Peace goes perfect with Savings

I was unsure if I would even comment on "Silly Season," at all this year, but here is one man's humble opinion:

(A) Republicans-Romney-Ryan-R-r-r...

An 8 page plan, half of which is a critique of the Administration, where four competing ideas, are assured to us to somehow compose the basis to run an entire nation, is the only "detail," released by the R team.  The rest seems code, insider talk, and self reference for we dont like the current president-- for whatever reason.

Realistically, another "r" word, cutting taxes, reducing deficits, and balancing budgets appeals to the fiscal conservative in me, except that the fiscal conservative knows math, and economics.  This strategy will wreck Social Security, Obamacare, and probably eventually destroy medicare and other long standing social networks necessary for an empathetic and humanistic society-- unless there is fundamental change.

Ad naseums of trickle down sunsets from 1970 ~ 2008 are enough for me, just because the Republican says it (over and over) doesn't mean it somehow becomes true over time.  Just ask Romney's sons.

Republicans in general halted a majority of ordinary congressional business for the last two years-- dump the bums!


(B) Obama Administration, and Dems

Occupying the center on most rational issues, Romney has no room to create differentiations, and as they both agree on a majority of the Corporate Agenda-- Obama has come up very short on the progressive radar.

Over the four years he has made proforma moves long in the works, and the cornerstone of his efforts, especially when the Democrats held majority powers,  becomes Obamacare.

On that criteria alone, there was literally no difference between Romney, who created a similar program for Mass., and the President.  Only Romney pretending to be some different version of himself created some platform to repeal Obamacare-- easier said than done, and a total waste of energy, because it throws out many babies with the bathwater.

The major issues this election are Liberty, Freedom and Peace.


(C) Liberty, Freedom, and Peace

Not discussed, but actually alluded to by Obama on his recent appearance on The Daily Show, are the lifting of Emergency Powers and restoration of habeus corpus.  Without these actions by the executive we are still electing to be compared to the best of fascist regimes, not the best of all human governance systems.  We must restore the balance of powers, and lift the permanent state of war.

Freedom to start business, be lent money upon a equitable basis, and to succeed.  Onerous tax systems, fee and regulatory, and ambiguous State powers to assist Sole Proprietors, Small Businesses, and entrepreneurs all are part of the sluggish recovery.

Common sense and easy to understand regulations are necessary for entry, but then additional reorganization of the SBA and CofC systems to help all the incoming generations of highly distracted, creative and slightly entitled Americans are only secondary to furthering easy access to proper community development loans by the banks we allowed to survive past 2009 by making them loans as taxpayers with faith in the powers that be.

Yet, now the banks restored, have tightened guidelines, so the rich grow richer, and the businesses, and taxpayers, continue to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.  Where are our new business loans?  Where are the mortgage streamlines?  Where are the forclosure forestallments?

Somehow the banks feel that their request for $6 trillion in 2008 was more imperative than the last person they just turned down for the foreclosure prevention.  The sense of corporate citizenship needed to be a part of the conditions for TARP funds.

But it all belies the pretext, which is we rely upon perpetual escalation, warfare, and conflict in order to justify our War Economy.  Neither candidate is offering a vision of Peace, pax americana, or otherwise, where we save Billions by suing for peace, and restoring multilateral order as organized by International Laws and standards.


CONCLUSION

When the US grows up and more nimbly interacts with it's allies to defend our allies, then a huge peacetime savings will accrue.  Interestingly, the $5 trillion deficit most economists agree the RR "5-points" would incur, I estimate could be saved once a complete peace has been negotiated.

Except neither candidate is talking about restoring Liberty, Freedom, or Peace!

I already voted, and refrain from endorsing either candidate.  God save the USA, and may we vote without consideration of party.  VOTE!

Hague Gaddafi

What we are witnessing in the Mid-East today is full of hope and promise, yet signals the beginning of a long road for each of these societies filled with peril and danger.

To that end we begin to see the result of a dictator of convenience to oil consuming nations, thoroughly ensconced in the best soldiers, weapons, and hiding places in his capitol city bitterly beginning his attempt at counter-revolution-- like that picture of the little fish trying to eat the big fish! Except, the big fish is turning around to swim at them and say, "I'm gonna git you sukka!"

Dont worry little fish, stay true to your purpose, and next thing you know the big fish is back to where he once was... moments away from being eaten-- just the opposite direction.

We are witnessing the promise of the world wide web truly materializing-- democratization through information.

In the Reagan era, they called this The Information Age. A bit overstated, but undeniable, too.

When they made the Internet something that anyone, who happened to have a computer, residence, phone line, and subscription, could access we heard of all the exciting potentials.

In this day and age of the $100 computer, multi-function hand held devices with wireless internet access, and the general saturation of technology over time the other shoe has begun it's foot fall.

