Uh...

So, it looks like Mikhail Gorbachev and really rich dude Alexandr Lebedev are forming a new Independent Democratic Party because "without independent political institutions" Russia can't progress a country.

So yeah. Great, I suppose. But this is bizarre and one reason why I love Russia so much:

Lebedev, a former State Duma deputy and a billionaire who describes himself on his LiveJournal blog as a "capitalist-idealist," said it was too early to talk about possible participation in the 2011 Duma elections.

Naturally, LJ - whose parent company is a Russian corporation - is big in Russia and it shouldn't be surprising that it's popular for those wanting to get their message out. It's just weird that literary figures and political operatives over there all use an online social network noted in America for its numerous communities devoted to slash fiction. Just saying.

Quote of the month?

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski sez:

Of course we don't like it when the Russian president or Russian generals threaten us with nuclear annihilation. It is not a friendly thing to do, and we have asked them to do it no more than once a month.

It's really seeing the small requests in life fulfilled that bring to us the most joy.

h/t: Joshua Keating.

Dear Keith Olbermann,

You mock McCain for stating that Pakistan is a failed state. This is kind of misplaced and there are a number of other things you could legitimately make fun of him for.

Pakistan is ranked eighth on Foreign Policy and The Fund for Peace's Failed States Index. A state is deemed to have failed by the following criteria:

• mounting demographic pressures
• massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples
• legacy of vengeance - seeking group grievance
• chronic and sustained human flight
• uneven economic development along group lines
• sharp and/or severe economic decline
• criminalisation and delegitimisation of the state
• progressive deterioration of public services
• widespread violation of human rights
• security apparatus as "state within a state"
• rise of factionalised elites
• intervention of other states or external actors

Now, that comes from the first goddamn thing my dumb, half-remembering ass typed into a popular, efficient search engine. And despite my miraculous laziness, I have figured this out; despite the tempting piece of fruit that is John McCain saying something stupid about foreign policy, I have resisted. Because, Keith, Pakistan has had a few bureaucratical snafus over the last decade or so. I've gathered as much from casual observation. So it didn't seem like that much of a stretch and lo and behold the marvels of the modern age have shown me the wonder of truth.

Thems the breaks, though. The ability to perceive grey areas and humility alone have yet to land me a high-ratings vehicle through which to bloviate and be incredibly condescending.

So please give me a job after this election, okay? When properly groomed I am quite decorative and especially suited in social functions to the distribution of small edibles with charm and with wit.

Thank you,

Benjamin Estes (age 8)

You're Being Robbed

This is going to be a bit of a downer. I'll preface it by saying this: The Democrats do not currently have a plan to replace the one the White House and Treasury Secretary proposed. This is because the Bush plan is just a money grab, not a real solution to what's wrong with our economy. The Democrats intend to fix our economic crisis the old fashioned way, by creating new wealth from the bottom up, by supporting American innovation and creating jobs. They also plan to roll back most of the irresponsible deregulation in the Finance industry that the GOP rammed through in 1999. This will prevent the type of speculation that got us where we are now from happening in the future. It's going to take time, not the "quick-fix" that appeals to the short attention span and unwillingness of most Americans to consider how government actions affect their lives. We are a country that needs to start paying attention. This is about preventing a massive theft from your pocket and mine, one perpetrated by our government on behalf of people who do not deserve it.

The $700 Billion dollar bailout plan you've heard about in the last few days is a dangerous, horrible idea. Treasury Secretary Paulson says it's necessary to prevent a major liquidity crisis in the world financial market, but it's a lie. This plan is simply a parting gift from the Bush Administration to the financial industry, and a brazen attempt to saddle a possible Obama administration with a crushing debt that will prevent them from making any progress on the issues that matter most to Americans. I heard just the other day someone contending that Obama wanted $670 Billion in new spending. They didn't bother to mention that most of it is revenue-neutral, and won't cost the taxpayers a dime. This plan, on the other hand will cost every single American Citizen over $2000.

