Not to say I told you so...

But here is what Uncle Skippy was saying a year ago about socialism.  And what industry did he pick to make his point?  I know, it was pretty obvious, but I like to preen a little from time to time.
.
Honestly, though, why did almost no one scream "socialism!" when the Bush administration socialized the banking system and so many are screaming it now when Obama's administration is taking on the long deferred task of addressing the healthcare system?
.
It's not a rhetorical question.  The answer is that Americans for better or worse, value their dollar more than they do the health of their fellow Americans.
.
For better or worse.

Let Them Go This Time

Perhaps, as a Virginian, it is completely appropriate that I am all in favor of Texas's secession from the United States. I believe, generally speaking, in soveriegnty and the Tenth Amendment. I just believe that it's a whole lot different than what Rick Perry (Steve Perry seems like a nicer guy) seems to think that it is. In case he forgot, the Civil War (WONA) settled that issue pretty clearly, and Supreme Court decisions since then have toed that line. But if he, and other Texans, don't like the way the Constitution is interpreted, so be it. Off with you. Best of luck, I say.

But a friendly secession would be significantly different than what happened in 1861 following the Secession Convention. This time around, the Federal Government ought to withdraw all of its resources from the territory of the nascent Republic of Texas rather than allowing them to be violently seized by the seceeding state.
.
The Department of Homeland Security including Customs and Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Transportation Safety Administration? Out of there. Every rifle, truck, pistol, and badge. Every x-ray machine and bomb sniffing dog. They'll be needed to protect the new borders between the USA and the New Republic.
.
Social Security Administration? Out. Payments to retirees in Texas only in the way that we make them available to retirees overseas. And with no international agreement in place it might take a while to get all that going. Medicare? Doesn't apply "overseas." Unemployment benefits? Paid in the same way the USG pays for folks who are unemployed "overseas." In other words, not at all.
.
FBI? All the special agents should reassigned to new U.S. postings. We'll send our Legal Attache (usually just a few agents) to the new Embassy to the Republic of Texas (once it gets built).
.
And the military? Come on home, men and women. Every tank, every jet, every helicopter, every machine gun, returned back to the United States. There are 18 military bases in Texas, and most of the personnel and materiel belong to the United States, not the State of Texas.
.
Support for higher education? Done. Ask University of Texas at Austin how long it can survive without federal grants for research and federal loans for its students to attend. And kick all those schools out of the NCAA. Good riddance, Mack Brown and Rick Barnes.
.
And then the bill. Send the New Republic a bill for the infrastructure left behind, for the highways, the hospitals, the schools, the university buildings, the airports, for anything that was built entirely or partially with federal funding. How many billions do you think that might be?
.
Anyway, I think by now you've gotten YDS's point. Let Texas go. But just make sure they know the real cost before they step out the door.
.
Oh but one parting shot: Why is it that no one has described Mr. Perry's comments as treasonous, or as giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war? Do you wonder whether someone in the previous administration might have?

More stolen kids

Watch CBS Videos Online

I like to think I'm pretty liberal ...

But some days, the thinking of conservative economist makes a lot of sense to me. Consider this Wall Street Journal opinion piece on the downside of a foreclosure "bailout." http://http//online.wsj.com/article/SB123336541474235541.html

I don't think that politically the current administration will be able to avoid providing foreclosure relief. But the author of the WSJ piece thoughtfully considers the long term effect of being trapped in that house, that really, you couldn't afford before the credit market crashed, and you won't be able to afford even once housing prices stabilize again.

I know, I know. I'm just bitter because I didn't buy a huge house that I couldn't afford and now I won't be getting any help from the government keeping it. I have a heart of stone.

This guy came by work too.

Nice to know that he knows he has folks working for him on C Street as well as in Arlington.

OBAMA: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Please, everybody. Thank you. Be seated. Thank you so much.

It is my privilege to come here and to pay tribute to all of you, the talented men and women of the State Department. I've given you an early gift, Hillary Clinton. (APPLAUSE)

You -- in her, you will have a secretary of state who has my full confidence. And I want to thank Chairman Kerry and the Senate for acting swiftly to confirm her, because we have no time to lose.

My appearance today, as has been noted, underscores my commitment to the importance of diplomacy and renewing American leadership. And it gives me an opportunity to thank you for the services that you perform every single day.