So, this simple suggestion to the West in general and USA in specific from your humble observer:

This is the opportunity in clearest daylight for the USA and Obama Administration to back the Court of International Justice in Hague, it's processes, and all that it represents for the future of International Justice.

Obviously, events must play themselves out, but when Gaddafi is captured or escapes to his island hideaway, ala Dr. No from James Bond, we Americans must agree that The Hague Court was set up to deal with dictators actively killing their citizens in popular revolt. Where else should we have him tried as a consistent War Criminal and human rights abuser?

That move would continue the momentum we see for transparency, democracy, and set the model for future dictators subject to popular rejection. It would also reverse yet another backward Bush-era policy.

Silly Season: Open for Hunting

Dems have always had constituent group politics: gays, latinos, blacks, labor, etc.

Those groups, or factions, dont always agree, and often dont get everything they wanted, either.

This flexibility is something the Pubs are not known for; if anything they are know as being in lock-step, on-message, and in-synch-- a real machine. Except now, they really dont agree with one another on how best to proceed, and Boehner may risk (political) life and limb trying to get the stump out of the thresher-- to use a farming metaphor.

In other words, they now actually have sub-groups!

How Boehner deals with the transition to a group process format for these expressed interest will be measured by the body count in the 2012 elections. Try focusing on that instead of screwing Obama, and by the transitive property the nation as well-- First reason, it's what you guys did last time you were "in power."

Lest we should forget that neither party wants to talk about the real pain points, and so most of what is being fed as the primary proceedings of the political dialogue in DC really amounts to irrelevant misdirection to keep the interested confused and the rest of us bored with all of the lying!

BP Aftermath

Knock wood that there will only be an absolute minimum of oil spilt hereafter from the Deep Water Horizon Disaster.

That said, a quick reckoning, and I think the Obama Admin got this right:

My assumptions-- A leak of 80K BBL per Day with a straight line 1% reduction over 86 days to define the various captures, ruptures, and miscillaneous unknown variables (unless BP would like to submit the actual data, instead of somehow going from 1000BBL to 5000BBL to as much as 80000BBL per day-- I feel this method is fair); The fine is $4300 per barrel per day that such oil remains uncleaned;

What we come up with is just about $20BB as of today... BP you better get to cleaning!

(Here is my worksheet [sorry it didn't come out that great, but gotta go]:

