Scripting News

Who cares if they hate us?

Sun, 28 Sep 2008 16:35:29 GMT

I spent the first years after my illness driving around the country, stopping in some places for a year or two, then moving on. In that time I drove across the United States four times, and across Canada once. I mostly lived in places where people like myself, politically, live, but on most of my trips, except for the trip across Canada, the politics were the red state kind. Me, I'm a coastal guy, a blue stater, through and through.

I'm the kind of guy the red stater's hate.

I have an excellent education, and I didn't stop after I finished school. I worked hard, and struggled, and made a success of myself. I didn't borrow money, I don't have much in my Social Security account, but I do have good retirement savings and health insurance. I have a well-used passport. I read voraciously, and on some subjects, systematically, and communicate with people on the Internet from all over the world.

Because of my education both formal and continuing, I have a perspective on the world that people in the flyover states not only don't have, but that they openly express hatred of. I know that's an extreme statement, but listen -- in the east and the west you don't hear ignorant people boasting of their ignorance the way Sarah Palin did in her acceptance speech at the RNC. But in the middle of the country, esp the South, you do hear that. A lot. So much so that you can pretty much win a national election by appealing to that character flaw.

Now I'm not a Democrat, and I'm quite conservative on a number of issues, but they still call me "The Left" when dismissing me. I follow the example of my maternal uncle who said he was a Party Of One, he thought for himself, and made up his own mind. So I am totally Pro Choice, anti-death penalty, and I practice no religion. That's another reason people in the flyover states hate me.

But I've decided I don't care if they hate me or not. After all, they say that we as Americans shouldn't care whether people outside the United States hate us. So why should I care if they hate me?

Another reason they probably hate me, though few have the guts to say it openly, is that I'm Jewish. Many of them don't like immigrants. I was born in the US, but my parents weren't. I'm as much an American as any of them are, but I'll never agree with their paranoia about immigration.

They act as if they're the only ones who die in our wars or pay taxes or do hard or meaningful work. They feel pretty sorry for themselves. They didn't care a bit for NY until it provided them with an excuse to hate other people. Shit, you would think they would applaud the act of terrorism that destroyed the twin towers and all those New Yorkers! I've never figured that one out. I thought they hated liberals who live in NY?

And by the way, I do care if people outside the United States hate us, if they're right. If they're wrong, fuck em. But I'm willing to listen.

And all my religious brothers and sisters in the flyover states, aren't you supposed to in some way attone for your sins? If you fuck up, and break one of the Commandments, aren't you supposed to ask god to forgive you? I may not be religious but I do believe in greater beings. I do believe if you screw someone, it'll come back to you, so if I find out I'm doing something wrong, I stop doing it as soon as I can. Now does it say in the Bible that the Commandments don't apply to Muslims or Liberals? Heh.

In the debate on Friday, you could tell that Obama cared if people in the flyover states hate him, that's why when he listed the costs of the senseless war in Iraq, he didn't include the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died or whose lives were ruined in the war. The displacement, the devastation caused by the war is something people in Flyover-Land don't want to hear about. But why shouldn't we talk about it anyway, even if they don't want to hear about it? That's been our mistake, us bluestaters, we worry too much about what they think, we coddle them, and encourage their ignorance and naivete, to the point where their leader, McCain, says we're naive. No sir, that's not accurate. He's trying to keep the people in the middle of the country from knowing the awful truth. We've done some horrible things, the United States of America. And we should have stopped a long time ago. Not because of the money it cost us, or the allies who doubt us, or the relatively small number of American lives that have been lost or ruined. We've grieved plenty for ourselves. We haven't begun grieving for the people who we have aggrieved.

We excuse a lot in the name of ignorance, but we are not actually ignorant. That's the disconnect, our hypocrisy. Just because you blindly and forcefully assert that you did nothing wrong doesn't mean you actually did nothing wrong.

Here's what we did that was wrong: After being attacked by people who live in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, we took it out on people who live in Iraq, who had nothing to do with the attack. We killed many of them and destroyed their country.

We say it's not our fault because we didn't vote for Bush, but if you're an adult, you know that's not how it works. You and I, because we are Americans, are responsible for what America does. Once you realize that, you can't not talk about it.

