How Come Palin Still Hides From the Press

How come Joe the so-called Plumber has given more interviews and answered more questions from reporters than Sarah Palin?? Palin even refused to take questions during the SNL skit about her first press conference.

But admit it, the Alaskan rap song was absolutely hilarious.

Just imagine, if McCain wins, we'll get four years of SNL skits about Palin. Almost makes you want to vote Republi-con.

President McCain or Generational Change, Which Will It Be

Obama received more than $150 million in political donations in September, and on Sunday got Colin Powell's endorsement. Powell is a retired Army general who was a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President George Bush and President Bill Clinton. Powell said of McCain "As gifted as he is, he is essentially going to execute the Republican agenda, the orthodoxy of the Republican agenda, with a new face and a maverick approach to it, and he’d be quite good at it. But I think we need a generational change."

One Republican strategist described the endorsement by saying that "Powell is a glass of warm milk and a cookie for those who can’t sleep worrying about the lack of experience of a President Obama."

But McCain might still win. Read, Washington Post, Just in Case McCain Wins, A Survival Guide for Reporters Who Wrote Him Off.

More Articles About How We Got Into, and How We Might Fix, the Economic Mess

Read Time, Nobel Laureate: How to Get Out of the Financial Crisis. Joseph Stiglitz writes that the "troubles we now face were caused largely by the combination of deregulation and low interest rates . . . [ l] oose money and light regulation were a toxic mixture." He suggests that we recapitalize banks, stem the tide of foreclosures, pass a stimulus that works, restore confidence through regulatory reform, and create an effective multilateral agency.

Also read Washington Post, We Forgot Everything Keynes Taught Us.

And if you are interested in more details, see The Baseline Scenario, Financial Crisis for Beginners.

Or play an updated version of the Depression-era board game Monopoly, Econoply, with loose money, instant mortgages, vague and constantly-changing rules, and Bankers that can't go bankrupt.

A Dog's Purpose (Who Cares If It Is a True Story)

A Dog's Purpose (from a 6-year old).

Being a veterinarian, I had been called to examine a ten-year-old Irish Wolf hound named Belker. The dog's owners, Ron, his wife Lisa, and their little boy Shane, were all very attached to Belker, and they were hoping for a miracle.

I examined Belker and found he was dying of cancer. I told the family we couldn't do anything for Belker, and offered to perform the euthanasia procedure for the old dog in their home.

As we made arrangements, Ron and Lisa told me they thought it would be good for six-year-old Shane to observe the procedure. They felt as though Shane might learn something from the experience.

The next day, I felt the familiar catch in my throat as Belker's family surrounded him. Shane seemed so calm, petting the old dog for the last time, that I wondered if he understood what was going on. Within a few minutes, Belker slipped peacefully away.

The little boy seemed to accept Belker's transition without any difficulty or confusion. We sat together for a while after Belker's Death, wondering aloud about the sad fact that animal lives are shorter than human lives. Shane, who had been listening quietly, piped up, 'I know why.'

Startled, we all turned to him. What came out of his mouth next stunned me. I'd never heard a more comforting explanation.

He said, 'People are born so that they can learn how to live a good Life -- like loving everybody all the time and being nice, right?' The Six-year-old continued, 'Well, dogs already know how to do that, so they don't have to stay as long.'

Forrest Gump Explains the Economic Crisis

If asked about the economic crisis, Forrest Gump might say:

"Mortgage Backed Securities are like boxes of chocolates. Criminals on Wall Street stole a few chocolates from the boxes and replaced them with turds. Their criminal buddies at Standard & Poor rated these boxes AAA Investment Grade chocolates. These boxes were then sold all over the world to investors. Eventually somebody bites into a turd and discovers the crime. Suddenly nobody trusts American chocolates anymore worldwide.

Hank Paulson now wants the American taxpayers to buy up and hold all these boxes of turd-infested chocolates for $700 billion dollars until the market for turds returns to normal. Meanwhile, Hank's buddies, the Wall Street criminals who stole all the good chocolates are not being investigated, arrested, or indicted.

Mama always said: 'Sniff the chocolates first Forrest'."

