January 28, 2010
A Note on the White House's Light Rail Proposal
Doing a word search of today's announcement regarding $8 billion of funding (.pdf) for high speed rail projects, one finds only two, with a total value of $74 million, that explicitly mention Amtrak. Once again, the U.S. government wants to spend more for less, on the assumption that unlike in every advanced industrial country Amtrak should pay its own way. One also notes that $1.25 billion is to be spent on a train between Tampa and Orlando, a train that, according to expert James McCommons, Florida completely failed to develop. Obviously, Florida got pork-barrel spending for 2012. In contrast, the Boston-New York-Washington DC corridor, one of the nation's busiest, got a measly $112 million. Some of these spending priorities (California; Washington/Oregon; Illinois/Wisconsin) make sense but even a casual look shows a great deal of waste as well as many missed opportunities. Score it a "D-plus," which, nevertheless, is one of Mr. Obama's very best efforts.
The Speech, Selectively Annotated
So I know the anxieties that are out there right now. They're not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for President. [A true statement. Struggles are grist — but only grist — for Mr. Obama's rhetorical mill.]
It is because of this spirit — this great decency and great strength — that I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight. ['Never been more hopeful that what worked on the campaign trail can work again and again and again. Besides, I don't know any other way to relate to people than by being a huckster.']
January 27, 2010
The Good Humor Man
What moist, glistening eyes. What an inviting smile. What white teeth. The message: you're lunch! Mark Shields, the Newshour's designated "liberal," gushingly called the speech "Reaganesque." Despite Reagan being passé that pretty well sums it up. My own reaction was to wonder just how out of touch with reality American politics can become and, secondly, whether Mr. Obama might be the first President to switch parties while in office. Senators do it from time to time (twenty one times since 1890, according to the Senate's website), while Representatives do it fairly frequently. Having a President switch, however, would be a novelty. It might spice things up. The main political question, of course, being who scavenges the best...
January 24, 2010
Broken Field Running
I like reading Simon Johnson, even if he did twice pass up a chance to be a guest on the EP podcast. But Simon is better at the economics than the politics and I was most unhappy to read his first take on Mr. Obama's obviously insincere feints at Wall Street. Simon, nevertheless, is smart enough to recover and in his follow-up he gets it. His fast footwork is worth noting as an example of how one should assess Mr. Obama's false and dishonest lectures, because all too many of those who voted for him are all too anxious to believe in whatever meager scraps he pretends to toss them. Bank reform? Ha! Hell will freeze over first. And on the extreme off-chance that Congress produces any financial "reform" legislation you can bet that it'll be as much a give-away to the banks as Congress' proposed health care "reform" is to the medical services sector.
In Praise of Organic Apple Cider
Samuel Smith brewery, of Tadcaster, UK, produces a wide range of outstanding, artisanal beers. I'm particularly partial to their organic lager which I've purchased from time to time for many years. Recently, to my delight, I discovered Sam Smith's organic apple cider after my local grocery began stocking it in the produce section. Initially I bought it to use in cooking a pork roast (the roast on a rack, cooked long and slow, cider in a pan beneath adds moisture and flavor) but, since the cider comes in a 18.7 ounce "Victorian Pint" bottle, there was a short glass left over. The stuff drinks very nicely. Now I'm starting to keep a couple bottles always cold in the fridge. I'm not entirely sure but I think I might prefer this cider to regular beer and the portion size of one bottle seems about right. Highly recommended!
Clueless
In this morning's Washington Post, Mr. Obama's 2008 campaign manager, the non-college graduate but brilliant brownnose David Plouffe, offers op-ed advice to Democratic Party candidates running in this year's election. Plouffe sez: "no bed-wetting." Plouffe — and probably every hack who Mr. Obama surrounds himself with — seems to think campaign strategists deserve the credit for 2008's victories without understanding that white-hot anger drove most voters to the polls. Plouffe's advice for 2010 is not only trivial, but dangerous.
January 23, 2010
What To Do About Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission?
As Keith Olbermann pointed out the other night, the logic of the Supreme Court's decision means that eventually all politicians will be overtly purchased and thus it will become impossible to overthrow the corporatist state. Olbermann is right — logically — except that before then things will surely happen that upset the applecart.
Corporations will take their time to really begin to weigh in using their newfound First Amendment rights. They'll want to test the waters; none of them wants to become a sacrificial lamb, or scapegoat; and all of them are very much aware that hasty action risks galvanizing determined opposition. Moreover, nobody can foresee all the nasty unintended consequences of this revolutionary ruling. For an immortal entity, especially, it makes sense to take things slowly. Most likely they'll tinker in 2010; they'll put their thumbs ever so carefully on the scales in 2012; they'll be prepared to pursue some serious gambits by 2014; but, assuming everything else stays much the same, they won't fully open the money sluice before the end of the decade, if not later. Such corporate political calculations work two ways: the public probably gains plenty of time to mobilize but that same delay will lull people into complacency.
Continue reading "What To Do About Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission?"...
