate policy of credit expansion.
To combat the depression by a forced credit expansion is to attempt to cure the evil by the very means which brought it about; because we are suffering from a misdirection of production, we want to create further misdirection - a procedure that can only lead to a much more severe crisis as soon as the credit expansion comes to an end... It is probably to this experiment, together with the attempts to prevent liquidation once the crisis had come, that we owe the exceptional severity and duration of the depression.
The only thing we learn from history, I am afraid, is that we do not learn from history.
The very people who have spent the past several years assuring us that the economy is fundamentally sound, and who themselves foolishly cheered the extension of all these novel kinds of mortgages, are the ones who now claim to be the experts who will restore prosperity! Just how spectacularly wrong, how utterly without a clue, does someone have to be before his expert status is called into question?
Oh, and did you notice that the bailout is now being called a "rescue plan"? I guess "bailout" wasn't sitting too well with the American people.
The very people who with somber faces tell us of their deep concern for the spread of democracy around the world are the ones most insistent on forcing a bill through Congress that the American people overwhelmingly oppose. The very fact that some of you seem to think you're supposed to have a voice in all this actually seems to annoy them.
I continue to urge you to contact your representatives and give them a piece of your mind. I myself am doing everything I can to promote the correct point of view on the crisis. Be sure also to educate yourselves on these subjects - the Campaign for Liberty blog is an excellent place to start. Read the posts, ask questions in the comment section, and learn.
H.G. Wells once said that civilization was in a race between education and catastrophe. Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have.
In liberty,
Ron Paul
*Swoons in horror*, then joins Sven and SC. That's my yoof you're trashing there, Janine!
Ummmmmmmmm Scott,
If we want to read the thoughts of Chairman Paul, they're readily available. Give it a rest.
Nick, sigh, did you read what I said? I gave people your age a pass.
Just never understood the Dead as a cultural phenomenon. I guess I knew too many people who started listening after reading The Electric Kool Aid Acid Test. And those neo-hippies drove me up the wall. Funny thing, many of my older friends were hippies in their youth. I found the former hippies to be more engaging than neo-hippies.
My blahs were meant to be deadly boring. They are in protest of Scott being deadly boring by beating a dead horse day after day. I save my sluttiness for those of you capable of appreciating it.
I was at Autsen stadium for the last Dead show they played in Oregon before Jerry died. I'm still pissed at him for dieing, and John Belushi too. They could have stuck around and entertained us, but noooooooooooo!
I used to work for the Dead. I have more stories than I will ever share.
Nah nah...
As for the politics... when I am affected, I make an effort to make a difference...
For those who want a nannie state to take care of you, I say fuck you. Stop trying to put another clown over me...
For me, it's never been so much about the "cultural phenomenon" or "the sixties" or being a "neohippy" (though I suppose I are one); rather, they were a band, and I love the music they played. As a young jazz purist/elitist I got sucked in by their improvisational risk-taking (arguably, no other "rock" band has ever so closely paralleled the jazz aesthetic), but I soon grew to appreciate their timeless songwriting and honestly emotional, no bullshit performance style, and eventually even the unabashed Americana of the cowboy tunes and Chuck Berry blues riffs. Sure I participated in and enjoyed the cultural phenomenon during the late 70s and early 80s (still sport the ponytail freakflag and Birkenstocks to this day), but the reason I listen to the music almost daily is simply because of the music.
Boring? *shrug* Sorry, but I have to conclude that you just don't know. For me, musical adventurousness and nuance are far, far less boring than the one-time exhiliration of a 3-chord punk band, or even the MC5. YMMV, of course, and we're supposed to be talking about McCain.
What's up with his left eye?
I wonder where the hell Truth Machine buggered off to? This thread could use a good sling blader.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 25, 2008
Boring? *shrug* Sorry, but I have to conclude that you just don't know. For me, musical adventurousness and nuance are far, far less boring than the one-time exhiliration of a 3-chord punk band, or even the MC5.
I have heard enough Dead over the years. I know. But just so you know, the MC5 did do Sun Ra and country covers. And when it comes to being able to synthesize different influences, I prefer Richard Thompsom.
As for commenting on McCain, other people have commented on him much better then I could. But I wish more people would bring up his connection with The Keating 5. And that picking Palin shows how much he is willing to pander to the stupidest voters.
I wonder where the hell Truth Machine buggered off to? This thread could use a good sling blader.
He's traveling. Cool for him, less fun for Pharyngula.
Scott (as channeling Paul): The financial meltdown the economists of the Austrian School predicted has arrived.
Can't we give credit as well to ol' Karl Marx? And about a thousand other Doomsday (say with a low voice ala the Russian ambassador in Dr. Strangelove) prophets, who predict The End, but never gives us an explicit mathematical model that is independently verifiable?
Gahh - how long must we have these fools? These are pseudo-economists who are at best philosophers, doing meta-economics, but have given birth to no real science? And then the fools who join their schools (cults)?
Don't worry Patricia, he'll be back. He skirts on the edge of existence, hovering but waiting, ever present.
I think you may have come to the party post TM getting his OM but the comments on his nomination thread are priceless and worth a read. Mothra at #33 should have got a Molly for his/her nomination poem in itself!