Days BBL/dayTOTAL BBLs in MM gal Fine in $MM TOT Fine $BB
1 80000 80000 3.36 $344.00 $0.34
2 79200 159200 6.69 $684.56 $0.68
3 78408 237608 9.98 $1,021.71 $1.02
4 77624 315232 13.24 $1,355.50 $1.36
5 76848 392080 16.47 $1,685.94 $1.69
6 76079 468159 19.66 $2,013.08 $2.01
7 75318 543477 22.83 $2,336.95 $2.34
8 74565 618042 25.96 $2,657.58 $2.66
9 73820 691862 29.06 $2,975.01 $2.98
10 73081 764943 32.13 $3,289.26 $3.29
11 72351 837294 35.17 $3,600.36 $3.60
12 71627 908921 38.17 $3,908.36 $3.91
13 70911 979832 41.15 $4,213.28 $4.22
14 70202 1050033 44.10 $4,515.14 $4.52
15 69500 1119533 47.02 $4,813.99 $4.82
16 68805 1188338 49.91 $5,109.85 $5.11
17 68117 1256454 52.77 $5,402.75 $5.41
18 67435 1323890 55.60 $5,692.73 $5.70
19 66761 1390651 58.41 $5,979.80 $5.99
20 66093 1456744 61.18 $6,264.00 $6.27
21 65433 1522177 63.93 $6,545.36 $6.55
22 64778 1586955 66.65 $6,823.91 $6.83
23 64130 1651086 69.35 $7,099.67 $7.11
24 63489 1714575 72.01 $7,372.67 $7.38
25 62854 1777429 74.65 $7,642.95 $7.65
26 62226 1839655 77.27 $7,910.52 $7.92
27 61603 1901258 79.85 $8,175.41 $8.18
28 60987 1962246 82.41 $8,437.66 $8.45
29 60378 2022623 84.95 $8,697.28 $8.71
30 59774 2082397 87.46 $8,954.31 $8.96
31 59176 2141573 89.95 $9,208.76 $9.22
32 58584 2200157 92.41 $9,460.68 $9.47
33 57998 2258156 94.84 $9,710.07 $9.72
34 57418 2315574 97.25 $9,956.97 $9.97
35 56844 2372418 99.64 $10,201.40 $10.21
36 56276 2428694 102.01 $10,443.39 $10.45
37 55713 2484407 104.35 $10,682.95 $10.69
38 55156 2539563 106.66 $10,920.12 $10.93
39 54604 2594168 108.96 $11,154.92 $11.17
40 54058 2648226 111.23 $11,387.37 $11.40
41 53518 2701744 113.47 $11,617.50 $11.63
42 52983 2754726 115.70 $11,845.32 $11.86
43 52453 2807179 117.90 $12,070.87 $12.08
44 51928 2859107 120.08 $12,294.16 $12.31
45 51409 2910516 122.24 $12,515.22 $12.53
46 50895 2961411 124.38 $12,734.07 $12.75
47 50386 3011797 126.50 $12,950.73 $12.96
48 49882 3061679 128.59 $13,165.22 $13.18
49 49383 3111062 130.66 $13,377.57 $13.39
50 48889 3159951 132.72 $13,587.79 $13.60
51 48400 3208352 134.75 $13,795.91 $13.81
52 47916 3256268 136.76 $14,001.95 $14.02
53 47437 3303706 138.76 $14,205.93 $14.22
54 46963 3350669 140.73 $14,407.88 $14.42
55 46493 3397162 142.68 $14,607.80 $14.62
56 46028 3443190 144.61 $14,805.72 $14.82
57 45568 3488758 146.53 $15,001.66 $15.02
58 45112 3533871 148.42 $15,195.64 $15.21
59 44661 3578532 150.30 $15,387.69 $15.40
60 44215 3622747 152.16 $15,577.81 $15.59
61 43773 3666519 153.99 $15,766.03 $15.78
62 43335 3709854 155.81 $15,952.37 $15.97
63 42901 3752756 157.62 $16,136.85 $16.15
64 42472 3795228 159.40 $16,319.48 $16.34
65 42048 3837276 161.17 $16,500.29 $16.52
66 41627 3878903 162.91 $16,679.28 $16.70
67 41211 3920114 164.64 $16,856.49 $16.87
68 40799 3960913 166.36 $17,031.93 $17.05
69 40391 4001304 168.05 $17,205.61 $17.22
70 39987 4041291 169.73 $17,377.55 $17.39
71 39587 4080878 171.40 $17,547.77 $17.57
72 39191 4120069 173.04 $17,716.30 $17.73
73 38799 4158868 174.67 $17,883.13 $17.90
74 38411 4197280 176.29 $18,048.30 $18.07
75 38027 4235307 177.88 $18,211.82 $18.23
76 37647 4272954 179.46 $18,373.70 $18.39
77 37270 4310224 181.03 $18,533.96 $18.55
78 36898 4347122 182.58 $18,692.62 $18.71
79 36529 4383651 184.11 $18,849.70 $18.87
80 36163 4419814 185.63 $19,005.20 $19.02
81 35802 4455616 187.14 $19,159.15 $19.18
82 35444 4491060 188.62 $19,311.56 $19.33
83 35089 4526149 190.10 $19,462.44 $19.48
84 34739 4560888 191.56 $19,611.82 $19.63
85 34391 4595279 193.00 $19,759.70 $19.78
86 34047 4629326 194.43 $19,906.10 $19.93 )

The Shame of Big Oil

Here is the rhetorical question: Imagine if you will the Blob from the 1950's movie of the same title, and it was sweeping the streets removing only the gas stations, refineries, offices, and production facilities of every oil company that existed in five states.

How much money would the oil industry collectively spend to stop the Blob? How fast would that private action (without any help [or probably permission] from the Government-at-large) be done?

Now, if instead of "blob," we read massive uncontrolled oil gusher; we replace the streets with the Gulf of Mexico; and instead of oil companies we read: every fisherman, much of the tourism, a lot of recreational dollars, and the future health of millions of people-- not to mention the immense and incalculable devastation to our aquatic creatures and ecosystems-- we must wonder.

Is it not in every oil companies interest to assist in solving this problem ASAP so as to be able to have opportunity at future access to public waters?

As for BP: It was different to hear within the first days of this tragedy, that BP will honor all reasonable economic claims. That said, sending claimants out to help with the clean up and containment without proper safety (equipment, training, resources, etc.) is in some ways worse, because then they shall have several claims as a class action: (1) economic, and (2) health.

It seems there will probably be many levels of costs for BP, Halliburton, et. al.: (A) immediate, (B) long-term, (C) Criminal claims, (D) Civil penalties, and (E) future opportunity costs.

I also want to make the statement that this situation is not as advertised or spun, "Obama's Katrina." Bush got a four day notice, and if memory serves did nothing for an additional four or so days. When he did it was to reassure people, as opposed to acknowledge the tragedy. That tin ear populism was what created (along with catch phrases like, "heckuva job Brownie,") the sink hole of political legitimacy for Bush.

