global economy » Undiplomatic

30 November 2008 Charles J. Brown
09:00 pm

Weekend Link Dump

Light linking this weekend — I think everyone was too stoned on tryptophan to blog much. . .

Spencer Ackerman, writing last July, profiles up-and-coming women in national security, two of whom are now playing a key role in the Obama transition.

Spencer, again, suggests that Dick Holbrooke would be a perfect choice for U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. Kevin Drum counters that Obama should send him to Pakistan instead. And Patrick Barry asks why not make him a senior special envoy covering both countries as well as Afghanistan.

The BBC reports on the death of Jorn Utzon, the man responsible for designing the iconic Sydney Opera House.Steve Clemons makes the case why why Colin Powell should be Obama’s special Mideast envoy.

Helene Cooper profiles James L. Jones, who Obama most likely will name his National Security Advisor tomorrow.

Nate Silver patiently explains why progressives should stop freaking out about the people Obama picks and start focusing on the progressive policies he is most likely to implement.

Gayle Smith, David Sullivan, and Andrew Sweet outline the strategy President-elect Obama should use to get ahead of global crises.

Jeff Stein explains why the Mumbai attacks mark the end of the 9/11 era and the start of something that is likely to be even more lethal.

If your time is limited, start with Cooper, Silver, and Stein.

Maureen Dowd Call Your Office

Did anyone else cringe a little when they read Maureen Dowd’s column this morning?

Titled “A Penny For My Thoughts?,” Dowd does a fine job describing how newspaper work is being outsourced to… wait for it… India.

Hmmm, I know I have read something else recently in the news about India. What was it?

Oh yeah, I remember: a horrific terrorist attack which left over 170 dead, gripped the world’s attention for three solid days, and is now unfolding as a standoff between two nuclear armed nations.

Given all this, doesn’t it just feel weird for a major columnist, writing for America’s leading newspaper, in a prime Sunday slot, to point out that an Indian journalist was confused about what the Rose Bowl really is?

Couldn’t that wait a week?

Obama: The Science President?

In a September 11, 2008 editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine, Jacob Hacker noted the difference between the expert and the partisan:

Politics is about power more than truth, about winning more than being right. But expertise is about truth more than power, and being right is the whole point. The authority of the expert cannot survive long when expert judgment is seen to hinge on grudges or biases.

The same can be said about the difference between campaigning and governing, and the reality check of outcomes in the physical world makes science and technology an easier area than most others to assess what is “right” or “true” when evaluating the actions of governments and politicians.

The outgoing administration had little regard for facts on the ground in any area of governance, foreign or domestic, and frequently emphasized the importance of firmness with which a belief or position was held instead of the solidity of data or facts supporting it. In this sense the election of either Obama or McCain would have been a welcome change.

During the recent election, neither candidate campaigned to be the “science president.” That’s not surprising since science has never been a major issue in any presidential election. Both McCain and Obama identified some laudable science and technology goals: encouraging biodefense research (McCain in particular more realistically emphasizing detection over Obama’s come-lately drug development strategy); improved math and science education with a reduced focused on the very distracting creationism debate; continuing the President’s Emergency Aids Fund (PEPFAR, for which President Bush should be credited); and encouraging innovation and immigration of foreign PhDs.

Although I would agree with most science policy groups and publications that, on balance, Obama was and is more “science-friendly” than McCain, the election of Obama is not without some downsides: continuation of scientifically illogical subsidies for corn ethanol; the creation of a $10 billion/year clean-tech venture capital fund unclear about what niche it would be filling; and a commitment to doubling the NIH budget over the next 10 years when the world needs to put much more economic capital towards development and commercialization than towards basic research.

For at least the next four years, President-elect Obama (and Congress) will have to interact with the private sector to create the science and technology positions with which the US will interact with the world. As a final nod to the election and the campaigns of both men, I next will focus on the confluence of energy, environmental/climate, and economic issues that both campaigns agreed require immediate action.

Headline of the Day

From Think Progress:

What’s on tap today: Obama to address economy, Bush to pardon Turkey

That about captures it.

