And the envelope please ...
The nominees for head of the G.O.P. are Rush Bunker and Michael Jefferson. May I have the envelope please ... and the Oscar goes to ... Oh, my gosh. The name was written in disappearing ink.
WILL TRUTH BECOME THE FIRST CASUALTY OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION?
Today's reports that President-Elect Obama intends to avoid investigating and reporting to the American people the details of the Bush administrations actions raise the troubling prospect that Bush's misdeed will never be thoroughly investigated. The bottom line is that unless the Obama investigates and reports on the actions of the Bush administration, we probably will never learn the truth.
It will be too bad indeed if truth becomes the first casualty of the Obama administration.
Advertisement
The Greatest Myth
Reading the work of so many columnists you might think that the last election represents a tectonic shift in the electorate. That is the greatest of many myths promulgated by the pundit class. The truth is:
47 OUT OF EVERY 100 VOTERS CAST THEIR BALLOTS AGAINST OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
The GOPpers are not out and they are barely down. In most states the number of registered Republicans is only about 33% of all registered voters. The GOP's appeal to both its card carrying members and its cadre of independents remains strong and threatens real change.
Our work ain't done yet folks.
Moving Ahead
The Democratic gains in the last election have been impressive, truly impressive. But I wonder, how far have we really come. I believe there are four key issues that will unfold early in the Obama administration that will tell us just how effective President-Elect Obama will be and whether he restore.
Zell Lieberman. Despite Sen. Lieberman's antics during his campaign to join the Republican party, many Democrats in the Senate are supporting Sen. Lieberman's bid to retain his position as chair of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Keeping Sen. Lieberman as Chair of that committee will indicate a woeful lack of determination to correct the excesses of the Bush administration in curtailing civil liberties. A progressive agenda demands a Chair willing to conduct tough investigations and hearings on the Bush administration's conduct. Lieberman clearly is not the right person for that job. However, Lieberman is just the right person for business as usual in Washington.
The Bush Claims of Executive Privilege. The Congress should pursue numerous investigations that have been stymied by President Bush's assertions of executive privilege. Whether Congress actually will pursue those investigations remains unclear. Pelosi and Reid have shown a lack of leadership to date. Those investigations and hearings should take place early (before March), otherwise they will be history rather than news. Obama may take some unilateral actions (waiver of privilege, compelling testimony, uncovering and publishing documents) as President to shine some light on Bush's actions. Unfortunately, Presidents in office seem to have little interest in exposing the wrongful or imcompetent conduct of the outgoing administration. Let's see whether either the President-Elect or the Democratic leadership will take appropriate action.
The Bailout. The bailout now in progress seems to be running amok. Congress has no idea where the money has gone. Moreover, we still do not have a clear statement of what the bailout aims to correct. Those who know (Paulson, et al) won't say. Until we at least learn where the taxpayers' money has gone, nobody can make a credible claim of having insisted upon accountability. That includes Pelosi, Reid and the President-Elect.
Further, it appears that the bailout will not succeed and the economy will not recover until the mortgage foreclosure crisis has been abated. The best hope for dealing with foreclosures is to let the Bankruptcy courts reform the mortgages. The Bush administration has been stonewalling on giving the Bankruptcy Courts jurisdiction to reform mortgage loans.
Obama will either take charge on this critical economic issue or lose his credibility.
Healthcare Reform. No issue is more important to our economic competitiveness than healthcare. As long as our business entities remain burdened with excessive healthcare costs, they never will be able to compete globally. If healthcare reform is not enacted, state and local governments will continue to with offer greater and greater concessions to attract new businesses. Our irrational commitment to employer-based healthcare lies at the root of our inability to create new jobs.
Obama seems to have at least a broad outline for a national healthcare plan. If he fails to enact healthcare reform immediately, I expect to see economic stagnation rather than recovery.