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/february_needs_a_molly.php#c…
BoS,
I just read that recently. Very entertaining, including his responses.
I have to say that the Dead is one of two bands (the other being the Jerry Garcia Band) that has the power to instantly lift my mood. No matter how stressed, upset, hung-over (not that this happens much these days) or downtrodden I might be, Jerry & Co can transport me to a happier place by the end of the first song. It's not just about the nostalgia factor, but polyphony, improvisational adventures, smooth delivery, and some damned fine lyrics.
I also have to say that MikeM at #272 makes an excellent observation re: the confidence, or lack thereof, McCain's latest actions have shown in Palin. Fucking-A.
Re: the request for Patricia to deliver the 'blahs' with sluttish intonations--perhaps we should all just mentally picture a burlesque bump and grind to accompany each 'blah'...
And the reason I was on the Molly page to begin with was that I was checking to see if the Rev. had actually been awarded his and I had just missed it. Alas, no. Perhaps if we add more comments to the August Molly thread...?:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/09/saywhat_about_molly.php
Unsure if this question has been raised: Can anyone tell me how the "John McCain, Hero" meme ever came about? I appreciate that he spent several years as a prisoner of war, but a POW does not a hero make unless he actually does something heroic. I admire him for this even though (I believe) he broke under pressure and even made some propaganda statements for the North Vietnamese.
Like many words, "hero" seems to have been cheapened by applying it to people who don't really deserve it. To my thinking, a war hero is someone who has put his own life in jeopardy in order to save others. Did McCain ever do this? Maybe the 5 planes he crashed were purposely aimed at enemy combatants to save others?
Bride of Shrek - That was a funny thread! The poem about TM was good. He does pound alright!
Seems like so many good posters have faded away. Sure do miss them. On the other hand, it does mean a lot less sangria sprayed down the front of my well filled blouse.
Soooo, zey would have me wave my boo-bies in ze gene-rahl direction of zer grond fahzers, and sey blah! Boor me a-gain and I shall hurl ze blahs in le pots de chambere!
Hey, I did!
He insisted on waiting to be released, under the "first in, first out" policy, despite being offered early release. His insistence boosted POW morale and denied the Viet Cong a propoganda coup.
Of the five planes that McCain "crashed," one was shot down by the Viet Cong, and the other was hit by an errant U.S. missile while grounded on an aircraft carrier. During the latter, McCain was struck by bomb fragments while aiding another pilot.
I understand if you hate the man's politics, but if you actually learn about his experiences as a POW I think you'll find that he really was a hero.
A further note on the "McCain crashed 5 planes" meme. Like I already said, it was 3, not 5. That still sounds pretty bad, and it might be. It's entirely possible McCain was a terrible pilot. It's hard to say that, though, without knowing how typical McCain's experiences were compared to other pilots flying the same craft. I honestly don't know. "Crash" might be a bit of an overstatement, too. Considering McCain didn't sustain any injuries, it seems likely that when they say "crash" they're referring to emergency landings. Whether they were attributable to pilot error, the vagaries of flying 1950's era combat planes, or some mixture of both is open to debate.
I have more stories than I will ever share.
could you maybe abbreviate that even a wee bit more?
say, to not sharing at all, maybe?
thanks, ever so much.
OK, those of you who know me a bit here also know that I don't usually paste in lengthy stuff, but I think this deserves posting. It's in regard to McCain's service. Thanks for indulging me in this.
From "Military.com"
Phillip Butler | March 27, 2008
Benefit Why I Will Not Vote for John McCain
Phillip Butler | March 27, 2008
As some of you might know, John McCain is a long-time acquaintance of mine that goes way back to our time together at the U.S. Naval Academy and as Prisoners of War in Vietnam. He is a man I respect and admire in some ways. But there are a number of reasons why I will not vote for him for President of the United States.
When I was a Plebe (4th classman, or freshman) at the Naval Academy in 1957-58, I was assigned to the 17th Company for my four years there. In those days we had about 3,600 midshipmen spread among 24 companies, thus about 150 midshipmen to a company. As fortune would have it, John, a First Classman (senior) and his room mate lived directly across the hall from me and my two room mates. Believe me when I say that back then I would never in a million or more years have dreamed that the crazy guy across the hall would someday be a Senator and candidate for President!
John was a wild man. He was funny, with a quick wit and he was intelligent. But he was intent on breaking every USNA regulation in our 4 inch thick USNA Regulations book. And I believe he must have come as close to his goal as any midshipman who ever attended the Academy. John had me "coming around" to his room frequently during my plebe year. And on one occasion he took me with him to escape "over the wall" in the dead of night. He had a taxi cab waiting for us that took us to a bar some 7 miles away. John had a few beers, but forbid me to drink (watching out for me I guess) and made me drink cokes. I could tell many other midshipman stories about John that year and he unbelievably managed to graduate though he spent the majority of his first class year on restriction for the stuff he did get caught doing. In fact he barely managed to graduate, standing 5th from the bottom of his 800 man graduating class. I and many others have speculated that the main reason he did graduate was because his father was an Admiral, and also his grandfather, both U.S. Naval Academy graduates.