Weekend Link Dump

Something new here at Undip: a weekly compilation of other blogs and stories worth reading (but on which I don’t have time to offer my own observations):

Bruce Ackerman on the challenge facing new White House Counsel Greg Craig: reducing his office’s power and authority;

Brian Bender on John Kerry’s new role: Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee;

Max Blumenthal on Malaak Shabazz’s condemnation of al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri’s comparing Barack Obama to a “house negro” (Shabazz is Malcolm X’s daughter);

Steve Clemons on the risks and benefits of a Clinton appointment;

Daphne Evitatar on the current conflict between State and DOD over Guantanamo detainee policy;

Anatol Lieven’s memo to Obama on what he should and should not do when it comes to foreign policy;

Robert Reich on the idiotic argument that we should save Citigroup and let GM fail;

Paul Richter on Richard Holbrooke’s delusion belief that he should be Obama’s Secretary of State;

David Schorr on the need for a coordinated State-Defense-USAID budget strategy — one that includes significant funding and personnel increases for both State and USAID;

Peter Scoblic on Marine General James L. Jones, who has emerged as the frontrunner for National Security Advisor.

The Odd Choice of Bill Richardson for Commerce

If anyone had any doubts that Hillary was going to take the Secretary of State job, the announcement that New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, her chief competitor for the job, is being named Commerce Secretary should put them to rest.

I like Richardson. I’ve met him on a few occasions, and wrote a couple of speeches and did some press for him when he was U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. He would have made a fine Secretary of State, and his experience as an executive would have helped him reform Foggy Bottom. But I find his selection to head Commerce quite odd.

I don’t know whether Richardson will do well at Commerce, or it he’s the right pick. But it seems to me that he would have been a far better choice for the head of the Environmental Protection Agency. As Governor of New Mexico, Richardson pursued a number of environmental initiatives, including a major effort to make the state government carbon neutral.

I wish him the best at Commerce.

21st Century Lessons From Pirates

With all that is going on in the global financial meltdown and the presidential transition, not nearly enough attention is being paid to the piracy crisis off the Somali coast. I mean really… people in little tiny boats are boarding and taking command of giant oil supertankers. And we can’t do anything about it?

This is 2008, not 1908 or 1808, and we can’t keep vital international shipping lanes safe? Somehow we kept commerce going between North America and Europe at the height of German U-boat attacks in the big war. And back then we didn’t even have GPS or night vision or Chuck Norris.

Here are my takeaways on the issue thus far:

Nonstate actors (like pirates) really are a major piece of the 21st century fabric.
Failed states (like Somalia) really are major breeding grounds for 21st century instability.
The national and global security apparatus we have invested in may not be the national and global security apparatus we need for the 21st century.

Over at Democracy Arsenal, Patrick Barry adds:

So does anyone else find it interesting that there are now multiple countries policing, or intending to police the waters off the Somali coast? Seriously, there are Russian, EU, NATO, Indian and U.S. ships patrolling the area, all without a clear, coordinating mechanism or any definitive sense over who has jurisdiction. Hmmm. Seems like someone should do some thinking on that.

Evening Transition Thread

At this pace, by the time Obama takes office, the Stock Market just might hit 2000.

Talk amongst yourselves, but whatever you do, don’t check your retirement portfolios.

The G Spot

The so-called Group of Seven leading industrialized nations (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States) started meeting in 1976. The group has no permanent offices or structure. Annual meetings are rotated among the member states.

In 1994, Russia was invited to sit in on the meetings and became an official member in 1997… forming what is most often referred to as the G8. Interestingly, when Russia invaded Georgia earlier this year the old G7 was resurrected. Do a Google news search on G8 now and half the links are about a car from Pontiac. All of the juice is under the Google News search for G7.

In foreign policy wonk circles today, there is all kinds of talk about G7, 8, 14, 16, 20, and so on as potential answers to the growing crisis of competency and credibility in what we could call the G192 (otherwise known as the United Nations).

In a new Stanley Foundation report, former U.N. Assistant Secretary General Stephen Stedman argues for the creation of a G16. European Union leaders have said the G8 should be transformed into a G14. Many talk about one Gx replacing another Gx. Who knows? Maybe there is room for all of them, each one used for different purposes.

The focus this weekend is on the G20 (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States of America). The goal of the Washington, DC meeting? Saving the world from global financial meltdown.

I say, good luck and Godspeed.

More

Eight Isn’t Enough: G-20 Countries To Meet In D.C., from NPR
Why G20 summit stirs few hopes of real reform, from the Financial Times
G20 summit: New world order?, from the Independent
Washington Summit: Another Defining Moment in the United States?, from Citizens for Global Solutions
C. Fred Bergsten: Stopping a Global Meltdown, from the Washington Post
G20 Should Focus on Solutions, Without Obama, from The Washington Note

The BBC Box Prepares to Leave Shanghai

Have you been following the BBC Box?