Class Today at No Bull U on WEBY

Listen to the voice of wisdom and reason in a wilderness of partisan rhetoric -- No political insanity, no conservative hypocrisy, no liberal foolishness -- Just straight talk, straight at you, and that’s no bull!!

NoBullU will be on air today, Friday, from 4:05 to 6 p.m. at 1330 AM WEBY and on line.

Tune in, call in, but only if you can handle the truth!

Another Con Job By the Republi-cons

Turns out that Joe, the so-called plumber, is not a plumber, he doesn't have a plumber’s license. He also claims he's going to buy the plumbing business, but I'm not sure where he would get the money since he can't even pay his taxes.

Joe, the so-called plumber, is a registered Republi-con, an agent, a plant, an impostor put in the debate with a rehearsed story and role to promote the McCain campaign. Joe the so-called plumber is a fraud, and a perfect metaphor for the Republi-con Party.

See:

• New York Times, Real Deal on ‘Joe the Plumber’ Reveals New Slant
• Bloomberg, 'Joe the Plumber,' Obama Tax-Plan Critic, Owes Taxes
• AP, Is 'Joe the Plumber' a plumber? That's debatable
• Houston Chronicle, Questions about his past leave debate's 'Joe' a bit flushed
• Miami Herald, Joe the Plumber's tale has a few leaks

Worth Repeating

William Kristol wrote in the New York times that McCain should fire the campaign. Kristol states that McCain needs to reposition himself as a serious but cheerful candidate for times that need a serious but upbeat leader.

I agree. As noted below, one option for McCain is to focus on the "racial resistance among white voters" but that sounds too much like playing the race card. If McCain does that he would probably lose the election and his honor. So how can he fire the campaign and win.

He should give a speech that acknowledges that some have suggested that he focus on the "racial resistance among white voters." He could then categorically renounce the suggestion and instead say that henceforth he will campaign as serious but cheerful candidate. Further, because the country is so deeply partisanly divided, McCain should announce that if elected that he would ask Palin to step aside so that he (McCain) could nominate Obama as VP.

Another brilliant NBB solution, don't you think.

P.S. Yes, I realize that he might alienate some rabid Republi-cons, but I think McCain would rather lose with honor than win by focusing on the "racial resistance among white voters," which in my opinion would be dishonorable. If you think there is another way McCain can win, let's hear it.

UPDATE: An alternative strategy would be to focus solely on the 'split government is better government' argument. That is, government works better when one party doesn't control both the executive and legislative branches. In any case, McCain needs to do something.

Others are making suggestions. See Washington Post, What Could Change the Election? The Post asked John Podesta, Newt Gingrich, Mary Beth Cahill, Peter J. Wallison and Stuart E. Eizenstat what would be an election game-changer.

Just in Time for Halloween

Just in time for Halloween, another scary movie, "W.", a biopic about George W. (The Worst) Bush. Read the review from Bloomberg, Stone's Biopic Portrays George Bush as Party Boy, True Believer. The best quote from the article:

"This is a story that Preston Sturges could only invent -- a guy who was a complete failure at 40 becomes president at 54, and look what happens ... the world changes forever."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

It Would Be an Appropriate End to 'The Worst' Presidency

The Boston Globe calls for Bush and Cheney to resign in November:

"The next president will be elected on Nov. 4, but will not take office until Jan. 20. Normally, this lag time is not an issue. But with the financial system in meltdown, the 'real' economy threatening to follow, and a feckless, lame-duck administration unable to lead, this yawning interval is a problem. If history is any guide, a very big problem. . . .

But there is a way out - if our political leaders are smart, courageous, and public-spirited enough to take it.

Assume that Barack Obama wins the election, as polls show is increasingly likely. The following day, Vice President Cheney should be prevailed upon to resign. Using his powers to designate a successor under the 25th Amendment, President Bush should then appoint, and Congress should confirm, Obama as vice president (just as Richard Nixon appointed Gerald Ford vice president in 1973 when Spiro Agnew resigned). Bush himself should then resign, elevating Obama to the presidency - as Ford became president when Nixon resigned. Obama should then appoint Joe Biden as vice president."

