It seems that since phdave returned, LAexile has fallen from the face of the earth. My theory is that neither of them actually exist. They are both personalities created by PartisanBot

drsmooth wrote:
Tom Friedman weighs in on the bailout today. This may be the only part he got right:

I always said to myself: Our government is so broken that it can only work in response to a huge crisis. But now we’ve had a huge crisis, and the system still doesn’t seem to work. Our leaders, Republicans and Democrats, have gotten so out of practice of working together that even in the face of this system-threatening meltdown they could not agree on a rescue package, as if they lived on Mars and were just visiting us for the week, with no stake in the outcome.

Every time I see Tom Friedman's name I think he's Thomas Frank, when he couldn't be further away. Still, for about the 5th time this week it's made me think that I need to get a copy of One Market Under God (again).

TenuredVulture wrote:But this bailout thing is different. I believe, if the bailout is successful, and followed by bailouts of the big 3 and the airlines, we're going to find ourselves in a nation very much like pre-Thatcher Britain.

I'm not being snarky, but I am curious as to why you think you might end up like the UK in the 70s. It sounds too much like hyperbole. There's going to be nowhere near the wide level of state ownership, nor will there be problems with unions bringing the country to a standstill, nor will you face the problems of a slowly dying manufacturing sector.

I realise in the states that state ownership is anathama to most, but how it is used varies widely. Hell, even in denationalised UK, we've still got a state owned tv and radio, and currently two banks (both of which crashed). Instead of arguing against the principle, people should be looking for the best use.

gr wrote:on competency, she ran a successful statewide campaign and currently has a 80% job approval rating in her state.

To be fair, it's probably easy to score high approval ratings when your main engagement with the electorate is sending them phat checks thanks to high oil prices.

And while the "exotic Alaska" thing might or might not be overstated, I don't think it's at all wrong to assert that she'd be facing a vastly different set of issues as vice-president than as governor of Alaska--a gig in which, by all accounts, she wasn't very hands-on anyway.

But it's not even about that. Palin's a cultural phenomenon, and a source of evidently endless fascination, because the two sub-countries inside the U.S. see such different things when they look at her. "Red America" sees a person of principle, engaged with "real" concerns, who, as you say, didn't have time to read Foreign Affairs or The Economist while raising five kids. And that reassures them. "Blue America" sees a simpleton whose certitude, stemming from received values (Wasilla Assemblies of God, mostly) not only dwarfs her factual knowledge, but seems to render such knowledge irrelevant. And that scares the fucking hell out of us. I know it does me.

Sarah Palin: Everywoman!

Hewitt: Governor, your candidacy has ignited extreme hostility, even some hatred on the left and in some parts of the media. Are you surprised? And what do you attribute this reaction to?

Palin: Oh, I think they're just not used to someone coming in from the outside saying you know what? It's time that normal Joe six-pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency, and I think that that's kind of taken some people off guard, and they're out of sorts, and they're ticked off about it.

If it makes me a horrible elitist to think that I'd rather not put the guy or gal spilling over the next bar stool a heartbeat away from the nuclear launch codes, that's fine.

SarPal wrote:It's time that normal Joe six-pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency

No Sarah, it's really really not

i saw something on spike TV last night...i don't know if it was a real political commercial or not, but it seemed to be for some guy who was talking about being 6 feet tall standing on a milk crate and supersizing his value meal. and watching football. or something.

i didn't really catch it with full attention so i'm not sure...was that real, or was it just spike spoofing political ads?

?

lay off the pipe

seke2 wrote:i saw something on spike TV last night...i don't know if it was a real political commercial or not, but it seemed to be for some guy who was talking about being 6 feet tall standing on a milk crate and supersizing his value meal. and watching football. or something.

i didn't really catch it with full attention so i'm not sure...was that real, or was it just spike spoofing political ads?

circumsupersized?

Woody wrote:Yesterday I heard Sean Hannity refer to Fox News as an alternative media outlet

I think it's fair to say they're an alternative to news.

TenuredVulture wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkqosRiyYo[/youtube]

Counting, Fox style!

I did post this several pages back, but it's worth posting again, especially since you actually posted the video, where as I just gave a link to it.

Some new polls out today...

Quinnipiac has Obama +8 in FL, +8 in OH, and +15 in PA
Insider Advantage has Obama +6 in VA and +2 in OH

Woah.

538 is currently projecting 336-202 electoral vote, 51.4%-47% popular vote, and a 85.4% win percentage for Obama. The 538 map basically has PA, OH, and FL blue, and now the battlegrounds are Missouri, Indiana, and North Carolina. If even a small fraction of this is reality, Obama will have to make a huge mistake to lose this thing.

