Sunday, November 16. 2008
From guest poster Bruce Kesler - Business As Usual Goes In Circles Statists on the Left resemble some private sector advocates on the Right. They argue over which path to take, both leading in similar circles. Both avoid the road right before their feet, as it would require looking forward to benefits for all instead of selfishly at themselves. That road not taken is of outcome neutral free enterprise that enriches all. Statists on the Left defend and want to enlarge government programs that sap productivity, reward sloth, and create a New Class of taxpayer-supported or obliged favored. Their fun-house mirror images from the Right defend and want to enlarge large corporate welfare, wasteful and needless products, and self-serving and enriching speculation. Both are dependant upon the supposed largesse of government steering its huge budgets toward one or the other’s pets. Government’s core role is in preserving freedoms to be individuals and national freedoms to avoid foes endangerment of our individual freedoms. One can legitimately, also, propose that government serves that role when it can mobilize to increase our abilities. But, government must then compete with other providers for which can do so most cost-effectively. Private enterprise’s core role is in developing and selling -- transparently, honestly and without coercion -- solutions and products that individuals want to purchase, either directly or through government. One can legitimately propose that trial-and-error may be wasteful, and some of that waste enriches selfish schemers. But, if subject to market penalties, waste is most quickly penalized and investments that benefit more are encouraged. In the current economic meltdown, the central fallacy of runaway statists and of irresponsible corporatists is exposed. Both plead they are too big to be allowed to fail. But, both already have failed. Both seek to put makeup on the zombie by sucking life out of productive sectors. The easy pickings of criticism come to mind, but they only scratch the surface of our aimlessness and lack of understanding of what works: Competitiveness comes from competition, not from government protectionism. Big-Three auto industry critics correctly point to uncompetitive wage rates and pension promises reducing profitability, but erroneously criticize now competitive quality or pricing. Their strides forward on these fronts came from having to meet quality and pricing market pressures from foreign-owned auto makers. Preserving their uncompetitive labor structure injects formaldehyde -- at the cost of more jobs lost and of taxes and debt squandered -- rather than life. Instead, auto executives plead for taxpayer-relief from exorbitant labor costs. Those who enable this avoid the clearly marked road. That this seemingly easy and obvious conclusion is neglected by statists and by auto executives, both under pressure by union supporters or by union threats, highlights the path in other realms of our difficulties. The bulk of state budgets are consumed by labor costs and pensions. The Left’s think tank, the Center on Budget and Policy Studies, counts 41 states in severe deficits, most wanting Washington to pay their bills as if manna from heaven. The Center points at relatively minor restraints placed on program beneficiaries – the first to be impacted when 50-75% of budgets are deemed “fixed costs” of government workers and structures -- while hiring – which exploded along with wages and benefits during the past 10 years – is merely slowed. The largest contributors to statist political candidates are government-employee unions. The obvious path should be that any state program be first subject to cost-effectiveness competition, as with school vouchers and other private service providers, subject to reasonable standards. Private providers, however, must meet – indeed, take the forefront in proposing -- such reasonable standards rather than seeking loopholes to be primarily self-serving. Clear and tested market standards are not the enemy of free enterprise but its underpinning. Notice, this is a separate matter from whether this or that program is worthwhile. Those decisions will be clarified by open competition and standards of measurement. More difficult distinctions arise when other realms are considered. For example, the contracting of Defense and State tasks abroad provide flexibility in staffing and incurring costs only when needed instead of idly in reserve, but at higher costs when necessary. Again, reasonable standards of competence and results for competition are required, rather than protecting government payrolls and longer-lasting retirement obligations. Veterans organizations and retired diplomats, here, operate like unions in being more oriented toward benefits than toward mission effectiveness. Taxing certain expenditures and not others, exempting certain organizations – particularly “charities” whose prime recipients are those running and working for them, are more difficult to justify when exposed to more scrutiny. These and many other instances of spreading transparency and freer competition provide citizens with clearer choices over their taxes. One-by-one and in mass, special favors embodied in the thousands of pages of tax codes will be exposed. Essentially, this would move toward more neutrality between richer and poorer, between saving/investment and consumption. Competition breeds competitiveness and more efficient choices that better meet each individual’s needs and ability to advance. The truly unfortunate are not abandoned. Instead, resources are not wasted but able to be focused on providing them with more opportunities. The truly motivated are not penalized for adding to their and our opportunities. That’s the American road, not the protectionist staying-in-place circle of self-destruction we’re now trodding in circles.