People often ask if I was a Prisoner of War with John McCain. My answer is always "No - John McCain was a POW with me." The reason is I was there for 8 years and John got there 2 _ years later, so he was a POW for 5 _ years. And we have our own seniority system, based on time as a POW.
John's treatment as a POW:
1) Was he tortured for 5 years? No. He was subjected to torture and maltreatment during his first 2 years, from September of 1967 to September of 1969. After September of 1969 the Vietnamese stopped the torture and gave us increased food and rudimentary health care. Several hundred of us were captured much earlier. I got there April 20, 1965 so my bad treatment period lasted 4 1/2 years. President Ho Chi Minh died on September 9, 1969, and the new regime that replaced him and his policies was more pragmatic. They realized we were worth a lot as bargaining chips if we were alive. And they were right because eventually Americans gave up on the war and agreed to trade our POW's for their country. A damn good trade in my opinion! But my point here is that John allows the media to make him out to be THE hero POW, which he knows is absolutely not true, to further his political goals.
2) John was badly injured when he was shot down. Both arms were broken and he had other wounds from his ejection. Unfortunately this was often the case - new POW's arriving with broken bones and serious combat injuries. Many died from their wounds. Medical care was non-existent to rudimentary. Relief from pain was almost never given and often the wounds were used as an available way to torture the POW. Because John's father was the Naval Commander in the Pacific theater, he was exploited with TV interviews while wounded. These film clips have now been widely seen. But it must be known that many POW's suffered similarly, not just John. And many were similarly exploited for political propaganda.
3) John was offered, and refused, "early release." Many of us were given this offer. It meant speaking out against your country and lying about your treatment to the press. You had to "admit" that the U.S. was criminal and that our treatment was "lenient and humane." So I, like numerous others, refused the offer. This was obviously something none of us could accept. Besides, we were bound by our service regulations, Geneva Conventions and loyalties to refuse early release until all the POW's were released, with the sick and wounded going first.
4) John was awarded a Silver Star and Purple Heart for heroism and wounds in combat. This heroism has been played up in the press and in his various political campaigns. But it should be known that there were approximately 600 military POW's in Vietnam. Among all of us, decorations awarded have recently been totaled to the following: Medals of Honor - 8, Service Crosses - 42, Silver Stars - 590, Bronze Stars - 958 and Purple Hearts - 1,249. John certainly performed courageously and well. But it must be remembered that he was one hero among many - not uniquely so as his campaigns would have people believe.
John McCain served his time as a POW with great courage, loyalty and tenacity. More that 600 of us did the same. After our repatriation a census showed that 95% of us had been tortured at least once. The Vietnamese were quite democratic about it. There were many heroes in North Vietnam. I saw heroism every day there. And we motivated each other to endure and succeed far beyond what any of us thought we had in ourselves. Succeeding as a POW is a group sport, not an individual one. We all supported and encouraged each other to survive and succeed. John knows that. He was not an individual POW hero. He was a POW who surmounted the odds with the help of many comrades, as all of us did.
I furthermore believe that having been a POW is no special qualification for being President of the United States. The two jobs are not the same, and POW experience is not, in my opinion, something I would look for in a presidential candidate.
Most of us who survived that experience are now in our late 60's and 70's. Sadly, we have died and are dying off at a greater rate than our non-POW contemporaries. We experienced injuries and malnutrition that are coming home to roost. So I believe John's age (73) and survival expectation are not good for being elected to serve as our President for 4 or more years.
I can verify that John has an infamous reputation for being a hot head. He has a quick and explosive temper that many have experienced first hand. Folks, quite honestly that is not the finger I want next to that red button.
It is also disappointing to see him take on and support Bush's war in Iraq, even stating we might be there for another 100 years. For me John represents the entrenched and bankrupt policies of Washington-as-usual. The past 7 years have proven to be disastrous for our country. And I believe John's views on war, foreign policy, economics, environment, health care, education, national infrastructure and other important areas are much the same as those of the Bush administration.
I'm disappointed to see John represent himself politically in ways that are not accurate. He is not a moderate Republican. On some issues he is a maverick. But his voting record is far to the right. I fear for his nominations to our Supreme Court, and the consequent continuing loss of individual freedoms, especially regarding moral and religious issues. John is not a religious person, but he has taken every opportunity to ally himself with some really obnoxious and crazy fundamentalist ministers lately. I was also disappointed to see him cozy up to Bush because I know he hates that man. He disingenuously and famously put his arm around the guy, even after Bush had intensely disrespected him with lies and slander. So on these and many other instances, I don't see that John is the "straight talk express" he...
Senator John Sidney McCain, III is a remarkable man who has made enormous personal achievements. And he is a man that I am proud to call a fellow POW who "Returned With Honor." That's our POW motto. But since many of you keep asking what I think of him, I've decided to write it out. In short, I think John Sidney McCain, III is a good man, but not someone I will vote for in the upcoming election to be our President of the United States.