The BBC is tracking one cargo container for a full year as it travels around the world. The container, outfitted with a GPS transmitter, started from the Southhampton docks in September and traveled to the port of Greenock near Glasgow where it was loaded with scotch.

On October 29, the box and its precious cargo arrived in Shanghai after traveling through the Suez Canal, the pirate infested waters off Somalia, the Bay of Bengal, and the South China Sea. The scotch whiskey has apparently been unloaded, and the box is taking on new cargo bound for America.

The entire project is an attempt to better understand a slice of globalization and international trade. The Box itself has now become a minor celebrity for the BBC which offers a do-it-yourself paper model of the shipping container.

Asia Matters For America

I love this new site from the East-West Center. It explores connections between U.S. states (even Congressional districts) and Asia. Statistics include trade, exports, jobs, and students.

http://www.asiamattersforamerica.org/

The interactive maps are very cool. Geeks like me can get lost in this stuff for HOURS!

Fall Down Go Boom

Two stories today illustrate just how bad it’s going to get before things get better. First, via Calculated Risk, the story of one company and its sales in 3Q 2008 versus 3Q 2007:

[T]ruckmaker Volvo admitted demand across the [European] Continent has crashed by 99.7 percent as it took orders for just 115 new lorries in the last three months. That compares to orders totalling 41,970 in the third quarter of 2007.

Just to be clear, this is sales of semis in Europe. But look at those numbers again: 42,000 in 2007 and 115 in 2008. That’s beyond ugly.

The second story, from today’s Washington Post, describes conditions in Cleveland as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis and the subsequent collapse (and sale to PNC ) of National City Bank:

By 2003. . . property values began to soar. Wood-frame houses built nearly a century ago were fetching $70,000, $80,000 and even $90,000 — multiples of their previous peaks. Tax revenue accelerated, punctuating Cleveland’s claim as a comeback city. National City got in on what turned out to be a national boom, as it rapidly expanded its mortgage business into the fast-growing Sun Belt and ventured deeply into the subprime lending market. For a time, the strategy was wildly profitable, as the bank reported profit of more than $13 billion from 2000 to 2006.

And then the boom fizzled, leaving both the bank and its home town faltering. Overall, nearly 10 percent of the city’s properties have gone into foreclosure. National City has lost more than 80 percent of its market value this year. On Tuesday, chief executive Peter E. Raskind said 4,000 positions would be eliminated from its overall workforce of 29,000 over the next three years. The bank slashed 3,400 jobs a year earlier. . . .

Much of that money, from National City and other banks, found its way to Slavic Village, the childhood home of Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D), which local officials call ground zero for the foreclosure crisis. For decades, the neighborhood, which abuts a steel mill in the city’s southeast, was a struggling working-class community with an aging population and few new residents. But Slavic Village underwent a dramatic change beginning in the late 1990s as the tide of mortgage money flooded the area with new homeowners, lifting prices to unprecedented heights. Thousands of the neighborhood’s small wooden homes turned over, with investors selling to new buyers at multiples of their purchase price, sometimes within months, and often after making only cosmetic repairs.

“The deals became toxic immediately,” said City Council member Anthony Brancatelli, who for 17 years headed the Slavic Village Development Corp. “What should have been $20,000 or $30,000 homes became $80,000 or $90,000 homes with toxic loans.” The result has been a rush of foreclosures. The number of foreclosure sales in the five-square-mile neighborhood swelled from 114 in 2001 to 840 last year. In the first six months of this year, 316 Slavic Village properties have been through foreclosure, according to figures compiled by the development corporation.

This is the dark side of the crisis that most Americans really aren’t thinking about yet. It’s a vicious cycle: mortgages become toxic, jobs in sectors like banking and technology start to disappear, property values fall, the tax base erodes, and city revenues start to decline.

The bailout isn’t going to make any of this go away tomorrow, nor is it going to convince European companies to start buying semis.

I was in Cleveland last spring, and came away quite impressed with its dynamic central business district and its residents’ optimism that they were coming back from the worst of the seventies and eighties. Molly and I even talked (briefly) about moving there, given the relatively cheap mortgages (even at $90,000 the homes looked cheap to someone used to DC house prices) and its proximity to her mom in Michigan.

Sad to say, we made the right decision. It’s going to be a while before Cleveland rocks again.