We are told that this "Emergency" plan is a reaction to the fluctuations on Wall Street last week. If so, why has the Bush Administration been planning it for months? WH Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto:

"Fratto said it would be “unthinkable” for Congress not to pass legislation this week, asserting the result would be a “very, very serious situation” for the U.S. economy. “It shouldn’t take much analysis to remember what happened last week, which was a very serious freeze-up in our credit markets,” Fratto said. “Our financial markets right now do not need uncertainty, they need increased certainty as to how this rescue plan is going to go forward — and that they can be sure that there is a plan to go forward — and that will begin the correction in our financial markets.” Fratto insisted that the plan was not slapped together and had been drawn up as a contingency over previous months and weeks by administration officials. He acknowledged lawmakers were getting only days to peruse it, but he said this should be enough. "

Source: http://www.rollcall.com/news/28599-1.html?type=printer_friendly

If the White House and Treasury saw this coming, why didn't they act earlier, or at least consult Congress as they were drafting a piece of legislation that represents the largest transfer of public funds into the private sector in history? Don't you think the people that represent you and I should have been allowed to help shape this plan? Why was it written in secret? I remember another Bush pet project that was cooked up in secret for years before being hastily announced and forced through Congress without meaningful oversight; we're still In Iraq, still presumably looking for those "Weapons of Mass Destruction." Our brave servicemen and women are still dying.

I'll tell you why this was a secret; it's because Congress never would have agreed to it. Among other things, it renders the office of the Treasury Secretary above the law. Decisions made by the TS would from now on be legally untouchable, and immune to legislative review. I don't know about you, but I want any decisions made about my tax dollars to be subject to scrutiny from Congress, the Supreme Court, and whoever else we've appointed or elected to oversee this stuff. That's why we elect them in the first place, right?

Another example of the foolishness in this bill? Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have asked that companies receiving assistance from you and I must limit their Executive's salaries to the amount of the highest-paid government employee. That would be $400,000 a year, that's what we pay the President. The corporations are pushing, with support from Bush, to keep salary caps out of the bill. I don't think it's right to expect taxpayers to foot the bill for Financial CEOs' extravagant lifestyles, especially when their "leadership" has put their companies in the position of needing a taxpayer handout. If they're on my dime, 400k is plenty. It's about 10 times the average salary in America. I refuse to cry for them because they have to sell a couple houses. I can barely afford gas.

The Bill also opposes something called "warrants," which are effectively stock options that would be owned by the federal government on the Mortgage-Backed Securities that you and I are about to purchase. There are two problems here; one is that the plan calls for taxpayers to purchase all this bad debt at ABOVE market price, for some reason, and the other is that at whatever price, we would not be profiting from those assets if and when they increase in value. To simplify:

You are being asked to loan a company money to buy a stock that's only worth $2. But they want you to pay $5, since they feel like it's worth more than the market dictates it's worth, and they need the capital. Then, after you pay $5 for the stock, if it eventually goes up in value to $10, they will be keeping all the money. And you've lost $5, they've earned $8. Good for them, Bad for you.

The bottom line is this: This is probably not a crisis. If it is, I'm sorry to say, $700 billion is not going to solve it. IF we are about to enter a period of severe financial depression, this plan only serves to give one last gift to the rich before it all comes crashing down, it WILL NOT FIX THE PROBLEM. The problem is regulation, and the reckless attitude that allowed Wall Street to gamble away your home's value and your 401k. And giving these idiots more money to play with is not going to help.

There are indications that the market is already self-correcting. Warren Buffet announced today he was buying $5B worth of Goldman-Sachs premium stock, and possibly more in common stock. Now, this may have been a reaction to the news that Goldman stands to benefit massively from the bailout, but the point is this: Some people gambled and lost. There are companies out there that are still strong, and they are absorbing the weak ones. A lot of people made bad decisions, and this is the beginning of the reckoning for them. I'm not interested in propping them up. These failures are either the beginning of a massive liquidity crisis, or they're not. Nothing we do is going to prevent it from happening, the market is what it is. If you think that $700B is a lot of money, google "credit default swaps." There's about $65 TRILLION dollars worth of heavily leveraged, crazily unpredictable debt floating around out there that could bring down the world financial system eventually. But it probably won't, because the market is ruthless, but not dumb. Companies that are strong will survive, and those that are weak will die. It's natural selection, maybe that's why Bush doesn't believe in it.