From another article that talks about how Sarah Palin can't identify a newspaper

"I have quite a few people who are giving us information about the record of Obama and Biden, and at the end of the day, though, it is — it's so clear, again, what those choices are. Either new ideas, new energy and reform of Washington, D.C., or more of the same," Palin said.

If you took out the candidates names, and someone asked you who said that, wouldn't you assume it was the Obama/Biden camp?

Philly the Kid wrote:The banks need capital and stabilization. I find it very peculiar this un-easy alliance of far right and far left. I being far left, would like to see any new directions involve TOTAL TRANSPARENCY, tight regulations and rules and independent entities monitoring.

After hearing how weak certain provisions were in the bill shot down yesterday - no real limits of executive compensation or even golden parachutes, apparently some real holes in oversight, et al - I am very glad the bill failed yesterday.

That said, I am well aware of the futility of hoping for a bill that actually might look out for the interests of the middle class, provide for some real accountability in the financial world, hold accountable those who brought about these failures, offer more to troubled mortgage borrowers and less to troubled CEOs, etc. I want a solution that works, but I also want reform and fairness.

And although I am a partisan Democrat, I will admit this is an area in which both parties are to blame - they both sell out the taxpayer at every turn. Even now, apparently, the greed-heads who caused these problems apparently are lobbying successfully for the things they want, rather than the things this country needs. Who on earth is listening to Wall Street and why? Washington, in the interests of the American people, now should be dictating to Wall Street. Period.

Our political system is broken - the average American trusts neither Washington nor Wall Street - and with good reason.

I am now in the camp of those who keep voting no - whatever passes ultimately will be exposed as a sweetheart deal for connected people who don't deserve it, while middle-class people in danger of losing their homes and their retirement savings will get jack.

Personally, I have little to lose. My bank accounts are well within FDIC insurance limits and my mortgage is current and has been all along. Yes, my IRA is probably taking a big hit but it isn't very big and wasn't performing all that well anyway. If taking a hit in my IRA is the price I have to pay to see Wall Street a smoldering ruin, right now I think I'm willing to pay that price.

seke2 wrote:Some new polls out today...

Quinnipiac has Obama +8 in FL, +8 in OH, and +15 in PA
Insider Advantage has Obama +6 in VA and +2 in OH

Woah.

538 is currently projecting 336-202 electoral vote, 51.4%-47% popular vote, and a 85.4% win percentage for Obama. The 538 map basically has PA, OH, and FL blue, and now the battlegrounds are Missouri, Indiana, and North Carolina. If even a small fraction of this is reality, Obama will have to make a huge mistake to lose this thing.

The 538 numbers have been so good for Obama in recent days I just have to take them with a grain of salt. I want to believe, but I'm wary. When McCain/Palin were surging a couple weeks back, JerseyHoya pretty much kept his perspective - I think Obama supporters should do the same now. No doubt it looks good, but I just don't believe it's that good.

RCP, no tossup states, is 348-190 for Obama right now. I guess that's sort of the right-wing closest equivalent to 538, and they're on board for an Obama cakewalk right now too.

When McCain was doing well on 538 a few weeks ago, there was an obvious reason why to take it with a grain of salt--he was in the middle of his convention bounce and Sarah Palin was still an unknown. At this point, we're running out of time for any more major game-changers in this election, and everything has gone Obama's way since the end of the RNC, including people getting to know Sarah Palin and realizing she's way out of her league.

I hope you're right, Seke. But with more than a month to play, I'm sure the Republicans have more up their sleeve than what we've seen so far. Whether they have a good candidate or not, they are better at this game than the Democrats.

The theory is that we'll be hearing a lot more about the Rev. Wright, Ayres, et al this month. Because these are absolutely the most important things to talk about, of course. Country First!

Friedman ftw:

This is a credit crisis. It’s all about confidence. What you can’t see is how bank A will no longer lend to good company B or mortgage company C. Because no one is sure the other guy’s assets and collateral are worth anything, which is why the government needs to come in and put a floor under them. Otherwise, the system will be choked of credit, like a body being choked of oxygen and turning blue.

Well, you say, “I don’t own any stocks — let those greedy monsters on Wall Street suffer.” You may not own any stocks, but your pension fund owned some Lehman Brothers commercial paper and your regional bank held subprime mortgage bonds, which is why you were able refinance your house two years ago. And your local airport was insured by A.I.G., and your local municipality sold municipal bonds on Wall Street to finance your street’s new sewer system, and your local car company depended on the credit markets to finance your auto loan — and now that the credit market has dried up, Wachovia bank went bust and your neighbor lost her secretarial job there.

We’re all connected. As others have pointed out, you can’t save Main Street and punish Wall Street anymore than you can be in a rowboat with someone you hate and think that the leak in the bottom of the boat at his end is not going to sink you, too. The world really is flat. We’re all connected. “Decoupling” is pure fantasy.

Nice book plug there, Tommy!