Partying Like It’s 2012

Last week I wrote both on Undip and HuffPo that I think Sarah Palin is likely the front-runner for the Republicans in 2012. Now, a number of other bloggers have joined the discussion, and most agree.

I know it’s way to early to assume this election is over, but if it is, there are four major contenders for the Republican nomination in four years: a business leader/neocon wannabe (Mitt Romney), a libertarian with social conservative sympathies (Ron Paul), and two social conservative/economic populist mavericks (Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee).

Of those four, two — Romney and Paul — are largely Dukakasian figures, not really rising to the level of serious contenders for the presidency even if they manage to win the nomination. Palin and Huckabee, however are far more formidable, and both could pose a serious challenge to Obama in four years.

The problem they face is that they have the same base: social conservatives. So the question is, who is more likely to move outside their base to cobble together the semblance of the coalition necessary to win the nomination?

My gut is that it’s Palin. As much as social conservatives like Huckabee, they think Palin walks on water. Economic conservatives are likely to find her less threatening than Huckabee, given his largely populist views on economic matters. Libertarians, especially those of the Ron Paul mode, like her pro-gun, anti-government rhetoric. She’s smart enough to highlight the small business owner/anti-tax facade of her image, helping to mollify the other factions. And, as Jane Mayer notes in the most recent issue of The New Yorker, she already is building a constituency within the neocon cognoscenti.

So where does that leave Huckabee? If he runs in four years and loses, it’s the end of his political career. If he’s smart, he’ll stay on the sidelines. He’ll be 61 in 2016, certainly young enough still to mount a vigorous campaign. In addition, voters in this country are more likely to change parties after eight years than they are after four. It also would enable him to avoid the likely civil war within the Republicans among the social conservatives, economic conservatives, and libertarians.

To be completely honest here, I think Palin is a crypto-fascist, Romney is a corporate tool, and Paul is a raving lunatic. In contrast, Huckabee is, despite his limited knowledge of foreign policy and troglodyte views on social issues, a smart, thoughtful, and largely decent man whose economic views are more in line with convential Democratic thinking than anyone else in his party. Were he to be the nominee in 2012, he could pose a real challenge to Obama. So it’s in my (and other Democrats’) interest to see him stay on the sidelines while his party self-destructs.

Nightly Election (Expensive) Thread(s)

I guess this is what happens when you go shopping with Cindy:

The Republican National Committee appears to have spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August. According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.

The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September. The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.

Politico asked the McCain campaign for comment, explicitly noting the $150,000 in expenses for department store shopping and makeup consultation that were incurred immediately after Palin’s announcement. Pre-September reports do not include similar costs.

Spokeswoman Maria Comella declined to answer specific questions about the expenditures, including whether it was necessary to spend that much and whether it amounted to one early investment in Palin or if shopping for the vice presidential nominee was ongoing. “The campaign does not comment on strategic decisions regarding how financial resources available to the campaign are spent,” she said.

So I guess she can see Saks from her house. And it’s good to know that Neiman’s is part of “real America.”

Ohhh boy. Anytime your spokesperson defends Ferragamo pumps as a “strategic decision,” you know a campaign is in trouble.

This kind of shoots to hell the whole moose-hunting small-town girl image, doesn’t it? She just went from Joe Sixpack and Joe the Plumber to Thurston and Lovey Howell. And it makes her look about as out of touch as the Howells were on that island.

So when the campaign is over does the Sarahnator get to keep this stuff? And if not, doesn’t she have to report it as gifts? Come to think of it, doesn’t she have to report it as gifts now? Or does Alaska not have the ethics laws that everyone else has?

I bought a wedding present at Neiman Marcus once. It cost three million dollars. Okay, maybe three hundred. For a serving dish. In 1990.

Talk amongst yourselves.

John the Plumber

Let me acknowledge up-front that this is a bit off-topic for me. I’ve tried to stay away from this whole Joe the Plumber nonsense (other than in my live blogging of the debate), but I think the following is worth passing along.

From a guest op-ed by John Phillips that ran in today’s Sarasota Herald-Tribune:

I own a small company in Sarasota - John Phillips Plumbing Service.

I have been in business more than eleven years and, by any standard, I have been successful for most of those years. But, in response to the questions posed to Barack Obama by “Joe the Plumber,” and mentioned repeatedly in the presidential debate Wednesday night, I have to say [that] paying higher taxes is the least of my worries right now — because people won’t owe taxes if they are not making any money.