Call your Congressperson. Tell her that you oppose this gift to people who were incompetent and stupid at their chosen profession. Tell her that you demand oversight, not another blatant power grab by the Bush Administration. Here's the number:

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/mcapdir.html

It is time to admit that Conservative Fiscal Policy, Reganomics, and "Trickle-Down" are all failed ideas. We have, for the better part of the last 30 years, been ruled by these ridiculous notions, and the events of the last 8 years have proven them to be false. The rallying cry against Liberal financial policy has always been that it is "Socialism" in disguise. That Democrats are "Communists" who want to take all the money and ruin the country by handing it out to the poor, or something. Who are the "Socialists" now, Mr. Bush? You have, in the last 8 weeks, taken over the largest Mortgage Company in the Country. The largest Insurance Company in the World. You are preparing to assume ownership of most of the Financial Sector as well. We, the taxpayers, now own these companies. But I'll tell you why it's not Socialism. Socialism implies public ownership of industry, with public distribution of profit. Your current policy is public ownership of industry with distribution of profit going to a select few in the private sector. There a word for that type of Government, too Mr. Bush. It's called Fascism.

There is a solution. But we have to wake up. The economy is broken because of Republican-backed deregulation that allowed it to get that way. Democrats have consistently opposed the laws that got us into this mess. We are at the end of the failed experiment with GOP fiscal policy. We must act now to elect the people that know how to fix it. I'm tired of being led by those that only know how to give more and more of our money to the rich.

Volunteer. Call your local Democratic party and ask how you can help. Florida People can find the number here:

http://www.fladems.com/content/county_organizations

If not there, visit the campaign website, sign up, and get moving.

http://www.barackobama.com/

Now is not the time to panic.

I think this is an excellent point:

At the Republican National Convention, McCain adopted Obama's rhetoric and has promised that he and Palin would be the true agents of change, though he declines to specify exactly which Bush-era policies he would change. Ironically, a common castigation of Obama is that he isn't setting the narrative of the race -- that the debate isn't on his terms. But it should be clear by now that this isn't true: The race is about change and who can bring it to Washington. Obama's campaign is betting that its message will be the one that resonates with voters, and McCain's will be seen for what it is: pure rhetoric. Maybe that's a bad bet, but nonetheless Obama's story has set the frame, and McCain is the one who's had to work within it. Obama should not get nasty because that undermines the entire narrative of his candidacy.

I have a lot of faith that Obama's an intelligent guy who's surrounded himself with intelligent people and that the recent polling and the Palin phenomenon are not really things to get doom and gloomy over. We'll see how this plays out, but I'd wager that we've finally got a candidate who knows what he's doing.

:(

I love this blog, but there's something about this post that strikes me as self important in the same way I can't really stand to watch Keith Olbermann's "special comments" - because their indignant tone completely misses the point of their intended message.

According to him, we've forgotten 9/11:

It's hard to remember the national mood right after 9/11. The pall that fell upon American life the moment the planes shattered the towers. Irony was declared dead. The late night comics went dark. Bush ceased to be a figure of fun. The world was dangerous, and existence was a heavy burden. It needed to be taken seriously.

Ezra forgot, apparently, about the wonderful semicolon - whose absence in the above passage is indicative of our neglect of one of the most fascinating, terror-inspiring and abused punctuation marks in our grammar.

on iTunes 8

The new Genius function, which creates playlists FROM MAGIC, is really stupid and obvious and pisses me off to the extent that the utter triviality of my displeasure towards it makes me that much angrier.