 Reviewing our posts since the election, I notice that we have returned to a better, more wholesome balance between Real Life and politics. That's a good thing.
As heavy-duty tax-paying Citizens of a free republic, we feel obligated to care about current events and, as our readers know, individual freedom and respect for our culture are our primary political interests. But current events (ie the "news") consists mainly of ephemeral things which mentally exist in a strange virtual reality as much as in reality, and likely never matter to us on our deathbeds - assuming that we will even die in bed (but that's what we at Maggie's call the "Deathbed Test" of what is important in life - a test which is highly individual.) Semi-sorta related: We see that Diana West, author of Death of the Grown Up - a book we plugged when it came out - has a blog or, as I prefer to call these things, a website. We need to add her to our blogroll, and I will tell her that we admire her and that she is on the same page as our resident shrink Dr. Bliss. (A communal site without a shrink is like a canoe without a paddle.)
Saturday, November 15. 2008
 AVI speaks up for the Social Conservatives. I think you could call them "normal, decent people."
Online Books Boston: "We're #1." In ugliness, totalitarian-style. I think that building was designed to make people terrified of their government. Why didn't they build something human-scale and welcoming, instead of something that looks like it has security cameras and 50 mm machine gun mounts? After all, the people are the ones who pay for all of this. Celtic coin cache found. I've been reading that there really is no such category as "Celts," but I guess people sorta know what is meant by the term - barbarians. Hitler's mortgage Obama skips his grandmother's funeral. There's a pattern of family disconnection here which seems odd to me. Steele update. I think Steele is a good guy. A quote from J C Phillips: I disagree with the politics of Barack Obama. To suggest that because we share the same skin color I should be teary-eyed as he takes office is to make the election about racial validation rather than ideas.
More on how Conservatives need leaders who can communicate. Bush and McCain are fine men, but neither can talk their way out of a wet paper bag. Villainous on the prospects of "getting past race" Worst post-election stock market ever Leading Psychiatrist says Liberalism is a mental disorder. A bit of hyperbole there. h/t, Theo Via Conservatism Today: You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative
and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could
and should do for themselves.
William Boetcker, 1873 - 1962
Very amusing. Dennis Miller on Palin's great sex life, Obama, and other topics (h/t, Tiger):
Friday, November 14. 2008
Somebody has compiled clips of Peter Schiff, the Ron Paul economic advisor and president of Darien, Connecticut-based Euro Pacific Capital, from Fox News business segments over the past few years, debating with the likes of Ben Stein and Art Laffer. Schiff gets the last laugh.
 The new Russian submachine gun
Repubs are losing the IQ War. Duh. NYT: The next Ice Age will be a long one. We've been warning about the coming Ice Age for three years here, but does Al Gore listen to us? Nope. The election being over, Ayers is cashing in on his new-found fame. Lefties always love money. The election being over, Ayers says the Obamas were family friends Free Money (for deadbeats only) We recently wrote about Our Two-Class Society - Taxpayers and Non-Taxpayers. Is it paranoid to imagine that the Dems would like to get the Non-payers up to 51%? Here's At What Point Does Atlas Shrug? Here's an idea: So, we’re thinking of bailing out the Detroit auto industry to the tune of something like $25 billion. Hmm. I notice at at present stock market values, GM--the whole thing--is now worth less than $2 billion, and Ford is worth less than $5 billion. Why doesn’t the feddle guvmint just buy up GM and Ford lock, stock, and barrell (and union contracts), and save the taxpayers money (at least for a while). I’m sure the feddle guvmint can run the auto industry at least as well as Amtrak and the Post Office.
Thursday, November 13. 2008
 The EU: Unelected, redundant, condescending, unaccountable, largely unwanted - and now slowly building their own military. It's a Mandarinocracy.
