A Plague On Both Your Houses

The McCain - Palin Campaign Has Crossed Over to Evil

No longer can we simply dismiss the McCain campaign as “rallying the base” or “politics as usual.”  The times have changed. For the worse.  Every responsible politician, and particularly John McCain, needs to step back and say “Am I encouraging a mob?”  We are in the worst economic times perhaps in 70 years.  People are angry and in pain.  They are losing their jobs, their homes and their savings.  They are looking for people to blame.  They still fear for their safety. They are looking for ways to release their frustrations. 

John McCain and Sarah Palin, instead  of “Country First,” take the “get elected first” approach.  They associate their opposition with terrorism here and abroad.  They associate him with being “different.”  “Do you really know who he is?” the ask.  They are encouraging and exploiting the fear, the anger, the frustration and it is getting worse. 

What they are doing is evil.  That’s right – evil.  Not just wrong.  Not just bad.  Not just politics. Exploiting otherwise decent people and using their fears, pain and frustration to unleash them on others with different names or different skin colors or different religious beliefs is evil.  That’s not what American politicians do.  That’s what Adolf Hitler did.  And he did it when people were afraid and angry and losing their jobs and their life savings.

Tags: McCain, Palin, campaign, politics, Hitler

The Palins' un-American activities | Salon - Where is the outrage?

"My government is my worst enemy. I'm going to fight them with any means at hand."

This was former revolutionary terrorist Bill Ayers back in his old Weather Underground days, right? Imagine what Sarah Palin is going to do with this incendiary quote as she tears into Barack Obama this week.

Only one problem. The quote is from Joe Vogler, the raging anti-American who founded the Alaska Independence Party. Inconveniently for Palin, that's the very same secessionist party that her husband, Todd, belonged to for seven years and that she sent a shout-out to as Alaska governor earlier this year. ("Keep up the good work," Palin told AIP members. "And God bless you.")

AIP chairwoman Lynette Clark told me recently that Sarah Palin is her kind of gal. "She's Alaskan to the bone ... she sounds just like Joe Vogler."

So who are these America-haters that the Palins are pallin' around with?

Before his strange murder in 1993, party founder Vogler preached armed insurrection against the United States of America. Vogler, who always carried a Magnum with him, was fond of saying, "When the [federal] bureaucrats come after me, I suggest they wear red coats. They make better targets. In the federal government are the biggest liars in the United States, and I hate them with a passion. They think they own [Alaska]. There comes a time when people will choose to die with honor rather than live with dishonor. That time may be coming here. Our goal is ultimate independence by peaceful means under a minimal government fully responsive to the people. I hope we don't have to take human life, but if they go on tramping on our property rights, look out, we're ready to die."

This quote is from "Coming Into the Country," by John McPhee, who traipsed around Alaska's remote gold mining country with Vogler for his 1991 book. The violent-tempered secessionist vowed to McPhee that if any federal official tried to stop him from polluting Alaska's rivers with his earth-moving equipment, he would "run over him with a Cat and turn mosquitoes loose on him while he dies."

Vogler wasn't just a blowhard either. He put his secessionist ideas into action, working to build AIP membership to 20,000 -- an impressive figure by Alaska standards -- and to elect party member Walter Hickel as governor in 1990.
Vogler's greatest moment of glory was to be his 1993 appearance before the United Nations to denounce United States "tyranny" before the entire world and to demand Alaska's freedom. The Alaska secessionist had persuaded the government of Iran to sponsor his anti-American harangue. That's right ... Iran. The Islamic dictatorship. The taker of American hostages. The rogue nation that McCain and Palin have excoriated Obama for suggesting we diplomatically engage. That Iran….

Imagine the uproar if Michelle Obama was revealed to have joined a black nationalist party whose founder preached armed secession from the United States and who enlisted the government of Iran in his cause? The Obama campaign would probably not have survived such an explosive revelation. Particularly if Barack Obama himself was videotaped giving the anti-American secessionists his wholehearted support just months ago.

Where's the outrage, Sarah Palin has been asking this week, in her attacks on Obama's fuzzy ties to Ayers? The question is more appropriate when applied to her own disturbing associations.

The Palins' un-American activities | Salon.

How come we haven’t heard more about this?  How come the Obama campaign doesn’t put this out everywhere?  This is much worse than a guy who was generated by the Viet Nam war and turned himself in to the FBI.  These are people who are still out there and whom Palin, far from disavowing (as Obama has with Ayers), has openly praised and who’s party her husband joined.  You want to talk about big lies, John?  Talk about this.