Now for the good news. You can see the awakening beginning to happen, and its the looming financial collapse that's making it possible. On This Week, you could see George Will, Robert Reich and Newt Gingrich agreeing that the US needs to invest (key word there) in education, health care and infrastructure. Bing! Exactly right. At least 20 years too late, but better late than never.

People in Flyover Land, when you lose your manufacturing jobs and are reduced to government handouts, think about how we can work together, not who Did This To You -- for that we all need to look in the mirror. Boy were we blessed, we could have been really smart and worked together, but we didn't. Some of that is the bluestaters' fault because we cared too much about your hatred of us. So be it. That's the past. I believe we still have many blessings, and we're no worse off than anyone else on this planet. But we're also no better than they are either. It's our hubris, our arrogance and ignorance that led us to believe that we were.

More than any other country, the United States is a product of and part of every other country on the planet. That's our legacy, and our strength, because to get here, our ancestors had to be smart, hard-working and brave. That's the advantage of America.

PS: I'm turning comments off for this post. If you want to respond, post something on your blog. Thanks.

Update: Cross-posted at Huffington.

A broken clock is right twice a day

Sun, 28 Sep 2008 17:32:44 GMT

First a disclaimer. Andrew Keen's book is a piece of trash, he says things that enflame people just to enflame them, I don't want to do anything to encourage him.

That said...

He was on a Gillmor Gang last week discussing Sarah Palin with Steve and Michael Markman, and he said something profoundly correct, and surprisingly validates his theory about the Cult of the Amateur.

Sarah Palin is the ultimate expression of the lunacy of the belief, that I don't share, that amateurs should replace professionals in every walk of life. That's the false premise of Keen's book, that anyone is advocating this, but clearly the Republicans do actually believe that being President is something that any schnook can, and should do. It's so obviously not true, incredibly dangerous thinking, so dangerous it borders on treason.

It's provably ridiculous.

Would you get on a plane if you knew the person flying the plane had never flown one before?

Would you let a surgeon operate on you if you knew he or she hadn't been to medical school?

Do you think that operating the US government, and the military, is less complex and specialized as flying a plane or operating on a human being?

And before you say that Obama doesn't have the experience either, don't insult your own intelligence. No one has experience being President when they take the job for the first time. Not McCain, not Roosevelt or Reagan or Bush.

I read a piece this morning by Fareed Zakaria who said Palin was unqualified. That's overly polite. That someone like her can get as far as she has reveals a serious flaw in our form of government.

Update: Andrew Keen responds.

Bad news

Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:27:14 GMT

Get Susan Collins on the record

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:29:15 GMT

I had an idea while walking to the Hillside Club today. I was listening to a Nightline from last week, they were interviewing Susan Collins, one of two Republican senators from Maine (both are women, btw). She was talking about off-shore drilling and explaining why, even though there might be oil off the shore of Maine, they wouldn't support drilling because fishing off the coast is a huge part of their economy. Then they got around to Sarah Palin and she said Palin was a great choice, and how she had energized the Republican Party. I found this shocking. (Here's the clip.)

Then I realized it was an old podcast and she hadn't had a chance to see the Couric interview with Palin yet and wondered how she'd react if she had. I imagined that Collins, who is an intelligent, thoughtful and fairly liberal Republican, probably would find it offensive, and would be scared on behalf of the country as many of us are. So I wondered how we could get her on the record. My guess is she'd try like hell not to get asked that question.

Then I thought of a way to drag her into it, and I think we should do something about it.

First, let me tell you that my friend Andrew Baron did the mashup with Miss Teen USA and Sarah Palin and it's become a viral hit on YouTube. So we have flow to play with.

Imagine a split screen and on the left is Palin and on the right is Collins. For 30 seconds Collins is speaking. Then for 30 seconds Palin speaks. That's all. Compare the two. Ask a question -- why didn't the Republicans choose Collins?

The next day do the same thing with Christie Todd Whitman.

Then Kay Bailey Hutchinson.

Get the idea. Keep going with intelligent, thoughtful, well-spoken Republican women. Then throw in a few men like Tom Ridge or Mitt Romney.