Sometimes I think the American public doesn't fully understand the sacrifices that you and your families make, the dedication that is involved in you carrying on your tasks day in, day out. And I know I speak for Joe Biden, as well as everybody else on this stage, when we tell you that we are proud of you. You are carrying on a vital task in the safety and security of the American people.

And part of what we want to do is to make sure that everybody understands that the State Department is going to be absolutely critical to our success in the years to come, and you individually are going to be critical to our success in the years to come. And we want to send a signal to all kinds of young people who may be thinking about the Foreign Service that they are going to be critical in terms of projecting not just America's power, but also America's values and America's ideals.

The inheritance of our young century demands a new era of American leadership. We must recognize that America's strength comes not just from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from our enduring values. And for the sake of our national security and the common aspirations of people around the globe, this era has to begin now.

This morning, I signed three executive orders. First, I can say without exception or equivocation that the United States will not torture. (APPLAUSE)

Second, we will close the Guantanamo Bay detention camp and determine how to deal with those who have been held there.

And, third, we will immediately undertake a comprehensive review to determine how to hold and try terrorism suspects to best protect our nation and the rule of law. The world needs to understand that America will be unyielding in its defense of its security and relentless in its pursuit of those who would carry out terrorism or threaten the United States. And that's why, in this twilight struggle, we need a durable framework.

The orders that I signed today should send an unmistakable signal that our actions in defense of liberty will be just as our cause and that we, the people, will uphold our fundamental values as vigilantly as we protect our security. Once again, America's moral example must be the bedrock and the beacon of our global leadership.

We are confronted by extraordinary, complex and interconnected global challenges: the war on terror, sectarian division, and the spread of deadly technology. We did not ask for the burden that history has asked us to bear, but Americans will bear it. We must bear it. Progress will not come quickly or easily, nor can we promise to right every single wrong around the world. But we can pledge to use all elements of American power to protect our people and to promote our interests and ideals, starting with principled, focused and sustained American diplomacy.

To carry forward that effort, we are going to be calling on your hard work and perseverance in the months and years to come. Given the urgency and complexity of the challenges we face and to convey our seriousness of purpose, Secretary Clinton and I are also calling upon the two distinguished Americans standing with us today. It will be the policy of my administration to actively and aggressively seek a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as Israel and its Arab neighbors. To help us pursue these goals, Secretary Clinton and I have asked George Mitchell to serve as special envoy for Middle East peace.

George is renowned in this country and around the world for his negotiating skill. He brings international stature and a lifetime of service. His years in the Senate were marked by strong leadership and bipartisan achievement. His efforts on behalf of peace in Northern Ireland were indispensable in reconciling a painful and protracted conflict. Time and again, in public service and private life, he has acted with skill and acted with integrity. He will be fully empowered at the negotiating table, and he will sustain our focus on the goal of peace.

No one doubts the difficulty of the road ahead, and George outlined some of those difficulties. The tragic violence in Gaza and southern Israel offers a sobering reminder of the challenges at hand and the setbacks that will inevitably come. It must also instill in us, though, a sense of urgency, as history shows us that strong and sustained American engagement can bridge divides and build the capacity that supports progress. And that is why we will be sending George to the region as soon as possible to help the parties ensure that the cease-fire that has been achieved is made durable and sustainable.

Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel's security. And we will always support Israel's right to defend itself against legitimate threats. For years, Hamas has launched thousands of rockets at innocent Israeli citizens. No democracy can tolerate such danger to its people, nor should the international community, and neither should the Palestinian people themselves, whose interests are only set back by acts of terror.

To be a genuine party to peace, the quartet has made it clear that Hamas must meet clear conditions: recognize Israel's right to exist; renounce violence; and abide by past agreements. Going forward, the outline for a durable cease-fire is clear: Hamas must end its rocket fire; Israel will complete the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza; the United States and our partners will support a credible anti-smuggling and interdiction regime, so that Hamas cannot rearm.

Yesterday I spoke to President Mubarak and expressed my appreciation for the important role that Egypt played in achieving a cease-fire. And we look forward to Egypt's continued leadership and partnership in laying a foundation for a broader peace through a commitment to end smuggling from within its borders.