Pubs and haters praying for this to suddenly be Obama's Katrina are going with the old 'argumentum ad naseum,' again, but more startling is their admission that in this (and on several other issues like the economy) matter their last leader with a fully stacked Pub Congress flubbed on issue after issue. I think with the foot falling and the Tea Parties it is clear that the Pubs havent gotten out of circular firing squad formation quite yet....

This situation was precipitated by the Bushies, and the only problem I have with Obama (Administration) is that they did not catch the paper tiger collusion between MMS and Big Oil before it came to this.

So, now as far as I am concerned, we the people must ask the oil companies to verify and prove the statements they made in writing to our governmental bodies in order to acquire permits. If they claim this situation happens only once every 30 years, then they must show they have what it takes to either improve techniques and/or possess the technological wherewithal to mitigate even the slightest damage to our public lands and natural resources.

As far as I am concerned, even the fishermen are missing the bigger picture: they should not just ask for a years wages, or another job... What about charging wholesale prices for every pound of shrimp, dolphins, fish, crabs, clams, crawdads, mollusk, etc. that has been "eaten" by this blob; and what about all the future costs for the billions of creatures that have been aborted in this man made catastrophe facilitated by a chain of fools.

Finally, it is hard to write this knowing I am on track to have to fill up at the gas station in about a week. We are all conspirators at some level of this tragedy, but imagine how much this will cost the tax payers total. It is probably a very incalculable number like say $208,972,340,000.00, just to pick one out of the hat. We have dozens of these rigs out there. If we would just spend that $208,972,340,000.00 x 12 to facilitate electric cars, improved clean technology, solar, and wind, then would we not be in this mess when the next one is due in thirty years or less?

President's Question Time

An incredible display of the evolution of democracy and accountability was put on by President Obama this week.

To me, this was a culmination of what I am only assuming was fine political calculation.

My assumption, based on absolutely nothing other than life experience alone: This kind of "Prime Minister's Question Time" was something candidate Obama had on his Transparency Wishlist.

But President ranks somewhere between King and Prime Minister here in the USA, so the UK model isn't totally apt; besides this was ('would be' goes the imaginary explanation to then candidate Obama) a radical step which needed to be timed correctly. I cant imagine how much more apt this exercise's introduction to the dialogue of transparency and accountability could have been.

Remarkable points;

(I) Had Obama done this earlier, in say August, the flux af the situation could have greatly distorted outcomes of the various vitriol of the time (people yelling at politicians in town halls about false rumors).

(II) By waiting a full year to watch as the Congress fiddled while the US was burning, Obama has now set himself apart from their poor favorability-- all parties.

(III) Having all but lost this first match (in what is expected to be a three to eight match game) in the health care issue, in spite of many accomplishments by the Congress, the culture of Partisanship was writ large by the election of the Junior Senator from MA. Obama's final answer hammered home the point about no one talking with one another, looking only to score rhetorical points, and the active schadenfreude by both parties and their mouthpieces-- including the acts and deeds to extend and further that attitude of blame and buck passing.

(IV) Responding to the situation of somehow 51 Senators no longer being considered a majority, rather that the threat of cloture and filibuster was so persistent by this sessions Republican's now 60 barely qualified as a majority, he held this first televised question time with the Republican's. He had earlier held question time with Democrats, but did not televise that. This partial version of the UK PM?T, essentially broadsided the Pubs into having to answer for the elephant in the room (pun intended), that of the obstructionist tact.

(V) Finally, like a breath of fresh air, this display of scholarly brinksmanship, artful rhetoric, and skilled debate highlighted the features of a qualified President! It does not matter what that President's policies are... the question is do we have an Executive truly capable and qualified to be the Chief? A command of details and issues, clarity in thought and actions, and accurate language to reflect the inner mind of a political genius. All POTUS' are by definition political geniuses (sorry rabid detractors of Bush II), because somehow they got there to the station of our republic's modern Ceasar. If somehow Obama makes this a regular feature of our modern 21st Century 24 hour News democracy/political cycle, then we can expect it, like the State of the Union, to be an essential set piece for the abilities of any future POTUS or would-be POTUS-- much as it is already standard form for any PM or shadow Minister to be able to stand the hot seat of the multiparty question time held in the UK's House of Commons almost weekly.

***

SO my humble suggestions:

(A) Next time, treat it exactly like the PM?T and have all members of either the Senate or House (not both at the same time, but from all parties) voluntarily attend the televised question time. This will then promote a semblance of dialogue, because by then calling from the various parties and factions in alternate, there approximates the status of a political conversation or national dialogue (NOT DIRECTED BY THE MEDIA!).

(B) To be fair to everyone, let's have these events as more or less scheduled set pieces, no sudden TV cameras in the room at the last minute. That said, probably one of these per quarter is more towards our Corporation style republic model, as opposed to the weekly meeting of Ministers and MPs in just the lower house version in UK. (Also, probably best to have these set about two to three weeks after recess has ended so (i) the members would have fresh info from constituents, (ii) any changes from elections and such would be more or less in place, and (iii) everyone was making a fresh start-- more or less.)

