Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are both trying to give each other a run for their money on the subject of religion. In the vein of, "I'm more religious than you are," or "My religion works better than yours." Both of them are blowing spectacular holes in the ideal that there should be no religious litmus test in order to be elected in this country. It would appear that a religious litmus test may be the only thing that allows someone to be elected on the Republican ticket.
Mitt, in his recent speech at the George HW Bush Presidential Library, said, "Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom."
Yeah... Like in Saudi Arabia, where religion pretty much runs things. Neat-O!
Of course, the Dem candidates are going, "I'm religious, too!!!" all over the place and embarrassing the rest of us. Progressives would rather that you mention that you have religion, or faith, or whatever you call it, and then shut the hell up. As long as you don't pray to God for scientific information, or directives on reproductive rights, we don't care if you pray to God or Dog or Bob or whoever.
UFOs bother us a little, but nevermind.
The Huckster, on the other hand, may believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that Adam and Eve were an actual, ya know, item. Ask him straight out, and his current response is "well, I can't be sure, because I wasn't there when it happened." Hmm... That would pretty much invalidate most scientific arguments, wouldn't it? Maybe the dinosaurs were here the same time as humans. Can't be sure, because none of us were here at the time. Testable, provable scientific facts can be discounted, because we don't have any actual direct experience of such things. Like air. Can't see air. Maybe it's something else.
So, Mitt is running away from his record in Massachusetts as a too-liberal Republican governor.
And Huckabee is running away from his speeches as a Baptist preacher.
In the race for president, the Republican direction appears to be "away."
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
Subprime And Proud Of It!
As with many interesting situations that HAVE for certain been created by both Bush and the previous Congress, the Subprime mortgage thingie can be traced way back to the fifties, when credit cards became available. As our banking and consumer systems have progressed, weird things keep happening.
I have been offered a credit card (for example) that was sold to me at an APR of 12%. When I received the first statement, it turned out to be 12% over PRIME (which put it around 22% at the time). Many people have been lied to, snookered, hoodwinked, cheated. Because they believed that it is their right to imagine they could own a home in their lifetime. Places like Countrywide fed that dream with promises of homeownership, and because everything on TV says "you deserve" this or that, people believe they deserve it, and sign on the dotted line.
When people talk about economics, it sounds like they're trying to run with the Invisible Hand theory of Adam Smith (the orginal capitalist), and under normal circumstances, they're not wrong - the market can generally be pretty fair. However, when banking concerns and financiers have more of the lawmakers' ears than the general public, the game is rigged in their favor.
As Voltaire said long ago, "when bankers are jumping out the windows, follow them - there's probably money in it."
- You can no longer take interest payments on anything other than mortgages as a deduction from income off your taxes. This changed in the mid seventies.
- Savings interest rates have gone from 5.5% (back when I was dropping a buck a week into a savings account) down to 2-3%.
- Institutions like Money Tree (and other check-cashing places) have grown by leaps and bounds, and most are owned by large financial institutions, such as CitiBank and Wells Fargo. Generally patronized by poor and retired folks.
- The Bankruptcy bill, passed in 2005, essentially says that if you're a corporation, you can declare bankruptcy, but if you're an individual, you pretty much can't, or if you do, you still have to pay back what you owe. So, if you can't pay, you can declare bankruptcy, and you still have to pay what you can't afford to pay. Makes sense, huh?
- If you fall behind on credit card payments, most credit card companies will raise your interest rate, which will usually put the borrower further behind.
- Banking deregulation started in the 1980s, under Reagan (remember the Savings and Loan Crisis?). It continued through Clinton. It has been enhanced during Bush II.
- Alan Greenspan (former head of the Fed) was responsible (under Bush II) for influencing regulations by saying whether or not certain banking practices should (or should not) be regulated. He claims - now - that he saw the subprime crisis coming, but if you look at what he said about subprime lending while he was still at the Fed, he didn't seem to have a problem with it at the time.