Now here comes the fun part. Citizen journalists in Maine should try to get an interview with Collins, on camera, about Palin. Go where she goes, like the press does, and just ask. Eventually you'll get some good footage and we'll run it on the Palin Channel on YouTube.

Everywhere there's a Republican, ask them about Palin and how prepared she is to be Commander In Chief or Economist In Chief. Make her issue #1. The Republicans will keep trying to bury the Palin issue, but we should keep digging it up!

What do you think??

Congress should ratify the Paulson plan as-is

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:03:58 GMT

It seems today is the day when everyone is putting their stake in the ground, so I thought since I have a blog, and a stake, I should put my two cents in too.

First, when people ask why should we the people bail out Wall Street when they caused the problem in the first place? Well, they did, but so did the rest of us. If you took out a second mortgage to pay living expenses or to buy luxury, you were living high on the real estate bubble, you caused the problem too, and we're bailing you out. Might as well start placing responsibility where it really belongs, and take some yourself.

Second, I know these Republicans are dicks, and they lied about the pretense for war, and just yesterday they admitted to discussing torture in The White House (which is worse than what Bill Clinton did in the White House). There's no reason to trust them, but I've weighed all the evidence and decided, again, we don't have a choice but to believe them. It might all be a scam again, but it probably isn't.

Third, this isn't a moral thing -- if it were, we would let everyone fail so they can learn their lesson and pass down the lessons so it doesn't happen again. But right now it's a question of what's a good use of our money. And there seems to be no choice about that, if you trust Warren Buffet, and I don't see any reason not to.

NY Daily News: "Warren Buffett urged quick action and compared the current crisis to Pearl Harbor."

Now, is it really all that much money? I don't think so...

If you average the $700 billion over the population it's somewhere between $2K and $10K per (depending on whether you count people or households). So let's figure this one out. If there's a market crash on Monday, and if the credit crisis is real, you might lose your job, or your savings, or both. Most people are still in their houses, you might lose your house. You have kids who want to go to college, etc, etc. Are you willing to put down $10K to make sure that doesn't happen? You may come to a different conclusion, but I'd be willing to pay ten times that to make sure we don't have an economic collapse.

About all the michegas they want to tack on to the proposal -- come on get real! None of that is going to make a difference. It's all the same old shit, it'll go to the same industries that always get our handouts, we won't see any of it. Don't delay the whole thing and take a chance on a crash for something with zero upside.

That's how I see it. We'll find out, I suppose, who is right.

An aside: It's not surprising that we failed to remember the lessons of the Great Depression and gradually removed the regulations that were put in place after the financial collapse of 1929. What is amazing is that we also failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam, which happened to the generation in power when the decision was made to go to war in Iraq. I guess the economic regulations worked for a while. Maybe we should pass some new laws regulating war.

Palin-Couric, part II

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:47:42 GMT

Sarah Teen USA Palin

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 02:35:23 GMT

Another McCain bombshell/Hail Mary?

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:21:55 GMT

Taegan Goddard just posted a piece at CQ suggesting that McCain may be preparing to join Republicans in voting against the bailout. If so, he's basically saying "No way am I going down for this, Bush, it's your problem, you take the fall."

An interesting discussion followed my post yesterday outlining four possible scenarios for the bailout negotiations in DC. The whole thing is playing out now in DC.

We're moving toward options 3 or 4.

I don't think it's #1. It could be #4. I kind of hope it's #3.

Palin-Couric interview

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:12:10 GMT

It's not over until Bush and Cheney leave town

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:30:24 GMT

There are four distinct possibilities.

1. The need for a bailout is a bluff, so nothing happens and Bush finally looks wholly like the idiot asshole that he is. McCain suspended his campaign for nothing. The Republican Party loses in a landslide in November.

2. McCain votes for the bailout, providing cover for other Republicans to follow him, and enough Democrats will sign on so the bailout passes. The Republicans who vote for it blame McCain for the mess, and he loses to Obama, in a landslide, and the Republicans lose more seats, but most of them get re-elected anyway. (Democratic voters think the bailout sucks but it's not a matter of religion for them as it is with the Republicans.)