(C) Like PM?T, maybe have some Cabinet Members available to be referred to for details? I think in the case of our financial mess, this would either secure Geitner as a great choice or put him on the fast track to join the millions of unemployed!

(D) Like the UK, sometimes the PM cant make it, so why not Pelosi, Reid, or even >gulp< Biden to make interim question times?

+++

Kudos to Obama, and I think anyone from any party, who believe transparency and accountability is important for our nation and its political system to begin to heal and repair itself, would have to agree!

Strategy, Tactics, and Terrorism

I will make this brief.

The idea that we can stop terrorists who seem to be coming in via London, Amsterdam, or other foreign ports into America to set off havoc (and bombs) by essentially removing civil liberties here at home beggars belief.

A phrase that would have been heresy just several years ago, but is now on the TV-machine a lot is "security theater."

Now in my mind this would be the staging area for a secure zone, but in fact means staging an act which is designed to lend the appearance of greater safety.

We still haven't completely implemented the work of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Republicans continue to play petty politics by not conferring a TSA Chief, and meanwhile New safety measures appear arbitrary... I mean here.

The simple Strategical guidance I would offer is simple: We must shift from a Reactionary Defense to a Proactive Defense; We must shift from a Nation-State Invasion Model to a Sectarian Counter-terror Model.

Easier said than done!

That said, Proactive Defense looks more like what the British accomplished in 2005 with the liquid bombers; or the French have been dealing with since Algerian Independence in 1962. A lot of very advanced police work!

Our current reactionary basis has us looking at areas where the opponents last struck. As they say in investing, "past performance does not guarantee future results." This is backwards hindsight mentality.

The balance is to get international cooperation on improved intelligence techniques that somehow maintains reasonable personal privacy and functional civil liberties.

As for our wholesale invasion of places where terrorists live, well that is as delusional as the idea that Terrorists will somehow destroy the Freedom we enjoy in the West.

Our freedoms, our wealth, and our model of social change is not something that people plan on giving up on, and like any good product or service-- it is in high demand!

Ours is not a natural state of governance, but a logical outcrop as a result from hard earned lessons and wars of the past. Ours is the best model, for now, and people basically like Freedom, Liberty and Justice. So the terrorists can't expect random acts of havoc to remove or somehow dethrone this truth.

On the other hand there are dissenters and at the harshest end bad actors, those who would commit terrorist acts, probably in any major nation-state in the world. It becomes a question of what is aspirational and what is operational as to what threats are indeed real to human safety and liberty.

So, to invade yet another country to ensure freedom and democracy is so 20th century, and a very proven failed idea from not just a budgetary, but a benefit-cost, point of view.

Like NASA, our defense and offense needs to get more focused, accurate, and scale appropriate to live within their means.

Keeping Score

Trying not to get totally sidelined by the Obameter!


My God I wish all the Presidents had one of these... It would have been amazing to watch the Bushes break promises, or see more clearly Reagan and Clinton's agendas.


This is truly our first 21st Century President, now being held accountable to every campaign promise, in the golden light of free speech and public access. That is a good definition of transparency, and certainly everything Obama's Administration does to address this extant challenge will set precedent.


So lets see the score card for what it really is:


TOTAL PROMISES:
515

PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED (Jan ~ Oct [so about ten months]):
36% (185/515)

PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED KEPT:
25% (47/185)

PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED COMPROMISED:
6% (12/185)

PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED BROKEN:
4% (7/185)

PERCENTAGE ADDRESSED STALLED:
6% (12/185)

PERCENTAGE IN THE WORK (ADDRESSED and TOTAL):
ADDRESSED; 58% (107/185)
TOTAL; 21% (107/515)

***

Now lets assign a number of time to this data set: we could argue that it has only been ten months, and 10/48 is about 21%. For simplicity lets say that some political capital has been expended and that this report card is emblemic of about one years worth of future work load-- or 25%.

Lets assume a similar rate of success/failure per annum:

9.125% KEPT
2.33% COMPROMISED
1.35% BROKEN
20.777% IN PROCESS


We then get this matrix:

1 2 3 4
KEPT 47 94 141 188
COMPROMISED 12 24 36 48
BROKEN 7 14 21 28
STALLED 12 24 36 48
PROCESS 107 214 281 203
UNSTARTED 330 145 0 0


Which translates to:

By year three all promises will have been addressed. If we count compromises as promises kept thats about a 46% success rate, or without compromise about a .365 batting average-- not bad.

5.44% of promises are broken, and 9.32% are "stalled." If we assume these to be the same we come up with a cumulative 14.76% failure rate.