I have been offered a credit card (for example) that was sold to me at an APR of 12%. When I received the first statement, it turned out to be 12% over PRIME (which put it around 22% at the time). Many people have been lied to, snookered, hoodwinked, cheated. Because they believed that it is their right to imagine they could own a home in their lifetime. Places like Countrywide fed that dream with promises of homeownership, and because everything on TV says "you deserve" this or that, people believe they deserve it, and sign on the dotted line.
When people talk about economics, it sounds like they're trying to run with the Invisible Hand theory of Adam Smith (the orginal capitalist), and under normal circumstances, they're not wrong - the market can generally be pretty fair. However, when banking concerns and financiers have more of the lawmakers' ears than the general public, the game is rigged in their favor.
As Voltaire said long ago, "when bankers are jumping out the windows, follow them - there's probably money in it."
Monday, December 3, 2007
The Wolfman's Back! (and we're gonna be in trouble)
Crimanently!
Can't we just lose this guy in the woods somewhere and be done with him? Considering his ability in predicting things, I say we put him in charge of the weather somewhere, and he'll do a lot less harm.
Maybe.
Paul Wolfowitz, one of the former members of the Bush administration, is being rehired by Condoleeza Rice as the chairman of the International Security Advisory Board (he'll be filling the Fred Thompson spot).
A little history of Mr. Wolfowitz: besides his appearance in Fahrenheit 9/11 (licking his comb to control his unruly hair - eeew), Paul Wolfowitz has been in government in one form or another since the 70s. And yet, amazingly, has learned very little about how to fight wars, or run government agencies, or work in a way that won't get him fired. An "expert" on the Middle East, he nonetheless pushed for war in Iraq, thinking that the warring factions that had been held away from each other's throats by a military dictator for decades would suddenly behave like old college chums the moment the dictator was gone.
But you know, Iraq is "floating on a sea of oil." That makes all the trouble worthwhile.
So, after prediction after prediction has gone spectacularly wrong (see what I mean about being a weatherman? he'd be perfect), he finally resigned from the Bush Administration, only to be appointed to head the World Bank.
His brief tenure at the World Bank was marked with a single scandal that rapidly morphed into a huge hideosity that eventually got him to resign. He promoted, then relocated, then promoted, and gave huge raises to, his girlfriend. Surprisingly, most people in the World bank (not the most philanthropic of institutions, no matter what their press releases may say) felt that this particular giveaway was perhaps a little too much. So he resigned in some disgrace.
At least I hope it was in disgrace.
But no matter - if you f**k up spectacularly in a major position in the Bush administration, then f**k up equally spectacularly in another job involving foreign policy and finance, you can always find a job.
In the Bush Administration!
In this case, he will be chairing a committee that looks at International Security for the State Department and will be instrumental in formulating policy and predicting the moves that the government should take based on how they read the signs.
You know, like dowsing rods, or phrenology.
Yup - we're doomed. Again.
Can't we just lose this guy in the woods somewhere and be done with him? Considering his ability in predicting things, I say we put him in charge of the weather somewhere, and he'll do a lot less harm.
Maybe.
Paul Wolfowitz, one of the former members of the Bush administration, is being rehired by Condoleeza Rice as the chairman of the International Security Advisory Board (he'll be filling the Fred Thompson spot).
A little history of Mr. Wolfowitz: besides his appearance in Fahrenheit 9/11 (licking his comb to control his unruly hair - eeew), Paul Wolfowitz has been in government in one form or another since the 70s. And yet, amazingly, has learned very little about how to fight wars, or run government agencies, or work in a way that won't get him fired. An "expert" on the Middle East, he nonetheless pushed for war in Iraq, thinking that the warring factions that had been held away from each other's throats by a military dictator for decades would suddenly behave like old college chums the moment the dictator was gone.
But you know, Iraq is "floating on a sea of oil." That makes all the trouble worthwhile.