About Phillip Butler
Doctor Phillip Butler is a 1961 graduate of the United States Naval Academy and a former light-attack carrier pilot. In 1965 he was shot down over North Vietnam where he spent eight years as a prisoner of war. He is a highly decorated combat veteran who was awarded two Silver Stars, two Legion of Merits, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Heart medals.
A contributing factor to the mortgage crisis:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0…
Of course, this was made possible by the bottomless hole of credit that the Fed was making.
When the money is inflated, it's going to cause distortions in the market somewhere. This time, it was the housing market. In previous rounds, it's been loans to foreign governments, margin financing for stock market speculation, unneeded weapons programs like the B1 and B2 bombers or the "Bradley Fighting Vehicle", and so forth.
-jcr
I was hoping Palin would show up without her blouse !!!
Well, Ive been away for a while. Having returned to find some loon named Scott of Oregon (who cant divide), I must object. As a native Oregonian I demand that he quit slandering my state .... and enough with the gigormous copy pasting of Ron Paul's blathering. Scott, pretend you are from somewhere else, or better yet, move somewhere else and become Scott of Alaska ... I think you would fit right in in Wasilla.
If he's a no-show, I think they should have the rubber chicken substitute for McCain.
Then they can put lipstick on it and use it as a substitute for Palin with press talks.
Ron Paul's blathering.
You know, if you actually read the text of Ron Paul's letter that Scott posted, you'll discover that it's a very concise description of the financial disaster we're facing, how it happened, and why going ahead with Paulson's bailout proposal will make it worse.
-jcr
Desert Donkey - As a native Oregonian, I join you in solidarity for wishing Scott would shut the fuck up. And perhaps we will hear from fellow Oregon slutess, Danio, who just might be sick of Scott's sour owl shit too.
If a coalition of Oregonians are tired of Scott perhaps PZ will pitch him into the dungeon.
The dead horse is really starting to stink.
#316 - Druidbros - Are you by any chance a member of ADF?
There goes another one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/business/26wamu.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slo…
Biggest bank failure of all time, exceeding the previous record set (IIRC) by IndyMac a couple of weeks back.
-jcr
perhaps PZ will pitch him into the dungeon.
Or, maybe PZ doesn't want this blog to become an echo chamber. How long have you had this desire to silence those who disagree with you?
-jcr
Here in the local Oregon news casts (Portland) the reporters are wheedling about like tops. They want to say something about McCain's chickening out, but yet they are afraid. It's like watching someone with one foot in the frying pan, and one foot in the fire.
The business reporter on the channel 8 news reported that the bail out price would buy EVERY house in the states of Oregon or Washington TWICE over! How the hell can we cover that? Thanks Bush.
Patricia, FYI
http://www.hayibo.com/articles/view/710
OT, I know, but I figured you'd have something to say.
A debate with Gov. Palin would be interesting, but honestly, how many times can you listen to "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition" before you're forced to change the channel?
Evolution:
http://www.hayibo.com/articles/view/863
Too much satire on the internetz.
John, It isn't that he disagrees with me. He probably would smile that I have been a Nader supporter all of my adult life. It's that he just won't quit pounding a dead issue. He does it thread after thread.
You may wish to scroll up past my post and see how many others are also tired of Scotts remarks.
Usually those that disagree with me are the most fun, Scott isn't. He's just *headdesk*
I am actually flattered that I garner so much attention from a bunch of sycophantic groupies.
I just "blather" here because I assume there are some intelligent Athiest with independant minds who occasionally traipse through these parts and read a bit of blather.
I figure the sycophants might not care about anything other than their cult of personality worship, but the more thoughtful passers-through might see the parallel between what is happening in the world and what I am describing here, and perk up and listen.
Being a big fella, I am not used to people calling me names or displaying childish condescension. It amuses me that the safety of the internet brings out the brave mouths of the truly timid in such a way as to expose them for what and who they truly are.
It is the meek and intellectually fearful who gather in groups and show scorn toward others who hold a differing view. You see this behavior all the time, but you always hear it denied.
I keep waiting to be impressed by a group of so-called "rationalists" as if that designation contained thoughtfulness and depth of reason.
Unfortunately, group-think and cult of personality worship seem to be all that transpires around here.
May I advise all of you Obama-heads to email your man and tell him to stop with this bail-out nonsense and expose it for what it is?
"The business reporter on the channel 8 news reported that the bail out price would buy EVERY house in the states of Oregon or Washington TWICE over! How the hell can we cover that? Thanks Bush."
I suppose blaming Bushg on everything is your way of demonstrating your political acumen? That's hilarious.
Do a little research into Chris Dodd and the fannie and Freddie debacle. Find out WHO is really pushing for this "bailout" and why.
Here. This will start you off--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et1N26fFapg&eurl=http://aeleope.blogspot…
Maybe using your brain may cure all that boredom you seem to possess?
Scott from Oregon
You are a pedantic twit and your postings are boring. It really is time for you to go into the dudgeon if only because too many of your posts are too long. Were you capable of shorter postings, I wouldn't have a problem with you, but since your rants consume valuable space, you need to join that select group that dwells . . . elsewhere.
Go hence, please.
Wow Scott, you are an unbelievable tool.