At this same rate of progress, assuming a re-election, adding an additional 31 promises then by year eight:


5 6 7
KEPT 235 282 329
COMPROMISED 60 72 84
BROKEN 35 42 49
STALLED 60 72 84
PROCESS 125 78 0


That would leave year eight to hammer through the 84 pieces of stalled business and run the new candidate slates.

It translates to the following baseball stats:

Kept .603
Comp .154
Broke .090
Stall .153


I know this methodology is simplistic, but to imagine a President held this accountable that someone like me can do the baseball math-- and to imagine a President who can keep his or her word 75% of the time in the light of public scrutiny-- is a good start.

The 10% (of GDP) Solution

[UPDATED (09/25/09)]

We approach one year since the Government of George W. Bush came to the rescue of Profiteers on Wall Street to create systemic reward for failure in our market driven economy.


Yesterday, Rachael Maddow interviewed Paul Krugman, and

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

In minute five he begins describing the remedies for the current situation and I will be discussing the statements he concludes by about minute six, and among the other interesting points he made he mentioned that in order to get out of the Great Depression we had WWII which required government fiscal input of ~40% of GDP.


He went on to state that the current stimulus is only about 2.5% of GDP.


Now I am not going to spend time checking to see how accurate those numbers are this morning, and I dont agree with everything Krugman says. That disclaimer out of the way, I will say hes probably pretty accurate on those facts, and it is clear (as he also went on to say) that the political fortitude for such a stimulus plan is weak at best (mirroring the point in the one minute clip I could find above).


SO lets take those facts as a rule of thumb. Lets say the economy is twice as efficient now as it was sixty or seventy years ago; Let grant that this Severe Recession isnt exactly the same as the Great Depression (lets say for simplicity its half as bad adding the broader networking of International markets, exchanges, and trade); and we would need about ten percent of GDP in stimulus to really soar past our current problems!


Now lets assume the government has screwed the pooch with Paulson-Cheney's rescue, and that Obama's versions are still too early to call. All that, according to Krugman yesterday is about 4% of GDP (including cash for clunkers, et. al.).


[Lets apply about 1.5% of GDP for Infrastructure improvements, as my memory from first post to this update was off by 1.5%, so that means] we have about another 6% of GDP yet to spend: So thats about $858BB we can still spend.



1. Thats about the estimated cost for the full Health Reform Bill without any efficiency savings



2. My top ten wish list (inclusive of increased infrastructure and health care inclusive of efficiency savings)


or


3. A Citizens Stimulus



Here's the idea: Instead of giving more money to the moneyed interests, give to the citizens! Let's say there are about 200,000,000 individual and family tax payers; There is about $850BB to give for completion of stimulus which is about 1/4th as strong as how we escaped the Great Depression; then we have about $4250 Credit Amount per individual.



A. Order of the Allthing. In Icelandic and Nordic cultures there was the All Thing which basically reconciled all debts every year-- including debt forgiveness. So here would be the thing which I prescribe;


i. First, subtract Federal back taxes and penalties forgiven up to the Credit Amount
ii. Then from that remainder, subtract State back taxes and penalties forgiven up to the Total Credit Amount (This money goes to the States!)
iii. Next from that remainder, subtract local (real estate) tax liens and penalties forgiven up to the Total Credit Amount (This goes to the local governments!!)
iv. Finally, assuming anything is left over, any outstanding judgements, child support, or other unpaid levies would be forgiven up to that Total Credit Amount



B. The way TARP should have been applied.


i. Citizen give government the right to examine credit records (they ostensibly have this data just from Fannie-Freddie)
ii. Government confirms real outstanding balances from an official capacity via subpoena powers (thereby any institution being usurious or illegal would be committing fraud at a Federal level)
iii. Citizen has time to dispute final balances
iv. Creditor has right to re-validate claim(s)
v. Citizen may elect to have any remainder from Allthing process (above) to be applied to some or all participating Creditors to discharge debts in a class manner



C. Citizen may simply bypass this class bailout/credit restoration process and collect remainder form Allthing process.


SO think about this practically! Lets say 33% have something left over and want to participate in this settling of debts. Lets imagine who the money is owed to? In its current configuration (post-bailouts and mergers) something like 90% of all consumer debts are carried by 5 major institutions.


IF we imagine that Citibank (for instance) then recovers something to the tune of 10% of its consumer debt, doesnt that serve the same purpose of stimulus? It also relieves the consumer, and technically allows Citibank to make new loans!


FInally, if all those bailout moneys had been so applied the amount being discussed would be closer to $10K per person, and if we added the idea that mortgages could be included as direct or indirect beneficiaries to the class settlements or the use of funds by individuals who elected to bypass the settlement process some of the foreclosure and real estate market issues would have been rounded out.