So, after prediction after prediction has gone spectacularly wrong (see what I mean about being a weatherman? he'd be perfect), he finally resigned from the Bush Administration, only to be appointed to head the World Bank.
His brief tenure at the World Bank was marked with a single scandal that rapidly morphed into a huge hideosity that eventually got him to resign. He promoted, then relocated, then promoted, and gave huge raises to, his girlfriend. Surprisingly, most people in the World bank (not the most philanthropic of institutions, no matter what their press releases may say) felt that this particular giveaway was perhaps a little too much. So he resigned in some disgrace.
At least I hope it was in disgrace.
But no matter - if you f**k up spectacularly in a major position in the Bush administration, then f**k up equally spectacularly in another job involving foreign policy and finance, you can always find a job.
In the Bush Administration!
In this case, he will be chairing a committee that looks at International Security for the State Department and will be instrumental in formulating policy and predicting the moves that the government should take based on how they read the signs.
You know, like dowsing rods, or phrenology.
Yup - we're doomed. Again.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
You Are Charged With... Stuff
In the latest offering of Good News From Gitmo, we now hear more and more details of how the current group of indefinite detainees ("Enemy Combatants" - don't get me started) were actually given the distinction.
The folks charged with, well, charging them, were not allowed to see the classified information that was used against the detainees in order for them to be picked up and brought to our lovely hunk of Cuba. The years of experience required to fulfill this particular task is apparently one year of work outside of law school (or possibly a Batchelor's in carpentry, it didn't seem clear). So they can't ask the CIA, the NSA or the DIA. Even within their own systems, if they're not part of a particular "community of interest," they would be blocked from retrieving data that normally wouldn't be considered classified. So they rely on interrogations of other detainees to find out whether you need to be a detainee yourself. Like, the guy cuffed to the seat next to you on the plane.
Sounds reliable to me...
Oh, and there's one more little bit of data they use to convict you of being permanently detained: your association with "Groups with Terrorist Associations." Like the various Muslim charitable groups that may or may not have been used to funnel money to terrorists, by feeding the poor. Feeding people - that's the same thing as promoting terrorism, right? You're feeding them, therefore you're promoting their ideals. And if you've given money to a "Group with Terrorist Associations," you're a terrorist.
Which reminds me, never give money to the Catholic church. They are, after all, associated with pedophile associations. Or they kind of are a pedophile association. Because if you give money to the Catholics, that would make you a pedophile, right? Right???
In other news, Dennis Kucinich was at Fort Benning, GA to protest the School of the Americas, now known as WHINSEC (can't remember what that stands for - click the link for the Wiki). He was joined (as he is every year) by a large group of protesters, who think that, as a country that espouses democracy and other quaint ideas, maybe we shouldn't have a school for torture, guerrilla warfare (usually used against the democratically elected leaders) and general mayhem. Many Latin American countries have been the beneficiary of SOA graduates, who usually end up with names like Death Squads, rapists, war criminals, etc.
Remember, you're either with the terrorists or against them.
The folks charged with, well, charging them, were not allowed to see the classified information that was used against the detainees in order for them to be picked up and brought to our lovely hunk of Cuba. The years of experience required to fulfill this particular task is apparently one year of work outside of law school (or possibly a Batchelor's in carpentry, it didn't seem clear). So they can't ask the CIA, the NSA or the DIA. Even within their own systems, if they're not part of a particular "community of interest," they would be blocked from retrieving data that normally wouldn't be considered classified. So they rely on interrogations of other detainees to find out whether you need to be a detainee yourself. Like, the guy cuffed to the seat next to you on the plane.
Sounds reliable to me...
Oh, and there's one more little bit of data they use to convict you of being permanently detained: your association with "Groups with Terrorist Associations." Like the various Muslim charitable groups that may or may not have been used to funnel money to terrorists, by feeding the poor. Feeding people - that's the same thing as promoting terrorism, right? You're feeding them, therefore you're promoting their ideals. And if you've given money to a "Group with Terrorist Associations," you're a terrorist.
