November 1 - New posts at Heidi Li's Potpourri

A variety of new posts are available at the new home of Heidi Li's Potpourri.

A couple, but there are others:

Conscientious objection and conscientious abstention
The Equal Rights Amendment and the First Hundred Days

Goodbye to TrueU

Sadly, TrueU--an apologetics-oriented web page, geared toward college students--is going out of business. The entire page will be down by the end of the year. I have about ten articles here and there are more by J.P. Moreland and other notable Christian thinkers. I encourage you to visit this site and download as much material as you can before it is no longer available.

The end of TrueU is part of Focus on the Family's huge layoffs of recent weeks. It is very sad indeed.

Obama 3, Labor 0: Bob Reich Shows True Colors

When Barack Obama held his first press conference after the election he brought with him the heavy hitters: almost to a man and woman they were leading establishment figures with little connection to or interest in the plight of the American labor movement.?

Some, like Bob Rubin, Larry Summers and Paul Volcker, have done terrible damage to workers with their aggressive defense of Wall Street over the years.?

But a few friends of labor in the commentariat noticed at the very edge of the crowd a dim memory of the Clinton era, former Labor Secretary turned Berkeley professor Robert Reich. From that they drew the hope that, indeed, labor would have a seat at the table in the new administration.?

A faint, and feint, hope that has turned out to be. Reich not only had a poor track record of defending workers interests during the Clinton era (starting out as a key economic honcho only to be elbowed aside by ex-Goldman Sachs CEO Bob Rubin) but now he has turned on the cornered members of the United Autoworkers arguing they have to give up even more in order to justify federal support.

Funny, when the Feds bailed out Wall Street they did nothing about CEO salaries but autoworkers struggling to get by have to cut their wages in order to keep their jobs? ?

In fact, just a few months ago the UAW did just that - engineering huge wage cuts in their faux militant collective bargaining effort on behalf of UAW members at the Big Three. At the time the union and management crowed that they were now competitve with the Asian and European transplants.

But Reich wants more before he is willing as an Obama insider to back government aid for the troubled industry.

With friends like Reich in the new Administration.....

UAW Faces Prospect Of More Concessions - WSJ.com

The right to offend

A Carolyn Davison from Carmarthen takes issue with my views on freedom of speech in today's Western Mail. She is entitled to her opinion.

She asks what example I am setting to 'our youth' by inviting Patrick Jones into the National Assembly:

Surely promoting responsibility and a caring attitude towards others should be a priority rather than putting others down to make oneself feel better! If this man is a Christian, as he claims he is, then he should be putting others’ thoughts, feelings and beliefs before himself.

Christian Voice did not consider the feelings of others when they sought to prevent a poetry reading in Cardiff Waterstones.

I am not doing this for myself nor do I really like or approve of the poems. I am doing it because I believe that in a democratic society people should not be bullied into silence. That is an important value to promote to young people. It is taking responsibility for the freedoms that we all take for granted.

Ms. Davison also asks who is covering the poet's expenses, me or the taxpayers? What expenses? There is no cost to staging this event and any expense incurred by Patrick Jones will be met by himself.

Obama and a Concert of Powers Approach?

The president-elect has selected Mona Sutphen to be his deputy chief of staff. Last year, she co-authored a book with her Clinton administration colleague Nina Hachigian (The Next American Century)on future directions for U.S. foreign policy, and expounded on a possible concert of powers approach to solving a number of pressing foreign policy issues.

Is this a direction he might move in? In a related essay for Culture 11, I noted that "depending on how he chooses to situate his Afghan policy, it could also serve as the basis for restoring the post-9/11 coalition of the major powers. Instability from Iraq is largely contained, and the major “proxy players” in Iraq — Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran — are skilled at limiting the fallout to the rest of the region. In contrast, there is no real prophylactic barrier that insulates Afghanistan from the larger world. A resurgent Taliban — even one that ends up in control only in southern Afghanistan — would not be in any of the great power’s interests.

"The return of the Taliban feeds the extremist current in Pakistani politics, which in turn causes the government in Islamabad to seek to export jihadis, principally into Kashmir and other parts of India. China and Russia do not want a return to the 1990s when terrorism spilled over into Central Asia and threatened their own stability (in Xinjiang and Chechnya, respectively). Europe doesn’t want a safe haven for extremists nor a resurgence of the heroin trade. There is a strong community of interest among the major powers for success in Afghanistan.

"If this is tied to two other issues which Obama has identified as first-order priorities for U.S. foreign policy — nuclear non-proliferation and climate change — one can see the emergence of a 21st century “concert of powers” approach where America “convenes the board” with representatives from Europe, India, China, Russia, and Brazil to hammer out workable solutions — in keeping with the original FDR vision for what the Security Council of the United Nations was intended to do (or, in keeping with Nixon’s “regional policemen” strategy)."

President Elect Obama is in Need of a History and Math Lesson

President Elect Obama unveiled most of his economic team today as well as the blue print for his economic recovery package.

President-elect Barack Obama unveiled key elements of his blueprint for turning around the economy -- and the team tasked with making it work -- including a massive stimulus package and tax cuts for a "vast majority" of Americans paid for by the nation's "wealthiest."

Against a backdrop of increasing calls for him to establish a viable economic rescue plan well before he takes office on Jan. 20, Obama said reforms in Washington will be needed to create a "sustainable economy," including larger contributions from taxpayers earning more than $250,000 per year.

"We've got to restore some balance to our tax code and the Bush tax cuts were disproportionately targeted to the very wealthiest Americans -- those who were making more than a quarter million dollars a year can afford to pay a little more," the president-elect said.

"And it is important if we're going to help pay for some of these expenditures that are absolutely necessary to get our economy back on track that those who are in a position to pay a little more do so. Whether that's done through repeal or whether that's done because the Bush tax cuts are not renewed is something that my economic team will be providing me a recommendation on," he said.

Saying his priority is to create 2.5 million jobs and sustain economic growth over the long term are his priorities, Obama on Monday named Timothy Geithner as his choice for Treasury secretary and Lawrence Summers as head of the National Economic Council.

This economic recovery proposal has both a math problem and a history problem. The proposal will cost somewhere between $500 billion and $700 billion. Yet, President Elect Obama says he will pay for it by raising taxes on the wealthiest 5%. This is an absurd distortion of basic math. Raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans will likely net no more than $75 billion in extra receipts and that assumes that most of this won't be eaten away as a result of the weakened economy. That leaves somewhere between $400 and $600 billion unaccounted for. In other words, this is NOT paid for. Rather, we are going to needlessly raise tax on the job creators in order to slightly reduce the massive addition to our budget deficit that his proposal will create.

Obama's second problem is even more troubling. His proposal total dismisses all economic lessons of history. FDR also raised taxes while increasing government spending exponentially during the Depression, and this policy caused our economy to still be in a Depression when he campaigned for President in 1940. That's because the stimulus of increased government spending was combined with the contraction of taking money away from those that create jobs in the private sector.

President Elect Obama continues to cling to the very destructive and faulty notion that if someone can afford higher taxes that this means there are no consequences with making them pay higher taxes.

Just because the wealthy will still be wealthy even while they pay more taxes, doesn't mean this extra tax burden won't contract the economy. The money that Obama is taking from these folks could be used to buy a second home, an investment property, a building, a business, a mutual fund, a stock, or even just simply be deposited into their bank. We no longer live in a world where money is kept in a mattress, and that means any extra tax is money taken out of the economy. The disaster of such a policy in the Great Depression is all the history lesson we need to see where such a policy will take us.

It appears that President Elect Obama is determined to impose income redistribution on our economy in the middle of a serious recession. This sort of social engineering is problematic enough during relatively good times. It is a total and unmitigated disaster during the current economic period.

