It's rare that a big scary athlete known for the violent manner in which he pursued his vocation turns out to be such a lovable and cuddly guy, but Bubba Smith was that rare breed.
It's sad to see him go so young.
Thursday, August 04, 2011
Why Is It...
...Conservatives are all about private charity, but liberals are the ones actually spending the cash?
Poor Sucker, Good Thing He's Rid Of Her
Without judging the events of the marriage or divorce, it's hard not to feel for this shlub.
Set up in a sting of giant proportion, which included a couple of corrupt police officers. Wow. I mean, wow.
That's not to dispose all responsibility from his shoulders, to be sure. You shouldn't even drink and drive, no matter the circumstances, but particularly when it's by choice.
But wow.
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
And Whose Fault Was That, Shithead?
Mitch "Obama Will Be A One-Term President" McConnell is all butthurt because his pwecious debt ceiwing is dirty.
I'm Surprised Obama Didn't Call The Big Dog
Clinton managed to smack down the Congress while sticking to principles
China May Like The Debt Deal
But Korea? Not so much
They think things are so bad over here, they are buying gold at the top of the market.
April Is The Cruelest Month
August is the slowest month.
Hey Gawker, I do all this shit already the other eleven months. Up your game.
Flat Tax Flounders
Inherent in the current sooper sekrit budjit soopercommittee Congress is setting up in response to the budget crisis, a re-write of the tax code is inevitable.
The time has come for an overhaul of the tax code, to be sure. Right now, taxes on the rich are the lowest they have ever been since Herbert Hoover was President (You'll notice the bookend of terrible unemployment and low taxes on the wealthy, too.) The effective tax rate on the wealthiest one percent (i.e. the rate the wealthy actually pay in total, after deductions, deferrals and exemptions) is the lowest it's ever been.
In turn, deductions that are available to the middle class that promote what had been good public policy (for example, the mortgage interest deduction in order to encourage home ownership) have become warped and twisted to such an extent that they actually create bad public policy. The recent collapse in the housing market is a terrific example of too much of a good thing, in terms of taxes. It only occured after the right to deduct the first $125,000 off the gain on the sale of a home, which had been limited to senior citizens as a one-time-only deal, was expanded to include practically the sale of any residence.
The alternative minimum tax (AMT), originally devised to ensure that the wealthiest pay a fair share of their income in taxes, has become a bane of the middle class. It was never indexed when first implemented in 1986 (at the $30,000 threshold for individuals, $40,000 for a married couple) and only peaks this year at $48,450/$75,000. It drops again next year to $33,750/$45,000. The AMT penalizes people who live in expensive states with high taxes, people who own homes (it phases out the mortgage interest deduction,) and/or have children, and people who like to give money to charity to lower their tax burdens.
It is, in other words, effectively a flat tax of 26% (28% if your income is over $175,000).
Which leads me to today's topic: the flat tax.
Now, given that there are so many "libertarians" who would call for a flat tax in the midst of this rigamarole, I thought it would be a useful prophylaxis to examine why it's a bad idea.
First and foremost, the flat tax is highly regressive, penalizing the poor while subsidizing the wealthy. On it's face, it seems fair (this is part of why many have euphemistically called it a "fair tax".) After all, dollar one gets taxed at, say, 10%, dollar one hundred at 10%, dollar one million at 10%. The guy making a million pays $100,000 in taxes. The guy making $100 pays $10.
Flip the numbers, tho. The guy making $100 is left with $90 to buy food, clothing, shelter. The guy making a million is left with $900,000 to buy the same things. Granted, the millionaire is likely to buy more expensive stuff, but here's the thing: he has a choice as to how much he can spend, but not how little. It's that last, how little to spend, that comes into play.
The guy left with $90 has to meet a threshold to feed, house and clothe himself. Let's say that will cost him, in total, $80. He's left with $10, and must make a choice what to do with the rest of his money: put it away for retirement, splurge on a movie, save it for a rainy day. Thr guy making a million, also spending that $80, is left with $899,920 to just go nuts.
How is this subsidizing the wealthy? Glad you asked. Unless you want to assume private roads and private infrastructure, the government is going to be the one who wires the community, who paves the roads, who builds the subways. You'll notice the poor soul can't afford a car, and walks to work, yet his taxes are paying for things he can't possibly avail himself of, much less benefit from.
A guy making a million bucks is part of a population that is less than one half of one percent of the whole. Good thing, too, because it will take 10,000 people making $100 bucks to equal his income (and to be fair, his tax liability.)