Zell Lieberman - GOP Wannabe
Zell Lieberman has spent the last year running for Repbulican and away from the hopes and dreams of his own party. The time has come. Hopefully Senator Reid and the Democrat caucus will give Zell Lieberman the window seat he has earned and so richly deserves.
Lieberman will then have the opportunity to redeem himself by supporting his own party.
Advertisement
The Non-Coverage of Critical Issues
If Barack Obama is correct that is the most important election of our lifetimes, then why has the coverage of critical issues been so superficial?
The most important issue in this campaign is health care. John McCain proposes a program that revolves around a $5,000 tax credit. Nobody, as far as I can determine, has taken a critical look the effect of such a proposal.
The greatest problem health care problems Americans now face is the loss of health insurance that accompanies the loss of a job. A great many who lose their jobs cannot afford to purchase replacement coverage while they are unemployed and looking for another job. That issue is especially critical in light of the economy.
The most serious deficiency of the McCain plan is that it provides no immediate help for those who have lost jobs and cannot afford replacement coverage. When a worker loses her job in February, how will a $5,000 tax credit to be received the following April 15th help her to pay monthly premiums and prevent her from joining the ranks of the uninsured?
Any meaningful comparison of the candidates' plans should address this critical issue. No evaluation or comparison that I have read, heard or seen in the mainstream media addresses this issue.
To be sure, one can think of ways in which a "tax credit" might be shaped to address this issues -- for example a prorated portion of the "tax credit" might be included with unemployment compensation, or alternatively paid directly to an unemployed worker's health insurer.
The point is that such fixes to the McCain plan stand our notions of "tax credits" and "single payer" on their heads and encourage genuine debate.
Whipsawed - Pelosi, Reid and the Palin - Pork Bailout Plan
Today the House takes up the Palin-Pork Bailout Plan passed by the Senate. While the outcome is not quite certain, the probable result is a flawed bailout plan enacted with preciously little critical thought, no meaningful debate and an almost total failure of the Democratic Congressional leadership.
Once again Bush and his GOP horde have whipsawed the Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate. The issue may change, but the script remains the same. Bush announces a crisis and proposes sweeping legislation. Democratic leadership, frozen like a deer in the headlights, rolls over in a spirit of "bipartisanship". This time, the GOPpers in the House have raised the stakes and demanded that the Democratic leadership lard up the bailout with enough pork to justify GOP support for a Bush proposal. In past crises, the GOPpers have been content to double down on the Bush proposal and play to their "conservative base". The change in GOP tactics highlight the weakness of Democratic leadership in Congress.
How many days will pass before we see Pelosi and Reid breaking their arms patting themselves on the back for their "bipartisan" leadership in passing the Paulson-Pork Bailout Plan? Well Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid, the Circus Rule has caught up with you. We won't be fooled this time.
The credit crisis has been brewing for months and has been on page one of virtually every newspaper for several weeks -- more than enough time for the leadership to formulate an effective bailout plan and at least schedule hearings. Instead, our fearless leadership has done nothing and let the lame duck administration take the lead. What might our fearless leaders have done?
Well, the answer is plain.
Pelosi and Reid could have formulated a Democratic Credit Market Reform Bill -- a bill to stem the tide of mortgage foreclosures and tighten regulation of the credit markets. Such a plan would begin with giving the Bankruptcy Courts jurisdiction to reform mortgages, granting additional authority to the Treasury Department and the SEC to regulate financial markets and establishing a Select Committee with subpoena power to conduct hearings for 60 days to determine the scope of the credit crisis and its causes. Armed with such a record the incoming Congress and President would have a record that could be the basis for truly effective reform.
As pitifully as Palin's performed in last night's debate, she got one thing exactly right. The American people outside the Beltway don't understand, believe in, or support the tactics of an ineffective Democratic leadership in Congress.