The gradual return to economic normalcy: excellent little summary by Tiger. Yes, recessions are normal too. Sundown for California. How did it happen? Oh no! Is this a joke? Al Gore as Climate Czar? Thanks for reminding me why I voted for McCain/Palin. I think this is what it's all about: Run candidates who can communicate. The delusion that "progress" comes from Washington. Hasn't government stupidity been fairly well-established over the past 70 years? That piece pretty much captures the Maggie's view. Is now the time to buy stocks? I would say "Definitely, if you have a 20-year time horizon." But I don't pretend to know much. I got through about 7 seconds of this. How long can you listen? An election the Repubs needed to lose. Dick Morris (I'd compare it to GM) Jindal and others at Repub Governor's Assoc We ask this question all the time, but when Insty poses it, it carries more weight: SOME ECONOMIC QUESTIONS: I like this one: "Is it good public policy to have your entire electorate pay taxes? If so, why? If not, why not? I'm trying to figure out how it is healthy to have 35-40% of the electorate outside of the income tax system." I think that everyone should pay something in income tax, and that the amount they pay should go up or down with total federal spending. Otherwise nobody has any incentive to control spending, and we wind up . . . well, where we are. More questions, and an invitation to discussion, at the link.
A remarkable set of photos at Boston.com, via Am. Digest. Here's one: 
Wednesday, November 12. 2008
Michael Lewis of Liar's Poker fame returns to Wall Street to survey the mess. (Thanks, reader.) One quote from the darkly humorous piece which explains the consequences of the investment banks' going public, thus transferring risk from themselves, as partners - to shareholders: His (Eisman's) dinner companion in Las Vegas ran a fund of about $15 billion and managed C.D.O.’s backed by the BBB tranche of a mortgage bond, or as Eisman puts it, “the equivalent of three levels of dog shit lower than the original bonds.”
FrontPoint had spent a lot of time digging around in the dog shit and knew that the default rates were already sufficient to wipe out this guy’s entire portfolio. “God, you must be having a hard time,” Eisman told his dinner companion.
“No,” the guy said, “I’ve sold everything out.”
After taking a fee, he passed them on to other investors. His job was to be the C.D.O. “expert,” but he actually didn’t spend any time at all thinking about what was in the C.D.O.’s. “He managed the C.D.O.’s,” says Eisman, “but managed what? I was just appalled. People would pay up to have someone manage their C.D.O.’s—as if this moron was helping you. I thought, You prick, you don’t give a fuck about the investors in this thing.”
One quote from her piece: Bailing out the auto industry offers no net gain to society. It is a straight transfer of resources from one sector to another: we tax money, or borrow it from a finite pool of capital available to the nation, and spend it on auto workers. The people who pay the taxes, or the people who would have borrowed that investment capital, now have less to spend. Whatever they would have bought goes unbought; whoever would have made it goes unemployed. To coin a phrase, what is made on the swings is lost on the roundabouts We have the illusion of a gain only because that other group of people is invisible. Even if we don't bail out GM, they will not be visible--we will never know who didn't lose a job or a business because we declined to spend one squillion dollars saving the Chevy Cobalt.
It's been as clear as day to everyone for years that the once-Big Three are lousy companies with lousy businesses, products that don't sell, and that nobody wants to invest in anymore - except politicians. We're a Toyota country now (except for the Ford F series). But who ever said raw politics has to make logical sense? This is called vote-buying, and a big thank-you to Michigan for going blue by supporting existing union contracts. With our money. There is a certain sort of political logic in that. Comment from The Barrister: What is often left out in these discussions is that bankruptcy would not put these companies out of business and these workers out of work. They would reorganize (and renegotiate contracts), or sell off their parts. And from BD: Follow the money. Best I can figger, all that a bailout would bail out is the existing union contracts, and little more. And from the NJ: I would not be happy to be working to support Michigan union benefits, which are so much more generous than mine - or those of most folks - that it's ridiculous. Why would I want to do that? Those businesses are obsolete, but somebody is going to try to sell us the notion that they need my money to go green, or some similar BS. Toyota already did that.