Howard Kurtz Pens a Love Poem to Obama

Kurtz writes “A Giddy Sense of Boosterism” which has been interpreted by many as critical of the MSM’s over-the-top celebration of their Chosen One’s election. But its recitation of the adoration that the media has for all-things-Obama is really a victory lap, with a mild warning that while Obama walks on water, he may not do it well … in the future. A warning that they may want to tone it down before we get Obama’s “Bay of Pigs.”

But not to worry, Howie, the Bay of Pigs did nothing to stop the creation of the Camelot legend. The “Legend of Obama” has taken on a life of its own; a golem no longer controlled by its master.

What gives it away? Here’s a sentence that a neutral observer would NOT write:

The media would be remiss if they didn't reflect the sense of unadulterated joy that greeted Obama's election, both here and around the world, and the pride even among those who opposed him.

Really? “unadulterated joy … and pride … even among those who opposed him?” Howie must be referring to the distant cousin of the wife of a friend in the newsroom, who knew of a McCain supporter who’s so glad that … what?

Meanwhile in another part of the galaxy, a place that “unadulterated joy” has never visited we’re sort of worried if the slimmer, “cleaner” version of Kwame Kilpatrick will do for the entire country what the Democrats did for Detroit.

Just sayin’ bro.

A Revelation from 1976: Lost

While attempting to clean up my office and make more room for books and writing, I found some notes I took on a plane trip from Anchorage, Alaska, back to Greeley, Colorado, where I attended my first year of college at University of Northern Colorado. It was in early January 4,1976, and about six months before I became a Christian. I had just turned nineteen. I wrote, "I've just gotten that bizarre spontaneously-occurring feeling of thinking in circles...It may stem from not having a firm base to look out and around from." The prose is less than stellar, but it reveals my sense of intellectual need. At that time, I was on a fast in order to try to find something beyond myself. I would later begin to study Eastern religions and philosophy more seriously.

Since becoming a Christian, I have labored to find "a firm base" for my worldview and my living in the world. Nearly my entire adult life has been committed to that end. I am convinced that Christianity is both the best way of life and a true and compelling worldview. May Christians reach those like me, who in 1976, are starting to realize that they are lost.

MSM: We're not biased, but the perception of bias is a problem.

Newspapers are losing readers, some have gone out of business, the NY Times is essentially bankrupt, and the solons at the media are beginning to notice that one of their problems is that at least half the country hates them. They are the only major industry that actually insults its customers and asks them to pay for the pleasure.

Like the sclerotic leaders of the Soviet Union, some are beginning to pay heed, but they are still in denial.

From Extreme Mortman:
Tom Rosenstiel –

“a former political reporter who directs the Project for Excellence in Journalism:”

“The perception of liberal bias is a problem by itself for the news media. It’s not okay to dismiss it. Conservatives who think the press is deliberately trying to help Democrats are wrong. But conservatives are right that journalism has too many liberals and not enough conservatives. It’s inconceivable that that is irrelevant.”

How to respond to so much denial packed into so little space? It’s merely the “perception of bias” that’s the problem? You mean lots of people are deluding themselves about bias in the MSM? The word perception is a code word that is meant to imply that reality and perception are two different things. So Rosenstiel is still in denial about bias.

Then there is the statement that “Conservatives who think the press is deliberately trying to help Democrats are wrong.” How stupid does Rosenstiel think his audience is? If the press is composed of 80+% percent Liberal Democrat, does Rosenstiel think that the press is “accidentally” trying to help Democrats rather than “deliberately”?

No reporter, no human being, is going to make a case for a proposition which he believes to be wrong. He is going to help people who he believes are doing the right thing and hinder people who he thinks are doing the wrong thing. It so happens that the members of the press believe the Democrats are on the right road and the Republicans are wrong. So of course the press is going to help the Democrats.

If he really believed that the press is not deliberately trying to help Democrats, why add that journalism has too many liberals and not enough conservatives? Why is the mix NOT irrelevant if the people in the press are not trying to help Democrats? The logical inconsistency of Rosenstiel’s argument is mind-blowing.

And Deborah Howell is nattering on again about examples of Liberal bias in the Washington Post and ends with this howler:

After Obama is inaugurated, he will be the authority the news media challenge. It happens in every administration.

Haaaah Haaaah! Oh Deborah, you kidder you. You kill me.

Some comments from the folks at FreeRepublic:

“We are not sinking. It is the perception of water that is the problem.” - Last Words of the Captain of the Titanic

Like every failing enterprise they blame their problems on their customers.

Right. It's not you, it's the tens of millions who perceive you incorrectly.

Your Honor, How can my client get a fair trial with all this evidence against him?

Ted Bundy was not a serial killer, but all those women he killed sure created the impression he was.

The Politics and Policy of Bailouts and Corporate Tax Cuts

The other day, when speaking to a liberal colleague, I laid out plan for an economic stimulus and recovery. The plan is mostly a set of tax cuts including tax cuts to corporations. My colleague mostly liked the plan except the part where taxes were cut for corporations. Initially, he characterized these tax cuts as a bailout. Of course, I protested furiously. A corporate tax cut is in no way a bailout. Then, he said he was against giving fat cat corporations money. Again, I protested furiously. I wasn't proposing to give anything to anyone. A corporate tax cut would allow corporations to keep more of what they have already earned. My colleague next protested that corporations couldn't be trusted to do what's right with such a tax cut.

This conversation crystallized in my mind the dichotomy between the politics and policies of corporate tax cuts and corporate bailouts. Throughout the campaign, Barack Obama demonized corporate tax cuts proposed by John McCain as tax cuts to fat cat corporations like Exxon. Yet, as soon as the bailout was proposed, Barack Obama was quick to embrace it. As such, Barack Obama is against allowing fat cat corporations to keep more of what they earn while he is perfectly comfortable giving fat cat corporations someone else's money. Worse than this, these perverse dual policies worked to perfection as part of a successful campaign.

How does such a thing occur, and more than that, what are the policy consequences? Bailing out struggling corporations has a populist political angle. Eric Cantor lays out the political angle of supporting the bailout when he referred to the banks as a sort of utility that funds the day to day operations of businesses, consumers, and most everyday activity through their lending. A bailout is necessary because the commoner will soon feel the effects of a lack of a bailout when they get a car loan, student loan, or mortgage. A similar political angle is in play with a bailout for automakers. Those that support such a bailout bemoan the fact that autos are a fabric of our society and that they provide jobs in one way or another to one in ten Americans.

A corporate tax cut, on the other hand, rewards those corporations that are already successful and in need of no help. It's almost impossible to create a populist angle to a corporate tax cut. The benefits of a corporate tax cut are largely invisible. They are almost always created on a macro scale. In order to believe a corporate tax cut would be worthwhile, one needs to believe that corporations would use the extra money in a good and beneficial manner. That would require viewing corporations in a positive manner. Such a perspective gets politicians absolutely no favors and even fewer votes.

Yet, the policy behind a corporate tax cut is on much firmer ground than the policy behind a corporate bailout. First, you would be rewarding success not failure. Second, a corporate bailout requires oversight and strict accounting of the money. A corporate tax cut requires none of this because corporations would simply keep more of their money. In this environment, a corporate tax cut is exactly the right medicine. By giving successful corporations more of their own money, they will have more money to hire all those folks that will lose jobs from failed corporations. Rather than trying to prop up failed corporations in a desperate attempt to maintain jobs in a losing endeavor, you reward successful corporations so they have more capital to hire as many of these folks as possible.

Of course, in our current environment such a plan is likely impossible. That's a shame. The Bush tax cuts cost 1.3 trillion Dollars over ten years. The bailout has cost $700 Billion already. Another $100 billion and counting is going strictly to AIG. We still haven't counted Citigroup, the autos, or Barack Obama's promised bailout. We could approach $2 trillion in bailout money. A corporate tax cut would cost one tenth as much. It would also be far more effective because it would target those entities with a history of using money effectively. The politics, however, forces weak kneed politicians, charlatains, and demagogues, to propose policies with far more lucrative politics, even though its likely their policy effects will ultimately be counter productive.