Which reminds me, never give money to the Catholic church. They are, after all, associated with pedophile associations. Or they kind of are a pedophile association. Because if you give money to the Catholics, that would make you a pedophile, right? Right???
In other news, Dennis Kucinich was at Fort Benning, GA to protest the School of the Americas, now known as WHINSEC (can't remember what that stands for - click the link for the Wiki). He was joined (as he is every year) by a large group of protesters, who think that, as a country that espouses democracy and other quaint ideas, maybe we shouldn't have a school for torture, guerrilla warfare (usually used against the democratically elected leaders) and general mayhem. Many Latin American countries have been the beneficiary of SOA graduates, who usually end up with names like Death Squads, rapists, war criminals, etc.
Remember, you're either with the terrorists or against them.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Beware the Falafel Bomb
I couldn't make this one up if I tried.
The FBI in the San Francisco Bay Area was looking for a spike in falafel sales to track Iranian spies/infiltrators.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA- Oh, you're serious?
I need more than a drink at this point. If they had done this while the Dead was still touring, or even Phish... Now we're looking more at Indigo Girls, maybe Ani diFranco.
Boy, if we ever get need to worry about Irish infiltrators, are we going to track the sales of Bushmills or Guinness? How about the Italians - a spike in ravioli sales, maybe?
The article mentions that the FBI supervisor that eventually squashed this investigation was concerned with the idea that it might be illegal to track people by food consumption. If that's the case, why do we let grocery stores do it anyway, with all of those "frequent customer cards" they pass out to everyone.
Oh, yeah, he also mentioned it was "ridiculous."
How stupid do we have to be? Let's keep stooping to the lowest possible common denominator, until we start tracking illegal immigrants by spikes in sales of avocado.
In more interesting news, there is a way to protest the treatment of the Buddhist monks in Burma: send the ruling junta your unwashed panties, ladies - apparently it freaks them right out.
The FBI in the San Francisco Bay Area was looking for a spike in falafel sales to track Iranian spies/infiltrators.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA- Oh, you're serious?
I need more than a drink at this point. If they had done this while the Dead was still touring, or even Phish... Now we're looking more at Indigo Girls, maybe Ani diFranco.
Boy, if we ever get need to worry about Irish infiltrators, are we going to track the sales of Bushmills or Guinness? How about the Italians - a spike in ravioli sales, maybe?
The article mentions that the FBI supervisor that eventually squashed this investigation was concerned with the idea that it might be illegal to track people by food consumption. If that's the case, why do we let grocery stores do it anyway, with all of those "frequent customer cards" they pass out to everyone.
Oh, yeah, he also mentioned it was "ridiculous."
NO S**T, SHERLOCK!
How stupid do we have to be? Let's keep stooping to the lowest possible common denominator, until we start tracking illegal immigrants by spikes in sales of avocado.
In more interesting news, there is a way to protest the treatment of the Buddhist monks in Burma: send the ruling junta your unwashed panties, ladies - apparently it freaks them right out.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Dogs of War, Indeed
Blackwater Worldwide is a criminal organization that murders indiscriminately and bilks the American taxpayer out of our hard-earned cash.
Sue me.
On February 7th of this year, three guards, Nabras Mohammed Hadi, Azhar Abdullah al-Maliki, and Sabah Salman. working at the Iraqi Media Network, were shot by sniper fire from a Blackwater specialist on the rooftop of the Justice Ministry, across the square from the Network. Someone was insisting they be allowed to park in the traffic circle in the square below (which isn't allowed as everyone is worried about car bombs), and Hadi (on the balcony above) engaged the folks below him, raising his AK-47 to a ready position in case things got ugly. The Blackwater sniper shot him dead. The Iraqi guard's buddies saw him drop, ran up, trying to stay behind the low wall of the balcony. Al-Maliki stuck his head up a little, and took a bullet in the neck from the Blackwater sniper. He didn't die right away. His friends managed to get both of them off the balcony. Salman (unarmed) went up later to collect the AK-47, and was apparently shot in the side and died. He never made it to the rifle.