 Yummy. Good and easy rib-sticking Vegetable Soup. I think Right Wing Prof would rather cook than write. Understanding synthetic CDOs. Dino The NYT bailout watch. Michelle. Here's the mess they are in. There's plenty of good stuff in that newspaper for a curious reader, but their bias and partisanship drives readers away. Speaking of the NYT, Sowell goes after Kristof and the idea of intellectuals in politics. Kristof's condescension is insufferable - and even worse when he's making stuff up. Hugging and loving in DC? Q&O All gun owners are mentally ill? Well, we'd in good company in the violent ward. However, my feeling tends to be that anybody who wants to control how I live is mentally ill. "We cannot tolerate the intolerable." The roots of liberal censorship. I think that academic would want to ban Maggie's Farm. I want Newt and Steele.
Via SDA, this graph speaks for itself: 
Taxes during the New Deal, via Mankiw (excellent discussion of this topic at Marginal Rev: Understanding fiscal policy during the Great Depression - government attempts at stimulus were cancelled out by higher taxes) - 
What middle-class tax squeeze? Graph from a piece at Willisms: 
Tuesday, November 11. 2008
 Political bloggers are having fun discussing whether they want to provide a genteel loyal opposition to a presumably hard-Left and seemingly grimly humorless White House and Congress, or whether to attempt the same sort of relentless knee-capping and smearing to which the Dems subjected Bush for 8 years.
Naturally, the soon-to-be-installed Federal pols and their supporters are urging Kumbaya peace and harmony - on their terms, of course. That will never happen. Paul at Powerline makes the case for genteel, loyal opposition. In a similar vein, neoneo warns those at risk for Obama Derangement Syndrome. John Hawkins is inclined the other way: You guys arent going to do to us what we did to you, are ya? A cranky Ace tries to straddle the line thus: You spent the last eight years engaged in a disgusting orgy of divisive political hatred and now you want to play nice and pretend we're all united now? I for one am not going to treat President Obama the way you treated President Bush. That doesn't mean, though, I'm going to just forgive and forget the fact that you've polluted the political landscape with your bile and patchouli-stanking spittle.
My opinion? My opinion doesn't really matter, but I'll try to stand for some humor and truth. (Plus we aren't a political website anyway.) Photo from Moonbattery's Moonbats Ready for Unity Now. Where was all of the togetherness last year?
DMB likes the Poulan chainsaw. He likes the light weight, which surely can be a plus after a few hours. Illegal immigration, solved The list of excuses Obama will need. Reality's a bitch. The election being over, the WaPo confesses US trials for Gitmo prisoners? Good grief. Can't we just ship them all to Botany Bay? From Blame Bush: "...that's all Obama wants to do, really. He just wants to share his peanut butter and jelly sandwich with all the people of this country." From the KKK to Birding. Newt offers himself up. I say, Take the offer. He has all the brains in the Stupid Party, and he knows what it's like to be Palinized. Norm rates the Emmylou albums. My favorite is always the most recent one I've heard. Child labor can be a good idea PJ O'Rourke says "We Blew It." I know what he means, but I do not entirely agree. Polls show Reaganism is far from dead. How to avoid the clutches of Obama Derangement Syndrome An open letter to my friends on the Left Somebody please tell this jerk to shut up: UK's Brown says Now the time to build global society. No thanks. From Powerline: In the 1970s a survey was taken of German and American auto executives. They were asked, "What do you do?" The Americans replied, "We sell cars." The Germans answered, "We build cars." It was a difference in corporate culture. The Japanese noticed. They decided to build cars, and they succeeded. Many Americans today, brought up on Pontiacs and Fords, won't own an American car, unless it's a car made in Ohio by a foreign company. What a stunning change.
Why you cannot build a Party around moderates. Related, from Big Lizards: 34% of voters called themselves "conservatives." - Of that 34%, 20% voted for Barack H. Obama; that means 6.8% of the electorate both called themselves conservatives and also voted for Obama. (Would that include Christopher Buckley and his ilk?)
- Contrariwise, only 10% of self-dubbed liberals voted for John S. McCain. Conservatives defected at twice the rate of liberals.
I think this from VDH is true. Not just because I want to think it's true, but because it's consistent with what I hear from people: I think many advisors privately are thinking that the turn-out the vote hoopla in key states wasn’t all that much more than in 2004. And for all the talk of a new realignment and the end of the old conservative regime, 2008 is more likely explained as a once in a lifetime alignment of the stars (cf. Carter in 1976): the mid-September meltdown that ruined McCain’s lead; the normal weariness after eight years of incumbency; two wars; a charismatic young and path-breaking Democratic candidate, a liberal's renouncing of public campaign financing to amass $600 million.