In the last couple of years — as a result of mismanagement, lack of oversight and rampant greed in the greater economy — my business has gone from eight employees to having one employee part-time. My sales are off by 70 percent. For the first time in eleven years, I am having a hard time paying my fixed overhead — things like fuel, rent, electricity and insurance.

All the material I buy for my business has skyrocketed in cost, with no end in sight. I am going to have to downsize my shop because I have no need for 3,000 square feet. I have already cut my employee’s pay by 25 percent. I can’t offer medical benefits any longer, and it is getting harder to pay for vacations and holidays.

Phillips does not endorse Obama (or McCain), and he goes on to make some arguments that I don’t necessarily agree with (such as suggesting that illegal immigration is one of the reasons for his woes). But his outlook certainly represents a much more realistic portrayal of the challenges facing small businesses than those of that other plumber guy.

What’s particularly interesting about Phillips’ piece is that he’s appears to be writing from the perspective of what’s happening on the ground before he has felt the impact of the current economic crisis. For him, and thousands of other small business owners like him, the drying up of credit may prove to be a tipping point. If, as John McCain likes to say, small businesses are the engine that drives our economy, it’s about to seize up and throw a rod.

Hat tip: Undip reader Dad

Debate Analysis

This was McCain’s strongest debate. I don’t think he “won” in the way that he needed to. No game-changer. Obama was steady, strong, Presidential. McCain was angry, nasty, often mean-spirited. As the debate went on, he got angrier and angrier. Lots of mugging for the camera. He really came off as a cross between Grandpa Simpson and the Hulk.

The key exchange was on the tone and tenor of the campaign. McCain responded with more negative attacks, while Obama was gracious but firm. And Obama was smart to avoid discussing Palin.

Obama really didn’t make any mistakes. McCain didn’t land any hard blows.

Advantage Obama.

Live Blogging the Debate

Okay, here we go. The last debate.

Thank. God.

I hear that McCain’s going to talk about “divided government.” The Republicans already have the Supreme Court. What more do they want?

McCain was actually polite at the intros.

BTW, no times tonight. Thought I’d try something different.

First question is about economy.

Damn I didn’t take hurting and angry in my drinking game tonight. McCain leads off with Fannie and Freddie talking point and then talks about his $300 billion home plan.

Who are McCain’s friends? Inquiring minds want to know.

Obama and McCain agree that this is the worst financial crisis since the Depression. Dur.

Obama mentions the middle class first. I win the over/under. Why is McCain so afraid of those words? Obama, unlike McCain, highlights differences between the two plans.

Okay, mistake by McCain — he refuses to engage Obama.

McCain is going to help this Joe the plumber guy start a business! Will he help my blog? Ka-ching!

McCain told Obama that he wanted the spread the wealth around and then said he would help spread the wealth.

If I hear anymore about Joe the Plumber I’m gonna hurl.

McCain seems to think that his best shot at winning the debate is to focus on small business owners.

Next question: deficit.

Obama says bailout must be structured to help Americans get their money back. Talks about pay-go. Do people know what that means? Says he will cut subsidies of insurance companies, but then switches to health care, energy, infrastructure. Key words: ethic of responsibility.

When McCain talks about the Great Depression, he sounds like he was there. McCain largely avoids the question, only promising an across the board spending freeze.

McCain opposes subsidies for ethanol. Guess he’s given up on Iowa.

Back to earmarks. Meh.

When he looks at Obama,

McCain looks like a bobblehead doll on crystal meth.

Why is McCain such a planetarium hater?

McCain: I’m not Bush, if you wanted Bush, you should have run four years ago. That’s a zinger? Obama’s going to smush him. Senator Obama, I know George Bush. George Bush is a friend of mine. Senator Obama, I am no President Bush.

McCain asks Obama what he’s stood up to the leaders on his party. When Obama answers, McCain shows contempt for the first time.

ACKKKKK! CREEPY FACE! CREEEPY FACE!

I’m waiting for McCain, like LBJ, to actually show us his scars. Oooh not convincing! What a comeback.

Schieffer asks the hard question about negativity. McCain blames it on Obama’s refusal to do town hall meetings. That seems like a weasel to me. McCain: I regret the negative aspects of both campaigns. Attacks John Lewis not in anger but in sorrow. McCain is setting up Obama to talk about Ayers. Claims that he is running a truthful campaign. Hits Obama on campaign finance issues.

Obama: cites CBS/NYT poll that 2/3rds of Americans think McCain is running a negative campaign. Obama refuses to take the bait on Ayers. Says politics as usual can’t work.

