Debates and Antics

There is a growing consensus in the blogosphere that the McCain campaign's announcement that they want to delay Friday night's debate is theater, and many are suggesting that it may be both bad theater and tactically foolish. As today unfolds it looks more and more likely that congressional representatives will come up with a compromise around the bailout plan, perhaps even before McCain can make it south to DC from his campaigning (Wait... wasn't his campaign "suspended" yesterday??) at the Clinton Global Initiative in NYC.

Wonkette throws my favorite wording onto this whole campaign theatrical fiasco in this post, where they link the debate delay suggestion to the McCain camp's hesitancy to allow Sarah Palin to do anything other than read directly off a teleprompter to crowds that have been pre-screened to be that perfect mix of 95.3% bible-thumping Republican and 4.7% cold-dead-hands-gun-gripping Republican. This snippet is 1/3 of their post, but you should really read the whole thing yourself:

"...and then once they’ve rescheduled the Palin/Biden debate, John McCain can pull another crazy stunt — announcing his own daughter is fake pregnant, maybe, or firing Ruth Bader Ginsburg, or refusing to appear in public in anything but a glittering leotard — and everyone will forget all about this Palin nut and how she withers under intense questioning by Katie freaking Couric."

Views on the Bailout: Part 3

Thanks to Matt for starting up a quality series of posts related to the bailout. I found an editorial I wanted to post yesterday or the day before about the bailout, socialism, and hypocrisy but it took me a day to get it up here, so I'll add it as part 3 in this ongoing series. Thomas F. Schaller writes for the Baltimore Sun (and Salon.com) and in a rather scathing and brilliant bit of rhetoric (cause that's all we liberals really care about these days anyway) he give us the following:

To social conservatives, Darwinism is merely an unproven "theory" about how our species evolved. But "social Darwinism" is an ineluctable fact: The smart and hardworking prosper, while the stupid and lazy fail.

Yet notice how those same chest-thumping capitalists of talk radio and at the corporate-funded think tanks often fall silent in the face of fixed markets, no-bid contracts, bailouts and subsidies for the very corporations that demand less government oversight when things are going well, then turn to Washington when things go horribly wrong.

The hypocrisies abound.

Now, pointing out the hypocrisies involved here doesn't necessarily have any bearing on the question of whether or not bailing-out is an economic necessity, I suppose. Still, I think it does have a direct bearing on some of the particulars at stake this week as the congress weighs and negotiates what a bill may look like.

These issues bear into the picture on questions around executive pay and the need for oversight. This sort of governmental largess in terms of spending cannot be made without the possibility for oversight, to do so would be somewhere way beyond reckless. Again, Shaller puts it well when he says:

Those of us who work hard and pay our taxes are getting screwed. Our Christmas bonus this year? The privilege of covering the tab for greedy executives in the deregulated insurance and mortgage industries who scoff at safety nets for you but demand a safety trapeze for themselves.

Since it's looking more and more inevitable that we'll all be screwed by this to some degree, ie: the taxpayers will be footing something in the way of a bailout, let's at least have someone watching the ways in which this screwing is taking place to make sure it doesn't become slimy and despicable on top of how ridiculous (if perhaps necessary) it already is.

Campbell Brown Goes To Town On Sexism and Sarah Palin... With a Twist.

I'll be honest, I don't know if this feels real or a little too theatrical, but regardless Campbell Brown has a point, and I like it. Nice of her to flip the sexism claim, and I'd love to see what Carly Fiorina has to say about this rant.

Baseball Break: Bullpens Make the Difference, Bomb Threats And The Phanatic

Jayson Stark has a nice piece of commentary over at ESPN this week about how the race between the Phillies and Mets this fall is being decided by bullpens. The Phillies amped up their bullpen support in the off-season by signing primo closer Brad Lidge, who has been lights-out all season long. Meanwhile, the Mets have struggled with injuries and inconsistency out of their own bullpen.