Capt. Ahmed Thamir Abood, the head of the security detail of the IMN, approached the Blackwater guards in the square below the balcony where the guards were shot, he asked to speak to someone in charge. At which point, the Blackwater personnel decided it would be the right moment to act like the Marx brothers: "He's in charge." "No, he's in charge." etc. The fellow they were guarding (a thirty-something white guy in a blue suit), came out of the Justice Ministry flanked by more Blackwater personnel, jumped into an SUV, and sped off, all the while ignoring the entreaties from Abood. The remaining Blackwater fellas dropped smoke grenades, jumped into their vehicle, and sped off towards the Green Zone.
Thanks to CPA Order 17, security contractors in Iraq are immune from prosecution in Iraq for any crime they commit against Iraqi military or civilians. That's the Coalition Provisional Authority, by the way.
The Iraqi guards were paid the equivalent of $231 US per month. Each of the Blackwater guys are making (on average) $850 per day. The TV station was able to help pay for the burials of these three men, and hired one member of each of their families in order to help out with the lost income.
The State Department, after talking to no one at the TV Station (by their own admission), and pretty much getting all their information from the Blackwater personnel, determined that the shooting was justified, and no money would be forthcoming to the families of the slain guards. Blackwater claimed they were defending themselves against precision small-arms fire, but no evidence has been shown to prove that. Even if it was an unprovoked killing, as far as anyone can determine, at worst these Blackwater personnel face being fired and shipped home.
But that's all.
Sue me.
On February 7th of this year, three guards, Nabras Mohammed Hadi, Azhar Abdullah al-Maliki, and Sabah Salman. working at the Iraqi Media Network, were shot by sniper fire from a Blackwater specialist on the rooftop of the Justice Ministry, across the square from the Network. Someone was insisting they be allowed to park in the traffic circle in the square below (which isn't allowed as everyone is worried about car bombs), and Hadi (on the balcony above) engaged the folks below him, raising his AK-47 to a ready position in case things got ugly. The Blackwater sniper shot him dead. The Iraqi guard's buddies saw him drop, ran up, trying to stay behind the low wall of the balcony. Al-Maliki stuck his head up a little, and took a bullet in the neck from the Blackwater sniper. He didn't die right away. His friends managed to get both of them off the balcony. Salman (unarmed) went up later to collect the AK-47, and was apparently shot in the side and died. He never made it to the rifle.
Capt. Ahmed Thamir Abood, the head of the security detail of the IMN, approached the Blackwater guards in the square below the balcony where the guards were shot, he asked to speak to someone in charge. At which point, the Blackwater personnel decided it would be the right moment to act like the Marx brothers: "He's in charge." "No, he's in charge." etc. The fellow they were guarding (a thirty-something white guy in a blue suit), came out of the Justice Ministry flanked by more Blackwater personnel, jumped into an SUV, and sped off, all the while ignoring the entreaties from Abood. The remaining Blackwater fellas dropped smoke grenades, jumped into their vehicle, and sped off towards the Green Zone.
Thanks to CPA Order 17, security contractors in Iraq are immune from prosecution in Iraq for any crime they commit against Iraqi military or civilians. That's the Coalition Provisional Authority, by the way.
The Iraqi guards were paid the equivalent of $231 US per month. Each of the Blackwater guys are making (on average) $850 per day. The TV station was able to help pay for the burials of these three men, and hired one member of each of their families in order to help out with the lost income.
The State Department, after talking to no one at the TV Station (by their own admission), and pretty much getting all their information from the Blackwater personnel, determined that the shooting was justified, and no money would be forthcoming to the families of the slain guards. Blackwater claimed they were defending themselves against precision small-arms fire, but no evidence has been shown to prove that. Even if it was an unprovoked killing, as far as anyone can determine, at worst these Blackwater personnel face being fired and shipped home.