None of whom can benefit from the spending that he benefits from.
So it's regressive in terms of the actual taxation, but also regressive in terms of the benefits derived from that taxation. The poor will receive less from the government than the rich under a flat tax system, by definition.
Too, the income tax helps mask another annoying fact of the American tax code, which is that other taxes are highly regressive: sales taxes, property taxes, excise taxes, tolls on highways, mass transit fares, all have to be paid by rich and poor alike in direct proportion to the value of the benefit obtained, which means the rich skate by yet again on the backs of the poor.
There are other reasons the flat tax is a ludicrous proposition. For one thing, it discourages savings, since that would become effectively a double tax: you're taxed on the wages and the interest earned on the money you've socked away. It discourages investment in businesses, for similar reasons. It discourages saving for retirement, since the income that is building towards that is taxed now.
Some might argue, well, Social Security would be off the table. OK, except that the employer portion is taxable at the corporate level (since we're flat taxing all income, no restrictions) so you're double taxing the same money. Revenue is fungible, it doesn't matter how it's apportioned.
Plus, you'd have to raise Social Security taxes to cover the now-heavily-reliant population. And that means wages would now be double taxed even more heavily (you pay SSI and Medicare tax on gross income. You pay income taxes on gross income.)
In other words, a flat tax would kill the few American businesses still left.
Lower the corporate tax rate to compensate? American corporations already pay a marginal rate that's among the lowest in the world, and the effective tax rate of the corporatocracy is (based on the Fortune 500) about 18%. So if anything, a flat tax would raise taxes on corporations. Not a bad thing, in my book, but you can bet your bottom dollar ExxonMobil would disagree vehemently, and continue to offshore money.
Proponents of the flat tax point to the success its had in other nations (Montenegro and the bankrupt Iceland, neither of which is an economic model I'd choose to follow in any other respect,) conveniently forgetting that no state that currently has a flat tax had to transition from a progressive taxation to the flat tax.
And in many of these countries, adding in the equivalent of the Social Security tax raises their tax levels *higher* than many if not most states with progressive rates.
It seems to me the Clintonian shibboleth about welfare, "mend it, don't end it" applies to the progressive tax system, too.
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Why Teabaggers Should Love Federal Spending
See that chart up above? The greener the state, the bigger surplus the Federal tax coffers run from it.
Notice that red states seem to hew nicely with Red States.
This is from The Economist. Not exactly your hyperpartisan progressive journal.
Old & Busted: Excusing Yourself By Saying "I Don't Recall."
New hotness: Excusing yourself by saying "My Twitter was hacked!"
Where have you gone, Anthony Weiner, you've started a brand new Internet meme, woo woo woo....
Oh, That's Just Sad
The former Speaker of the House, ideological icon of the conservative movement, FOX News pundit and current Presidential candidate New Gingrich has to make up Twitter followers to stay relevant.
Man Tells Truth
Man gets fired. Well, put on administrative leave pending a full investigations for reasons that have nothing to do with his work and everything to do with the fact that the truth hurts.
Shame on you, President Obama.
Oh, But They're Not Racists, Nosirrreeeeeeeeeeeeee
Obama's a "tar baby"? Really? In the 21st century someone still uses this language?
Tim, Not Helping!
The whole point behind a debt deal was to ensure a) no default and b) people could have faith in American bonds.
Bifurcated Democracy
This was an interesting Op-Ed in yesterday's New York Times
OUR nation isn’t facing just a debt crisis; it’s facing a democracy crisis. For weeks, the federal government has been hurtling toward two unsavory options: a crippling default brought on by Congressional gridlock, or — as key Democrats have advocated — a unilateral increase in the debt ceiling by an unchecked president. Even if the last-minute deal announced on Sunday night holds together, it’s become clear that the balance at the heart of the Constitution is under threat.
The debate has threatened to play out as a destructive but all too familiar two-step, revealing how dysfunctional the relationship between Congress and the president has become.
The article talks about how Presidents have decided to exercise power unilaterally, like Obama's Libyan adventures (although the practice goes back decades to Reagan and even Nixon,) while the Congress has been unable to rally itself to challenge the President's usurpation of power. Either the Congress is divided (like now) or reinforces the person holding the Oval Office (as under Bush the Younger.)
This is what the punditry tells us we want, over and over again: divided government. Given what we've experienced for over three decades now (absent the six years of Bush the Younger) is this really what we want? An ineffectual Congress hamstrung by the tyranny of the minority and a Presidency who usurps power like a king?
