Re: The Auto Bailout

Am I the only one who sees something inherently wrong with attacking the pensions of people who are already retired? It's not like their in a position to address any sudden drops in income.

What Paul said at 23

Whenever I think about Rev. Wright, I remember that half of the stuff he says would be utterly uncontroversial except for a prevalent and totally unhealthy belief that the USA has some kind of inside track to Godliness. The Gospels themselves make clear that loyalty to God is an entirely separate matter from loyalty to any earthly political entities. Confusion on this point leads directly to the notion that the USA is incapable of immoral actions. The same people who end up attacking Wright's patriotism are the very one's who write off Abu Ghraib as no big deal

I thought this was worth preseving

From Time:
The right answer here is not for the executive branch to have zero latitude in the highest stakes interrogations," Wittes said. "And you don't have to be Dick Cheney to believe that." In the past, members of the intelligence community have also argued for keeping some approved methods of interrogation classified, so as not to tip off enemies to what they might possibly face in the future.

From Me:

Again the biggest problem I have with this whole discussion is the concept of latitude. As soon as there's latitude then there's no longer a line preventing torture. I'm sympathetic to the notion that techniques might need to be classified, but as soon as you suggest that agents in the field should be free to apply their own judgment then all bets are off. Genuine, unambiguous torture will be soon to follow. Has everyone forgotten how much fun the soldiers at Abu Ghraib appeared to be having?

I find this remarkable

Obama's Favorability at 70%

So as the GOP licks its wounds and tries to piece together what went wrong it's instructive to realize that the hard-core who are unwilling to give Obama the benefit of the doubt only represent 25% of Americans. Next time to you think running a campaign based on hate, fear and lies is a good idea, you might want to think again!

Such a nice sentiment

That I had to link:

http://crooksandliars.com/node/23938

Because something I witnessed truly moved me –I watched McCain’s concession speech, and was saddened by the booing when he congratulated Obama, called him a good man, and looked forward to supporting him as our President. He more than once raised his hands in the attempt to rebuff those who jeered, but the months of maligning his opponent as a scary, un-American, possibly even terrorist bogeyman are not something that will be so easily switched off. That Frankenstein monster McCain’s campaign created has a way to go before it dons a tuxedo and top hat and puts on the Ritz. When I then watched Obama’s victory speech, I was moved by his praise for McCain, calling for unity, to be seen as a president for all the people, both on the right and the left… and by the crowd cheering in response to those words, many in tears of joy and gratitude. There was no sense of conquest over an enemy, no feeling of imminent retribution, no hatred, no vengeance. No booing.

The campaign of fear lost to the campaign of hope.

Re: McCains concession

McCains' experience on the lawn there was exactly a case of reaping what he sowed. He was exceedingly gracious and except for the fact that in my view he overemphasized the significance of Obama's race, he spoke very well with a message that his supporters needed to hear. Unfortunately the message he had was utterly foreign to his supporters and it showed loudly and clearly in the crowd's reaction.

I'm still convinced that if he had run half as honorable a campaign as he said he intended to and that his fans (Michael...) insisted against all evidence that he was doing, he could have won. Every drop in the polls that he experienced was directly related to some tactical move designed to appeal to the Hate-R-Us right at the expense of the "please don't raise my taxes" Center.

Even more important than my satisfaction of knowing that Barack Obama will be the next President, is my satisfaction of knowing that campaigning on the assupmtion that only 30% of Americans are real Americans and that patriotism is reserved for a small subset of our nation's citizens is an exercise in self destruction

A commenter at Swampland

Said this about a pogniant Joe Klein post re: Obama's Grandmother

What a way to distract from the real issues at hand.

This is my response:

Interestingly enough, while there are many specific issues that need to be debated and that people can find themselves on several sides of, this campaign has unfortunately become a referendum on whether hatred and fear will continue to sell.
.
It actually touches on all the other important issues, because when we deal with terrorism and threats abroad, it will be important that we deal rationally and with the knowlege that we are dealing with fellow human beings and not demons, and as we tackle a sinking economy, it will be important that we realize that we are all in it together and that by sharing the burden and working together we can lift ourselves out of the difficulty, but if we insist that it's every man for himself, we're doomed to do more harm to everyone.