His article give evidence to support what I could already observe in the couple of Mets fans, Kim and Carolyn specifically, who I know. We went to a game at Shea where Johann Santana pitched 7 great innings, leaving with a 5-run lead, only to have the Phillies rally back in the 9th against Mets relief and take a victory. This pattern has repeated so many times this season that I can see my friends cringe even with late-game leads, knowing they're never safe until 27 outs have been recorded and the lights are turned out on a Mets game. The Phillies have given their fans reason to feel this way many times, but this year we have reason to believe.

Still funnier, yesterday there was a bomb threat at Citizens Bank park. "Funny?!?!!?!?," you might ask. Yeah. Funny when you know the back story. Turns out they were filming a commercial with the Philly Phanatic, the Phillies classic and bombastic mascot outside the stadium. Said commercial involved the fanatic shooting foil-wrapped hot dogs out of this air gun, and lord only knows what else. When they wrapped, they left a couple foil-wrapped dogs behind, and later someone spotted them and followed the post-9/11 "See Something/Say Something" credo. The police evacuated fans from the stadium and called in the bomb squad to detonate the packages... only to learn very quickly that they were blowing up all-beef franks.

Isn't a little fall baseball just what we need to release a little of the bailout/financial crisis pressure?

Go PHILLIES!

Views on the Bailout: Part 2

So here is a completely opposing view from Ron Paul, of Internet fame. This might surprise you, but he believes government intervention in the economy is a bad idea. Shocking right?

Here's an interesting tidbit:
Laws passed by Congress such as the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to make loans to previously underserved segments of their communities, thus forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks.

This is a pretty classic conservative/libertarian/ federalist viewpoint. Well-intentioned(?) Senators in Washington pass legislation that warps the market and has unintended effects. There might be something there, but it would require a pretty massive study. Paul doesn't come close to making a real argument for that, but then it's just a piece on CNN, not really the place for Paul to get all Austrian on us.

I still think that Ron Paul may end up being the most influential candidate of this cycle... eventually.

Views on the Bailout: Part 1

Just to get it out of the way, I know pretty much nothing about the proposed bailout. I've read about it in the newspaper and heard people talking about it online, but my understanding of what's really going on is as superficial as Paris Hilton. But of course this is America and mere ignorance will not stop me from voicing my opinions, or, more accurately, repeating the opinions of smarter people.

The first opinion piece that I enjoyed is from the Times (London, not NY). It essentially argues that free-market concern about the bailout is misplaced. It's a well-written piece by someone who knows vastly more about the whole mess than I do and it is full of very British humour:

As Charles Goodhart said in the FT this week, the time to worry about moral hazard is in the boom. Worrying about moral hazard now is like “refusing to sell fire insurance just after the Great Fire of London for fear of adversely affecting future behaviour”.

I can't help but wonder, though, if it does not unfairly simplify some of the concerns that people have about the bailout. Moral hazard is surely one of the boogymen that has been invoked, but I suspect their are other legitimate worries. In any case, it is worth reading and will make for good conversation over the proverbial dinner table or water cooler.

Ghost-Writing For McCain

Salon has an interesting feature today, written by Margriet Oostveen who writes a weekly column called "Message From Washington" for the Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad. Oostveen has volunteered in various political campaigns and then written about the experience, and in today's feature article on Salon she documents her experience writing fictional letters to the editor that will eventually be circulated to McCain supporters as possible letters for them to sign and have sent into their local newspaper.

I have no idea how common this practice is, or if I'm even all that worried about the act itself, but I do think her story is an interesting one, fun to be along for the ride. Meanwhile, if you're curious about more details on her task, you can read up on sample letters and guidelines the campaign gave her.

Email Hacking!

Obama's email hacked by the Onion! (click image to see more):



Hat tip to Purple State.

If Democrats were Republicans, they would air this... um... maybe

Wow. 23/6 has put together some interesting stuff this cycle, but today I caught up with two ads following the theme, "If Democrats were Republicans they would approve this message."

Both ads play that interesting mix of fun and disturbing... thought provoking, and laugh-inspiring. Here's one that works from the supercute Piper Palin video I posted awhile back:




And there is another tied to the Manchurian Candidate idea here.