Tags: Palin, Obama, McCain, terrorism, Ayers, Vogler, politics

The United States should buy Afghanistan's poppy crop instead of trying to eradicate it. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine

in the short term, hard-pressed Afghan farmers should be allowed to sell their opium to the government rather than only to the many criminal elements that continue to infest it or to the Taliban. We don't have to smoke the stuff once we have purchased it: It can be burned or thrown away or perhaps more profitably used to manufacture the painkillers of which the United States currently suffers a shortage. (As it is, we allow Turkey to cultivate opium poppy fields for precisely this purpose.) Why not give Afghanistan the contract instead? At one stroke, we help fill its coffers and empty the main war chest of our foes while altering the "hearts-and-minds" balance that has been tipping away from us. I happen to know that this option has been discussed at quite high levels in Afghanistan itself, and I leave you to guess at the sort of political constraints that prevent it from being discussed intelligently in public in the United States. But if we ever have to have the melancholy inquest on how we "lost" a country we had once liberated, this will be one of the places where the conversation will have to start.

The United States should buy Afghanistan's poppy crop instead of trying to eradicate it. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine.

Why the US has an inability to see beyond myopic and moralistic strategies in foreign policy I will never understand.  Why not buy the stuff?  It is cheaper to buy it than deal with its consequences on so many levels it strains credulity that we have rejected this strategy.  It supports the people of Afghanistan.  It takes drug supply off the open market. It denies funds and supply to our enemies.  It denies our enemies a recruiting tool.  Sometimes I wonder what the politicians in Washington are smoking.

Tags: Afghanistan, politics, strategy, war, taliban, drugs, terrorism

Whatever Happened to Moderation?

What happened to Rockefeller republicans?  What happened to people who understood economics and believed that the government shouldn’t interfere in your private life?  What happened to fiscal conservatism, a belief that both parties espouse and neither follow?  Why can I find nowhere a person who says, “You know, Obama is good on this but not on that, and McCain is good on this but not on that and in the balance I like….”  The discourse no longer even resembles rationality.  “Obama is a muslim terrorist.”  “McCain is a war mongering pawn of radical right wing wackos.” 

I wish there was a party that believed as I do.  Capitalism is good, but the markets are, in some cases, inefficient.  Health care and the environment to give examples. 

In this world, to allow financial markets the greatest efficiency, you need regulation but only enough to require that information reach the marketplace – disclosure  and transparency are the keys.  You don’t need pay limits and other foolishness that doesn’t pass the economics 101 smell test.  Sarbanes Oxley was overkill.  It layered on a bunch of costs with little incremental information getting to the marketplace.

On social issues – the government should be out of it in most cases.  As an example why should a gay couple not have the rights and obligations of a straight couple?  If the state is going to provide certain rights and obligations to couples, why does it matter if they are gay or straight?  On the other hand, just because in its infinite wisdom the government has decided to give tax breaks to churches, doesn’t mean it can dictate what they do.  It should not tell any Church that it has to “marry” a gay couple nor should it limit a tax exemption because it refuses to do so.

This polarization makes me scream.  It is unnecessary, counterproductive, mean spirited and vitriolic.  People wonder why nothing gets done.  Probably because the people trying to get things done are being shouted down by both sides who would rather nothing get done than make a compromise.  Without compromise, we would not have had this country.  We would not have had the kind of freedoms we now enjoy.  Without serious, unpleasant, compromises, the United States would not exist.  If we continue to refuse compromise, berate it and call it capitulation, we may no longer have the freedom to choose.

Tags: politics, Moderates, compromise, extremism, republicans, democrats

Debate Strategy

McCain might want to back off the attack campaign.  He looks like he has nothing to say and that its all about Obama.  Voters start to think that you have no substance if all you do is react to, and talk about, the opposition.  McCain should talk about what he will do, not what Obama will do.  McCain might want to say “You know, I’ve tried to let you know about the ways Senator Obama is going to actually hurt Americas economy with tax increases and big government, but I’ll let you judge that for yourselves.  My friends, let me tell you what I will do to help America remain the great country that it is…..”

Obama needs to attack pre-emptively.  I think he would be well served to start out the debate by saying something like “You will probably hear a lot from John about me and my policies.  John will say I voted 94 times for tax increases, a completely misleading statistic, or that I hung out with terrorists, also completely misleading.  But that’s because John doesn’t have much to say about his policies, how specifically he is going to help the working people of this country.  Well let me tell you how I am going to help the working people of this country, then we’ll both be talking about the same thing, my Presidency…..”

Tags: politics, Obama, McCain, debate, republicans, democrats

Sarah Palin - Shame on You

Well the McCain campaign is certainly starting to panic.  Its one thing to talk about bad policy or disagreements or even character flaws, youth or inexperience.  Talking about voting records is ok.  But now they are calling Obama a terrorist.  Do the words “I have in my hand a list” ring a bell?  Governor you are not Joe 6 Pack, you are trying to be Joe McCarthy and America will punish you for it. 