If you were on the mark, that may have been the case. But you were way off the mark. There's plenty of difference of opinion here, actually read the threads before talking about sycophants. It's rare to find multiple people here who completely agree on any political issue. So if you got of your soapbox for a minute and actually took the time to learn what others are saying instead of being a preaching arse, then you actually might see that... but of course you couldn't make sweeping generalisations and act like you are the only one with an open mind. And that just doesn't seem to be in you to act any other way.
#326 - Cheerful - Cut that out! Don't just haul out a post like that in front of the ladies without a warning that we loosen our stays and hover near the fainting couch.
I have tears in my eyes and I think I've soiled my pantalettes. The sheer stupidity of the commenter's makes the full-some bosom heave in hilarity.
(Seriously, I pity the women that live with such fools.)
Patricia (334)
C'mon, stop fakin' it all the time. All us guys know it's just an act. All that "Imman, Imman, I'm coming!" Who do you gals think you are? Jesus?
I have no political acumen, I'm a hillbilly and an ignorant slut. The channel 8 news business report was free to you Scott. Call them up and tell them what idiots they are, I'm sure they will want to employ you right away.
Drop the 'from Oregon' and continue to drivel away until PZ gets sick of you. How about Scott from the planet Kuzbane? That shouldn't offend anyone.
Now that's just cheerfully naughty!
And damn it, give me a moment, I was in pawing through the unmentionables for some stainless, from your last damned post. Do you think these things tie themselves?
Isn't that the point of Kegels?
Something interesting I've observed from working in the USPS during election years.
When the Republicans are hot and 'on top,' they send nearly all of their requests for donations via mail the cheapest way possible, the non-profit rate. If they're feeling generous, they'll include a business reply envelope to send the money back in.
When they're in trouble, they use first class to ask for donations.
When they're going down in flames, they send their richest contributors letters by certified mail, begging for money. I saw this in 2006, and i got to hear most of those super-rich contributors say, "I've given all I'm going to give," and "I wish they'd leave me alone." Nearly all of those letters went back REFUSED.
I haven't seen any of the certified letters lately, since I don't come into contact with much of that these days (although I could take a peek, if I were really curious), but I saw something this year that I hadn't before:
McCain is sending a first-class mailing to lower-tier contributors with a pre-addressed, PRE-PAID Priority return envelope inside.
For a mass-mailing like this, Priority mail costs $4.75 per "flat" envelope. Period. And I'm pretty sure they have to pay the fee up front, unlike BRM, which companies pay as each mailpiece comes in.
You don't pay BIG MONEY (and Priority Mail is big money for a campaign) to encourage supporters to send donations, and in a way that you can get the $$$ as quickly as possible. You don't do this unless you absolutely have to do it. Most of these mailings went out right after the convention, possibly to grab what money they could while excitement was high about Palin, before the easily-influenced woke up from their stupor about her.
I can't say it for sure, but McCain could well be in bigger trouble than we realize. Something is wrong over there. Very wrong. Things may be unraveling. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Sorry Kel, I have this overwhelming urge to pinch your cheeks and call you darlin, because you share the name with my cousin. I've never met another Kel - you break my stride. *Darlin*
Holy crap.
This is unprecedented, as far as I can tell:
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/09/feds-fisher-says-ban…
I've never heard of a member of the Fed board of governors calling bullshit on a Fed chairman like this. This is historic.
Bernanke might be out of a job in the near future.
-jcr
P.Z. You are a dishonest, hateful, partisan hack. John McCain wanted more debates as Bill Clinton recently pointed out. Also to assume the worst because you hate republicans is really immature, it's behavious that can be expected from people on the left all the time.
I used to work for the Dead. - Scott from Oregon
*Goes off and smashes all his Grateful Dead albums*
jcr,
I don't want SfO (or you, or other loonytarians) dungeoned - in certain moods I find you amusing, and having a wide variety of views represented here is a good thing. I do want him to stop copy-pasting The Thoughts of Chairman Paul and prefacing his comments with "Ummmmmm". If you, as a fellow-idiot, ask him to desist from these irritating practices, maybe he will?
Today's Grauniad reports that Bush refused an Israeli request for permission to bomb Iran in May, and indicated this refusal was unlikely to change: he feared retaliation in Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly the US itself, using Hizbollah sympathisers based in Canada. The Israelis will be crossing their fingers for a victory by John "bomb, bomb, bomb" McCain.
jcr: When the money is inflated, it's going to cause distortions in the market somewhere.
Please explain the boom-bust cycles of the 19th century (and beyond), before the implementation of the mixed-model state with the capability of manipulating the money supply beyond the first order behavior of printing more?
Really, market fundamentalism like that is such an oversimplification of economic transactions - it's a childish response to an awesomely complicated system.
Ummmm,
The picture painted by the supporters of the bailout is dire. President Bush reinforced this notion in his address to the nation last night and again urged Congress to act immediately.
Remember what happened the last time the executive branch warned of horrible consequences and rushed legislation through Congress? We got the Patriot Act, which to this day threatens our civil liberties on an unprecedented scale.
We do know that our economy is in for a rough ride. These bad mortgage-related assets will have to be cleared out and the market will have to reset. The only question is how that will happen.