Obama 1, Labor 0: Rahm the Hammer to lead Obama team

The first appointment in the wake of the Obama victory could not have been reassuring to the many thousands in the labor movement who deployed $400 million in this campaign to assure a Democratic victory. Rahm Emanuel, a Chicago congressman, was the key Clinton staffer behind the push for the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993.?

NAFTA has been a disaster for workers and peasants in all three member countries with union manufacturing jobs moved to Mexico where gangs of thugs backed by the state enforce sweatshop conditions in the maquila zones along the US border. And US and Canadian agro-business exports helped push Mexican peasants off their land desperately seeking jobs across the border to the north thus fueling ethnic tension and political battles over illegal immigration for most of the last decade.

I wrote about the weakness of the labor protections in NAFTA in my book co-edited by Lance Compa which you can find here.

Casual Browser's Friends

For those who read Russian.

General Electric Spends Millions Of Dollars On MSNBC Salaries To Buy A Punchline (actually several punchlines)

According to Jacques Barzun, "when people accept futility and the absurd as normal, the culture is decadent".

So what sort of culture does MSNBC, The Daily Show & GMP1 thrive in?

Exactly.

What happens when someone defines you as an “enemy?”

You may not take them seriously since you are too “grown up” … too sophisticated … to take the ranting of crazy people (fringe groups?) seriously. After all, Mr. & Mrs. Liberal, you stand at the pinnacle of civilization (even as you deny this in “multiculturalism class”). So what happens when the rabble comes to your 5 star hotel and shoots you?

From India during Mumbai:

We did not wish to be ‘enemies’, but since we have been constructed that way, should not we take our roles as ‘enemies’ a bit more seriously? I cannot speak the language of peace and love anymore. If the war is forced upon us, we will have to accept it. And since our state is too inept to handle it on our behalf, let us debate ways in which we can all participate in this ‘war’, through words, wisdom or actions.

I am afraid it will not soothe my senses anymore by being told again and again that religions stand for peace and ‘some people’ are misusing religion and misquoting scriptures. The problem is that the supply of ‘some people’ seems to be never ending. These ‘some people’ are not just a few people but like amoeba they keep multiplying. I am afraid I will not feel calmed tomorrow when I hear that we should try to understand the ‘root causes’, the injustices and anger that force people on the path of terror.

I grew up at a time when the nation of India stood for pacifism. Mahatma Gandhi – that uber-pacifist – was still our image of the typical Indian. That image of India has passed, but it still lingers in the mind as a cultural echo. So what is going to be the India that has war waged against it?

If we are paying the price for being a tolerant and democratic (although not perfect) nation (there are many dissenting voices tolerated in this country including the voices that speak of hatred against communities of all kinds, voices that talk of revenge and exclusion and voices that are overtly seditious against the state), I reject the guilt, shame and tolerance today for it makes me your ‘enemy’. You punish our innocent people for crimes of a few; and scream hoarse when the ‘innocent’ in your community are held up because of your barbarity. You reject our diversity (of our opinion and politics as well that has defended you and stood for you always), you do not like it when we have spoken with different voices. I, therefore, accept the ‘national identity’ you have bestowed on me as your ‘enemy’, an identity that I had always questioned in order to understand you and your problems. Thank you for reminding us, Indians (those who consider themselves one), once again that we are all equal ‘enemies’ in your war and that we need to think of an equal and befitting response.

This is a comment that could be made by pretty much anyone in the US. Except Hollywood, the Universities, the Left, No?

AjaxWorld 2008

AjaxWorld was this week, and it was interesting. I think the down economy is having an affect on everyone, but there were still a lot of interesting things to learn about. On Monday, I did a talk on a favorite topic of mine, networked applications. The talk was a lot of fun, hopefully the audience would agree with that assessment. Overall though, I would say there were a couple of major themes at AjaxWorld this year.

1.) Comet. There were a lot of talks about some form of data push from the server to the browser. Kevin Nilson did a nice job of differentiating Ajax (infinite loop of XHR polls) vs. Comet (long poll.) The folks at ICEFaces have built some nice abstractions on top of Comet. There was also a lot of interest around WebSockets, especially the work by the folks at Kaazing. A duplexed socket connection to the server sounds great on paper. I think there will be some very interesting technologies that grow around that.

2.) Don't make me learn JavaScript! There seemed to be a lot of folks advocating the "only know one language" approach to the web. In most cases that language was NOT JavaScript (even though the Jaxer guys say it can be.) Vendors liked Oracle and ICEFaces preached abstractions that shielded the developer from JavaScript. Of course the GWT folks say do everything in Java. Microsoft says use Silverlight so you can do everything in C#. Of course one of the best sessions was by Doug Crockford who told everyone to man up and learn JavaScript. I tend to agree with Crockford, even though I prefer ActionScript...

A Food Note

Apparently, you should be grateful that turkey is the Thanksgiving staple, as opposed to testicles. Even in a goulash...

Canadians Abroad: Melissa Fung, Journalist

A

Gvosdev's Nationality Theses

I presented these thoughts at a roundtable yesterday at the annual conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies--on Russia's national identity in the 21st century. Submitted for your consideration.

1. Growing convergence between nation and citizenship. Twenty-three years ago, Mikhail Gorbachev's famous slip in Kiev, when he talked about "Russia" as the Soviet Union, implied Russians and Soviets were interchangeable. Solzhenitsyn's 1990 essay on rebuilding Russia went narrower--Russia was not the Soviet Union but it was more than the Russian Federation. Today, I think we are moving in the direction that a Russian is someone who carries the passport and citizenship of the Russian Federation. These are the people that Russia is seen as having an obligation to protect. Russian-speakers, people of Russian heritage, the Russian "diaspora"--they may form part of a community of culture with Russia, but unless they carry Russian passports, they are not Russian in the same way.

2. Emergence of post-Soviet "markers" for Russian identity. Aided tremendously by the enormous resurgence of the Russian-language media--films, internet, book publishing--creating a new post-Soviet Russian popular and elite culture. Emphasis on "cultural Orthodoxy" providing norms. Vladislav Surkov's attempts to define a "Russian political culture"--and the fact that his opponents also debate the same ground. Resumption of old imperial notion that to be Russian is to be part of the Russian state.

3. The wild card: Russia cannot fully define its national identity as long as Ukraine's remains undefined. 17 percent of people in Ukraine define themselves as Russian; 14 percent of those who define themselves as Ukrainian cite themselves as Russian-speakers. But is there a defined identity of "Russian-Ukraine"--where the Ukrainian state is the focal point of loyalty but the cultural identity is seen as Russian? In other words, could this 30 percent or so of Ukraine end up being like the Austrians vis-a-vis Germany? (Think what might have happened if Skoropadsky's Hetmanante of 1918 had lasted longer.) And in Russia itself, what would be the reaction? And over the next several decades, how will Ukrainization proceed, and will it begin to change these numbers--and again, what would be the reaction in Russia? Right now there is (reluctant) acceptance of the reality of a separate Ukrainian state but also the sense that there really isn't a major border that prevents and cuts off contact. That certainly changes if Ukraine gets in NATO.

The current financial crisis, of course, has ramifications for all of this. Much of Russia's cultural soft power--films, for instance, could wither away if the funds dry up. Also some of this has rested on Russia being attractively economically so that people have wanted to live and work there. If Russia goes down economically and (even if highly unlikely) the EU moved rapidly to integrate Ukraine, this would have a major impact, I think, on attitudes in Ukraine.