We are tired of the George Bush tactics of swiftboating and worse.  We are tired of Character assassination.  We are tired of a complete lack of substance.  Don’t tell us what’s wrong with the other guy, tell us why we should vote for you.

I for one will not.  Not now.  You have finally gone beyond redemption.  Anybody that reminiscent of Joe McCarthy will never have the support of Joe 6 Pack.

Tags: politics, McCain, Palin, Obama, McCarthyism, campaign

McCain knows how to win a War?

Palin said in the debate that John McCain "knows how to win a war." How? By being in the bottom of his class at West Point? By being a POW in a war we lost? Where does this knowledge come from? What does he have that Obama doesn't that gives him this knowledge?

Tags: McCain, Obama, War, politics

Explaining a Vote for the Rescue Plan

I live in the OC, a bastion of conservativism.  John Campbell is my congressman.  He is conservative and a republican.  This letter is one of the more cogent explanations of a vote for the rescue plan that I have heard.

You are one of many people who called, wrote, or e-mailed my office with questions or opinions about the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. As you probably know, the bill was passed by both houses of Congress, signed by the president, and is now law. The vote in the Senate was 74-25 and included yes votes from a wide range of the political spectrum including both Senators Obama and McCain, both California Senators, and the most conservative member of the Senate, Tom Coburn (R-OK). It then passed the House by a vote of 263-171 which included yes votes from The Speaker, Majority Leader and Minority Leader. 

 As you may also know, I voted in favor of the bill and was a strong advocate of it. I hope you will take the time to read on so I can explain why I feel so strongly about this legislation.

 First of all, if you are personally opposed to the bill it is probably because you are against a $700 billion bail out of Wall Street. You should be against that. I am too. But that media term for the bill is a complete mischaracterization of what the bill does. It will not cost $700 billion and it is not a bail out of anyone. Let me explain:

$700 Billion: This amount will not be spent. It is being invested in hard assets (mortgages secured by homes) which will have an expected cash flow in excess of the purchase price. So the taxpayers should get all their money back that way. But if that doesn't work, taxpayers will also get warrants (stock options) in the companies from which these assets are purchased. So, if those companies recover, taxpayers get part of profits. And if both of those don't get the whole $700 billion back, whoever is president in 5 years is required to submit to Congress a proposal to get any loss back from the companies who sold the government the assets. That's 3 different ways to be sure the taxpayer is made whole and maybe makes a profit. This bill may wind up costing less than one year's worth of earmarks.

 Bail Out: The assets will be bought from companies at probably 30%-60% of what they paid just a year or two ago. If I offered to buy your house that you bought 2 years ago for half what you paid for it, would I be bailing you out? I don't think you would look at it that way. These companies will lose lots of money. Fine. They made an investment that went bad and they have to live with it. But they will not be bailed out. Many companies and a number of banks will still fail even with this bill. The purpose of the purchase is to cut out the cancer that is clogging the world's financial arteries so that credit and loans and cash can flow again. No one is being bailed out. 

 Wall Street: If we do nothing, expect to see many days on the stock market like Monday, September 29th when the stock market suffered its biggest one day point drop ever. That will devastate the retirement plans of millions of everyday people. All forms of credit have already dried up. If they dry up more, companies small and large will not be able to get standard short term loans to buy inventory and make payroll. That means lots of job losses and layoffs. And people with money market funds and bank accounts may not be able to get their money, even with FDIC Insurance because these entities have to sell a loan to get you cash. And no one is buying the loans. 

 Many different proposals were looked at and discussed.  I was actually part of a working group appointed by the Republican Leader to develop an alternative plan, which, in fact, developed several provisions that were included in the final bill.  Our goal was to develop a virtually cost-free plan to stabilize the global financial markets and save every American's savings and investments, not a bail out.  I believe that the final bill meets these criteria.  There is no guarantee that this bill will work. But I have not seen an alternate plan that I thought had a better chance to both work and pass both houses of Congress. 

 If the bill works, some banks will still fail and some companies will still not make it. But it will be far, far fewer than would have otherwise occurred. Some of you have asked me why a believer in free markets would support this bill. I have done so because I believe this is a solution to preserve free markets, not replace them. In some ways, this bill is more of a free market solution than other actions that have been taken. The government will not take over any companies here. Even the warrants will be non-voting. No one will be compelled to sell the government their assets if they don't want to. Even the "reverse auction" process of establishing pricing for the assets, where sellers submit bids to one buyer rather than the other way around, is a market based pricing method. 