Now, just as the terror of rocket fire aimed at innocent Israelis is intolerable, so, too, is a future without hope for the Palestinians. I was deeply concerned by the loss of Palestinian and Israeli life in recent days and by the substantial suffering and humanitarian needs in Gaza. Our hearts go out to Palestinian civilians who are in need of immediate food, clean water, and basic medical care, and who've faced suffocating poverty for far too long.

Now we must extend a hand of opportunity to those who seek peace. As part of a lasting cease-fire, Gaza's border crossings should be open to allow the flow of aid and commerce, with an appropriate monitoring regime, with the international and Palestinian Authority participating. Relief efforts must be able to reach innocent Palestinians who depend on them. The United States will fully support an international donor's conference to seek short-term humanitarian assistance and long-term reconstruction for the Palestinian economy. This assistance will be provided to and guided by the Palestinian Authority. Lasting peace requires more than a long cease-fire, and that's why I will sustain an active commitment to seek two states living side by side in peace and security.

Senator Mitchell will carry forward this commitment, as well as the effort to help Israel reach a broader peace with the Arab world that recognizes its rightful place in the community of nations. I should add that the Arab peace initiative contains constructive elements that could help advance these efforts. Now is the time for Arab states to act on the initiative's promise by supporting the Palestinian government under President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, taking steps towards normalizing relations with Israel, and by standing up to extremism that threatens us all. Jordan's constructive role in training Palestinian security forces and nurturing its relations with Israel provide a model for these efforts. And going forward, we must make it clear to all countries in the region that external support for terrorist organizations must stop.

Another urgent threat to global security is the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the central front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism. There, as in the Middle East, we must understand that we cannot deal with our problems in isolation. There is no answer in Afghanistan that does not confront the Al Qaida and Taliban bases along the border, and there will be no lasting peace unless we expand spheres of opportunity for the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is truly an international challenge of the highest order.

That's why Secretary Clinton and I are naming Ambassador Richard Holbrooke to be special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ambassador Holbrooke is one of the most talented diplomats of his generation. Over several decades, he's served on different continents and as an outstanding ambassador to the United Nations. He has strengthened ties with our allies, tackled the toughest negotiations, and helped deliver a hard-earned peace as an architect of the Dayton Accords. He will help lead our effort to forge and implement a strategic and sustainable approach to this critical region.

The American people and the international community must understand that the situation is perilous and progress will take time. Violence is up dramatically in Afghanistan. A deadly insurgency has taken deep root. The opium trade is far and away the largest in the world. The Afghan government has been unable to deliver basic services. Al Qaeda and the Taliban strike from bases embedded in rugged tribal terrain along the Pakistani border. And while we have yet to see another attack on our soil since 9/11, Al Qaida terrorists remain at large and remain plotting.

Going forward, we must set clear priorities in pursuit of achievable goals that contribute to our collective security. My administration is committed to refocusing attention and resources on Afghanistan and Pakistan and to spending those resources wisely. That's why we are pursuing a careful review of our policy. We will seek stronger partnerships with the governments of the region, sustain cooperation with our NATO allies, deeper engagement with the Afghan and Pakistani people, and a comprehensive strategy to combat terror and extremism. We will provide the strategic guidance to meet our objectives, and we pledge to support the extraordinary Americans serving in Afghanistan, both military and civilian, with the resources that they need.

These appointments add to a team that will work with energy and purpose to
meet the challenges of our time and to define a future of expanding security and
opportunity. Difficult days lie ahead. As we ask more of ourselves, we will seek new partnerships and ask more of our friends and more of people around the globe, because security in the 21st century is shared. But let there be no doubt about America's commitment to lead. We can no longer afford drift, and we can no longer afford delay, nor can we cede ground to those who seek destruction. A new era of American leadership is at hand, and the hard work has just begun. You are going to be at the front lines of engaging in that important work.

And I'm absolutely confident that, with the leadership of Secretary Clinton, with wonderful envoys like Richard Holbrooke and George Mitchell, with the dedicated team that is before me today, that we are going to be able to accomplish our objectives, keep America safe, and bring better days not just to our own country, but all around the world.

Thank you very much, everybody.

Meet the new boss ...

Same as the old boss? Doesn't sound that way. Anyway she dropped by on her first day of work and this is what she had to say.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you all so much. Well, I am absolutely honored and thrilled beyond words to be here with you as our nation’s 67th Secretary of State. And I believe, with all of my heart, that this is a new era for America. (Applause.)