You may say I am a dreamer, but I hope someday you will join me...!

Aftergloworm Turning

One week since a huge landslide in Presidential politics for the historic figure Mr. Obama.

I imagine, although I've been busy, like most people, cobbling together the means to afford the predicament of this economic situation, the MSM has been focusing on several other items not related to presidential politics, or at least that is what I would hope will be happening.

Not to say that I dont appreciate a good honeymoon... thats all fine, for christsake the "O" Administration doesnt get into power for another 70 days, and it would be too bad if after his first month the desperately unimaginative and incurious Media are already "looking back to the 'first' 100 days."

That said, the fourth estate has been an overwhelming disappointment during the "W" administration. I think when some anchors got the Katrina "scoop," in other words it wasnt being covered or handled properly (a) some of the real news hounds smelled a story, but alas, I am growing cynical, I also think that some of the corporate execs felt there may have been liability in under reporting (or to be accurate in my guess, 'that the disinformation of the government around events and items related to the catastrophe in LA and secondarily in MS could subject that reporting organization to liability.' But of course that didnt or wouldnt bother Fox as a quasi-offical bully pulpit for the W admin.), therefore they put boots on the ground to investigate-- and began to WAKE UP.

If every MSM vendor is serving up the exact same pile of tripe in varying portions and from minutely differing vantages to form slightly different piles of the same garbage, then we have truly learned nothing in the past eight years.

How cool would it be (a la Woodward and Berstein) to actually scoop the Congressional Investigations? Go ahead reporters in waiting, cub reporters, and various CSI/Inspector Clouseau/Mrs. Marple wannabes... I would estimate there are literally dozens (if not thousands) of reports to be filed that discover real evidence of how foul the government and its administration has been and how we have been led astray. All of them potentially original, a potential scoop, and vitally important to the restoration of communication, democracy, and law and order in our society.

That is the duty of the Fourth Estate. Not to burnish the non-sequitur utterances of incompetents, nor to buy into the lies without introspection or vigorous discussion and examination. Sure there will be mistakes, but rather an honest mistake done for duty and country, than as a tool of the state, say I.

Lets explore the issues... Going into the meta of number of mortgages in default is fascinating for economists, chartists, and financial students like me... But how many reports of hardship, heartache, and wrongdoing can be found within these types of numbers? Countless.

The "horse race" type reporting was cheap, easy, and allowed the execs, reporters, and much of their field staff to drive small distances (with apologies to those who actually rode tirelessly with the campaigns) and appear to be offering comprehensive coverage of "what is happening in America."

Thank Gawd the two year Presidential Campaign is now finally over, and not to diminish from (oh theres another ten thousand stories) all the personal emblematic meaning Americans have from this historic result, but lets start ACTUALLY reporting on the Actual events from actual places on this earth in order to more clearly see how far we have been led astray-- and how much ground our society and the world need to make up for the unmitigated disaster of these last eight years!

Memo from the Peanut Gallery to President Elect Obama's Economic Team

There are a multitude of complex issues to grapple with which separate and as a whole are unprecedented.

Great minds and scholars have been hard pressed for solid answers amidst the crisis.

So the few relevant words from a man who has barely cobbled a career from giving advice on real estate, mortgages, and finance is probably pretty low on any priority list, let alone item on the agenda.

Yet here in my own fantasy world known as my blog, I first have to point out this item from June 26th, which clearly defines some of the precipitous issues as it relates to market speculation and its forthcoming consequences as warned in other articles.

Next I would like to point out this article/commentary from 2007 which illustrates clearly the point of view of a humble and honest broker well before the Fannie-Freddy debacle.

And as this is my first commentary on economics and policy since the events of September 15th (a day which will live in infamy), please let me first make plain my assessment of the outgoing W administration, and secondarily the up shot of the Republican's as leadership:

1. The Soviet Union was founded upon less of a Nationalization of private wealth than as what has occurred in the "bailout" package.

2. Unlike the Soviets overtaking means for Production, this is similar to the mulligan that Enron took (Bankruptcy protection) after siphoning off billions of dollars from consumers and state purchasers (notably California).

3. If I was to make the argument that the solution(s) posited by the W administration's Paulson to Republican/Conservative people any time in my life starting in 1970 through to the "Bail out package," I would be considered a 'Commie,' 'Pinko,' or at best 'Looney Liberal.' Luckily I dont believe this is the best solution, although a necessary minimum of confidence was restored to the capital markets.

4. Although anti-free marketers are quick to assert this is proof that its a failure of free market concepts, unfortunately its not quite that simple. True free market principles would then suggest that we allow Wall Street to shatter into a million pieces, and allow the Phoenix of the Invisible Hand to rise from those ashes. The risk of Anarchy, Revolution, and War should not be a hinderance to those stoutest in defense of these principlea.