The easy way out is to continue the same practices that got us to this point. We can put $700 billion, for starters, in the hands of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (a former CEO of Goldman Sachs) and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and let them spend the money on whatever they wish.
This option will only delay the economic downturn, which will only be worsened.
Or, we can take this opportunity to end the federal government's interference in the marketplace, truly embrace free market capitalism, and return to a sound monetary system.
The Federal Reserve's practices of easy credit and monetary inflation have crashed our economy, and now they're asking us to trust them to fix it.
When you call Congress to express your outrage at the bailout, tell them you want real solutions.
It is time for Congress to:
1.) End the Bailouts - Congress must revoke the Federal Reserve's authority to bail out failed businesses at your expense.
2.) Cut Taxes and Curb Regulation - If we really want to stimulate businesses and revive the market, we need to cut corporate and capital gains taxes, spurring investors to come back to the market and making it easier to attract new workers and clients. It is also time to end failed legislation like Sarbanes-Oxley, which has crippled capital markets, diminished our competitiveness, and greatly harmed small businesses.
3.) Reduce Spending - We must freeze all non-entitlement spending by the federal government at current levels and eliminate wasteful spending both domestically and in our trillion-dollar overseas budget. Our debt has to come down, and it won't until we start living within our means.
4.) Reform the Monetary System - If we are to have long-term economic progress, we must end the system of printing money out of thin air. The current laws limiting the circulation of gold and silver-backed currency must be overturned. We can no longer base our money on the empty promises of bureaucrats that it is sound.
The federal government is trying to scare us into accepting more tyranny. Don't stand for it.
McChicken's backed down and agreed to take part in today's debate, according to BBC.
Apples and oranges. But you don't have to choose--see, that's what eclecticism is all about!
p.s. I like the MC5* **, but you have to admit that "nuance" was not their thing!
*and when I lived in Michigan I played in a band with a guy who knew Wayne Kramer personally
**and I like Richard Thompson too, since back in the Fairport Convention daze
Scott: Or, we can take this opportunity to end the federal government's interference in the marketplace, truly embrace free market capitalism, and return to a sound monetary system.
Yes! Let's return to the 19th century! Yes, Yes, Yes!
They never had panics - we know there were no boom-busts cycles until 1929! Yes!
Because the current crisis clearly arises from financial institutions having too little money and too much oversight.
Eric Atkinson: begone, foul troll.
Scott,
Your god is the free market system. We get it. We really do. You've made your one main point enough times. Over and over and over...
and over...
In your eyes it is infallible and perfect beyond the minds of men and we just need to get out of its way. We know this is how you think. No, really, WE KNOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE! However, for the most part, we're a bunch of atheists here. WTF? Go start your "Church of the Mighty Market" and leave us in peace fer chisake.
You're becoming the "Kenny" of politics.
"Your god is the free market system. We get it."
Evidently not...
"However, for the most part, we're a bunch of atheists here. WTF? Go start your "Church of the Mighty Market" and leave us in peace fer chisake."
Who is "we"? Are you a member of a tribe? A cult? A "movement"?
And here I thought rationalists were all free thinkers, standing on their own, using their own minds...
I didn't realize that I was rocking a party boat full of group-minded "individualists"...
Did you call your Congressperson yet and tell him/her that you want this bailout rejected?
You'd rather spend your time talking to me about me?
The mind boggles...
Scott, did you notice that the point of my last comment was that you say the same thing over and over and over? Then you reply to it by, wait for it... saying the same thing over again. It's delicious! Lol! You make my case for me. Pathos.
"Who is "we"? Are you a member of a tribe? A cult? A "movement"?"
Ummm, "we" are the people making comments on this site. Surely you can't by so stupid as to not understand that. Notice the "for the most part" I tossed in also. Really, you do seem to be ignorant to an astonishing level.
Well, all for me. Enough troll feeding for one day. Back to work.
Bye-bye Kenn... um Scott.
No, we're Ilk.
loonytarians...
- in certain moods I find you amusing...
If you, as a fellow-idiot..
Don't ever change, Nick. Pharyngula wouldn't be the same without people like you to toss off the standard pseudo-intellectual put-downs.
BTW, do have anything substantive to say about the upcoming debate, or the $700B bailout proposal, or would you rather continue posturing?
-jcr
Getting back to the subject of bailouts, the first one I remember from my childhood was the Chrysler loan guarantee bill, back during the Carter administration. (It wasn't the first big, expensive handout by any means, but it's the one that brought the subject to my attention.)
Now, because Chrysler did make good on those loans, that's often cited as an example of a successful market intervention by the congress, but is it really? A couple of decades later, Chrysler's been acquired and spun back out by Daimler, and it's still far from being a stable, prospering business. They've got their hand out again this year, as one of the Detroit companies that are begging for $50 billion to fund development of hybrid drivetrains and other technology to help them compete with the rest of the world.
Meanwhile, Toyota isn't asking for any help, and they're making cars that people actually want to buy. Toyota is making more cars in the USA than Ford or Chrysler. Maybe if we let the formerly big three fail, Toyota or some other organization with competent management will buy their plants and other assets and put them to better use.