I have faith that most Americans realize this and that this will become evident as the day wears on.

Someone explain

Why this would end up in moderation!

I disagree strongly on one point. While Obama might be somewhat satisfied with the National Security team that's currently in place, he is certainly going to have to make an assertive move on arrival if for no other reason than to remove all doubt that HE'S in charge. The last thing we're going to need is for any second guessing along the chain of command, especially if some of his strategic decisions happen to be unpopular with the troops themselves

In response to

This

Powell's finest moment was when he told Tom Brokaw that what really bothered him about the sinister rumors labeling Obama a secert Muslim wasn't that they were a lie; it was the suggestion that there was something un-American about being a Muslim.

There's a very good reason the Founders thought it necessary to include Freedom of Worship in the Bill of Rights. They knew first hand that religious conflict was among the most emotionally engaging variety and that a properly formed Government has no business inserting itself into it.

Almost everything in the Bill of Rights is there because the things it prohibits are exceedingly tempting. If coercive interrogation weren't a real temptation then there would be no need for a rule against self-incrimination. If intrusive searches weren't a real temptation, then there would be no need to spell out warrant requirements. And if there weren't a real temptation to impose a particular faith on people against their will, then there would have been no necessity to explicitly prohibit it.

It is therefore unsurprising that the battle to preserve our rights is ongoing. In that sense they are unnatural and require positive effort to keep them intact.

Re: EO Wilson

The subject of an EO Wilson article came up at Washington Monthly;

Here's what I had to say on the subject:

if we can hold both that morality is a human contrivance and that biology is not relevant to answering moral questions

I feel compeled to point out that biology is an inescapable part of moral reasoning. After all, how can we possibly speak of 'suffering' or 'pleasure' or otherwise describe the results of our choices except upon the substrate of bodies and minds that feel pain and hunger or triumph. We can certainly think of such things at a hiogher level of absraction but without biology, we would be nothing more than rocks.

Later:

Wilson, Dawkins and Dennett among others all struggle against the question, "Why in spite of all my efforts, do people insist on continuing to be religious?" They then go on to argue (convincingly in my view) that religious feeling is actually a selected adaptation that has among its effects, the potential to motivate people into fatal acts in defense of their tribe (and hence their fellow gene-carriers) What they fail to consider is that the resolute absence of religious feeling is an effect of precisely the same force.

Certainly a congregation of athiest is capable of creating the same sense of belonging and community that churchgoers enjoy and at its fringes is capable of fomenting actual hatred against those who insist on viewing the Universe differently.

I might say the above in the shorter form. "Even atheists are capable of religious intolerance."

Just a quick note

To say that I agree with this wholeheartedly.

Paying The Piper

The biggest problem with the widening gap between the wealthy and the middle class is that the reduced spending power of the middle class eventually results in reduced consumer spending that affects everyone.

Call it the Trickle-up theory.

Posted on a Joe Klein Thread:

Swampland

Both your article and Michael Scherer's post-debate post seem to address the same point. Neither candidtae is willing to give the public any bad news about the limits of what the Government can do to help. This is the bad news.

The good news is that are able to reopen all the philosophical underpinnings that led in a straight line from Johnson to Reagan and allowed Americans to believe that corporations were somehow inherently superior to government agencies.

The basic assumption that has now been become frozen into the public consciousness is that because businesses are motivated by profit, that they are better than government at operating efficiently and NOT wasting money. This is true, as far as it goes, but the sad fact is that if the object of the game is to provide for the minimum basic needs of all Americans, the cheapest way is unquestionably unacceptable. It's taken almost 20 years for this realization to sink in.

The problem as I see it now however, is because these arguments are have all been internalized and simplified into slogans, we're no longer able to discuss them reasonably. All someone has to do is say "redistribution" or "socialist" and an otherwise open mind curls up into a tight little ball of Reaganomic true-belief.