Once again Bush and his GOP horde have whipsawed the Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate. The issue may change, but the script remains the same. Bush announces a crisis and proposes sweeping legislation. Democratic leadership, frozen like a deer in the headlights, rolls over in a spirit of "bipartisanship". This time, the GOPpers in the House have raised the stakes and demanded that the Democratic leadership lard up the bailout with enough pork to justify GOP support for a Bush proposal. In past crises, the GOPpers have been content to double down on the Bush proposal and play to their "conservative base". The change in GOP tactics highlight the weakness of Democratic leadership in Congress.
How many days will pass before we see Pelosi and Reid breaking their arms patting themselves on the back for their "bipartisan" leadership in passing the Paulson-Pork Bailout Plan? Well Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid, the Circus Rule has caught up with you. We won't be fooled this time.
The credit crisis has been brewing for months and has been on page one of virtually every newspaper for several weeks -- more than enough time for the leadership to formulate an effective bailout plan and at least schedule hearings. Instead, our fearless leadership has done nothing and let the lame duck administration take the lead. What might our fearless leaders have done?
Well, the answer is plain.
Pelosi and Reid could have formulated a Democratic Credit Market Reform Bill -- a bill to stem the tide of mortgage foreclosures and tighten regulation of the credit markets. Such a plan would begin with giving the Bankruptcy Courts jurisdiction to reform mortgages, granting additional authority to the Treasury Department and the SEC to regulate financial markets and establishing a Select Committee with subpoena power to conduct hearings for 60 days to determine the scope of the credit crisis and its causes. Armed with such a record the incoming Congress and President would have a record that could be the basis for truly effective reform.
As pitifully as Palin's performed in last night's debate, she got one thing exactly right. The American people outside the Beltway don't understand, believe in, or support the tactics of an ineffective Democratic leadership in Congress.
BAILOUT FEARS
The much discussed bailout may be passed tomorrow. The bailout "debate" has been too short and too shallow. As a result, I have more fears than hopes for the success of the bailout.
Fear No. 1 Weapons of Mass Destruction. The actual problem has not been sufficiently identified. Apparently the credit markets are beginning to dry up. Consumers continue to receive credit card solicitations, but the commercial paper market reportedly has contracted.
The cause, according to the Bush administration, is too many mortgages are in default. The mortgage defaults have caused other financial instruments vaguely identified as "derivatives" to decline in value. Apparently Paulson intends to spend $700 billion to purchase such "derivatives". But not one news story I have seen accurately identifies the "derivatives" to be purchased, the identity of the issuer of such "derivatives" the financial institutions holding such "derivates" or the number and value of such "derivatives" held by each financial institution.
Congress is about to appropriate $700 billion to purchase securities that it cannot identify any more accurately than the weapons of mass destruction it authorized a war to find.
The so-called debate on the Paulson has never gotten beyond an exchange of metaphors. Surely we can hope that our Congress can shed more light on the greatest financial crisis of our time.
Fear No. 2 The purpose of the bailout is to conceal a massive securities fraud. The bailout plan is so vague as to the relationship between the underlying mortgage pools and the "derivatives" that the vagueness surely is intentional. The first question that I ask is whether all or some the financial institutions that issued the "derivatives" effectively sold the underlying mortgages many times over. If the issuers did that, then fraud is almost surely involved. And both the administration and Congress owe the taxpayers a candid explanation of why they find it necessary and appropriate to spend $700 billion to conceal fraud.
If the "derivatives" to purchased are nothing more than fraudulently issued securities, the "derivatives" are almost surely worthless and we taxpayers have no hope of getting our $700 billion back. We need to know that before Congress appropriates the money.
Moreover, if the "derivatives" are nothing more than fraudulently issued securities, the Bush administration and Congress probably do not know the actual scope of the fraud and just how much money will be needed to buy up fraudulently issued derivatives.
The fact that none of the issuers of the "derivatives" to be purchased has appeared before Congress to testify under oath to catalog and explain the "derivatives" raises suspicion that the "derivatives" have been fraudulently issued.