Monday, November 10. 2008
Marginal Rev makes the case that slipping housing wealth is the cause of this recession, not banking. A quote: This is truly incredible. Homeowners have lost more than $5 trillion in housing wealth. There is a very well established wealth effect whereby $1 of housing wealth is estimated as leading to 5 to 6 cents of annual consumption. This implies that the loss of wealth to date would cause consumption to fall by $250 billion to $300 billion annually (1.7 percent to 2.0 percent of GDP). If you add in the loss of around $6 trillion in stock wealth, with an estimated wealth effect of 3-4 cents on the dollar, then you get an additional decline of $180 billion to $240 billion in annual consumption (1.2 percent to 1.6 percent of GDP). These are huge falls in consumption that would lead to a very serious recession, like the one we are seeing. This would be predicted even if all our banks were fully solvent and in top flight financial shape. Even the soundest bank does not make loans to borrowers who it does not think can pay the loans back (except during times of irrational exuberance).
Link above. Of course, these things snowball with slipping markets further reducing wealth and causing people and businesses to feel more reluctant to spend. Finally, Springtime eventually returns once marginal and undercapitalized businesses have been swept away, and pricing finds its realistic level. I continue to insist that we folks are in an ordinary recession - but the banking biz is surely in a strange and ugly one. I figure I have lost close to 20% of my net worth thus far, but that's measuring from the peak. One should never measure from peaks, because peaks never last. (Always measure things from historical trends.) Plus I really do not care what my home and land is worth, since I have no plan to leave it, I don't mind the bank holding title to it, I like having the mortgage interest deduction, and my equity line remains open (from which I used $150,000 for restoration work on the barns earlier this year - new roofs, new windows, plumbing, electric, repair rotten siding...). I have more wealth than I had 10 years ago, and that's what counts for feeling secure. I am utterly relaxed about my hefty mortgage and home equity because I know that Obama will pay it for me, unlike that mean George Bush who never offered to pay my bills. And I can't wait to get my government pony. Ponies are cute and, if times get tough, you can eat them.
 The piece at the WSJ begins thus:
In the Washington mind, there are two kinds of private companies. There are successful if "greedy" corporations, which can always afford to pay more taxes and tolerate more regulation. And then there are the corporate supplicants that need a handout. As the Detroit auto makers are proving, you can go from being the first to the second in the blink of an election. For decades, Congress has never had a second thought as it imposed tighter emissions standards on GM, Ford and Chrysler, denouncing them for making evil SUVs. Yet now that the companies are bleeding cash, and may be heading for bankruptcy, suddenly the shrinking Big Three are the latest candidates for a taxpayer bailout. One $25 billion loan facility has already been signed into law, and Senator Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) wants another $25 billion, this time with no strings attached.
Sheesh. So do I. If they get it, they'll buy munis with the money because munis are more profitable than Chevys. Read the whole thing.
h/t, Dr. Sanity (who is taking a blogging break): 
Last week, a friend recommended this Lumix (Panasonic) camera to me. Also last week, Insty recommended another Lumix, and Samiz posted on the Lumix G-1. Something must be going right at Lumix. But not so with the US automakers. Dems press for auto rescue for GM and Chrysler. You can call it stupid, but it's not stupid - it's political. Surber says: "...if failure is going to be rewarded, that is what you are going to get." (Kudlow commented last week that these aren't auto manufacturers: they are pension and health care companies that occasionally make a car or two.) Another failing biz: carbon emission rights, which are a joke anyway. Mr. Free Market presents a better idea: Carbon Debits! Unfortunate phrasing: "...ready to take power and begin to rule" Good grief. Where have all the bigots gone? John Tierney We have joked about having our own home-made nuke generator in the farm basement, but something similar is actually in the works. This sure beats windmills. Do our current methods of nominating national candidates make sense? I have never thought they did. James Caesar: The Presidential Nominating Mess (h/t, No Left Turns). One quote: If blame must be assigned, a portion of it must go to the founders for instituting a system that never fully succeeded in managing the problem. But it was certainly not for want of trying. The Constitution, contrary to popular impression, created not three but four national institutions: the presidency, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the presidential selection system (centered on the Electoral College). The question of presidential selection was just that important to the founders, and they created a system that was meant to institutionalize the process from start to finish—from the gathering and winnowing phase up through the final election. The Constitution, in other words, was intended to control "nominating" as well as electing: the electors, meeting in their respective states, would vote for two people for president (at least one of whom had to come from another state), thus nominating and electing at the same time. When the votes were collected and opened on the floor of the House of Representatives, the winner (if he had a majority) would become president, and the runner—up would become vice president. The nominating plan, as matters turned out, worked as intended only when there was no real need for it.