Some Strategies under Obama

Constructive activities to oppose the Obama regime

1. Pray and fast for mercy for America.
2. Contribute to and volunteer for organizations that counsel women to keep their unborn children and who help them once the children are born. It is unlikely we can do too much to stop the supply of abortions under Obama, but we can work to slow the demand. To keep up with policy issues, consult National Right to Life.
3. Do all you can to stop The Freedom of Choice Act. Write, call, visit members of congress. This will probably come up soon in the Obama regime.
4. Prepare for a major economic recession, if not depression. I am not a financial adviser, but do not assume the economy will look much like it did under Bush.
5. Prepare for more terrorist attacks. They will likely hit US soil again under Obama, since he is weak on national defense and homeland security (as is nearly the entire US left). Store food and necessities. Prepare your soul under God.
6. Oppose attempts to create a so-called Fairness Doctrine, that would allow the government to control the content of media presentations. This denies the First Amendment and is meant to censure conservative viewpoints. Expect it under Obama.
7. Teach and preach biblical principles for civil government. These are being lost, as the last election demonstrated. Start with Francis Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto.
8. Oppose draconian expansions of civil government under the label of "compassion" and the like.
9. Prepare yourself for hard, crushing times, perhaps unlike any previously in American history. This means radical depedence on God, a willingness to take up our cross and not compromise the faith given once for all to the saints. These conditions may also require more support among church members. When the crunch comes, the church must be a place of radical care, godly resistance, and compassion. On this, see Francis Schaeffer, The Church at the End of the Twentieth Century.

Of course, I hope I am wrong in these dire predictions. I do not claim to foretell the future, but only to warn those with ears to hear.

IF Tim Pawlenty Is McCain's VP Pick, Remember 10/08/07 (UPDATED)

In October 2007, while John McCain was still HEMORRHAGING political support, Tim Pawlenty flew to Manchester, NH to do a political event on McCain's behalf in Fairlee, VT.

Vermont.

The state with negative electoral votes.

For a campaign event that took Governor Pawlenty well over 10 hours to complete if you include fly and drive time.

But, as Mr. Pawlenty was finally being dropped off at his hotel after a very looong day, he turned to Team McCain's Jim Barnett and said, "I'd like to do more, please let me know how I can do that."

That was in October of 2007.

When 3/4ths of the Republican Party was saying, "John? John Who?"

We know that this happened because we were in the car with the Governor on that trip.

Bottom line - Tim Pawlenty is qualified to be Vice President for any number of reasons.

As are most of the folks rumored to be on McCain's short list.

But we hope that Pawlenty's respect for, and loyalty to, John McCain puts the Minnesota Governor over the top in the Veepstakes.

Fingers. Crossed.

----------
(UPDATED) A longtime reader writes to remind us that Tim Pawlenty is the "clear" choice of McCain loyalists who have ridden the '08 campaign roller coaster from the beginning.

Don't we know it.

It's Not Going To Be Mitt Romney

Chuck Todd is reporting.

And we want to give Chucky-T a big, wet kiss.

Democracy Now: Naomi Klein on the Bailout Profiteers and the Multi-Trillion-Dollar Crime Scene

Naomi Klein on the Bailout Profiteers and the Multi-Trillion-Dollar Crime Scene
Democracy Now
Host: Amy Goodman

“The more details emerge, the clearer it becomes that Washington’s handling of the Wall Street bailout is not merely incompetent. It is borderline criminal,” says Naomi Klein, author of The Shock Doctrine.

To Listen to the Interview

Preview of a Cat-Robot Alliance?

Not. Good.

Thanksgiving message to readers and more...

...at the new home of Heidi Li's Potpourri.

How it was in DC

I love Joel Achenbach's blog posting with photos of the spontaneous demonstration that erupted outside the White House Tuesday night: All-Night Party at the White House; as well has his report on the lines for copies of the Washington Post the next day. (And more, on other demonstrations.)

Washington was always a place where you never knew what was going to happen next, and people came out to express their feelings. I still miss it some days.

Progressive Radio: Naomi Klein, the author of The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

Naomi Klein, the author of The Shock Doctrine, The Rise of Disaster Capitalism
Progressive Radio
Host: Matthew Rothschild



To Listen to the Interview

More:

Naomi Klein's Website

The latest over at the new home of Heidi Li's Potpourri

These posts can be read at the new home of this blog.



Confidence and Cooperation: Franklin D. Roosevelt's first Fireside Chat - "The Banking Crisis

WE WILL NOT BE SILENCED: A documentary that might help people understand why it is time to Put Principle Before Party

Why Mass Loan Modifications in this Environment With Unnecessary Government Interference is so Dangerous

Introduction: If you are new to the process of loan modifications, here is a quick run down. This is the process by which banks create a new loan for borrowers that are struggling to pay their current loan. Terms and rates are set not by credit worthiness but frankly by credit unworthiness. In such cases, borrowers have loans they can't afford. Banks adjust the loan and make the payment something they can afford.

To understand just how truly dangerous loan modifications are everyone needs to wrap themselves around this concept. The better one's financial situation is combined with a steady mortgage rate and payment...the less chance someone has for a loan modification. The worse someone's financial situation is combined with a moving interest rate and payment...the better chance someone has for a loan modification. There is one other concept everyone needs to understand...perception is reality. In other words, the key to loan modifications will soon be to present the borrower as someone in hardship whether that perception is real or not. In other words, loan modifications work in reverse of the way in which loan approvals are supposed to work. More than that, the process of loan modification was something that banks kept in their back pockets to use in those extreme cases where fairly good borrowers really had a hardship and the bank thought they would be responsible enough to handle a lower payment.

Now, this process is about to explode. Nearly every single mortgage company is now developing a loan modifications division. Many former loan officers are creating loan modifications businesses. Why not? Loan modifications are perfect for borrowers that have mortgages that are far too expensive for their monthly budgets. They are extremely appropriate if this process has happened or will happen if a loan adjusts to a higher payment. In other words, the overwhelming majority of sub prime loans that put us into this mess will now be perfect candidates for loan modifications. Just how good a deal does the borrower get. One proprietor of a loan modification business told me they average a new interest rate of 5%.

This is combined with another potentially explosive dynamic. This was never meant to be an en masse business and so not only is it totally unregulated but banks have no set rules for it. There are no guidelines for this process. Banks simply look at a person's financial profile and decide what sort of a payment they should get. Finally, federal and state governments are essentially forcing banks to make this process into something of a mass scale. The state of California has outlawed any foreclosure procedure unless a loan modification has been performed. In other words, if you fall behind on your mortgage in the state of California, have no fear because this action will be rewarded with a loan that is affordable. The bank can't foreclose on you. They have to give you a loan modification by law. Only if you fall behind on your modified loan will you be foreclosed on. The FDIC is now insuring millions of these modified loans as well.

Let's look at some places where there will no doubt be abuse. First, there is the option arms. These are gimmick loans in which the first five years the borrower's payments is set artificially low for the first five years and then resets. The loans were never meant to be kept more than five years. The problem is that will falling real estate prices and restricted credit many of these borrowers simply can't get out of these loans. If you have a $300,000 mortgage, you could for the first five years have a payment as low as $1296 (the payment is figured out as though you had a 30 year mortgage at 2.95% and often times the payment is based on an even lower pretend rate). Once that loan adjusts, your payment will be $2120 (this is based on the rate being 7% over the last 25 years). As this example clearly illustrates, anyone in an option arm can scream hardship. There are very few people that could possibly afford to add $1000 to their mortgage. In other words, almost everyone currently in an option arm is eligible for a loan modification. Many of these folks got into an option arm because the artificially low payment was the one they could afford in order to buy the house they wanted. In other words, they aren't going to necessarily afford much more than their current payment. As such, the loan modification would fit them with an interest rate equivalent to their current payment, or in this case 2.95%.