McCain claims that an attack on his health care plan, immigration plan are attack ads. No they’re not.

Grandpa Simpson and Joe the Plumber ‘08!

Obama comes back and talks about Palin rallies. In a competition between John Lewis and Palin for outrageousness, most Americans think Palin is worse.

McCain just snorted like Gore. McCain is getting snippy. That’s not good for him. McCain: I’m proud of those who come to my rallies, suggest that people like vets are who Obama is talking about.

McCain hasn’t repudiated Palin, though has he?

McCain needs to get his open contempt under control.

McCain brings up Ayers first, and ACORN. Opens up full attack. Isn’t that contrary to the intent of the question?

Obama answers Ayers and ACORN. Will it be enough? Good comeback on who associates with.

Given that a majority of Americans think McCain is too negative, how does being negative help him?

Next question: running mates. Obama first. Softball question to Obama, 120 mph fastball question to McCain. Obama is smart to talk about Biden, not Palin. McCain: Americans have gotten to know Sarah Palin. Friend: “And we hate her.”

Every minute McCain talks about Palin, he loses. McCain on Palin: Noun. Verb. Trig.

Obama: Question of whether Palin is qualified is up to the American people. Smart.

McCain: Joe Biden is wrong on many national security issues.

Most Americans have never heard of the word cockamamie.

Next question: energy and climate change. Unfortunately, the way Schieffer framed the question, it leads to talking points.

McCain: Obama hates Canada!

Obama: energy is the most important issue we’re going to face in the future.

Obama’s looking at the camera right now makes him look Presidential.

So far, McCain is attacking, Obama is ducking. Angry man v. smiling cool guy. McCain is winning some points, but he is coming across as nasty and angry. Which will people see?

When they show the split screen, Obama is looking at McCain, McCain is looking at Schieffer.

When McCain talked about Obama never having gone south of the border, he did the 538.com tongue tell.

Obama’s response: I understand it very well. Calm, cool, factual.

Good thing I had Peru in my drinking game.

Will Obama’s comments about Detroit dragging its feet on green tech hurt him in Michigan? I don’t think so.

McCain just rolled his eyes.

Does McCain really believe that people care about Hugo Chavez? Do most Americans even know who he is?

Is it me or is Schieffer letting McCain have the last word on every question?

Next question: health care.

Obama discusses his plan. Looks into the camera again. McCain talks about minutiae — though Molly liked the fact he raised childhood obesity. Seventh mention of Joe the Plumber. I think he has that guy’s vote.

So let me get this straight — McCain says Canada is good for energy, bad for health care. Hater.

Prediction: SNL’s skit this weekend will involve Joe the Plumber. Maybe as moderator? Which MSM outlet will get the first interview?

Poor Joe the Plumber: Obama will tax his income and McCain will tax his health care. Maybe he should vote for Bob Barr.

Advice to Obama: stop talking about Joe the Plumber.

I’m trying to figure out how we’ve had three debates and Peru has been mentioned more often than China. And Joe the plumber has been mentioned more than all countries in the world save Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.

Senator Government? You can bet that the McCain campaign will claim that was intentional tomorrow.

Next question: abortion. I recognize people feel strongly about this, but we know the positions of both. It’s a base issue, not one that is going to affect the election. That said, both candidates focused on judicial appointments, which is a crucial question.

Obama brings up Lily Ledbetter case, uses it as an example of how court decisions affect “real people.” Good for him. McCain calls the case a trial lawyer’s dream and blows it off.

Hey Senator McCain, what if Jo the plumber wants an abortion? Will you still like her?

McCain is playing to his base right now when talking about abortion. It will help him with them, but not with “mainstream America.”

Obama talks common ground and McCain snorts. A friend just pointed out that Obama basically just told people to turn off their TVs. Heh.

Our friend Matt just pointed out that they haven’t talked about the economy in a loooooooong time.

Last question: education. Obama: more money v. reform is a false dichotomy: “we need both.” McCain: it’s the civil rights issue for the 21st century. That’s code for vouchers. So is choice.

I always find it amusing that Republicans talk about choice as a bad thing re abortion and a good thing re school.

Aside: want to bet McCain sticks around and works the room tonight?

When McCain stares at Obama, he looks like an elderly Norman Bates. Or Charles Manson. Not sure which. Molly thinks he looks like a reptile, our friend Jen thinks he looks like Casper the ghost.

McCain: “Cindy and your wife, Mrs. That One.”