3. McCain convinces Bush & Cheney to resign, Pelosi becomes President until January 20, and a Democratic Congress and Executive passes the bailout, all Republicans who have conservative constituencies vote against it and win re-election in November. A few Democratic incumbents get thrown out because the public will hate the bailout, even if it works. Pretty good chance the next Senate has a Republican majority, maybe the House too.

4. The need for a bailout is not a bluff, Bush refuses to leave, McCain refuses to sacrifice his candidacy, the Republicans in Congress won't vote for the bailout so neither will the Democrats, and the world economy melts down.

Okay it's your choice. Which of the four scenarios do you think will prevail?

I think the hot potato lands in Bush's lap. His father comes down and tells him playtime is over, he has to leave to save the world economy, and what little remains of the Bush name, and we limp along until Obama takes office on Jan 20.

Now McCain wants to cancel the VP debate

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:15:40 GMT

Maybe this was the whole point of all the gimickry of McCain's announcements today, to provide a lot of smoke to hide the fact that they can't put Palin up in front of the country live.

CNN: "McCain supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham tells CNN the McCain campaign is proposing to the Presidential Debate Commission and the Obama camp that if there's no bailout deal by Friday, the first presidential debate should take the place of the VP debate, currently scheduled for next Thursday, October 2 in St. Louis."

Aside from the financial crisis, the candidacy of John McCain is melting down today. Never seen anything like this.

McCain to suspend campaign

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:56:56 GMT

11:55AM: Just heard an announcement on MSNBC that McCain has requested that Friday's debate be postponed so he can focus on the economic plan in front of Congress. He also said he plans to suspend his campaign until the crisis is resolved? Not clear on exactly what was said, but this is obviously a big deal.

AP: McCain calls for debate delay.

First reaction -- this is the right thing to do. Whether you like it or not, McCain's vote on this matter is pivotal, and being in debate prep is probably not the best place for him to be.

Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) says he's not so sure McCain's presence is needed in DC. He says the American people could hear from the candidates in the debate. So it's not clear that Obama is going to react positively to the McCain move.

Picture of McCain announcing the suspension of his campaign.

My first reaction was probably wrong -- this was an intensely political decision by McCain and a bit of a double-cross as Obama was trying to work out an agreement between the campaigns privately when McCain decided to go public.

Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post has background.

Lots of new stories on today's NewsJunk.

Wonkette calls McC's move a bluff-in-vain. "You could tell after seeing that new Washington Post/ABC News poll this morning that McCain would need one helluva muppet stunt to get himself a farthingworth's of non-horrendous attention."

"The debate is on," a senior Obama campaign official told ABC News.

MP3 of Obama response to McCain.

Listen to yesterday's FreshAir

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:33:59 GMT

If you want to spend 40 minutes getting a high-speed update on the financial crisis, I highly recommend yesterday's Fresh Air interview with NY Times financial reporter Gretchen Morgenson.

There's a chin-dropping number in the interview. $60 trillion. It's the dollar value of insurance purchased to back up the money market. It's as if all the neighborhoods in the world were on fire and the insurance industry is going to have to deal with claims on all of it. Obviously, they never planned for that. But there's a lot more shocking stuff in the interview, and it raises far more questions than it answers. If you're like me, and put off understanding how our financial system really works, I'd suggest clearing out 40 minutes and have a listen.

Update: Aaron Pressman, in a comment on this post, suggests (gently, much appreciated) a rewording. "The $62 trillion (not $60) is the total amount of credit default swaps, or insurance policies, that financial firms have written on all types of debt, not just money markets. So: It's the dollar value of insurance purchased to back up bond market investments. It's the amount that banks and insurers are on the hook for if absolutely everything goes down the tubes."

What if a Great Depression starts this week, part 2

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:14:05 GMT

If you love movies as I do the Great Depression was a time of tremendous growth in the art of moving pictures. Some great technology had just come online at the end of the Roaring Twenties, talking pictures, and that art matured in the 30s, when some of the greatest movies of all time were produced. So if there's going to be a Great Depression, get ready to go to the movies, a lot!

Did McCain know Davis was on Freddie's payroll?