Then, there is the case of self employed borrowers. Self employed borrowers normally have great difficulty being approved for loans because their income is difficult to track and they write off so much that it looks as though they make nothing. For the purposes of loan modifications, this works to their advantage. There used to be a certain genius to punishing self employed borrowers for writing everything off. After all, if you are going to take advantage of the tax implications of write offs, you are then punished by the mortgage implications. The exact opposite works out to be true in loan modifications. The more upside down a business looks the better a chance the owner has to receive a loan modification. This is also open to so much abuse and manipulation. Borrowers can apply for a loan modification immediately after a bad year. It's even possible that some banks will look at year to date earnings. Once borrowers get an idea of how the system works, the shrewd and unscrupulous ones will be able to find all sorts of ways to abuse the system.

Loan modifications are also perfect for commissioned borrowers. If someone's commission has taken a recent hit, that is the perfect set up to cry hardship. Once again a shrewd and unscrupulous borrower may hold off on collecting on commissions in order to make their income appear low while they are applying for a loan modification. They may ask their company not to pay them commission until such a modification process is over. They may simply apply for a loan modification when their business is slow. The potential for abuse is nearly unlimited here as well.

Finally, there is an obscene amount of potential abuse as far as manipulating debt. One thing that was told me in no uncertain terms was that taking on extra debt wouldn't be rewarded. In other words, if a borrower were applying for a loan modification and the bank looked at their credit report and saw a new car payment, that borrower would almost certainly be rejected. There are plenty of other ways to manipulate debt. Perfectly able borrowers can make their situation look dire. What if you had a long standing credit card which you always paid off monthly but it had a massive limit. Let's say you had a credit card with a limit of $15,000. A borrower could take out cash right befor applying for a loan modification. A really good borrower might have several such cards. Will the bank be able to know that this increased balance was recently manipulated? That's a great unknown of loan modifications because the whole process is brand new.

Then, there is the matter of cash and equivalents. Will banks know just how much borrowers have stashed away if they don't reveal it? What if a borrower is upside down on their debts, but they also have a million Dollar pension? Will the bank know? This is another area that can be manipulated if necessary. Accounts can be liquidated and transferred to family and friends prior to applying for a loan modification. Borrowers may start to cash checks at currency exchanges and hoard cash in order to make their situation appear more dire. This is yet another area where a borrower can potentially make a perfectly good situation look dire.

Finally, once this process really takes off banks will have no choice but to standardize this. Most will have guidelines for who qualifies and for what. They simply won't be able to look at these on a case by case basis when there are millions of them. Once professionals understand how the system works, they will no doubt manipulate it. That's exactly what the entire industry did in manipulating mortgages throughout the boom. The same way in which mortgage professionals figured out how to get unqualified borrowers qualified for mortgages they couldn't afford, these same folks will figure out ways to get borrowers qualified for loan modifications they don't need. Since the federal government is now essentially underwriting these loan modifications, banks will be all too willing to oblige in the next great mortgage fraud.

When Alan Greenspan dropped the Fed Funds Rates to below 1%, this created the artificial push that started the speculative market of sub prime mortgages. Now, the Federal government is doing much the same thing by guaranteeing these loans and by forcing banks to do them prior to foreclosing. The very same kind of artificial stimulation that lead to the sub prime crisis is now being created in this largely unregulated and misunderstood area of loan modifications. Furthermore, the very same artificial stimulation is being done to the very same industry with largely the very same players. Most former mortgage brokers are now getting into loan modifications. They will be dealing with the same banks. They will learn to manipulate the system much like they did when sub prime was booming. The elements for a horrible speculative market are largely the same as those created to start the sub prime crisis. The next great mortgage fraud is here.

Clinton at State

I'm fairly agnostic about the merits of the appointment -- I'm inclined to defer to Obama's judgment given the quality of his campaign and Clinton is certainly a person of substantial ability, but there are some real policy concerns here. Still, I have to admit the fact that it will make people like Our Lady of the Dolphins just a little bit crazier makes me feel better about the whole thing...

Earlier this week, Michael Vick was back in court to face a series of state charges.

Vick is serving a 23-month sentence in a minimum-security federal prison camp in Leavenworth, Kan., on a conspiracy charge relating to the interstate dogfighting operation he helped run on a property he owned in Surry County, Va. Vick is scheduled to be released on July 20, 2009.

Vick is currently being held in protective custody at Riverside Regional Jail in Hopewell, Va., until his hearing on Tuesday in Surry County Circuit Court to plead guilty to two state charges related to dogfighting.

The state charges -- one count of torturing and killing dogs and one count of promoting dogfighting -- each carry a maximum prison term of five years. But under the terms of his plea agreement, Vick is expected to receive a three-year suspended prison term and a $2,500 fine (which would be suspended if he pays court costs and maintains good behavior for four years).

By resolving the pending state charges, Vick would qualify to participate in the Federal Bureau of Prisons re-entry program, which could enable him to serve part of the
remainder of his federal sentence in a halfway house.

I for one hope that Vick gets his life back on track and I am willing to forgive him if he genuinely looks for forgiveness. That said, the nature of the crimes has admitted to along with his profile lead to a very troubling combination.

First, his participation in dog fighting has all the hallmarks of a sociopath, an individual devoid of a conscience. That's frankly the only way he could justify such a brutal act on a defenseless animal. He justified it because in his mind there was nothing to justify. A sociopath is so selfish that anyone else's feelings or thoughts never enter to the equation in their decision making process. Michael Vick justified being the ringleader in this dog fighting operation because the brutality that this would do to the dogs never even crossed his mind when he made the decision.

Second, to find the brutal sport of dog fighting enjoyable an individual must be afflicted with an enormous amount of sadism. Vick enjoys the sight of pain in a way that would make must people squirm. Rather than squirming, Vick gets a rush out of watching others inflict pain on each other.

pitbulls

Someone with this much sadistic tendencies is exposed to all sorts of criminal tendencies far beyond dog fighting, and when those tendencies are combined with sociopathy.

Finally, prior to being jailed, Michael Vick was in the middle of a contract worth well in excess of $100 million. This not only likely gives Vick an enormous sense of entitlement but power. It gives Vick the resources to do a nearly unlimited amount of damage but also the sense of entitlement for the worst kind of reckless behavior.

It's frankly not a very long road from animal torture to crimes much worse than that. In fact, serial killers like Jeffrey Dahmer started their evil with animal torture. The sort of behavior traits that it takes in order to engage in such a vicious behavior is exactly the sort of behavior that creates criminals and other sociopaths that spend their lives being a cancer to every situation they come into contact with. I hope that Michael Vick has taken his time in jail to try and conquer his demons, but if he hasn't, he has a very troubling profile. It's a profile of an individual that will go on to do things much worse than orchestrating a dog fighting ring.

Freshman Beaten On Minnesota Campus for Being a Republican

The American Thinker:

On election night in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a blue state, comes a criminal horror story short of murder, but no less disturbing. It happened at Augsburg college, a private liberal arts school named after a place in Germany the reformer monk Martin Luther served in the 1500s.


After taunting 18-year old freshman Annie Grossmann for wearing her McCain-Palin campaign button at an election night get-together, and "getting in her face," four women beat her for political views which, obviously, they did not share. Grossmann took verbal abuse at the party, then left for her dorm after it was clear, about 10 p.m., that her candidates had lost. She was followed by the four women into the shadows of a nearby skyway.


There she was beaten. The four women, all black, called Grossmann a "racist." She knew none of them. Nor did they know her, to her knowledge. It was that damn campaign button that evidently caused their frenzy. Their earlier taunts proved that. They were, Grossmann said, "rubbing her face in Obama's win."