Mind you, none of this is partisan: Republicans and Democrats have been to blame in BOTH branches. Clinton was forced to legislate by executive order, much as Obama is. Both Bushes declared wars without making a firm case to the American people as to the need for them (this wasn't dominoes toppling or any such credible threat.) Reagan tossed American troops around like candy and American armaments to enemies.
In Congress, John Boener can't even get a centerpiece of legislation passed trying to keep the party's dog-and-pony show from tearing each other up. When Pelosi was in charge, she had to placate Blue Dog Democrats, rather than muscle them into line.
Hell, about the only thing any Congress since 1990 has been able to agree upon is that Bill Clinton needed to be impeached and a bunch of Asian desert bombed!
This has effective emasculated an entire branch of government. Power seeks a vaccuum. It's almost understandable that the President would unilaterally legislate.
Plus, members of Congress don't have to take a stand on anything controversial. Take the EPA actions earlier this year to regulate greenhouse gases. Now, long time readers of this blog know there are few people more concerned with global climate change than me. Maybe Al Gore. So while I don't have a problem with Obama taking the bull by the fumes...so to speak...I worry about the fact that Congress didn't vote on this.
Note: it wasn't voted down. The bill stalled before a vote could be taken. It's probably still in the hamper, waiting to be aired out. Look at what this saves Republicans from, say, Montana, where people believe climate change is real and a problem. The party would insist they vote against the EPA actions. Their constituencies would say "We need a better Congresscritter." No responsibility, yet they can parade around touting how angry they are that they didn't get their say.
The more a controversial issue remains undecided, and the more critical that issue becomes, the less likely it is Congress will ever actually take action. And the more likely it is they will cede that issue to the Executive branch. Fine for a liberal like me when a semi-liberal like Obama is in charge, but what happens when another Dumbya hits the Oval Office? One a little more clever?
Congress will still feel this is expedient.
But it is unhealthy. It is unhealthy for an economy, it is unhealthy for a Constitution and it is deep unhealthy for a society and its people.
Monday, August 01, 2011
America, The Chicken
I agree. The space shuttle is indicative of a time when America was not afraid of the future.
Not Sure I Completely Agree With Krugman On This, But...
He has the Ph. D. and Nobel Prize, and I do not
A deal to raise the federal debt ceiling is in the works. If it goes through, many commentators will declare that disaster was avoided. But they will be wrong.
For the deal itself, given the available information, is a disaster, and not just for President Obama and his party. It will damage an already depressed economy; it will probably make America’s long-run deficit problem worse, not better; and most important, by demonstrating that raw extortion works and carries no political cost, it will take America a long way down the road to banana-republic status.
Where I disagree with Krugman is in the details. This package has to be reviewed this fall. On the same date that the Bush tax cuts (extended two winters ago) expire. That will immediately raise revenues, and lower the deficit tremendously. In this, it seems, Obama gets to keep his campaign promise (two years too late, of course) of eviscerating those horrid cuts.
Disaster avoided? Maybe. Maybe not. Certainly Krugman is right to point out that the last thing we need right now is spending cuts (unless they're carefully targeted, like farm subsidies for corporate farmers) and the long term effects to the economy could be irreparable if Obama is unable to persuade Congress (absent Boener, of course) that the tax cuts must die.
The inference from reading the reactions of various House leaders indicates to me that the crux of this deal with Obama is the death of the Bush cuts. Yes, he gives up stuff first, and so there's no promises or guarantees that he is ultimately successful in his pursuit of this goal.
On the other hand, it sure looks like the political kabuki I've been talking about has taken form.
I don't support the deal as it appears on its face, but if Obama has managed to deduct the Bush tax cut burden from the American economy, then I can get behind most of the rest of this, enough that I can move on.
SHARK!
Look, as a SCUBA diver, I love Shark Week on the Discovery channel.
Not for the sharks, but to revisit destinations I've been to and to watch people SCUBA dive. Sort of preps me for the season, keeps me motivated, and reminds me of stuff that is really important, like the oceans, fish and the whole "circle-o-life" thing.
But Shark Week can be dangerous.
"Rogue Shark," "Killer Sharks," "Top Ten Shark Bites," Shark Kills Through History," are (or could be) shows that will air this week (OK, I'm making up the last two, but...)
Nowhere is there a discussion of what we do to sharks. The closest Discovery comes is a program called "Shark City," which purports to show the fun side of sharks. With "comedian" Andy Samberg.