I happen to be well aware of the limits of Government's ability to solve problems. I have sympathies toward Republican economic thinking. I'm a huge fan of balanced budgets and limited borrowing. But we have to be willing to take a systematic look at ALL our institutions and ask themselves "Are these designed in such away that blind self-interest nevertheless creates desirable results?"

The beauty of our Constitutional system is that it turns the self-interest of the Branches of government against each other in order to limit the excessive concentration of power. If only we were half as clever in designing our economic system.

A recent Palin quote:

"We see America as a force for good in this world. We see America as a force for exceptionalism..."

It's exceedingly interesting that A: she doesn't seem to have a clue about what "exceptionalism" means in that context and B: she seems to be promoting precisely the moral blindness that actually IS referred to by the word 'exceptionalism'

Whenever being "a force for good" is assumed by your identity rather than strived for by your ideals, then you are well on your way toward ceasing to be a force for good. This is the number one failure of the current Republican playbook. As soon as you are unable to evaluate your own actions or stated another way, as soon as the suggestion that your own actions might be wrong becomes taboo, then evil follows as assuredly as night follows day.

Even if they weren't taking the Obama quote out of context, the refusal to consider that we ourselves may doing harm is not only harmful, it's morally bankrupt.

More on Mediocracy

Digby

And they deserved it. They are the people, after all, who wrote garbage like that above for years and nursed the belief in the Republican base that the only thing required for world leadership is being as mediocre as possible. What did they expect?

Pulled Directly from AmericaBlog

AmericaBlog

Obama has noted this before, as has Jon Stewart - the fact that Republican politicians admire stupidity and ignorance. They wear their lack of education, their incompetence, their failure as a badge of honor. And it's certainly an American tradition, having disdain for intellectuals. But when push comes to shove, do you really want bubba, or bubba with lipstick, in charge of your 401k and your life savings? At some point America has got to get over its love affair with stupid. Or the mistakes of the last eight years, when we elected stupid to an art form, will continue to repeat themselves.

This is a theme that's been close to my heart ever since March. If you google the word 'elite' I'm sure you will find page after page extolling the virtues of mediocrity.

I find the whole thing - dare I say it - stupid!

Quoting from a Time article:

Time

Some people want to say there's too little regulation. It's not that. It's just outdated, outmoded, ineffective. The architecture was put in place in a different era, and it hasn't kept pace with the evolving financial markets."

Consider that when we refer to "evolving financial markets" we're refering to moves made and instruments created that are specifically designed to skirt regulation.

One of the grossest oversimplifications that muddies our debate is to think of 'regulation' as a single activity and declare it either good or bad. Regulation can be good or bad and finacial deals can either be fair or larcenous. There is no single slogan or approach that magically makes everything fair and prosperous. And there's no such thing as a totally 'free' market.

File under: The Stupid! It Burns!

It is now percolating up to the MSM that while Palin was mayor, she allowed her town to bill rape victims for their forsenic tests.

Amanda Carpenter of course rises to the occasion to note that Palin never supported such a thing.

AmandaCarpenter

This of course utterly fails to explain, if she didn't support it, why she allowed the practice to continue until it was made illegal by the State.

The most intriguing part is the TownHall comment thread. A series of people all pipe in to explain how her column does nothing to vindicate Palin while every fifth one or so chimes in to decry the HORRIBLE LIBERALS for trying to destroy the beloved candidtae.

Is McCain against teaching little kids to beware of sexual predators?

Yes.

This has been another edition....etc.

So much for deficit reduction

http://money.cnn.com/

I don't know a lot about economics but I have a great deal of faith in the laws of thermodynamics.

If, at any time it appears that you are getting something for nothing, not only will it end up being payed for at the end but with the additional cost involved in maintaining the illusion.

The housing bubble is only the most glaring example, but certainly the federal deficit is another fine demonstration.

Funny:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/213806.php

Apparently a photo of a North Hollywood Jr. High made its way into McCain's presentation on account of it's being named "Walter Reed"

Note to Google users. Avoid the "I feel Lucky" button when preparing for one of the most important nights of your life!