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:14:07 GMT

The first question raised by this amazing NY Times piece:

Did McCain know his campaign manager was also on the Freddie Mac payroll?

If he knew, McCain is corrupt to the core, if he didn't -- he's a figurehead who his own people don't respect or protect.

Either way it's not a good thing for a potential future President.

My guess, and it's just my guess is that McCain didn't know, that he sold his campaign to Davis and Schmidt when it was clear he had no way to win against Obama, and in doing so guaranteed himself a ceremonial role in his own administration if they could win the election. These are the people who write the speeches for Pailin, who designed her candidacy and it's looking more and more like Frank Rich hit the bulls eye in his Sept 13 piece about Palin and Whathisname (that would be McCain). McCain is the old brand that gets this crowd of Bush/Cheney/Rove Republicans back in the White House. After the election they'll just resume doing what they were doing during the previous two Republican administrations. And it still might work. It's hard to imagine that this revelation will mean much to people already planning to vote for McCain.

McCain's blogger calls the NY Times "an Obama advocacy organization."

The real estate bubble

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 02:28:11 GMT

I wonder if a lot of people understand how the financial crisis came to be. I'm not sure I would understand it if I hadn't gone to visit a friend who in the Sierra foothills last year.

She had inherited a house at a resort 10 years ago and had been living there ever since. It's a big house, but the construction wasn't finished. There were fixtures to be installed upstairs, and the driveway wasn't paved, but for the most part it was done.

She didn't have a job, but she had been taking out loans on the property every couple of years, and at first I didn't understand how she could do that, until I realized that the property value had kept increasing so even though she was spending most of the money she borrowed on living expenses and improvements to the property, she always had equity she could borrow against. Every two years she'd take out another loan, max out her equity, but in a couple of years the value would go up and she'd be able to take out another loan.

Until the value stopped going up, then the party was over. She still had to make payments, but now she didn't have the means to. She defaulted, left the house, and the bank took over. If they could sell it, it would be at a considerable loss.

I think a lot of people were doing that.

And I think that's where the trouble started. Making those loans was a profitable business, and a lot of people wanted some of the action. At one point I even wondered how I could, but I never (thankfully) figured it out. As long as real estate kept going up, everyone kept making money. There was even a way to rationalize it. The United States is where everyone in the world wanted to live. So property would keep increasing in value as long as there was growth somewhere in the world. But it turns out that China and India, Russia and Brazil are pouring their new money into their own countries, reproducing the infrastructure we already have, building their own highways, hospitals and universities.

When real estate started going down, the value of all those mortgages went down, in some cases way way down. Then the house of cards built on the ever-increasing value of real estated collapsed. That's the part you've been reading about. Banks need to have a certain dollar value of assets to back loans they get from other banks. When the value of the assets go down, their loans get called, they have to sell these assets to pay back their creditors, but no one wants to buy them. That's when you hold up the big Fail sign and hope someone thinks you're too big to Fail.

But really, this is probably the shit hitting the fan, it's probably not a liquidity crisis as Paulson says. It's our laziness, our thinking that our superior military and nukes would guarantee us a permanent position at the top of the pyramid. We don't make enough of the things people want these days, and instead of investing in building better education, health and infrastructure, and solving the energy problem, we've been lying to ourselves.

We also fucked up by electing idiots to lead us, and letting the press get away with providing entertainment instead of keeping us informed on what the rest of the world was doing. This led us to elect ever more dishonest idiots to lead us, and they didn't like what little oversight the press provided leading to the ridiculous situation where the candidates won't even sit down for an interview, and you can hardly blame them, the reporters are such incompetent jerks.

I heard someone say that the real estate bubble isn't the problem it's the canary in the coalmine, the first financial crisis of a series of crises. I believe this is probably true. I thought we had time to solve these problems, what Obama was saying and certainly still is saying are the right things: education, health care, infrastructure, energy. And pull back from the short cuts. We can't afford boondoggles like the war in Iraq, but it may already be too late.

No matter what, as a country we have to stop looking for the quick fixes, and start thinking about our future and doing the things we need to do to have one.

Of course all this comes at an opportune moment. We can change direction on November 4. That's not actually very far away and another opportunity like that won't come for a long time. Something to think about.