Sunday, November 9. 2008
 A slightly emotional message, which arrived over the transom. I will not say what friend wrote this thing, but I think they got it off their chest by doing so. Very therapeutic for them:
While the election results admittedly make it difficult, I am generally an optimist, and I'm not changing my stripes now. Obama has truly awful, awful ideas for our country, but I do not believe even he can ruin it. So here's what I feel good about right now: The next time someone - perhaps looking up from their Sunday New York Times - tries to tell you we live in a pervasively racist society, you can tell them to just shut the f*** up. Since their services are no longer required, we can send Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson off to their long-overdue retirements, perhaps to Charlie Rangel's place in the Dominican Republic. While we're at it, can we all decide that if blacks can rise to the presidency, it follows that we no longer need affirmative action? Time to put it in the ground. The constructionists on the Supreme Court should be able to hold out another four years before they retire. We wish them the best of health. We won't have to spend four years defending John McCain. Let's face it, he was a crummy candidate who wilted on most issues important to conservatives. It would have been four painful years followed by a lay-up election for...Obama or Hillary. With the economy in the tank, Obama may have somewhat limited flexibility. His plans to turn us into Finland may have to wait. Jimmy Carter was a painful experience, but he gave us (cue heavenly choir music) Ronald Reagan. Will Obama give us a Bobby Jindal? Tim Pawlenty? Rudy? We have a deep bench. Start thinking ahead now. Since the Democrats control both houses and the White House, there will be no one else to blame when they screw up, which is as inevitable as the sun rising tomorrow. While they will try to pin any problems on George Bush for at least the next millennia, the people will know better. The media has now officially been "outed" as in the tank for the Democrat Party. Even liberals know it. MSM credibility has never been so low. The New York Times was just demoted to junk bond status by the ratings agencies. Finally, let's be happy that it's finally just over.
I guess that covers most of it. Go in peace.
 Don't get the wrong idea: Racism still a big problem in America claims advocacy industry. But I was told...oh, nevermind. Whenever I say "But I was told...," I feel like Milton in Office Space.
Big Pumas. I did not know they grew that large. Scary, but I think it tends to be the foolish young ones that mistake hikers for deer, and jump down with their teeth in the back of your neck and rip your head off. Inverting the supply curve on health care I took this little test and came out right next to Milton Friedman. (h/t, Villainous) The Magical Thinking Watch OK, I can get this link post up to Three Miltons, because I happen to be about 1/3 of the way through Anna Beer's new Milton bio, which, if you overlook the rather minor and easily-overlooked touches of pomo Nouveau Lit Crit BS, is quite absorbing and well-worth the read. Lots of quotes from his stuff, and it offers a good picture of the times. Thanks to the BD pup for finding that book for me.
Saturday, November 8. 2008
 We Warned Ya #1: Dems target your 401-K. Do they really want to do that? Peoples' 401-Ks are like Social Security to them. Correction - I should say they are almost sacred to them.
A post-racial election? LaShawn. Steyn wonders whether America turned Left - or turned "cool." Aw shucks. We love to be loved. Don't we all? Sure enough, gun sales are through the roof Palin: my critics are jerks. Right on, Sarah. They aren't gentlemen, either. I think you're swell. What are Mount Shasta's glaciers a proxy for? A nation hopes for another FDR? Save Us, Dear Leader! Speak for yourself, NYT. That's the last thing in the world I want. Yes, we have another recession. Recessions occur on a regular basis, and wash away weak businesses. That's no excuse for the infantile hystrionics. Maybe the NYT wants a bailout. I listened to Kudlow on the wireless while I was cleaning the basement this morning. He made a compelling case for letting GM go bankrupt as a way to emerge smaller and stronger. Honda, Toyota, and VW are eating their lunch because they run leaner and smarter. I agree with Larry that routinely rescuing failing businesses is not a role of government. Businesses must fail, consolidate, change. Banking is different. How to invent names for new developments, like: The Preserve at Woodstone
The Village at Stonewoods.