Eesh.
Y'know, nowhere is a real in-depth discussion that we kill close to 100,000,000 sharks each year, that we've decimated entire species of shark and upset the entire fragile ecological balance of the entire ocean, the true breadbasket of the world. There are one millionth as many attackson humans...not kills, attacks...worldwide each year.
Do you know what happens when a shark gets finned? It gets caught by a fisherman. Still alive, barely, it's fins get sliced off: dorsal, tail, pectoral. The entire living animal is then tossed back into the ocean as bycatch.
Imagine you're out for a swim, just cruising along the water, and someone sticks a hook in you, drags you onto a boat, chops off your arms and legs, then tosses you back into the ocean?
That's what happens to a shark.
I've made about 250 dives in my diving career. I've seen sharks on six of them. Only once have I ever felt even close to threatened and that was because I didn't see the situation developing behind me (a camera had swum in underneath me to get a money shot) and the shark was coming to investigate. If I had known what was going on...well, the water would be a little less yellow right now.
Meanwhile, I've been hooked by fisherman a few dozen times, nearly knifed by another diver who was being careless, and bumped my head into any number of humans who decided they needed to be exactly where I was or was heading.
Trust me, I'd rather dive with a pack of hungry bull sharks than deal with a pack of humans any day.
Microwaved Wheat
Physics seems to have come up with a really good explanation for crop circles that doesn't involve ET.
My Only Surprise With The Debt Deal Is...
...it came about twelve hours too early. I had noon EDT in the pool.
MTV And The Death Of Democracy
It was thirty years ago today, Robert Pittman taught the band not to play.
MTV launched on August 1, 1980 and literally changed the face of music forever, altho you wouldn't know it from the first video Video Killed The Radio Star by The Buggles, a band composed of Trevor Horn and Geoff Downes, both later joining Yes. In the video, the lighting and the costuming and set were all designed to be particularly unflattering to a band whose members were not exactly Hollywood star-material.
OK, so Downes was not ugly, but...did you know that Video charted at #444 years before MTV used it?
I digress.
The immediate impact of MTV's popularity was the development in earnest of the music video. Prior to the launch, artists since the 1960s created promotional films for top 40 songs, sometimes even albums. The first true "music video" was for Surf City by Jan & Dean in 1964. The later Beatles' albums featured several of these, which were distributed to variety shows worldwide so that the "Beatles" could make an appearance on the show.
These were mostly performance clips of the band, although with the release of Sgt. Pepper, The Beatles went a little avant garde with theirs.
More and more, bands provided short films for their record companies to show in movie theatres, on television variety shows and to various conferences and conventions to promote a band's music.
The music. Not the band. MTV changed that.
I noticed this over the weekend while watching an old Journey video for the song Seperate Ways, and realizing, damn! That band was uggggggggggleeeeee! The song was released in the MTV generation, to be sure, but the band predates it.
No longer was it enough to be able to sing or play an instrument and/or write a song. Now you had to have "it." You had to be good-looking enough to wet panties and cause wet dreams worldwide. Or, failing that, you had to hire a really expensive and really creative producer to set up your video so it featured really pretty men and women. That means money and that means your record sales and music were beholden to the suits at the label. There was corporate rock before MTV (hello, Monkees!), but the visual aspect and the brand spanking new markets it opened up to songs made corporate rock inevitable.
There weren't bands anymore. They became brands. Brands, the goal of so many people in the blogosphere and even Blogtopia (© Skippy).
Sure, there were exceptions and parodies, most notably Money For Nothing by Dire Straits, but these were few, far between and badly needed.
Corporate music begets a bland, pablum of ear candy designed and honed over the years to not offend but to not excite either. It's meant to not make you think: no longer did you have to ponder the lyrics to a song. All you had to do was turn on MTV and voila! Some suit had decided what the song means to you. It moderates everything. There is no radicality except in small pockets of outliers who never really gain acceptance in the mainstream.
To me, it's no surprise that we haven't had another Beatles since MTV. Nor have we had a significant new direction in music since punk, pre-1981. Sure, there was rap, but rap rose without the benefit of MTV and the moment MTV got its hands on rap, that was the deathknell for bands with a point, like NWA. It stopped being about the music and started being about the heavy rotation.
We all started listening to the same things. Maybe not identical, but all the same things in form. We all needed like-minded entertainment.