Bush and Cheney must resign

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:09:38 GMT

I'm absolutely sure the economic bailout story is going to end with Bush and Cheney resigning. Or more accurately, not end, but move on to the next phase. Pretty sure they will be gone by the end of the week.

It's the only thing that will give Republicans cover, and will let the Democrats feel they are not being set up. It will get everyone's attention and remove the theory that it's more Bush-Cheney deception.

Bush and Cheney have no credibility, the only thing they can do right now to help the country, if that's really what they're doing, is to step aside.

I wrote up the idea in more detail yesterday.

It's going to shake a lot of people up, but they have to go, now.

A sure sign this idea will come up on a broader level is this story on Politico about an open rebellion among House Republicans in a meeting with Cheney earlier today.

Meanwhile OpenLeft says the Paulson plan is a sham, and former Speaker Gingrich urges Congress to reject it, saying any Rep that votes for it will lose in the November election.

Update: An alternate theory -- if McCain puts his head on the chopping block that could provide enough cover for Republicans and Democrats to vote for the proposal.

I don't use my iPhone as a computer

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:18:15 GMT

I bought my iPhone on June 29 last year, the first day they were available. A couple of months later, I realized I wasn't using my Blackberry and a couple of months after that, I turned it off. I don't miss it, even though I loved it when I was using it because it meant I didn't have to lug around my laptop to be in range of email and Twitter.

Now a funny thing has happened since I got my Asus, I've stopped using my iPhone as anything other than a phone. The Asus is a much better computer than the iPhone, and eventually I think I will come to use it as a phone too (with Skype). I won't give up much since I have an EVDO modem, so I'll be able to use it anywhere I can use an iPhone.

I won't miss using the iPhone as an iPod because that part of the iPhone only worked for the first couple of weeks, after that, no matter what I do, even after reformatting the phone several times, and using it on different computers, I can't get it to synch music or videos with the desktop computer. Never mind that synching with a desktop computer is ridiculous for a fully capable computer as the iPhone is, but that's the point -- iPhones are crippled computers, from the start, designed not to function like a computer. So why would anyone think you could happily get it to work like one?

That's the sad conclusion to the tale of Alex Sokirynsky, the developer of the Podcaster app. He built the software Apple hasn't gotten around to building and as far as we know never plans to build. HIs software works the way I always intended podcasting to work. Go listen to the early Trade Secrets podcasts I did with Adam Curry four years ago in Seattle. We talked about podcast player devices that had wifi receivers that downloaded and played your favorite programs without help from a bigger computer. Synching was never part of the vision of podcasting. You can see it as requirement #1 on my spec for a new podcast player device in the piece I wrote for the BBC last year.

Anyway, no need to wait for Apple. As Sokirynsky says, there will be other platforms, and it would be easy to make a perfect podcast player app for the Asus. It has such long battery life, and you can configure Windows to keep running when you shut the laptop cover, so there's no problem using it as a player. It's a bit overkill, but then Apple doesn't make a rational podcast player, and willfully shuts one down created by a developer, so it's the best we have right now.

And today's Asus actually costs $200 less than the iPhone I bought last June.

Yeah I think I'm beginning to move away from Apple, again. We'll see how it goes.

What if a Great Depression starts this week?

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:43:23 GMT

How do you prepare for a Great Depression? I was thinking of doing an extra backup. Ordering a few month supply of MREs from Amazon? What else?

Always thinking ahead, it's possible that by this time next week our economy will lie in ruins, people will be hungry in the streets, out of work, and we'll all be in for an incredible hardship possibly for the rest of our lives.

Last night at dinner I was musing about this subject. There still are plenty of people around who remember the last Depression. I think some people held onto their work and dignity and were able to put food on the table and stay in their homes. My house was built just before the Depression and it's still here.

I don't have a job now, I guess I'm basically retired, although I'm always looking for a new deal that I could make money with. I've basically been retired this way since I got out of grad school in 1979.

Anyway, I hope we avoid the Depression. I kind of like the way things were going there, hope we can get around this corner without electing a fascist government too.