-jcr
Patricia,
You are a hillbilly? I thought you were in Oregon. As a former resident of the southern Appalachians, and therefore a true hillbilly (born -n bred in West by dog Virginia!) I know how finely some can split the hairs of hillbilly/cracker/redneck/etc.
So, I guess what I'm a askin' is this: Is you a "true hillbilly", or just someone what lives in the hills?
Good question. It will take some split hairs to untangle. All of my grandparents are from Missouri, Kentucky and Tennessee.One of my grandfathers got run out of Kentucky for running shine and a botched revenge killing. So my folks ended up together out here.
None of the hillbilly talk, or habits got given up until my nasty old grandpa died in the 1970's. My relatives say I sound like a yankee to them. Probably I wouldn't qualify as a 'true' hillbilly being born here.
I wonder if we're related -- I also have a distant relative who was a sheriff in Kentucky, and was run out of town after he shot someone who pissed him off.
But then, that may have been a fairly common scenario in Kentucky.
My branch of the family went out from Appalachia to Ohio and Iowa, before drifting off to migrant farm work in Eastern Washington after the Civil War, though, so we got pretty thoroughly yankeefied and couldn't call ourselves real hillbillies anymore.
jcr: They've got their hand out again this year, as one of the Detroit companies that are begging for $50 billion to fund development of hybrid drivetrains and other technology to help them compete with the rest of the world.
Meanwhile, Toyota isn't asking for any help, and they're making cars that people actually want to buy.
Wait, are you seriously trying to compare the Japanese keiretsu system with American corporations? Talk about too big to fail, and endless tentacles into the government! It's like the old AT&T - yeah, they did a lot of good research - but they had their hands in everyone's pocket while they did it.
Additionally, to find out whether Toyota has held a hand out, you'd have to have a pretty deep knowledge of the mechanical and chemical engineering research communities in Japan. Often, the expensive, long term part of research is done by the government and then cheaply transferred to private enterprise.
The US massively subsidizes pharmaceutical and semiconductor development. We don't directly subsidize the companies - we directly subsidize the research, then pass the results to private companies cheaply. An honest accounting would consider this funding to be a subsidy to the very sectors of our capitalist economy that have been the driving force.
Please explain the boom-bust cycles of the 19th century
In a nutshell, banks were in the habit of issuing more paper money than they could redeem in specie, and this fueled bubbles which were typically ended by a run on the bank, and a relatively short period of market correction (rarely more than a year or so).
The Fed didn't invent fiat money, and they weren't the first organization in US history to issue it. There was the continental dollar during the revolutionary war, the greenback dollar during the civil war, and all manner of fraudulent gold receipts issued by many banks.
The effect of the Fed has been to make much bigger bubbles possible, and to make the resulting crash much worse and longer in duration. Bernanke's even admitted that the Fed caused the first great depression. I wonder if he'll admit to the second before he dies?
-jcr
jcr@357,
I've actually made my views clear on the bailout, but presumably your head was too far up your fundament for you to notice at the time. Briefly, there needs to be some intervention, or a 30s-style slump is practically certain rather than merely possible. The best suggestion I've seen is that the failing banks should be required to raise capital by issuing additional shares, which the government buys if no-one else will. That way the shareholders lose some of their potential future dividends to the government, which either has to tax less or can spend more.
As far as tonight's debate is concerned, I've also said that Obama will now win if he keeps his head (literally and figuratively), because the public trust the Dems more on the economy, and blame the Rethugs for the current mess; and in elections, salience counts for more than anything else. So all he needs to do is avoid getting thrashed. As it happens, I think he will wipe the floor with McCain.
PZ & Patricia,
Could you give us a kind of cultural anthropology of your folks? There's a huge gap between us roving immigrant types and the insular (montagneous?) Appalachian folk that leads to a lot of the political and social dynamics in this country - but we really don't understand each other.
I've tried to figure 'em out from Appalachian-ethnic friends, but I can't really be sure what's going on - how much is my misunderstanding.
Obama will now win -> Obama will now win the election@364.
jcr: In a nutshell, banks were in the habit of issuing more paper money than they could redeem in specie, and this fueled bubbles which were typically ended by a run on the bank, and a relatively short period of market correction (rarely more than a year or so).
I don't doubt this played a role in panics -- but you really think this is the whole story, and not just a trigger on a pre-existing dynamic? Don't tell me you believe in equilibrium dynamics for markets...
Is this your explanation of the boom-bust cycles back to the South Pacific bust, and the Tulip craze?
jcr: Or in short, you've heard of hysteresis, right? That such a dynamic is ubiquitous in nature (and physics), particularly in non-equilibrium systems, particularly when you have different scales with different positive and negative feedback loops? What could possibly convince you that in economic systems hysteresis would universally be due to a single cause, unlike the rest of the universe?
Patricia,
Well, you are probably correct that being born "somewhere beyond yonder" would disqualify you in the eyes of many a good ole boy. I still know quite a few folks back in WV who would be too polite to say I wasn't a real hillbilly since a real hillbilly would have never moved away. (I wonder if they are of Scottish descent...) But they do know in their hearts that there must be something not quite right with anyone who would move to Boulder Colorado. Something vaguely hippy-ish, and frightening.