McCain keeps looking at the camera briefly, nervously, but not engaging the crowd — except Joe the plumber, of course.

Precious children. My precious. We likes the children. THAT’s who he looks like.

Do the American people really give a crap whether Michelle Rhee favors vouchers or charters? I bet Joe the plumber does.

Closing statements.

McCain: My friends. New direction. Bush bad. Reform. MAVERICK! But a careful steward. Make health care “avoidable.” (Whoopsie!) Trust. Another mention of careful stewards. Hope. Future. Joe the Plumber Joe’s gonna be sad that he didn’t get a mention in McCain’s closing statement. McCain didn’t mention the economy in his closing statement!

Obama: Economy. Economy. Economy. Hope. Invest in American people. Health care. Education. Energy. Middle Class. Middle Class. Not easy or quick. All must come together. Will work tirelessly.

McCain is pointing like Palin.

Final analysis coming soon.

To the Hills! The Election Monitors Are Coming!

You gotta love those wacky, wacky ultra-right-wing conspiracy theorists: they can make the most innocuous event look like a vast plot to destroy America. Take, for example, the biannual efforts of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to monitor the U.S. elections. If you listen to the nutjobs long enough, they will convince you that vast hordes of European lefties are swooping down to steal our small-town values.

Four years ago, the vast-right-wing-conspiracy-that-often-sees conspiracies-everywhere (a.k.a. vrwctOSCE) were convinced that the OSCE monitoring mission represented the leading (w)edge of UN domination. The fact that the OSCE did more than almost any other organization to promote human rights and democracy in the old Soviet bloc was largely lost on them. No, this was an attack on America, an effort by effete Democrats to prevent George Bush from stealing another election winning reelection.

Here, for example, is Iraq war apologist-in-chief Daniel Pipes:

This is a significant step toward the erosion of American sovereignty, not so much operationally (what harm can some election monitors do?) but conceptually (placing the OSCE and perhaps later other institutions over domestic safeguards).

Then there’s raving nutjob 2004 Constitution Party candidate Michael Peroutka (whose VP candidate was current Constitution Party Presidential Candidate and Ron Paul endorsee, Chuck Baldwin):

It is an affront to our sovereignty and independence as a nation to allow so-called ‘international election monitors’ to observe or in any way interfere with our constitutionally mandated election process.

Last and certainly least, former Boston Herald columnist Don Feder:

The international-monitors scam is an assault on American sovereignty. Not that [Democrats] care. They’re internationalists who long for the day when Americans are ruled by the United Nations. After OSCE monitors, what’s next? Will disputed elections be decided by the World Court[?]

These courageous guardians of America better get ready — it’s happening again. Last Friday, the OSCE announced its intention to monitor the 2008 election:

The OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) today opened a limited election observation mission to monitor the 4 November elections in the United States of America. The deployment of the mission follows an invitation from the United States government. As a participating State of the OSCE, the United States has committed itself to conducting elections in line with OSCE standards and inviting international election observers.

The ODIHR mission, headed by Ambassador Audrey Glover of the United Kingdom, includes a core team of 13 international experts with the head office in Washington, D.C., and 48 long-term observers deployed in teams of two around the country. The observers are drawn from 20 OSCE participating States.

Oh. My. God. They’re coming — all sixty-one of them. Be vewy very afraid. This is going to cause panic, even rioting. I mean they might actually assign four people to Florida or something.

Those black-helicopter-riding, blue-helmeted bastards. To the hills! WOLVERINES!

(Best. Conspiracy. Theory. Movie. Ever.)

The absurdity of the vrwctOSCE’s attacks on the OSCE demonstrate just how out of touch the far right is. The OSCE’s token effort is little more than a demonstration to Russia, Belarus and other OSCE problem children member states that every country should welcome election observers. That’s why even the Bush Administration supports this.

That said, how much do you want to bet that this year, with Obama in the lead, the vrwctOSCE doesn’t say a thing? They’re probably too busy worrying about whether the latest iteration of the bailout represents a coming of the New World Order. I wonder if anyone has suggested that Henry Paulson is the Anti-Christ?

Silly people. It’s not Henry Paulson. Or Barack Obama.

It’s Gordon freaking Brown.

Hat tip on OSCE: Undip reader PK.

Morning Buzz: Up and Down. . . .

I hate Eurodisco. But given the craziness on Wall Street these days, it somehow seemed appropriate.

That’s three minutes of your life you’ll never get back. Sorry about that.