Fear No. 3 The Bush administration does not understand the crisis well enough to formulate and implement a solution. This crisis seems to be overwhelming the Bush administration. Paulson has engaged in a wide range of bailouts and interventions that seem to be symptoms of an underlying problem. Paulson's bailouts and interventions appear to have been ineffective. The Bush administration either will not or cannot define the underlying problem and take appropriate steps to address it. I have the impression that Bush is merely hoping to throw enough money at the crisis to keep the crisis at bay for the remainder of his term.John McCain's statement in last night's that the bailout "is not beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning" of the crisis speaks volumes.
When the next President takes office, Bush can then say, "I didn't let the crisis blowup on my watch."
Despite the apparent problems, Congress has not called upon representative of the financial industry to testify as to the scope and cause of the crisis.
$700 billion is too much to pay if we cannot be reasonably sure that the administration understands the problem and has formulated an effective solution.
Fear No. 1 Weapons of Mass Destruction. The actual problem has not been sufficiently identified. Apparently the credit markets are beginning to dry up. Consumers continue to receive credit card solicitations, but the commercial paper market reportedly has contracted.
The cause, according to the Bush administration, is too many mortgages are in default. The mortgage defaults have caused other financial instruments vaguely identified as "derivatives" to decline in value. Apparently Paulson intends to spend $700 billion to purchase such "derivatives". But not one news story I have seen accurately identifies the "derivatives" to be purchased, the identity of the issuer of such "derivatives" the financial institutions holding such "derivates" or the number and value of such "derivatives" held by each financial institution.
Congress is about to appropriate $700 billion to purchase securities that it cannot identify any more accurately than the weapons of mass destruction it authorized a war to find.
The so-called debate on the Paulson has never gotten beyond an exchange of metaphors. Surely we can hope that our Congress can shed more light on the greatest financial crisis of our time.
Fear No. 2 The purpose of the bailout is to conceal a massive securities fraud. The bailout plan is so vague as to the relationship between the underlying mortgage pools and the "derivatives" that the vagueness surely is intentional. The first question that I ask is whether all or some the financial institutions that issued the "derivatives" effectively sold the underlying mortgages many times over. If the issuers did that, then fraud is almost surely involved. And both the administration and Congress owe the taxpayers a candid explanation of why they find it necessary and appropriate to spend $700 billion to conceal fraud.
If the "derivatives" to purchased are nothing more than fraudulently issued securities, the "derivatives" are almost surely worthless and we taxpayers have no hope of getting our $700 billion back. We need to know that before Congress appropriates the money.
Moreover, if the "derivatives" are nothing more than fraudulently issued securities, the Bush administration and Congress probably do not know the actual scope of the fraud and just how much money will be needed to buy up fraudulently issued derivatives.
The fact that none of the issuers of the "derivatives" to be purchased has appeared before Congress to testify under oath to catalog and explain the "derivatives" raises suspicion that the "derivatives" have been fraudulently issued.
Fear No. 3 The Bush administration does not understand the crisis well enough to formulate and implement a solution. This crisis seems to be overwhelming the Bush administration. Paulson has engaged in a wide range of bailouts and interventions that seem to be symptoms of an underlying problem. Paulson's bailouts and interventions appear to have been ineffective. The Bush administration either will not or cannot define the underlying problem and take appropriate steps to address it. I have the impression that Bush is merely hoping to throw enough money at the crisis to keep the crisis at bay for the remainder of his term.John McCain's statement in last night's that the bailout "is not beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning" of the crisis speaks volumes.
When the next President takes office, Bush can then say, "I didn't let the crisis blowup on my watch."
Despite the apparent problems, Congress has not called upon representative of the financial industry to testify as to the scope and cause of the crisis.
$700 billion is too much to pay if we cannot be reasonably sure that the administration understands the problem and has formulated an effective solution.
WALMART MOM - SPLENDID METAPHOR
What a splendid metaphor -- Sarah Palin -- WALMART MOM.