It gets worse. MTV created an entire new requirement for film makers, who had to somehow reconcile movies and TV to the new form of entertainment. No longer could the camera linger on a scene, establishing mood. Two cigarettes burning down in an ashtray meant two people making love. Now that all had to be established immediately and undeniably. You couldn't infer. You had to state. The attention span of America was quickly narrowing and no one wanted to think anymore.
Maybe you've already guessed from the headline where this is going, and maybe you've started to put the clues together. I'm tempted to stop here but like I just said...
MTV gave us reality TV, too. It started with "slice-o-life" videos depicting the singer/band in a real-world scenario (usually lost love, or famously Madonna's Papa Don't Preach about teen pregnancy). It moved onto the Real World programs and continues to this day with Jersey Shore. We've become conditioned to accepting, no, demanding a titillating look into people's closets from MTV. We won't accept a thick line between the public persona of someone and their private life. We *know* there's something illegal or illicit or just plain immoral going on behind the scenes that they must be hiding and we want to know, if only to celebrate the fact that, there but for the grace of God, go us.
Birthers are the logical outgrowth of this. Birthers and shrill harpies of the right who find boogeymen in little children camping on an island.
I could probably go on, from talking about how MTV made it possible for fashion to become really pretty crappy to the fulfillment of Andy Warhol's "fifteen minutes of fame" prophesy to any number of terrible impacts on society.
That's not to say MTV has been all bad. For instance, it was MTV that broadcast Live Aid to try and fight famine in Ethiopia, and it was MTV that gave Bill Clinton the youth vote (and probably Barack Obama, as well.) And Jon Stewart got his start on MTV and became a nightly treasure on a spin-off of MTV's Ha! channel. I'm sure if I really sat and thought more on it, I could probably balance this post out with more positives.
But that would make this corporate blogging :-)
Apparently....
...Christians have joined Muslims in hating the Jews.
And World War II never happened. Or the Inquisition. Or the Black Death. Or 2,000 years of Papal decrees...
Friday, July 29, 2011
Nobody Asked Me, But...
1) House Weaker Boener: Epic Fail. What an embarassment!
2) Larry Flynt has offered Casey Anthony a half-mil to pose nude in Hustler. It would be appropriate on so many levels. Disgusting, but appropriate.
3) At first glance, this story makes you think gun control is unnecessary. I mean, after all, the industry policed itself and all right? Until you read more closely and realize it wasn't the fact that the guy bought six pounds of smokeless gunpowder that tipped the clerk off, but that the "terrorist" hadn't even bothered to Google the stuff first.
4) Steve Jobs for Treasury Secretary!
5) FOX News: Volcanoes on the Moon cause global warming. I'm not kidding.
6) The most expensive residence on the planet is for sale at $175 million dollars. That buys you three bedrooms. That's not a typo.
7) I remember when the iPhone was first introduced that steve Jobs said Apple would ship 10 million by the end of the following years (about fifteen months). I laughed. I thought it was ridiculous. There couldn't be ten million people in the US (as it turns out, the world) as stupid as me! Apple just shipped twice that many in three months, four years later.
8) He's Toad away
9) We wiped out an entire race of humans with our radical Sapienism.
10) She's beautiful! And what a set of teats!
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Holy Crap!
See? Sometimes, good comes out of bad. For example, I did not know this:
Are there other ways for the president to raise money besides borrowing?
Sovereign governments such as the United States can print new money. However, there's a statutory limit to the amount of paper currency that can be in circulation at any one time.
Ironically, there's no similar limit on the amount of coinage. A little-known statute gives the secretary of the Treasury the authority to issue platinum coins in any denomination. So some commentators have suggested that the Treasury create two $1 trillion coins, deposit them in its account in the Federal Reserve and write checks on the proceeds.
Other clever solutions may be found here.
A Candidate For A Darwin Award
With the cops right there, a Los Angeles man attempted to perform a hernia operation on himself.
Fat, Dumb, And Lazy Is No Way To Go Through Life, Son
Chris Christie, a plate of French Fries away from a heart attack.
Planned Parenthood...
...wasn't that the target of right wing outrage last year? A James O'Keefe-style hit job, too?
Looks like there's karma aplenty to be handed out just about now.
Gout? Really?
That disease of the rich is affecting an alarming number of Americans now.
Must be our fast food, fat food diets.
You Know What I Find So Astounding About This Story
That Sean Hannity still exists. I had forgotten.
Interesting Development
After months of bashing Muslims, Herman Cain is making nice.
I'm not sure why the Muslim clerics in question are even bothering. It's not like he's even going to be a consideration for anyone's Veep short list. I'm sure this is a stunt on Cain's part. I just can't imagine why the imams would placate him.