PS: I recently saw The Dancer Upstairs, which I enjoyed, and in it there's a character, a woman, who is always asking what she should wear to this or that. At one point she asks what she should wear to a revolution. I thought of Meg Fowler, and wondered what she would wear to a Great Depression. What's the right kind of makeup? Shoes? I admit to not understanding women or Great Depressions, but am fascinated by both.

We won't get fooled again

Sun, 21 Sep 2008 21:59:10 GMT

There's this great Who song that you should play before reading this post. One of the greatest rock and roll bands of all time. They sang about their generation and the magic bus, told Tommy to go to the mirror, but today's song is about not getting fooled again.

Flash back to the United Nations on 2/5/03. An impressive almost Presidential Secretary of State, Colin Powell, delivering some chilling news, not coming right out and saying it, but definitely leading you to believe that Saddam has nukes and chemical weapons and stuff even more horrible and is getting ready to use all of it in some unspecified horrible way. It's the lack of specificity that makes it so chilling.

Consider the whole scenario. Powell can't tell us what the danger is because that would violate some security that he can't violate. Well, I did what a lot of Americans did that day, I sucked it up and got behind my government. And they suckered me. And I'll never forget it. I got fooled, and used, and a lot of people died, in the name of freedom, and it was all a lie.

We all paid a huge price that day, and the bill may be coming due today, because they're presenting us with the same scenario, this time about the economy. And we're not going for it. You can see it in the way things flipped around overnight. A lot of people woke up this morning, like I did, and realized -- wait I've seen this movie before.

Now we have another impressive Almost Presidential secretary, Henry Paulson, who says there's impending doom, but he can't say exactly what it is, it's not security this time, but fear of starting another level of bank runs. Senators and Representatives come out of a Thursday night meeting with the secretary (would they have believed the President) won't say exactly what he said, but they are stunned. The next day buried in a sea of press about this event is an almost innocuous paragraph in a NYT piece that talks about a flight to safety from the US Treasury money market. OMG. A point made by the secretary to the Congresspeople, a lot of your constituents have their savings in money markets. The Senators think to themselves, Fuck the constituents, that's where my retirement savings are! (And by the way, mine.)

An aside, I never realized this until recently, but Congress was very easily whipped by fear of terrorism. The fourth plane on Sept 11 was likely headed for them. We were all so busy thinking about ourselves we forgot to notice that they had a huge conflict of interest, they were targets on Sept 11, and probably many of them suffering from post-traumatic stress from it.

Anyway, back to our story...

Having been fooled once, sure there are some among us who will be fooled again, but we will not all be fooled again, as evidenced by the posts on all kinds of blogs. This is one of those amazing days that except for stylistic elements the extreme right and the extreme left are in agreement. We can't trust Paulson the way he's asking to be trusted. It wouldn't be prudent.

On the other hand, what if they're right, and don't want to speak the unspeakable for fear of provoking a run on the credit markets that would wipe out your savings and mine? If you've been conservative, as I have and many other have, do you want to be poor? Want to lose your house? Want to live on the street? No health care. No job. How long do you think you'd last? Think it might be worth $1 trillion to prevent that? I do. I bet you do too. But we can't do it on the terms that Paulson asks for. There has to be some pain and there has to be oversight and checks and balances. There's no such thing as a law passed by Congress that can't be judged by the courts. Not in the USA, not under our form of government. And no way is Bush going to get that by us.

So here's what I propose. The Republican slogan today is Country First. So let's see the Republicans do a little of that famous Country First stuff.

Bush and Cheney must resign immediately. No immunity, no pardons. Nancy Pelosi will become President, promising not to run for re-election on November 4. Her term will be one of the shortest in US history, just long enough to enact the provisions of the bill being proposed by the Republican administration. If it really is the best thing for the country and not a trick, then the Republicans, being impressed by the seriousness of it, would have to insist that Bush step aside and let the Democrats execute the plan. The entire Bush cabinet stays in office through January 20, but reports, of course to Pelosi. And that includes Paulson.

It's pretty simple. If they won't do it, we know they're bluffing.

If they will, I will give my support to the plan, even though I still don't know what will happen if I don't.

Updated: An abbreviated to-the-point version of this piece on Huff.