"Why do you call me a racist when you don't even know me?" she screamed. Made no difference. Grossmann was felled by the largest of the four. She hit her head on the brick wall, and staggered back to her dorm. The other three black women at the beating chucked at this dark manifestation of partisan evil. They walked away laughing, offering no help to their victim. The banality of evil had asserted itself. And at four-to-one, it was also a cowardly act of mindless violence which, presumably, the four thought "normal."


Right here, right here in these United States, it happened, in my home state. A cruel re-awakening to the excesses of partisanship, in this case mixed with racism. That it happened on a college campus is hardly surprising. Not today. Campuses ooze with crazed partisan intolerance, places mostly where left-wing academia hold forth, along with politically correct staff, inculcating students with staunch, impenetrable biases, often leading to violent confrontation.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune is not sure of the reaons for the attack:

Politics prompted her assault, Augsburg student says

So Paul Walsh at the paper refers to the victim's "claim." See how it's done? I wonder if there will be a follow-up story? Nah, it doesn't fit the template. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

BNP Membership list published on-line

The Times reports that the entire membership list of the BNP has been published on the internet leading to concerns amongst members that they might be targeted by the party's opponents:

More than 12,000 names, home addresses, telephone numbers and e-mail contact details were included in a major breach of data protection. The names and ages of schoolchildren with family memberships were disclosed. Some supporters were listed with comments such as “discretion required — employment concerns”. A number had their hobbies recorded.

The paper says that the list describes the occupations of some members that are deemed to be sensitive or of use to the BNP, such as NHS doctor, teacher, journalist, vicar, company director, scientist, engineer or construction manager. Others are listed as public speakers. They say that the list appears to include several former police officers. Peter Fahy, Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, said: “Membership or promotion of the BNP by any member of the Police Service is prohibited.”

They add that there is no ban on teachers, doctors and nurses joining the BNP, but its racist reputation is seen as incompatible with frontline public service.

A number of bloggers have already referred to this and one has even posted it on a purpose-made blogsite. That site has not been removed. I have no intention of linking to it if it is still available as membership of the BNP is not illegal and people are entitled to their privacy, however the episode is nevertheless a major embarrassment for the party.

Keynes vs. Hayek, The Final Round

This is it. Much of the last century has been a showcase of two divergent schools of thought in economics: Keynes and Hayek. Keynes ruled up until the late 70's. The Hayek school found believers in Thatcher and Reagan, but they were both compromised. At best a compromise was struck, with attempts at "supply side" economics that was close to Hayek's Austrian school, along with more Keynesian monetary policy.

Now we have the kind of financial implosion that Austrians have all said was an inevitable consequence of Keynesian monetary policy conducted by central banks. Governments have responded with extreme measures -- extreme Keynesian measures. Austrians aren't willing to say that this won't work, but do say it is only delaying an even worse fate.

The Austrians are smart folks, but they don't like to be measured and tested. They denounce any kind of objective, scientific measurement of their ideas. But they cannot avoid this one. This is it. If you are a follower of Hayek, then you must agree that we will see economic hardship on a grand scale within the next ten years or so. How grand? Again the Austrians will never give you numbers, but you gotta figure we're talking Great Depression kind scale. That would be 25% unemployment, western governments collapsing, democracy giving way to totalitarianism. If we don't have something like that in the next decade, just a run of the mill recession, then the Keynesians (and most of civilization) win.

Recession bites

The news that repossession actions in Wales have risen by more than one fifth in a year is disturbing but not unexpected. Over 8,000 homes are under threat. The figures are especially bad in Merthyr Tydfil and in parts of Mid and North Wales. The Conwy and Colwyn County Court has seen a 77% rise in repossession cases over the year.Merthyr County Court has seen a 41% rise, while the figures for Wrexham and Carmarthen are both up 40%. It offers me no confort to record that these figures are still not as bad as the 1990s but they are getting there.

Of course not all court actions lead to the loss of a home. Roughly four in ten are suspended for further action such as the renegotiation of the mortgage or to allow time for an external intervention.

The Welsh Assembly Government has a mortgage rescue scheme in place that may help but details about its existence or how to access it are still too little known. Many people remain in denial of their worsening situation until it is too late. The one thing that needs to be added to the Government's strategy for alleviating this appalling situation is some direct interaction with the courts so as to increase the number of repossession orders deferred for alleviative action.

I raised this with the Deputy Housing Minister in Committee some weeks ago. I look forward to seeing whether she has been able to do something about it.

The U.N. and Canada - our first peoples and our newest arrivals

A

Muslims Ban Yoga

Malaysian Islamic leaders have issued a ruling against Muslims practicing yoga. They recognize its Hindu essence and claim that Islam should meet all of its adherents needs. If only more Christians realized the Hindu nature of yoga and relied exclusively on Christian spiritual practices.

And, by the way, the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. Nor should yoga be legally proscribed. Freedom of religion means the right to chose a false religion, the right to be wrong.

Racism Ends Forever

Racism Ends Forever

Atom.com: Funny Videos | Sketch Groups | Funny Animations

Living with Persecution

My sermon at Wellspring Anglican Church, "Living with Persecution," was not recorded. However, I have a fairly detailed outline of the message with resources for further study. If you'd like one, please email me.

Network Neutrality: The First Word is In

A

Spending the money

Now that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has had his moment and initiated the fiscal stimulus he promised it is left to the Welsh Assembly to spend the £140 million capital funding that will acrue to us under the Barnett Formula.

The Secretary of State for Wales has already made his view known. He says that the money can be used this year and next on road building and social housing. Perhaps he has not realised that the decision as to what this money is spent on is not his but the Welsh Government's.

Personally, I would prefer a substantial chunk of this cash to be used to upgrade our schools. Despite claims of investment by Government Ministers the fact remains that the vast majority of our school buildings are in a dreadful state. Previous government targets to have all schools fit for purpose by 2010 have been missed by a mile and many teachers and pupils are working in unacceptable conditions.

A properly-funded crusade by the Welsh Government to sort this out in partnership with local government would be very welcome. Unless there is more capital funding forthcoming from WAG then most local Councils will not be in a position to deliver ambitious improvement programmes. That is why the Welsh Liberal Democrats have tabled a debate tomorrow calling for this investment.

Back to the Financial Crisis: Beijing vs. Brussels Rules

Pirates are the fun story of the day--and I've been enjoying my commentary on the situation. But I wanted to go back to the global financial crisis and the "let's agree to talk again" G-20 summit in Washington over the weekend. Obviously the outcome was not the "reinvention of the international financial system" envisaged by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and the European Union.

And a clear divide was present. I characterized this in my contribution to the Stanley Foundation report on global leadership as the tension between the Brussels view of the world--increased transnational regulation--versus the Beijing approach--limited compacts among sovereign states. When it comes to the issue of "supervision" of the financial system, it is not surprising that Washington is leaning much more in the Beijing direction on this issue, at least for now.

Will that change under an Obama Administration? Does the pendulum swing towards the Brussels approach? Specific proposals are due on March 31 in advance of the follow-up G-20 meeting.

This is Your Brain on Drugs

Hinderaker, via Dave Weigel:

Obama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

I am struck speechless.

Should the U.S. Feel Confident--As Asia and Europe Join Hands?

Tomorrow is the Asia-Europe Summit Meeting in Beijing. All 27 states of the EU are represented, along with the European Commission; ASEAN and all its member states are represented, along with China, Japan, South Korea, India, Pakistan, and Mongolia. Germany's Merkel, France's Sarkozy, Japan's Aso, India's Singh, Korea's Lee, Italy's Berlusconi and Poland's Tusk are all attending.

China felt it necessary, via Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao, to stress "there wasn't any anti-U.S. sentiment within ASEM" since the U.S. has no representation at this meeting. Neither, for that matter, does Russia (neither a European nor an Asian country by the ASEM criteria? Is this tacit recognition that there does exist a distinct geographic, geopolitical and geoeconomic space called "Eurasia"?)