But as for myself, I think that grandparents from Tenn. and Kentucky are close enough. So, by the powers vested in me by the state of intoxication, I now pronounce you an honorary hillbilly. You may kiss your cousin.
Bubbles, boom-bust cycles, and cycles between fiat money (more generally, credit money) and commodity money seem to be intrinsic to capitalism. As I've noted before, the first bubble is usually taken to be "tulipomania" in 1636-7. Broader boom-bust cycles certainly go back to the early 19th century, probably further. Perhaps the greatest weakness of the loonytarian whine "if only we could get rid of fiat money everything would be dandy", is that powerful forces within capitalism always find it advantageous to reinstate it - as the Nixon administration did in 1971.
You may kiss your cousin. - Grendels Dad
But while legal, it's probably ill-advised genetically to take things any further!
Dang, Nick. That was cousin Becky Sue's excuse too! ;)
Dahan #353
"[Scott is] becoming the "Kenny" of politics."
Is he going start talking about the near death experience of the US economy and he saw Ron Paul at the end of the tunnel?
@373, Feynmaniac wins the thread!
Looks like McCain is going to debate after all
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080926/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate
*SMOOCH*
Perry County, Kentucky, and of course Hazard. My grandpa was related to the real Hoggs, among others...remember that blue banjo player in Deliverance? My relatives are full of that disease.
On my mothers side the DNA has been done and we're mostly Dutch. We used to own land on Broadway, we have a deed copy that was signed by William of Orange. They ended up in Missouri. The others are from Cades Cove, TN, and Dolly Parton calls my daddy cuzzin.
I hope that answers your question, I didn't understand one of the words you used. (better go look it up, must be some high falootin' yankee thang) If I find out I'm related to PZ I'm liable to get uppity and take on airs.
You've foxed me frog. That word montagneous isn't in my Oxford Dictionary or my online dictionary. As a hillbilly I'll guess it's either highly explosive or intoxicating.
What could possibly convince you that in economic systems hysteresis would universally be due to a single cause, unlike the rest of the universe?
Frog,
Have you considered maybe arguing by referring to things I've actually said, rather than trying to put words in my mouth?
-jcr
Well done sir!
you really think this is the whole story
No, of course not. That's why I prefaced it with "in a nutshell".
If you want more of the story, you can read Human Action by Von Mises, and Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, by MacKay. The latter has an excellent chapter on the Tulip Mania.
-jcr
"""To be sure, the new powers the bailout will confer on these three men are both historic and unprecedented. Although the news media have been focusing on the outrageous and unaffordable $700 billion price tag, the real story is the violence that such an act will perpetrate against our whole system of government. The destructive impact this new legislation will have on the balance of powers established by the U.S. Constitution will be nothing less than devastating.
For one thing, the U.S. Constitution assigns the purse strings to Congress; all bills for raising revenue must originate in the House of Representatives, according to Article I, Section 7. In other words, no money shall be spent without congressional approval. Yet the seizure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which could cost the federal government trillions of dollars, was done with no congressional authorization whatsoever. So were the bailouts of Bear Stearns and AIG. The latest bill, while undergoing the formality of a bipartisan imprimatur in Congress, will give enormous powers to the Treasury Department and the Fed (in effect, the executive branch) that either Congress has no constitutional authority to delegate, or that cannot be legitimately exercised by any branch of government, including Congress.
One of the greatest strengths of the U.S. Constitution is that it grants no power to the executive branch to raise revenue. America's presidents, unlike Old World sovereigns, have never been able to levy taxes with the stroke of a pen or to accumulate assets in sovereign wealth funds. However, since the creation of the Federal Reserve, the executive branch has been able to rely on inflation (the creation of money not backed by any precious metal) to fund projects that Congress is reluctant to authorize."""
Perhaps the greatest weakness of the loonytarian whine "if only we could get rid of fiat money everything would be dandy", is that powerful forces within capitalism always find it advantageous to reinstate it - as the Nixon administration did in 1971.
First of all, I don't claim that inflation of fiat money is the only problem in our economy, only that it's far and away the largest one, and that most of the other problems are symptoms of it. It's pretty hard to spend a trillion bucks on an unconstitutional war if you really had to raise the money first by sqeezing more taxes out of the people or getting investors to come up money to spend on an intrinsically money-losing proposition.
Secondly, it does not follow that because Nixon (or any other president) fucked up, that we should simply give it up as a lost cause instead of trying to correct it.
-jcr
Good night sweethearts!
Which includes you, dumbass Scott from Lala Land.
Secondly, it does not follow that because Nixon (or any other president) fucked up, that we should simply give it up as a lost cause instead of trying to correct it. - jcr
Agreed. But you won't do that within capitalism.
@385. Actually on second thoughts, not agreed, in the sense that Nixon didn't "fuck up". His aim was to reinforce the power and wealth of the US elite, and in 1971, dismantling Bretton-Woods and thus tying the entire financial system to the dollar alone was a highly effective way to do that. Made it possible for the US to exact tribute from the rest of the world (i.e. importing goods without paying for them) for several decades, and to win the Cold War.