Interesting Battle Upcoming
The appeal of Obama's healthcare reform has finally been filed with the US Supreme Court.
Normally, we'd assume this to be a 5-4 GOP decision overturning the law.
Not so fast. Justice Anthony Kennedy is really the key vote here. As this Daily Kos diary points out, Kennedy has been pretty firm in his belief that a broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause may be more necessary now than in the days of the Founders, the reason this case is anywhere near the SCOTUS to begin with.
In the one case where he has come out full-throated in support of the Clause is a case which relied on a purely commercial activity, which clearly the insurance reform is.
Not saying it's a slam dunk (I think the diarist is engaging in a bit of hyperbole there), but that it will make for an interesting argument.
You Know, If You're Going To Bash People Over Owing Money....
...the least you can do is be up to date with your court-ordered debt payments!
An Overarching Backdrop
The Teabagger-infused acrimony over things domestic has implications beyond our borders. Perhaps this is by design:
In one swoop, Britain has recognized Libya's rebel government, expelled the remaining London diplomatic staff of the Tripoli-based regime, and freed up millions in assets that can now be funneled to the cash-strapped rebel troops.
Amid a weeks-long stalemate, diplomatic activity seems to have stepped up. This is likely partially because Ramadan begins next week, which will force NATO forces to scale down the fighting as most of Libya begins the month-long daily fast. The US and France have already recognized the rebel government.
"This decision reflects the national transitional council's increasing legitimacy, competence and success in reaching out to Libyans across the country," Foreign Secretary William Hague said Wednesday, according to the Guardian.
As the title of the article states, the UK is really taking the lead on the withdrawal from Libya.
I'm not sure how I feel about this. It's true, the US participation in this NATO exercise has been about as non-existent as a sasquatch (which isreal, by the way) and again, my suspicion is that's by design on the part of the Teabaggers.
Three wars, even with one on a limited scale like Libya and one in a draw-down phase like Iraq, is three wars too many for a peacenik like me and two wars too many for an armed force to fight. So it's a good thing the Teabaggers have played the role of Shadow Ministry for Commiepinkohippiefags this time around. I'm glad for that.
And House Weaker Boener has grasped the Prime Minister for War Opponents like it was a goose for Christmas dinner, rattling the President's cage over the war Powers Act violations, and essentially going nowhere with that tactic. Again, failure is an option for the GOP. Me likey.
It worries me, too. All this fussin' and fightin' over debt limits and War Powers Acts and birth certificates and Messicans has created one overarching backdrop against which any President for the foreseeable future (but in particular, Scary Black Man) will have to contend. The fucking loons of the right wing have managed to turn the once-great America into a joke.
I'm not sure when it started. I mean, you can go all the way back to Joe McCarthy, I suppose. Certainly, Barry Goldwater is worth a look. Ronald Reagan, too.
But somewhere along the thread here, the American right morphed from a set of reasonable people with radical goals into a set of radical asshats with goals best left to Robert Heinlein novels.
In some regards, they fulfill one of the last remaining holes in my theory that Republicans run about a generation behind Democrats.
It goes like this: What Democrats endured as a party in the '60s and '70s, the Republicans only began to experience in the '90s and '00s. And now in the Teens. Party divisions? Democrats saw those flourish in the aftermath of Watergate when it looked like Democrats could maintain a permanent Democratic majority in perpetuity, and everyone wanted a piece of the prize and the squabbling allowed a stealth conservative movement the opportunity to undermine the good works and progress done to that point.
A gradual loss of relevance as a political party, turning into massive jokes during some Presidential campaigns? Look no further than the 1984 Reagan re-election for Dems.. Look no further than the 2008 McCain/Palin campaign for the GOP.
A wresting of the party's center with a jerk to the wing? The Dems in 1968. The Republicans in...well, I'd say 1994, but Newt Gingrich's "revolution" looks moderate and centrist by comparison to today's kamikaze.
All these growing pains-- and we must keep in mind that we are but a stranger in a strange land still, this novel experiment in democracy-- have taken our focus away from what was our purview for decades: our place in international affairs.
Some see this as a good thing and I might concur, but it's the way that we went about it that troubles me. We didn't gracefully exit the world stage, as President Obama put it in his address on Afghanistan, for "nation-building at home." We were dragged away like a mother in a supermarket trying to placate a panicked and tired toddler who demands attention. Or at the very least, candy.