What better way to highlight an extreme right-winger's traditional Republican values -- anti-union, anti-labor, undying devotion to corporate special interests and foreign manufacturing.
Go GOP, go -- you won't be missed
Family Values ... and Good Judgment
Sarah Palin -- just another hockey mom championing family values from the governor's office.
Well, family values begin with good judgment on family matters. Nothing is more important than providing children with a good example of sound, adult judgment. Sarah Palin life shows a woeful lack of good judgment in family planning.
In this day and age, how does a mature woman -- over forty -- have an unplanned pregnancy?
Why would a mature woman who is as strongly anti-abortion as Sarah Palin plan a pregnancy given the substantial risk of having a child afflicted with Downs Syndrome?
What do women think of her judgment on family planning?
Do women expect a good judgment on family planning matters from a female governor?
Well, family values begin with good judgment on family matters. Nothing is more important than providing children with a good example of sound, adult judgment. Sarah Palin life shows a woeful lack of good judgment in family planning.
In this day and age, how does a mature woman -- over forty -- have an unplanned pregnancy?
Why would a mature woman who is as strongly anti-abortion as Sarah Palin plan a pregnancy given the substantial risk of having a child afflicted with Downs Syndrome?
What do women think of her judgment on family planning?
Do women expect a good judgment on family planning matters from a female governor?
Sen. Zell Lieberman - Running for Republican
This evening Sen. Zell Lieberman appeared before the Republican to speak in support of his bid to become a card-carrying Republican. Well, judging from the lukewarm reception he received from the delegates, Zell Lieberman may have to earn his way into the GOP by knocking on doors and dropping literature in his home state.
Sen. Zell Lieberman - Running for Republican
This evening Sen. Zell Lieberman appeared before the Republican to speak in support of his bid to become a card-carrying Republican. Well, judging from the lukewarm reception he received from the delegates, Zell Lieberman may have to earn his way into the GOP by knocking on doors and dropping literature in his home state.
Get Over It Already
Hillary lost. She lost not because of sexism but because she deserved to lose.
Hillary never satisfactorily explained her vote for the war in Iraq. How could you expect her to beat Obama without doing so?
Hillary has become the poster child for supporting corporate special interests. Just compare her record in Congress with that of say Paul Wellstone. How can a Democrat win in 2008 without being an authentic populist?
Hillary speaks as forcefully and eloquently as Obama. Her speech on Tuesday evening at the Convention was just brilliant ... rhetorically. But, unlike Obama, Hillary just doesn't ring true. I find myself comparing her words with her actions and I just can't believe that she really intends to bring about the change we desparately need.
That's why Hillary did not get my vote and why she did not win the nomination.
So, get over and let's get on with it. The race is too close to call at this point and we all need to work together.
Hillary never satisfactorily explained her vote for the war in Iraq. How could you expect her to beat Obama without doing so?
Hillary has become the poster child for supporting corporate special interests. Just compare her record in Congress with that of say Paul Wellstone. How can a Democrat win in 2008 without being an authentic populist?
Hillary speaks as forcefully and eloquently as Obama. Her speech on Tuesday evening at the Convention was just brilliant ... rhetorically. But, unlike Obama, Hillary just doesn't ring true. I find myself comparing her words with her actions and I just can't believe that she really intends to bring about the change we desparately need.
That's why Hillary did not get my vote and why she did not win the nomination.
So, get over and let's get on with it. The race is too close to call at this point and we all need to work together.
IT'S 3:00 AM ... AND THE RED, BEDSIDE PHONE RINGS
John McCain is snoring loudly and stirs from his deep sleep. A voice on the line says that his home is being foreclosed and his family will be evicted in the morning. McCain replies, "Hold Please", puches a button, dials a number and says, "George what should I do about this foreclsure mess."
Complete and Utter Failure (Third and final try)
We Americans are not accustomed to failure -- at least when we think of the failure of our government. During the past eight years our