It would be an appropriate end to The Worst presidency, don't you think.

McCain Says, ACORN "Makes America Special"

Talk about hypocrisy, read The Atlantic, Sen. McCain Stood With ACORN Rally In 2006. There is a video, so you can even see McCain cavort with ACORN.

Another Lesson for History

More on the economic mess. Read Washington Post, What Went Wrong, "the story of how Washington didn't catch up to Wall Street."

"A decade ago, long before the financial calamity now sweeping the world, the federal government's economic brain trust heard a clarion warning and declared in unison: You're wrong.

The meeting of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets on an April day in 1998 brought together Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin and Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Arthur Levitt Jr. -- all Wall Street legends, all opponents to varying degrees of tighter regulation of the financial system that had earned them wealth and power.

Their adversary, although also a member of the Working Group, did not belong to their club. Brooksley E. Born, the 57-year-old head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, had earned a reputation as a steely, formidable litigator at a high-powered Washington law firm. She had grown used to being the only woman in a room full of men. She didn't like to be pushed around.

Now, in the Treasury Department's stately, wood-paneled conference room, she was being pushed hard.

Greenspan, Rubin and Levitt had reacted with alarm at Born's persistent interest in a fast-growing corner of the financial markets known as derivatives, so called because they derive their value from something else, such as bonds or currency rates. Setting the jargon aside, derivatives are both a cushion and a gamble -- deals that investment companies and banks arrange to manage the risk of their holdings, while trying to turn a profit at the same time.

Unlike the commodity futures regulated by Born's agency, many newer derivatives weren't traded on an exchange, constituting what some traders call the "dark markets." There were now millions of such private contracts, involving many of Wall Street's top firms. But there was no clearinghouse holding collateral to settle a deal gone bad, no transparent records of who was trading what.

Born wanted to shine a light into the dark. She had offered no specific oversight plan, but after months of making noise about the dangers that this enormous market posed to the financial system, she now wanted to open a formal discussion about whether to regulate them -- and if so, how.

Greenspan, Rubin and Levitt were determined to derail her effort. Privately, Rubin had expressed concern about derivatives' unruly growth. But he agreed with Greenspan and Levitt that these newer contracts, often called "swaps," weren't exactly futures. Born's agency did not have legal authority to regulate swaps, the three men believed, and her call for a discussion had real-world consequences: It would cast doubt over the legality of trillions of dollars in existing contracts and create uncertainty over how to operate in the market.

At the April meeting, the trio's message was clear: Back off, Born.

. .

[Levitt now says] 'I guess if I had to do it over again, I certainly would have pushed for some way to give greater transparency to products which turned out to be injurious to our markets.'"

Gee, thanks.

Palin is Now a Traitor

First, Palin praises a terrorist and now she sells out her country to pseudo-communist regime. A high-level delegation from the Russian energy company Gazprom met in Anchorage with state officials to talk about investing in Alaskan energy projects. See New York Times, Russian Gas Executives Visit Palin’s Turf.

Outrageous. Palin is a traitor to her country.

Why Republi-cons Cry

Republi-cons cry because they have lost their false idol, unregulated capitalism, and with it most of their money. See Washington Post, Gods That Failed.

Time for a Reality Check

Thanks to Bush's soaring budget deficits, neither McCain or Obama will be able to do half what they now propose or promise. See, Washington Post, When Life Hands You Deficits . . .

Time to implement GRAC, the Government Reform and Realignment Committee, to reform government. Wipe the slate clean of all government departments and agencies and add back only essential departments and agencies (the key work here is essential), honestly estimate the cost and reform the tax code to fund the entire cost of government, then implement over a ten year period. Presto, government reform.

Of course, someone with a little back bone will have to tell the public that we don't live in a fake world with false wealth, and you can't have your house and spend it too.

Blowback

Blowback is a term used to describe the unintended consequences of an operation, usually in the context of covert espionage ops. But I think it appropriate here. I tried to warn Republi-cons that McCain mudpies would dirty him more than Obama. Just as I predicted, the personal attacks on Obama appear to have backfired.