President Obama set the tone with his inaugural address. And the work of the Obama-Biden Administration is committed to advancing America’s national security, furthering America’s interests, and respecting and exemplifying America’s values around the world. (Applause.)

There are three legs to the stool of American foreign policy: defense, diplomacy, and development. And we are responsible for two of the three legs. And we will make clear, as we go forward, that diplomacy and development are essential tools in achieving the long-term objectives of the United States. And I will do all that I can, working with you, to make it abundantly clear that robust diplomacy and effective development are the best long-term tools for securing America’s future. (Applause.)

In my testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee, I spoke a lot about smart power. Well, at the heart of smart power are smart people, and you are those people. And you are the ones that we will count on and turn to for the advice and counsel, the expertise and experience to make good on the promises of this new Administration.

I want to thank Steve for his comments that really summarized the full range of xperience and expertise of both the Foreign Service and the Civil Service, and also to send my appreciation to all of the nationals around the world who work in our embassies and work with government officials.

This is going to be a challenging time and it will require 21st century tools and solutions to meet our problems and seize our opportunities. I’m going to be asking a lot of you. I want you to think outside the proverbial box. I want you to give me the best advice you can. I want you to understand there is nothing that I welcome more than a good debate and the kind of dialogue – (applause) – that will make us better. (Applause.)

We cannot be our best if we don’t demand that from ourselves and each other. I will give you my very best efforts. I will do all that I can, working with our President, to make sure that we deliver on the promises that are at the very core of what this new Administration and this new era represent. So we need to collaborate, and we need to have a sense of openness and candor in this building. And I invite that.

Now, not everybody’s ideas – (applause) – will make it into policy, but we will be better because we have heard from you.

I also want to address a word to the USAID family. I will be there tomorrow to greet them and thank them for the work they’ve done on behalf of development through some very difficult years, because they will be our partners. (Applause.)

Now, as Steve candidly said, so far, we’re thrilled. (Laughter.) This is not going to be easy. (Laughter.) I don’t want anybody to leave this extraordinarily warm reception thinking, oh, good – (laughter) – you know, this is going to be great. It’s going to be hard. But if it weren’t hard, somebody else could do it, besides the professionals of the Foreign Service and the Civil Service and our Diplomatic and Development Corps.(Applause.)

Now, as you may have heard percolating through the building, you know, when I was first nominated, I realized that there was this living, organic creature known as the building. (Laughter.) And as you probably already know, we are expecting the President and the Vice President to be here in the State Department this afternoon. (Applause.)

Among the many conversations that I’ve had with the President and with the Vice President, over years, but certainly much more astutely and in a concentrated way in the last weeks, we want to send a clear and unequivocal message: This is a team, and you are the members of that team. There isn’t anything that I can get done from the seventh floor or the President can get done from the Oval Office, unless we make clear we are all on the American team. We are not any longer going to tolerate the kind of divisiveness that has paralyzed and undermined our ability to get things done for America.

So the President will be here – (applause) – on his second day in office to let all of you know, and all who are serving on our behalf around the world, how seriously committed he is to working with us. So this is going to be a great adventure. We’ll have some ups and some downs. We’ll face some obstacles along the way. But be of good cheer – (laughter) – and be of strong heart, and do not grow weary, as we attempt to do good on behalf of our country and the world.

I think this is a time of such potential and possibility. I don’t get up in the morning just thinking about the threats and the dangers, as real as they are. I also think about what we can do and who we are and what we represent. So I take this office with a real sense of joy and responsibility, commitment and collaboration. And now, ladies and gentlemen, let’s get to work. (Applause.)

Thank you and God bless you.

It sounds good, sure but will there really be a difference? Am I too jaded to even hope?

An Auto Czar?

http://http//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081113/pl_nm/us_usa_obama_autos_1
All kidding about the efficacy of the Drug Czar aside, I think this is probably a good idea. The auto industry missed the boat deliberately on alternative technology and Congress and successive White Houses have let them get away with it because there is so much lobbying and money flowing from Detroit to Washington to maintain the status quo.
.
We should already have electronic and hydrogen cars available to us, but Detroit didn't see the money in it, and Washington let them play along. In my view, it is always government's role to make sure that the long view gets consideration, even if it isn't profitable now.