Surrounded by weak neighbors and fish

David Frum wrote something. And some may ignore his histrionic accusations of elitism and think that he has a point beyond that. He doesn't, sadly.


He doesn't waste any goddamn time. The closing sentence of the opening paragraph is such an exquisitely envious jab at a foundation of liberal thinking - diversity - that I almost want to recommend that you read the article in reverse so that your reading pleasure can have the properly cathartic terminal sensation it deserves.

With wealth comes diversity — and what is inequality but diversity in monetary form?

What a goddamn opening salvo! This is seriously like the Beethoven Fifth of ridiculous, hand-wringing articles.

Because I'm a dick, I was going to quote these next two out of context. Imagine, I was going to tell you, that a very disgruntled, hippo-joweled manchild is furiously denying the possibility of being incorrect by pounding his fists on a Risk board, throwing pieces into the air in glorious suicide before having to face the humiliation of admitting one's wrong move. I thought it would make them that much more special. But then I realized there is no need for context because they're fundamentally true. The logical pillars which Frum has so carefully erected underneath them are nothing more than pathetic attempts to gloss over that simple, damning fact.

Equality in itself never can be or should be a conservative goal.

Well, maybe if it were more like what I was talking about, he'd have said that in modern conservative policy equality can not be a goal. No really, I suppose the one that must hurt Frum the most is:

Conservatives need to stop denying reality.

Well, having said that in 2002 and 2003 would have saved several thousand American lives and several trillion dollars or whatever the hell it's up to now.


But Frum doesn't want conservatives to confront the reality of their own failed policies. In fact, the overarching theme of the article is Frum's nascent leitmotif. In 2005 it was that if two men who may or may not possess the body type right-leaning, coddled war nerds salivate over in action movies were to somehow be able to kiss and hold hands in public, then the world would be engulfed in the subsequent celestial fury. Now, as Summer 2008 fades it's the old chestnut that Democrats are elitist. To insist that the divide in this nation is political and not economic, to insinuate that the rich only vote Democratic, is a pretty spurious argument. Elitism should not be bandied about as a weapon by someone who earns his living telling people what he thinks about things in major, national publications. Period.

There's understatement! Yay!!

Republican economic management since 2001 has not yielded many benefits for middle-income America.

Again: he's on the money, folks. This reminds me of the oft passed around Soviet bit of punditry that Brezhnev's policy of alternating the color and effectiveness of the fuzzy balls (made from his own hair!) which the dour Russian premiere would stick in his ears for months at a time was rather small comfort to the out of work factory laborer, living in near medieval conditions 60 kilometers east of Moscow.

There's also denial! Or ignorance! Maybe?

Indeed, the Democratic tilt of the very richest Americans could be exploited as a powerful conservative recruiting tool.

I love the usage of the past tense here, as if exploiting the resentment of the wealthy (often, shocking as it may seem, by wealthy people themselves!) were not the central theme of his present argument.

In summary, David Frum is going to be applauded for trying to "save" his beloved ideology without dropping the immature reliance upon bitter projection and manipulative logic nor - and this is bizarre - admitting his own culpability.

Try again, I guess.

Best PSA Ever?

Yes. The answer is yes.

?

Quaint.

By the way, the only country other than Russia to recognize the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia is Nicaragua.

Celebrity

In lieu of posting anything of actual substance and because I have little time to actually write about the many ways in which Palin, Putin, and most of the rest of the internet is insane and wrong, I'll go ahead and quote - in its entirety - this great post by Anonymous Liberal:

Did anyone else notice that the primetime segment of last night's Republican National Convention began with a video tribute to movie star who later became president (Ronald Reagan)? And that was followed by a speech by an actor (Fred Thompson) who later became a senator, eventually returned to acting, and then ran unsuccessfully for president this year. And he was filling a speaking slot that originally belonged to another movie star turned politician (Arnold Schwarzenegger).

But remember folks, don't vote for Barack Obama because he's a "celebrity."

A story-link for you, Ben.

Amazing.