Guest Post: 1929 and 2008

My dad, James P. Brown, is a regular columnist for The Sarasota Herald-Tribune, writing mainly on local politics. He spent most of his career in newspapers, and later went into politics, serving four terms as Mayor of Longboat Key, Florida. His column this week looks at the differences between 1929 and 2008, particularly in terms of press coverage. I thought it worth sharing with readers of Undiplomatic.

Way back in my early newspaper days I did a lot of jobs for The Jackson [Michigan] Citizen Patriot, among them handling special promotions. One project was setting up a booth at the County Fair. What brings this up now is the queasy feeling I’ve been getting these last few weeks reading all the ‘negative’ headlines and stories about the economy.

Why do we have to write all this stuff? Even as a newspaper man I couldn’t help asking this. Are we just making things worse, feeding fear, generating further downtrends in the market? Can’t we focus on the positive?

That’s what took me back to that 1950s Jackson County Fair booth. I had decided to paper its walls with copies of headlines and front pages of the century’s biggest stories. One of these, I decided, was the Wall Street crash of 1929.

Over and over I went through the paper’s files for 1929. I couldn’t find a single headline that even hinted at the collapse of the stock market that was to shake the world. Not a one! As the days progressed, though, there were plenty of stories about “Things looking up” or “Buying surge predicted.”

It was a different age, for newspapers as well as the world. Editors were “responsible” people; many felt it was their job to build up the economy, not proclaim its weakness; to decide what was “good for readers”, not necessarily what they needed to know.

The obvious moral: sticking your head in the sand doesn’t work for the purveyors of news any more than it does for everyday citizens. To try to hide what’s happening, to sugar-coat, will if anything make the situation worse.

All of which stirs another memory – the famous putdown of Dan Quayle in a vice-presidential debate when he compared his career to the late President Kennedy’s: “Believe me, Senator,” said Lloyd Bentsen, his opponent, “I knew Jack Kennedy and you are no Jack Kennedy.”

Well, I’m old enough to have lived through the Great Depression and, believe me, what’s happening in this country is bad, yes, but it isn’t even close to what the 1930s were like.

There was no social security then, no Medicare, no employer financed retirement and health insurance. A fifth of the population that often was forced to live on the charity of others. Today, their children have a pretty darned good life. We didn’t have nearly as many foreclosures because very, very few could afford to buy a home. And, prior to 1933, we operated under a government that truly stuck its head in the sand and lived on the promise that “prosperity is just around the corner.”

Unemployment officially was 25 percent; in the real world it was closer to 50 percent. What is it today, 6 percent? Then thousands of men roamed the country in boxcars looking for work. No one had ever heard of insurance for bank accounts and, as failures piled one on top of the other, millions of families lost what little savings they had. It’s a crime the way today’s stock market found its way around regulation, but then, there essentially was none. Margin buying wiped out hundreds of thousands of people. Broken men leaping out of skyscraper windows became a symbol of the times.

My family – five of us — lived in a two-room cabin in a tourist court with community shower and bath, subsisting on what my mother earned setting hair for 25 cents for a finger wave – and felt lucky to have that much.

And month after month all that was reported in thousands of newspapers was “Things Looking Up” or “Buying Surge Predicted.”

As grim as today’s headlines make you feel, in news as in life maybe honesty really is the best policy.

Thought of the Morning

Why isn’t John McCain (or Barack Obama or anyone else for that matter) demanding that President Bush fire Henry “Captain Crisismaker” Paulson? Or for the resignation of Ben “Wingman” Bernanke?

Christopher Cox may have been culpable in helping create the conditions for this mess, but given the fact that we’re facing a crisis of confidence in liquidity, not liquidity, most of the blame falls on the Bailout Twins.

The Great Crash: Truth and Consequences

If you haven’t seen it yet, take the time to watch this extraordinarily sobering report on the impact of foreclosures on one part of Southern California.

B-H-H-B

Not a chemical formula. Merely the first initials of arguably the four worst Presidents in history.

Buchanan

Harding

Hoover

Bush

Light blogging over the balance of the afternoon.

Reactionary Nostalgia

My earlier post on Iowa got me thinking about the McCain’s strategy and tactics.

According to press reports, the McCain campaign has adopted a defensive stance, more intent on defending Bush-2004 states than winning over Kerry-2004 states. This is problematic because, right now, they are so far behind in a half-dozen Bush-2004 that it’s going

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts

Related posts