The Preserve at Woodstone Village
The Village at Stonecrest
The Preserve at Woodcrest Plantation (I like the idea of Ye Olde Village at Seacrest Heights Plantation. You could sell it in Paramus, right next to the mall: 1 BR condos, only $375,000 with no down payment and a view of Nordstrom's. Hmmm - this could be a good naming contest.)
Friday, November 7. 2008
Now the hedge fund and predatory lender Cerberus wants a bail-out? Gimme a break. I want a bail-out too, to pay my dental bills. And my mortgage and gas, please.
 I am hunting tomorrow. What about you? I'm taking the train up tonight. A friend got us permission to hunt some old overgrown farms in Dutchess County (NY). Grouse have been scarce this year and, rightly or wrongly, I blame the Coyotes. It's very mature to always blame somebody or something in life. But "how is my new job in NYC?," I hear you asking. Great. They pay me more than I deserve, and we thrive on chaos! It would be almost perfect, except no tobacco in the pubs is the main bummer, thanks to Nanny Bloomberg. Without tobacco, one tends to drink more...and nowhere in America are there more lovely, sexy, intelligent, well-eddicated, savvy, sophisticated, worldly, and put-together young females to make a huntin' and fishin' country boy like me nervous, and to make a rusticated ass of himself in front of.
This is what "unity" looks like: Rahm Emmanuel and his brass ones. The appointment of the combative Emmanuel is a declaration of war, and the Dems much prefer war against their fellow disagreeing Americans than they do against foreign enemies. Welcome to "Peace and Love." The toxic pipeline from China Good Texas snake photos Are colleges failure factories? Maine choses cheap beer over health-care taxes. Makes sense to me. For how many months will Europe love us this time? Jules What are fewer big storms evidence of? Sowell on affirmative action and gay marriage Rove on Why Obama won. Rove is a smart guy, but I think Krauthammer nailed it. The Idea of Change in American politics: Meaningful concept or Empty Promise? McClay Most rich people voted for Obama Nice little post-election rant from New England Repub A quote from a slightly crude but amusing rant from Ace: It's as if a great weight has been lifted off of our collective, white, redneck shoulders. I feel so light now. I can almost see the unicorns prancing in my backyard with little silver butterflies flitting from flower to flower.
I see them too, Ace. Pretty pink ponies and psychedelic day-glo butterflies playing out my back door among the pretty pretty orange flowers, and life is groovy and beautiful again, just like at Woodstock. But hey, wait a minute - don't Bogart that joint, my friend... Mark Twain on politics. Vanderleun introduces it thus: With the Presidential election finally behind us, and the next at least a week away, I am the third most relieved man in America. The second most relieved man in America would be John McCain. The first most relieved man in America? That would be George W. Bush. In the meantime, since I think it best to let the predictable waves of "Yea!," "Congratulations!," "We did it to ourselves," and "I told you that bitch was crazy" wash out of the bloodstream, I shall let Mark Twain's immortal insights from 1901 speak. Pay attention. There will be a test. Hell, there will be around 500 tests.
Liberals want to bring back the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" as their plan to put talk radio out of business. How would it do that? Because every subject has 30 different views on it. I doubt that the Dems would wish to extend it to The Daily Kos or to Maggie's, but who knows? It always amuses me how Liberals cannot tolerate dissent. Let's all rely on NPR and become one beautiful, happy family of group-thinking "sensitive, caring" parasites. Anyway, in honor of the Dems' and especially Chuckie Shumer's desire to reinstate the Fairness Doctine, and out of consideration for our lady readers who feel that our Cheesecake/Beefcake ratio is way off target, we offer these: Navy SEAL in training emerges from the ocean: 
In training, but not a Navy SEAL: 
|