But that's all.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Narf! (with apologies to Pinky)
Really, really sick of it all. Michael Mukasey (an otherwise reputable legal mind) has simply refused to comment on whether or not waterboarding is torture. And while that sort of mealy-mouthed behavior is nothing less than normal from anyone living in the white part of Washington, DC, doing it in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee should have been career suicide.
Then again...
Waterboarding (for those of you unfamiliar with the game) is a nasty way to get information, and in some cases a nasty way to die. The victim is strapped to a board, feet elevated above the head, and either water is poured directly over the victim's face, or the victim has a cloth wrapped over his/her face and water is poured over that. Either way, tastes like drowning. Elevated blood pressure, elevated heart rate, water up the nose, into the lungs. Folks who have been waterboarded report PTSD when it rains. Some people die (either of actual drowning or heart attack due to the sheer terror of drowning). And, strangely enough, when this sort of thing was done during WW II (by the Japanese), we made sure that the folks who did it went to jail for a long time.
We signed on to the Geneva accords a long time ago, which makes the Geneva laws both quaint and as much a part of the Constitution as that whole "We the People" thing. So, this is considered torture, and the Geneva Conventions say we can't torture anyone for any reason.
Now Senators Feinstein and Schumer have voted to allow Mukasey's nomination to go up for approval. Many of their constituents have protested. (I'd be upset about Arlen Spector's pre-vote stance saying that this whole business was "troubling," just not "troubling" enough for him to not confirm the guy - except that he's a Republican, so it's no big surprise) The reason these two Dems caved in are pure political pragmatism - if Bush can't have Mukasey, then he will appoint someone during a recess, or appoint an acting AG. And we might get someone scaaaaarier than Alberto Gonzales.
They claim they are worried about a vacuum of leadership in the Justice Department. I believe we already had that with Gonzo, but whatever.
Then we have the erstwhile work of the previous AG, still holding sway, even though he's not really there anymore. The Shrub can say with certainty that "we don't torture" because Gonzo privately redefined torture in various secret memos.
Proud to be on the side of the angels, like Pol Pot and other friendly folk.
Then again...
Waterboarding (for those of you unfamiliar with the game) is a nasty way to get information, and in some cases a nasty way to die. The victim is strapped to a board, feet elevated above the head, and either water is poured directly over the victim's face, or the victim has a cloth wrapped over his/her face and water is poured over that. Either way, tastes like drowning. Elevated blood pressure, elevated heart rate, water up the nose, into the lungs. Folks who have been waterboarded report PTSD when it rains. Some people die (either of actual drowning or heart attack due to the sheer terror of drowning). And, strangely enough, when this sort of thing was done during WW II (by the Japanese), we made sure that the folks who did it went to jail for a long time.
We signed on to the Geneva accords a long time ago, which makes the Geneva laws both quaint and as much a part of the Constitution as that whole "We the People" thing. So, this is considered torture, and the Geneva Conventions say we can't torture anyone for any reason.
Now Senators Feinstein and Schumer have voted to allow Mukasey's nomination to go up for approval. Many of their constituents have protested. (I'd be upset about Arlen Spector's pre-vote stance saying that this whole business was "troubling," just not "troubling" enough for him to not confirm the guy - except that he's a Republican, so it's no big surprise) The reason these two Dems caved in are pure political pragmatism - if Bush can't have Mukasey, then he will appoint someone during a recess, or appoint an acting AG. And we might get someone scaaaaarier than Alberto Gonzales.
They claim they are worried about a vacuum of leadership in the Justice Department. I believe we already had that with Gonzo, but whatever.
Then we have the erstwhile work of the previous AG, still holding sway, even though he's not really there anymore. The Shrub can say with certainty that "we don't torture" because Gonzo privately redefined torture in various secret memos.
Proud to be on the side of the angels, like Pol Pot and other friendly folk.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)