And So The World Takes A Small Step Forward
Or at least, the United States shuffles out of the Dark Ages a little.
Carlos, We Hardly Knew Ye
Normally, I don't write about my sports passions.
You think politics raises hackles, try being a sports fan.
Yesterday, a player of note left the New York Mets for a presumably better life: Carlos Beltran.
Beltran came of age in the 2004 season, specifically the 2004 playoffs. He set a major league record...actually, two, come to think of it. He was traded from the American League's Kansas City Royals to the National League's Houston Astros during the early part of July. He had been selected for the annual All Star game while with Kansas City, but was denied a spot on the NL roster until another player was injured, thus becoming the first player to make both leagues' All Star teams in the same season.
The record he's most noted for is hitting a home run in five consecutive post-season games. No player before or since has done that. Not even Babe Ruth.
The Mets signed him to an eye-popping $119 million, seven year contract in that off-season. And then the fun began.
In 2005, he dived head first into his teammate-- you read that correctly: both players were diving for a sinking line drive. In addition, he was nagged by leg injuries which limited his ability to run, field and hit. He still managed to produce numbers that the Mets could point to: a .266 batting average, 78 runs batted in, 83 runs scored and so on.
In 2006, largely injury free, Beltran tore up the league, hitting 41 home runs, and led the Mets to their last post-season appearance, one out away from the World Series.
In what would amount to signifying moment of his Mets career (and would sum up the futility of being a Mets fan in the 21st century,) Beltran made that final out, taking a called third strike in the bottom of the ninth of game 7 against the eventual champs, the St. Louis Cardinals.
In 2007, Beltran still put up good numbers-- he was one of the few bright spots in a disatrous September for the Mets, but you had the sense his age was catching up to him. In 2008, he started slowly, seemed lost at times at the plate and in the field, but managed to stay injury free and appeared in 161 games. And yet, the team collapsed from a seven game lead in the division to missing the playoffs on the final day of the season for the second season in a row. Many fans pointed to that called third strike in the 2006 playoffs as taking the swagger and confidence out of many players on the team.
Too, there were all kinds of off-field problems for the team as a whole. Then-manager Willie Randolph was under constant pressure from the general manager's office, most notably assistant GM Tony Bernazard (Google him. His story is fascinating.) Randolph was fired, and there were ugly rumours of racial motivation on the part of the management team (which was Hispanic) over Randolph (who is black.)
His replacement, Jerry Manuel, could do no better and in fact, was much worse than Randolph. The Mets tanked into a maze of injuries to key players, and yes, even Beltran joined the parade, opting for basically season-ending knee surgery in January without consulting the team first (he returned to the team on July 15, and hit a paltry .245)
And now he's been traded away. And I feel sad. Not because a player is gone, no, Beltran has value, the Mets (with their Madoff miasma) are going nowhere anytime soon, and so he deserves a better situation.
I'm sad because of what could have been for him here. In his just-short-of seven years with the Mets, he compiled a .280 batting average, hit almost 150 home runs, was a five-time All Star, four time Golden Glove winner, and yet only had one playoff appearance with the team. He put it out there, and got little in return.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Why This Nation Will Never Move Forward So Long As Teabaggers Exist
Thomas Friedman makes a rare cogent point:
That is why we need to raise new tax revenues as well — so we can simultaneously shrink the entitlements programs, but still keep them viable, and generate the funds needed to strengthen all five parts of our growth formula. Anyone who says that either entitlement reform or tax increases are off the table does not have a plan for sustaining American greatness and passing on the American dream to the next generation.
Alas, that is the Tea Party. It is so lacking in any aspiration for American greatness, so dominated by the narrowest visions for our country and so ignorant of the fact that it was not tax cuts that made America great but our unique public-private partnerships across the generations. If sane Republicans do not stand up to this Hezbollah faction in their midst, the Tea Party will take the G.O.P. on a suicide mission. No American politician was more allergic to debt or taxes than Thomas Jefferson, but he also appreciated the need to have the resources to make the Louisiana Purchase and insisted that on his tombstone it be written that he founded the University of Virginia.
Naturally, some assholes have a problem with this truth.
A Sad Loss
The Oak Room at the Plaza Hotel closes tonight for good.
It's not the Plaza anymore, even if it keeps the name. The Edwardian Room is long gone, replaced by a trendy little boite. Trader Vic's became a health spa. A Trump owns it now.
One of the last vestiges of the city I grew up in, a clubby, close-knit camraderie that one could enter easily even without fame and fortune, so long as you had stamina and determination, will go tonight to its grave.