January 22, 2010
High Court Decrees Existence of Corporate Übermensch
By Werther*
The Supreme Court's wholesale rejection of a century of statutes regulating corporate contributions to political campaigns is a breath of fresh air in a hypocrisy-ridden political process. It certainly ought to sweep away the tendency of timid rationalizers to deny the existence of corporate domination and control of every aspect of governance in the United States — a fact which should have already been made abundantly clear by the terms of the bank bailout and the health care travesty.
Continue reading "High Court Decrees Existence of Corporate Übermensch "...
January 21, 2010
American "Democracy" For Sale
Without knowing for certain, it's a safe bet that no other advanced industrial country allows an unlimited, unregulated amount of money into politics. At least not overtly (Italy being somewhat problematic). As in so many comparative areas, internationally we are an extreme political outlier. Barely a democracy. But within the context of American life today's Supreme Court decision makes perfect sense: corporations effectively run the country so why impose any constraints on them?
January 20, 2010
The Beginning of the End of Barry's Great Adventure
One can hear Mr. Obama's sigh of relief: Now that the Republicans have a 41 seat majority in the Senate the Democrats can blame them for obstructing every bill that the Democrats fail to pass. Better yet, on health care the president has every excuse to move further towards the "center" in order to gain "bipartisan support" for comprehensive "reform" from one or more Republican Senators. A corporatist overhaul of the U.S. medical services sector thus remains very much in the cards.
Continue reading "The Beginning of the End of Barry's Great Adventure"...
January 19, 2010
Screw the Democrats
A lot of people will spin Massachusetts a lot of ways, but what today's vote really means is that independents turned out in record numbers to tell the Democrats: ENOUGH! Trying to make every sort of policy on the basis of what one or two or three "moderates" want, when everybody knows that "moderates" is a code word for corporate interests, is just plain stupid. The only sensible option was to throw the Democratic supermajority out. Their vote doesn't mean that people in Massachusetts want a Republican Senator so much as that they've made a strategic point. It's a shame, but Washington almost surely won't listen. It'll take another election later this year to hammer the point home...
January 16, 2010
A Wild Hair in the Bay State
Next Tuesday's special election in Massachusetts, for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat, will be a referendum on the Democratic Party. Its prospects don't look good. The problem is, the lackluster Martha Coakley is a pawn of special interests and people in Massachusetts know it. And though few commentators want to point out the obvious, Massachusetts already has "health care reform" that panders to corporations — but folk up there haven't enjoyed any benefits. Moreover, a lot of Democrats are sick of Mr. Obama, they feel they've been hoodwinked yet again, and they're itching to send a message. Not to say a single good word about Scott Brown, it would be a rich comeuppance for the Democrats if he wins.
January 10, 2010
The Washington Cool Girl Pronounces on Terrorism
By Werther*
As we have said many times before, Washington and its national media apparat are "wired" to default to Right Wing positions, regardless of what the public supposedly decides in elections. Today's Exhibit A for that proposition is high school cool kid Maureen Dowd, [1] who thinks the government has to move heaven and earth and the Constitution be damned to keep her safe from ubiquitous, universal Terrorism. She thinks this thought in a vacuum, of course, since reflecting on how Washington got into a vicious cycle of action-reaction in the Middle East in the first place is a taboo subject among politicians, the media, and the camorra of think tanks dependent on defense contractors and DOD handouts.
Continue reading "The Washington Cool Girl Pronounces on Terrorism"...
January 8, 2010
Mashed Potatoes
With the world going to hell in a hand basket, one source of solace is good, old-fashioned comfort food. And in winter there's nothing better than a hot meal with mashed potatoes. The problem is, mashed potatoes tend to get kind of gummy. How to fix that? I wouldn't post on this subject except that I saw a cooking show on television the other day that explained the secret for fluffy mashed potatoes and, damn, it works great. I'd never heard of this before, Sharon never had either, but we agree, it makes the best mashed potatoes ever. My guess is that, like us, probably you also hadn't heard of this method, but if you enjoy mashed potatoes give it a try and you won't be sorry. I guarantee you that using the exact same ingredients you usually use, 100% of the time in a blind taste test you'll be able to tell the difference.
January 4, 2010
The Weak Link
Somebody at the U.S. Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, issued a visa to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the underpants bomber, which allowed him to travel to the United States. In contrast, British authorities denied him a visa to the UK. Quite apart from questions of how to now implement massive technological overkill, puffer-sniffer devices, full pat-down screening of passengers, or flying naked, the entire incident could have been avoided if, as the British decision demonstrated, the visa hadn't been issued in the first place. So why is the State Department getting a pass?
January 3, 2010
Medieval Rage
Two unrelated but eerily similar events happened last Friday: an insane axe-wielding Somali terrorist tried to kill a Danish cartoonist in Aarhus, for his 2005 lampooning of the Prophet Muhammad, and the Irish state put into effect a draconian blasphemy law, with penalties of up to $35,000, for public insults to religion. In today's world non-negligible forces are clearly at work, on both a large and a small scale, dragging us backwards to a medieval mindset where the expression of innocent opinion must not be allowed if anybody finds it offensive. Conformity to the lowest common denominator rules.
January 2, 2010