But is Washington's absence from deliberations that certainly will almost entirely be focused on the financial crisis a problem? It seems unlikely that solutions are going to be agreed upon and that the key European and Asian countries are then going to bypass the United States.

And despite problems at home, the fall in oil prices (hitting the "axis of oil" in the pocketbook) does seem to be benefiting the U.S. If America has suffered losses, Washington's attitude seems to be that no one else in the world is prepared to overtake the U.S. or rise at its expense.

So the feeling is, let them meet in Beijing, and then everyone will come to Washington in time for the U.S.-led solution.

On Having the Game Pass You By

While watching Penn State destroy Michigan State yesterday, it occurred to me that we aren't hearing much this year about how Joe Paterno is a coach lost in another era, the "game having passed him by". It also occurred to me that we would be hearing quite a lot about how Tom Osborne, Don James, Bo Schembechler, and Lou Holtz were being "passed by" if any of them had possessed Joe's longevity, assuming that the disasters their teams have endured as of late ensued on their watch. Although I suppose that there's some question as to how much control JoePa still has over the team, the lesson would seem to be that even elite college football teams are subject to cycles of success and failure. The relatively weak performance of Penn State from 2000-2004 is best interpreted as part of such a cycle, rather than as evidence of JoePa's creeping dementia.

AppleFutility Cup

Consider: The Washington State Cougars are currently 1-10, with only a victory over Portland State to their credit. The Washington Huskies are 0-10, and likely to lose at Cal. The Seattle Seahawks are 2-8. The Seattle Mariners lost 101 games this season. And the Supersonics? Heh. Is this the worst calendar year in the history of Washington sports? Of major college and professional sports in any single state?

I never thought I'd live to see an 0-12 Huskies team. Go Cougs!

...Cougs win, in a game living down to the hype. Worst. Overtime. Ever. Anyway, Huskies 0-11, looking down the barrel of a Cal team that's beating Stanford by 27 points right now.

...UPDATE by Scott: And let us not forget to celebrate this. I wonder which book is more obsolete: this one or this one...and let us not forget that Charlie Weis, Super Genius (TM) announced that he was taking over the offense two weeks prior to this stellar effort.

MLB Final Four

What can you say about the Cubs ... but wow. Statistically they were favorites against the Dodgers. Most people would have said that they were "heavy" favorites, since they had the best record in the NL. As an Atlanta Braves fan, I can tell you how little that matters. Statistically there was a 48% chance of the Dodgers winning, vs. 52% for the Cubs. That being said, there was only about a 10% chance of a sweep...

Of course those numbers are based on season statistics, and many would point out that the Dodgers were a much better team with Manny Ramirez on the team. Is this true? Their record was 29-24 with Manny vs. 55-54 without him. They outscored their opponents 249-214 with Manny, which would translate to a ridiculous 40-13 expected record. Even with 53 games, you see the craziness of small sample sizes... The Dodgers actually gave up slightly more runs per game with Manny than without him, 4.04 vs. 3.98. So the improvement really was in the offense. They scored 4.7 runs per game with Manny, vs. 4.14 without him.

So, Viva la Manny? The small sample size skews things, but they sure look like good picks for the NLCS. The Phillies were a better team in the regular season, but nobody is as good as the Manny Dodgers. You're not going to find me picking the Dodgers. The Braves were in the NL West for a long time, so I learned to hate the Dodgers many years ago. Of course that's only gotten worse since I moved to the Bay Area nine years ago.

So what about the ALCS? Boston is statiscally a better team than Tampa Bay. What is unusual too is that these two teams had strong home vs. away stats. Both teams were much better home teams than road teams. Tampa Bay won the AL East, so they have home field advantage. Could the home team win every game in this series? Even with these teams it is statistically unlikely, but the home team bias suggests that this series will be very close.

By the way, it should be no surprise that the ALCS is between two AL East teams. Six of the top AL hitters in terms of runs created were from the AL East. Ten of the top twenty hitters in terms of runs created per 27 were also from the AL East. Eight of the top fifteen AL pithcers in terms of ERA were also from the AL East. And it's not just Boston, Tampa Bay, and New York. Baltimore and Toronto also had very good hitters (Nick Markakis, Aubrey Huff, Alex Rios) and pitchers (Roy Halladay, Jeremy Guthrie).

Russia's "Look East" Strategy

The strategic plan for the development of Russia's foreign economic ties to 2020 apparently identifies China and India as Russia's leading partners for future development. This appears to be an attempt to balance Russia's existing dependence on Europe (as well as tying Russia's own economic growth to Europe's continued demand for Russian resources). India's ONGC is expected to get approval for its purchase of the British firm Imperial Energy which operates assets in Western Siberia; other sources indicate that by November 25, an agreement between Rosneft and Transneft and China's National Petroleum Company should be ready on supplying China via a Siberian oil pipeline supplying some 300,000 barrels per day.

A lot of talk, as usual, at the prime ministers' summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization last week--but of interest is to monitor whether the economic dimension of the group continues to develop or not, especially in light of the economic slowdowns in Europe and the United States.

China-Taiwan Pact

"Peaceful negotiation creates a win-win situation."

This was the calligraphy that PRC representative Chen Yunlin (head of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits) and Chiang Ping-kung, chairman of Taiwan's Straits Exchange Foundation, displayed after they signed the pact that sets forward direct flight and ship links between the mainland and the island. They have also agreed to hold regular talks every six months.

Both sides appear to be prepared to leave aside "final status" issues and concentrate on practical cooperation (the next set of agreements to be negotiated will deal with banks, food and product safety, and so on). The strategy in both Beijing and Taipei is to make it not worth the while of the other side to jeopardize the growing beneficial linkages to pursue maximalist solutions.

A possible model for Serbia-Kosovo, or Georgia and Abkhazia, to follow?

Proper Use Of Incentives

Yglesias commenter "hupcapiv" is making sense:

I’ll bail out out [any] writer who promises not to use the tiresome Friedman-esque phrase "it’s not X, it’s X on steroids."

I continue to endorse this idea. Some other fine choices here, although were he to write it today I'm sure the Editors would include "under the bus," "close the deal [at least in political context]," and "game changer."

Another Cycle, Another Bunch of My Misjudgments

By Stuart Rothenberg

Like everyone who makes a living in the reporting and handicapping business, I made my share of mistakes this election cycle.

While I didn’t jump on the “McCain is toast” bandwagon during the summer of 2007, I didn’t really expect him to come back to win the Republican presidential nomination. And while I never dismissed Barack Obama’s chances of winning the Democratic nomination, I certainly didn’t expect it until well into the Democratic nominating process.

Who thought that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) would lose Iowa but win New Hampshire? And who in their right mind really thought that McCain would pick Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) as his running mate? Don’t look at me.

Anyway, I thought I’d point out some of my dumber assessments and evaluations for those of you who don’t already think that I’m totally clueless about politics. (This, obviously, excludes many bloggers, who already think that I can’t find my own navel.)

I think my biggest blunder was believing (and writing) that McCain should pick someone such as Connecticut Independent Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman or former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge (R) for his running mate.

After watching what the Palin selection did to the GOP convention and to the entire Republican Party, I think a divisive pick, whether a pro-abortion-rights Republican or a Democrat with a liberal record on cultural issues and the environment, would have been a giant mistake.

Yes, selecting Lieberman or Ridge would have made a statement about his maverick or bipartisan approach (and that would have been a plus), but it would have created a chaotic Republican convention during which conservatives would have been in full revolt.

The GOP would have been in disarray for weeks, and McCain’s numbers, I now believe, would have tanked during that period. Lieberman or Ridge might have been more of an asset during the nation’s financial meltdown in late September and early October, but conservative Republicans would have been so turned off by a Lieberman or Ridge VP selection that I’m not sure they ever would have warmed to McCain — or voted for him, which they did.