The latest New York Times/CBS News poll found that "if the election were held today, 53 percent of those determined to be probable voters said that they would vote for Mr. Obama and 39 percent said they would vote for Mr. McCain. . . [and] roughly seven in 10 voters said that Mr. Obama had the right kind of temperament and personality to be president; just over half said the same of Mr. McCain."

Don't like the New York Times/CBS News poll, the New York Times has an interactive graph that allows you to select from a number of state and national polls that asked people which candidate they would vote for in the presidential race, even FOX (AKA the Republi-con spin machine).

Bottom line, it ain't lookin good for McCain.

Again, review my suggestion for McCain.

Who is Better With Your Money

Republi-cons hurt the bottom line. See New York Times, Bulls, Bears, Donkeys and Elephants, which states:

"Since 1929, Republicans and Democrats have each controlled the presidency for nearly 40 years. So which party has been better for American pocketbooks and capitalism as a whole? Well, here’s an experiment: imagine that during these years you had to invest exclusively under either Democratic or Republican administrations. How would you have fared?

As of Friday, a $10,000 investment in the S.& P. stock market index* would have grown to $11,733 if invested under Republican presidents only, although that would be $51,211 if we exclude Herbert Hoover’s presidency during the Great Depression. Invested under Democratic presidents only, $10,000 would have grown to $300,671 at a compound rate of 8.9 percent over nearly 40 years."

The article includes a nice graph the Obama campaign should run in an ad.

Listen to the Experts

Paul Krugman won the Nobel Prize for Economics this week. He is also a Princeton economist and a New York Times columnist. (I'm curious, does anyone know how many Nobel Prize winners work for FOX?)

You might want to read his column from September 22, "Cash for Trash," in which Krugman wrote that Paulson was demanding extraordinary power for himself to deploy taxpayers’ money on behalf of a plan that, "as far as I can see, doesn’t make sense." Instead, he called for the government to provide capital to financial firms and get a share in ownership in return.

"Among the first to push the idea of injecting money into banks in exchange for an equity stake was Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), who proposed the idea at a Sept. 18 night meeting on Capitol Hill that included legislators as well as Paulson and Bernanke."

How much time was lost before Bush adopted the idea? Of course, Paulson had to help his former firm Goldman Sacks first.

Bush Will Be Missed

Less than 100 days until a new president is inaugurated. And already the honors roll in.

See Jim Morin on fear itself, Pat Bagley on how Bush happens, J.D. Crowe on Bush's pep talks, Steve Sack on Bush's retirement plan, David Horsey on Team Bush, Dwane Powell on Bushland, and Mike Keefe on going back to the Rovian barrel.

Won't you miss Bush?

Suggestion for McCain

William Kristol wrote in the New York times that McCain should fire the campaign. Kristol states that McCain needs to reposition himself as a serious but cheerful candidate for times that need a serious but upbeat leader.

I agree. As noted below, one option for McCain is to focus on the "racial resistance among white voters" but that sounds too much like playing the race card. If McCain does that he would probably lose the election and his honor. So how can he fire the campaign and win.

He should give a speech that acknowledges that some have suggested that he focus on the "racial resistance among white voters." He could then categorically renounce the suggestion and instead say that henceforth he will campaign as serious but cheerful candidate. Further, because the country is so deeply partisanly divided, McCain should announce that if elected that he would ask Palin to step aside so that he (McCain) could nominate Obama as VP.

Another brilliant NBB solution, don't you think.

P.S. Yes, I realize that he might alienate some rabid Republi-cons, but I think McCain would rather lose with honor than win by focusing on the "racial resistance among white voters," which in my opinion would be dishonorable. If you think there is another way McCain can win, let's hear it.

UPDATE: An alternative strategy would be to focus solely on the 'split government is better government' argument. That is, government works better when one party doesn't control both the executive and legislative branches. In any case, McCain needs to do something.

Others are making suggestions. See Washington Post, What Could Change the Election? The Post asked John Podesta, Newt Gingrich, Mary Beth Cahill, Peter J. Wallison and Stuart E. Eizenstat what would be an election game-changer.