... meanwhile back in Alaska

The state government up in Alaska is systematically being shut down by the McCain campaign to prevent anyone from knowing anything about Sarah Palin's actual activities in office as Governor... anything other than the campaign talking points about lipstick, hockey, and "saying no to that bridge to nowhere"

Like it or not, did SNL have an impact?

Amy Poehler's Hillary Clinton closed the intro skit between her and Tina Fey's Sarah Palin last week with the line, "I invite the media to grow a pair, and if you can't I will lend you mine."

Now, whether you found the skit funny or kinda flat, whether you found Tina Fey's Palin inspired or insipid, it would seem, from this week's events, that the media has, to some degree taken heed of that call. Just today the McCain campaign arranged for a big photo op/media moment surrounding Sarah Palin's meetings at the UN with various foreign dignitaries. These meetings were set up as an attempt to give Governor Palin more foreign policy cred, but to me seem, well, a bit showy and strange on their face.

At the last minute the campaign announced (this morning) that no actual reporting would be allowed of these meetings, only photographers and a video crew from CNN would be allowed in (with CNN to provide video coverage for other news networks). When this was announced, however, CNN reacted to the barring of reporters from this event by pulling their crew entirely, denying video coverage to what the McCain campaign no doubt hoped would be a nice press moment for their incredibly popular (some might say celebrity-esque) VP candidate. Ultimately it turns out that a producer was allowed in, but isn't this back-and-forth strange and troubling.

It also isn't something happening in a vacuum. The Huffington Post has a nice rundown of increasing press frustration with McCain camp unavailability (on the part of both the Presidential and VP candidates). Some are trying to spread the term, "No Talk Express" as a new substitute for the McCain classic image of the "Straight Talk Express."

Still, why does any of this matter? Certainly Obama isn't being grilled on a daily basis by the press, and when he is perhaps we can see reasons why McCain is more hesitant. Both men have made gaffes, from the one mentioned by Venice in a post late last week to some of the gaffes that almost immediately pre-dated the McCain camp moving to curtail reporter proximity to their Presidential candidate, and to end the famous bull sessions that gave the Straight-Talk name to McCain's campaign bus in the first place.

I was thinking through these sorts of issues when I watched Tony Blair on the Daily Show last night (it was a repeat from last week). Mr. Blair's courage to go on and face some comical, but ultimately tough questioning shows something I think we should ask our politicians for, namely more honesty and less spin.

Right now both campaigns are attempting to tightly orchestrate the choreography needed to move from a tight race now to a November victory, and in so doing they are both hesitant to take chances, risk mistakes, and open themselves to missteps. Even so, I think what I want most from either or both of them right now is to display the sort of confidence in themselves and in the American public that would allow them to be bold and actually get out there, put their feet above the fire, take hard questions and give real answers.

Will I see this anytime soon from Barack, John, Joe or Sarah? I'm not holding my breath. Still, if the media continues to push hard and act like they really want the investigative, independent, respected credentials they should be chasing... we'll see if anything will change.

Has the world been turning or what?

So... not much going on in the last week, huh? Just the collapse of the western financial markets, the Bush administration's new-found love of communism (and consistent war against anything resembling reasonable oversight, even when dealing with a crisis likely caused at least in part by a lack of competent oversight), Tina Fey kicking ass at the Emmys after kicking ass as Sarah Palin on SNL (pasted below in case you haven't contributed to this being NBC's most watched web video... EVER).



I think there was also some Phillies retaking first place in the NL East from the Mets, some presidential campaigns coming slightly unhinged from reality. Not much, right? Not so very much.

What's ahead? Naps and workouts make for presidential debate prep (guess who's napping and who's working out)!!!

Money quote from the article on debate prep:

"The McCain campaign is having some trouble finding the right person for Gov. Palin's practice sessions. Sen. Joe Lieberman was considered, but dropped for being insufficiently fiery and loquacious to do a good Biden impression."