It was the kind of place where you order straight drinks: nothing with umbrellas or a list of ingredients that included tropical juices. Scotch. Gin. Vodka. "Exotic" here meant a Manhattan, and the look you got from the barkeep (always a friendly name like Tommy or Doug) for ordering a "Long Island Iced Tea" was enough to keep you chilled on the hottest summer night.
I wish I could be there, but I have a prior commitment, but damn, if I can get away early, I need a Jameson's.
Neat.
Welcome To The Party, Pal!
Like we didn't know this?
The only question I have is, did the Republicans learn how to do this from the Newscorp folks?
Your Photo Of The Day
(courtesy)
Ye Shiwen of China competes during the women's 200m individual medley final at the 14th FINA World Championships in Shanghai July 25, 2011.
What's Wrong With The Wall Street Journal?
They used to be on top of stories like this, instead of sitting around, scratching their asses, asking dumb questions.
You read a paragraph like this, say:
That's largely because the economy is growing much too slowly to absorb the available work force, and industries that usually hire early in a recovery—construction and small businesses—were crippled by the credit bust.
And that comes almost directly after this:
Over the past 10 years:
• The U.S. economy's output of goods and services has expanded 19%.
• Nonfinancial corporate profits have risen 85%.
• The labor force has grown by 10.1 million.
• But the number of private-sector jobs has fallen by nearly two million.
• And the percentage of American adults at work has dropped to 58.2%, a low not seen since 1983.
And the conclusion, after almost THIRTY YEARS OF CRAPPY JOBS GROWTH is that jobs were lost two years ago and aren't coming back?
I almost wish they WOULD tap voicemails there. At least they'd have a clue.
Constitutional Mandate
When thinking about this story, keep in mind that the US Postal Service is one of the few Constitutionally required services the government provides.
Why aren't we funding this properly?
This Is A Little Silly
Really? You have nothing more important to fight over than this?
An atheist group has filed a lawsuit seeking to prevent a cross made out of World Trade Center steel beams from going on display at the 9/11 Memorial Museum.
American Atheists filed a lawsuit this week in state court arguing that the group opposes the placement of the cross in the museum because members believe it is the only religious article getting special accommodation there.
The cross, made of two intersecting steel beams, was found standing in the rubble of the World Trade Center following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
I suppose you could look at it and see a religious symbol. Some people see Jesus in their Wal-Mart receipts, too, but that doesn't make the receipt a religious artifact.
Here's the thing: nobody made the cross specifically as a religious symbol. People build buildings. That means they have to make vertical and horizontal pieces of metal or wood intersect at 90 degree angles (else the building goes all haywire.) That usually requires a cross-like shape.
The cross in question survived the attacks. Many other artifacts of the collapse will be on display. Shall we now check with any group representing 2% of the population to see if they object? Somebody's eyeglasses will undoubtedly be among the relics. Will people with perfect vision object to that? Pieces of paper, too. Shall we check with the "paperless office" folks to see if they have a problem with reality?
I get your point: it looks like a cross, was treated like a cross (it was even stored in St. Peter's Church for a while,) and has even been called a cross.
But it ain't a cross. Give it a rest.
You Know What's Pretty Amazing About This Story?
Check out two lines from this article:
The military says an unarmed intercontinental ballistic missile has been destroyed minutes after it blasted out of an underground silo on the California coast on a test flight.[...] The military says the missile was nearing its target in the Pacific Ocean's Kwajalein Atoll area when it was destroyed.
Kwajalein Atoll is just a couple thousand miles from the Philipines....Probably take about twelve hours by plane, give or take.
Errrrrrrrrrr, uhhhhhhhhhhhhh...
You, um, errrr, announced on, uhhhhhhhhhh, June 21. Surely you must have known it was summer!
I Don't Think They Give Do-Overs, Rod
I think Blagoevich believes the justice system in Chicago is a little like the refereeing panel in the 1972 US-USSR gold medal basketball game.
Things To Think On
Paul Krugman makes an interesting point.
Amid all the insanity and hyperpartisan folderol, the mushy middle is precisely where it's supposed to be.
And it's killing us that this isn't being portrayed more clearly.
Josh Marshall makes basically the same comment.
Twelve Dimensional Chess Explained
In case you were wondering why Pelosi's been awfully quiet with respect to the debt ceiling limit (apart from yesterday's warnings), Greg Sargent raises a little bit of strategy.
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
Posts