Next, while I always thought that Obama could win Colorado and Virginia, I didn’t treat North Carolina and Indiana as in play until much too late. It’s easy to get locked into an assessment, and I did in this case.

Turning to the Congressional elections, I made two very different errors at different points in the cycle.

Initially, I assumed that voter sentiment would shift after the 2006 cycle, producing a more “normal” electorate and allowing Republicans to get out from under the “time for a change” sentiment that smothered them during the midterms. It never happened.

The public’s mood soured even worse after 2006, and the book never really closed on the 2006 election cycle until this month’s elections were over.

Then, as the 2008 balloting approached, I obviously underestimated some of the Republicans’ ability to swim against the tide. I expected Democratic House gains to be in the 27-33 range, at least a few seats higher than they are likely to net.

In individual contests throughout the cycle, I was too late in seeing the wins by Tom Perriello (D-Va.) and Walt Minnick (D- Idaho), as well as Democrat Travis Childers’ victory in the special election in Mississippi’s 1st district.

I hadn’t met either of the candidates in the Mississippi special, so I mistakenly assumed that the district’s Republican bent would be enough to elect Greg Davis. My job is to be ahead of the curve, not behind it.

I also totally messed up when I repeatedly warned readers that I expected a handful of GOP seats to fall that I had not even rated as vulnerable. This happened in 2006, when I failed to note that then-Reps. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) and Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.) could go down to defeat. This time, since the Democratic wave was smaller than I expected, not a single true long-shot won. I remain surprised by that.

My single biggest rating mistake was rating Republican Rep. Don Young of Alaska’s at-large House seat as “Democrat Favored.” I expected Young, who received his share of bad press over the past couple of years and is under federal investigation, to be defeated by challenger Ethan Berkowitz (D). I was wrong. Young won, and he did so by more than a razor-thin margin.

Finally, I wrote that the Louisiana Senate race would be a tossup all the way until Election Day, even asserting it was “likely to be decided by a point or two.” It wasn’t. In fact, my own newsletter moved the race from “Toss-Up” to “Narrow Advantage” for Mary Landrieu on Sept. 26. Landrieu ended up winning 52.1 percent to 45.7 percent, a 6-point win. Landrieu’s 52 percent showing was in line with her earlier wins (50 percent in 1996 and 52 percent in 2002), but the margin was not all that close.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on November 20, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

German Intelligence Did What Now?

Somebody explain to me how this makes sense:

A small explosion in Kosovo is quickly growing into a much bigger incident after the authorities in the capital, Pristina, arrested three Germans, alleged to be intelligence operatives, in connection with an attack on the building that houses the European Union's special representative there.

A judge in Kosovo remanded the three men - who media outlets there and in Germany have reported are members of the German foreign intelligence agency, the BND - to 30 days of investigative custody Saturday. On Monday in Berlin, a government spokesman, Thomas Steg, called the charge that Germany was involved in terrorist attacks abroad "absurd," but declined to comment on whether the men were intelligence agents or, as has also been alleged, members of the German Army, the Bundeswehr.

Sounds like a job for the Sandbaggers.

So much for democracy

Apparently President-elect Obama is not wasting any time emulating the authoritarian nature of the Bush presidency. Bush made unprecedented use of what he argued was the inherent power of the presidency.?

One example? The secret torture and detention of terror suspects, very few of whom actually turned out to be real terrorists.

Now Obama staffers are giddy at the possibility of using the same powers.

Oh, but don't worry, his closest advisers assure us that this time the exercise of unilateral powers by the new President will be for "good" not "evil."

Last time I looked we had three branches of government and states too.

Obama Weighs Quick Undoing of Bush Policy - NYTimes.com

And So, After 31 Years, Monday Morning Clacker (aka Christopher Stewart) Gets His Own Shop

GreenMountainPolitics1 lives on forever in "The Google".

And our archives will remain untouched (making all that harried downloading by various "interests" unnecessary).

Meanwhile, the action has moved here.

The greatest understatement in the recent history of human civilization

Jules Crittenden:

George W. Bush did not solve all the problems of the world's most troubled and dangerous region.

You don't say!

Crittenden's larger claim -- that the Bush Doctrine has somehow worked out more or less as planned and predicted -- is beyond absurd. He and others who follow this tack seem to believe that "success" may be defined as the fortunate avoidance of the worst possible alternate outcomes. But as anyone who isn't a transparent hack would understand, the fact that Bush took the nation to war in 2003 does not mean that (a) Saddam Hussein would otherwise have survived into 2008 stronger and more dangerous than anyone could ever have imagined, (b) that Iran would otherwise have nuclear weapons, (c) that al-Qaeda would have earned the sponsorship of numerous other regimes across the Middle East, and (d) that the entire region would otherwise now be perched on the edge of a genocidal bloodbath. There were numerous paths the administration could have taken to avoid any or all of these scenarios; it chose the bloodiest and costliest and the one least conducive to anyone's long-term interest, save those who enjoy writing about how the United States needs to "impress" and "chasten" its foes with multi-trillion dollar wars.

I imagine we'll have to endure a lot of this nonsense in the coming months, and probably forever.

Education Wonks Might Want To Take A Look At This

Michelle Rhee, head of the Washington, DC school system, is taking on the unions, firing bad teachers and paying good ones six-figure salaries(!!!) all in the name of saving DC's schools.

Newsweek has the story.

Well worth the read.

Somali Pirates Need a Good Keel-Hauling

A

Why Jews Vote the Way They Do

Don Feder:

Back in the 1980s, during the euphoria of the Reagan-era, Neo-cons like Norman Podhoretz and Irving Kristol predicted a seismic shift in Jewish voting patterns.

Once American Jews discovered that voting Republican was crucial for the survival of the Jewish state, they’d naturally align themselves with the party that actually believes in national security, we were assured.

It never happened.

After this year’s election – in which Barack Hussein Obama got 77% of the Jewish vote – we can confidently say it never will. Once again, in 2008, most American Jews voted their religion – liberalism.

Some minorities have a clearer perception of where their interests lie. According to the American Muslim Task Force for Civil Rights and Elections, nearly 90% of Muslims voted for Obama, only 2% for McCain – smart Muslims, dumb Jews.

If there was ever a year in which Jews should have been forced to reconsider their robotic loyalty to the Democratic Party, 2008 was it.

The Democratic presidential candidate should have set off alarm bells in the head of the average Jewish voter – from his whack-job pastor’s anti-Israel ravings, to his multiple ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, to his Middle East donors, to his terrorist cheering section, to his refusal to condemn Jimmy Carter’s meeting with Hamas – Jews should have broken out in a cold sweat at the thought of this ideologue directing U.S. military and foreign policy.
...
Along with other dogmatic utopians, they actually believe that any enemies we have are of our own making, that America has generally been a force for oppression and exploitation in the world, that terrorism is born of poverty and despair (rather than a murderous fanaticism), that America must do perpetual penance for past mistakes, and that a Palestinian state will usher in the messianic age. I could go on, but it’s too depressing.
...
To the question, “Would you support or oppose the United States taking military action against Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons,” 47% of Jews said they’d oppose America moving to save Israel from nuclear annihilation, 42% would support it, and 11% were unsure.

This is perhaps the clearest indication that a significant segment of the Jewish community either doesn’t give a damn about Israel or is delusional.

I have a friend who is an elderly Jewish retired professor. He is very, very proud of a grandson who took time off from college to work on the Obama campaign. Not wishing to introduce friction into our relationship I never asked him about the concerns I have regarding Obama's position on Israel and his anti-Semitic associates. I don't have to raise the issue since he is assuredly aware of them. Yet he ignores them and beams with pride at Obama's election.

Right At Ya, Middle America! (UPDATED)