 No one wanted this bill. No one wished for this crisis to occur. But it is here.  This is a worldwide problem and not just an American one.  And we had to act. My vote was carefully considered, but made without reservation. I applaud my colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, who joined me in doing so. 

 I appreciate the great honor you have given me by allowing me to represent you in the United States Congress. 

 I remain respectfully,

 JOHN CAMPBELL

Member of Congress

Tags: politics, republican, rescue+plan, bail+out, congress

Is McCain becoming a One Trick Pony

ARLINGTON, VA — U.S. Senator John McCain today issued the following statement on the jobs report:

“Today’s report of another 159,000 lost jobs confirms what America’s working men and women have understood for months: our nation’s economy is on the wrong track. It is imperative that Congress act to address the financial crisis while protecting taxpayers and being good stewards of their dollars. But we must do more.

“America’s middle class needs help from a government that is truly standing on their side and not in their way. I am committed to getting to the roots of this crisis — reforming Washington and cleaning up the mess created by the greed and crony capitalism of government-backed mortgage giants – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I will reverse out-of-control spending, end the wasteful and corrupting practice of earmarks, and get the government budget back to balance. I will reform health care to control costs and better serve American families, open markets around the globe for our products, cut taxes, and expand domestic production of energy to eliminate the ability of international oil markets to hold our economy hostage. I will create jobs and get the economy on the right track.

“Unlike Senator Obama, I do not believe we will create one single American job by increasing taxes, going on a massive spending binge, and closing off markets. Our nation cannot afford Senator Obama’s higher taxes.”

The Page - by Mark Halperin - TIME.

I think McCain has nothing to say about the economy other than “no new taxes.”  This is old, worn out rhetoric that no one really believes.  Americans generally know it is disingenuous and they have heard, and believe Obama, when he says he won’t raise taxes on 95% of the people and that is fundamentally fair. If McCain doesn’t find something else to say about the economy and economic policy, he isn’t going to win.

Tags: McCain, politics, Obama, election

Palin v. Biden

Surprise surprise.  I was wrong.  Biden didn’t screw it up.  In fact he was masterful. He did nothing that allowed anyone to accuse him of anything but being respectful of Governor Palin.  He called her “Governor” the entire time, even correcting himself when he went through the list of people in this race by their first names.  He was masterful in attacking McCain but never Palin.  Good lawyers know when to stop questioning a witness and let what they have said stand.  They know when to trust that the jury doesn’t need to have what they can see with their own two eyes forced down their throats.  He used this principle hear.  Americans can see her and can judge for themselves.  At the same time, she doesn’t matter and he used this opportunity to demonstrate that. The conversation will no longer be about Palin and that is good for Obama.

He also did a great job of exhibiting that he knows John McCain well and you felt that you wanted to trust his judgment on “John.”  You knew, by the end of the debate, that they were in the most exclusive club in the world together and you felt Biden gave you insight into McCain.  Strategically this is excellent because Biden made credible hits on McCain’s maverick status and on his similarities to Bush.  If McCain attacks Biden he will just look petulant because Biden isn’t his enemy.

Palin didn’t lose this either.  Biden won, but she held her own.  I agree with the Wall Street Journal when the say “her citing of facts sometimes came cross as rote….” but at the same time, she was no longer a deer in the headlights as she has been this past week. 

Palin did try to promote her image as Joe Six Pack, but to me it was flat.   She didn’t make mistakes but she was out of her depth.  You felt uncomfortable for her.  She did nothing to convince me that she belongs in the White House but she convinced me that she can improve.

Biden on the other hand really did a great job.  He came across as both down to earth and classy.  His use of McCain’s first name while calling Palin “Governor” gave the impression that he was being respectful of her but that she was a third wheel in the race.  He also gave the impression of genuine caring and honesty, which, for all her folksy rhetoric, she really didn’t do.

Palin scored points for me on tolerance and integrity.  I got no sense, and the democrats would do well not to promote the idea that she is corrupt.  I believe her when she says that she has friends that don’t believe what she believes.  The republican pundits tire me with their comparisons to Reagan.  She is not Reagan.  But on the other hand I give her credit for not being Bush or Cheney either.  She left me feeling that she would not provide the kind of polarizing, mean spirited politically vindictive corrupt leadership that Bush and his cronies have given us.  That heartened me about her and the Republicans generally.

On CNN someone said that she would be a candidate in four or eight years.  I have no doubt that’s true.  She reminds me of a talented sixth round pick in the NFL.  She needs some development but with some time on the practice squad she will be a contributor to the Republican Party.  Gone is the impression left from the Couric interviews that she is just a dope.

The verdict Biden wins.  Palin holds her own and improves.

Tags: politics, democrats, republicans, Biden, Palin, debate