Perhaps we are all hypocrits

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1108/Rick_vsJoe.html?showall
.
Joe the Plumber gets grilled. A victim of the 24 hour news cycle and, not surprisingly, his views don't really live up even to the scrutiny of a not-very-skilled interviewer. Should I feel schaudenfruede? Should anyone? I know many must, but I don't. Why don't we know more as an electorate? There is so much information out there. Shouldn't we be able to form intellectually honest opinions guided by a well formed moral compass? Shouldn't we be able to separate truth from spin?
.
I worry that with so much information there is simply no way to know what is truth. So many complain about the liberal MSM, but why not change the channel? Buy a different magazine. Listen to a different radio station. Their truth is how they report it. I don't know that there is a "mainstream" to the media.

Is it socialism yet?

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?cl=10335179

Leslie Stahl from 60 minutes asks a banker the question that has been plaguing me since I heard that the government was buying a big ownership stake in the nation’s banking system. What is socialism if it isn’t when the government owns major stakes in the commercial sector? Now in the U.S., after the bank bailout, that’s exactly what it is. And oddly, McCain and Palin accuse Obama of being a socialist. Last I checked McCain was heavily involved in the bailout package as was Obama…

But why is it that when the banking sector is in crisis and needs to be bailed out, or in this case socialized, it happens immediately and when say, the healthcare sector is in crisis, there’s no action whatsoever and suggesting that the system might be socialized ends up with politicians losing their jobs?

I don’t know. I’m just asking.

Not the Only One

http://warner.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/02/waiting-for-schadenfreude/?em

A nice blog entry in the New York Times that shows that I'm not the only one wondering about my life choices while the financial crisis is going on. But I don't like the concept of schadenfreude. (except with respect to sports teams I don't like. hehehe. Dook, I'm looking at you.) Schadenfreude, or taking joy in other's misfortune, is bad bad karma, and just sort of mean. I know the folks that she is talking about made a lot of money and don't care how, but I still couldn't find joy in them being ruined....

Just me.

Bumper Sticker Politics

I don't want to make this a blog about politics, but it is election season and I'm bound to see things that make me think. And things that make me think, I want to share with you all. So, with that said, I saw this bumper sticker:

"Jesus was a community organizer and Pilate was a governor"

Now there is undoubtedly a partisan message in this slogan, but I'm really less concerned about that and more interested in what it points out about drawing conclusions on about a candidate based on one or two characteristics. Certainly, Obama is not Jesus and Palin is no Pilate. But hammering Obama because a big hunk of his previous experience is as a community organizer seems just as shallow as suggesting that Palin's experience as a wife and mother doesn't make up part of her qualifications to lead.

Ultimately, you need to know as much as you can about the whole person before you decide who is right to lead the most powerful nation on earth. What cynical political machinery assumes about you, is that you are willing to reduce candidates to cardboard cut outs with only one characteristic. The machinery banks on the fact that you will vote based on their caricatures. The machine assumes that you don't care enough to look farther.

Rage against the machine.

Olympics

Is it me, or is the fact that the Olympics are in China sucking the interest out of the whole thing? Not only will all the events be on at ODark30 in the morning, but I've got this moral ambivalence about the whole fact that they will be in China. I guess I'll still Tivo the men's and women's soccer and basketball and probably check in to see if Phelps beats Spitz's record (Mark Spitz inspired my own considerably less stellar swimming career). But I think I'll feel a little dirty about it.

Uncle Sam to the Rescue

Don't want to offend anyone, but I have to say that I am pissed off about the White House's plan to bail out the mortgage industry on the sub-prime loan fiasco. I'm not in favor of kicking folks out in the street, but there was a reason that the sub-prime loans sounded too good to be true. They were too good to be true. If you bought a house that you had no business affording, why is it a big surprise when you can't afford it? I looked at sub-prime loans and decided (based on the facts) that I couldn't afford to take that kind of a risk. What if I didn't get raises? What if the housing market didn't do all that well? Then I'd be stuck with a mortgage I couldn't afford.

Well, now I'm the one that looks like an idiot, because I should have bought a house that I couldn't afford, because now my tax money will pay for the bailout of people who didn't think before they bought with a sub-prime loan.

I know. I'm a scrooge.