Rather what has happened is that the curtain has been unveiled upon the Wizard of Oz. Or more accurately Wizards: Power Elite; Ultra Rich; Super Rich; and their operatives... and as Gomer Pyle would say, "Sooprize sooprize," the W administration fits neatly into that last category (if not others).



The doctrine known as "free market," and, often as not, ascribed to as "trickle down," has been a fallacy waiting to happen since I took Economics in 1986 from my perspective. The fallacy is that the pitch (or soccer field to define the metaphor more readily) is absolutely not level (a lack of transparency of markets, trades, and companies-- let alone parity amongst status of trading parties), everyone knows this, but the referees (power elite) assure us that indeed the market is trading at a free clip, and they are doing their best to weed out the inept and destructive government (singular as in government is bad) in order to get back to those players to whom that unfair pitch advantage works against.

It is, like many convincing fallacies, a perfect ecosystem of utter nonsense.

What was revealed when the Wizard came out from behind the curtain?

The rules of the road were designed to insulate power elites from those market forces that every small business owner (not suckling directly from the teat of one or more of the power elite) faces yearly, monthly, daily, hourly, and even at a moment by moment level, wherein one bad decision can have the whole house of cards tumble down on them, their employees, and their families.

Perfect capitalism for 96% of the business owners in America, and pure communism for the ~4% that retain ~92% of the wealth and direction of capital.

The main difference here? That fallacy of "perfect" and "free" markets has been unmasked. For me it doenst make me less of a Keynesian or Miltonian (of which I am only some part in either case), rather confirms the sound logic of truth found within the mathematical models.

For all practical reasons, it wasnt the theories that were flawed, rather the implementation of those theories. You dont go golfing with Tiger Woods, and on holes 3, 7, and 12 receive a "0" on your score (an impossibility), then go on to say you bested Tiger Woods at Augusta for the Championship!

For lack of a simpler explanation that is what Corporate America has been doing for decades!

My Miltonian Tax suggestion of reducing tax paperwork to the size of a postcard, is premised on the fact that massive corporations with armies of lawyers can end up getting paid by the government, whereas the business owner will typically pay between 12 and 44% of GROSS EARNINGS in a profitable year to the Government!

LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD, PLEASE!!!

So, what are my suggestions?

A. Simple, Fair, and Flat Tax for individuals, businesses, and everyone and everything in between. I think if you make annually inflation adjusted exemption provisions for the first $22K individually, $38K jointly, $6K per child, and $40K for business plus $6K per employee, then a 13% flat across the board on first moneys and profits tax should suffice to amply maintain the Federal treasury. Double tax only counts in certain specific cases, but honestly the concept of a "double tax" is in itself a product of the Labyrinthine tax laws themselves. Simple, plain, and honest: You earn money, invest it and make more... you are taxed on the money you earn. So called "death" tax is a myth, and any exemption should be put onto a matrix which allows for inflation and number of legatees, but otherwise massive fortunes do need to have the same 13% (a lowering of current complex statues) flat tax after expemptions upon transfer of estate.

B. All regulation needs to be put into Plain English. There needs to be a rule book for all people that everyone who speaks a 7th grade level of English can understand, but moreover, each field of employ and oversight needs a smaller and comprehensive annual rule book for the relevant profession(s). If you are a Stock Broker, for instance, the SEC needs to publish a Plain English Guide to all relevant laws (including definitions of crime and punishment) which is the basis for testing and licensure. How do we expect companies to follow laws their people couldnt understand without a law degree? This will facilitate whistleblowing, self governance, and enforcement. (On that note free markets if given clear straight, and bright lines do have the ability to self govern.)

C. International Harmonization. Its well time to beat our swords into plowshares. NATO can also be an economic body which assists in (a la Bretton-Woods) harmonizing economic functions. Why limit it to NATO? Trade Areas can work, and do work. However, just as we need to (for lack of a better word) admit that NATO is also an economic force, we also need to create Fair Standards in order to proceed honestly with our Trading Partners-- applying that standard basket of goods (environment, civil rights, and labor standards) as a preset disposition for negotiations. If any free trading regions partners can all agree to certain basic workers rights, then there is no price advantage to using slave or child labor in order to queer the productivity quotients and balances. This esoteric set of ideas (which I have simply called Fair Standards) is the nutshell of why we have lost so many jobs over seas-- not just "tax advantages" as certain groups would have you believe.

D. Mortgage Relief. I will be writing a more defined explanation of this soon, but here it is in the nutshell version. There are many of the steps necessary to implement a comprehensive relief in place under the current "bailout" plans passed, but my addition would be EVERYONE NEEDS TO FEEL SOME OF THE PAIN. Borrowers should still be on the hook for the full amount of the mortgage when enjoying payment reduction, Lenders should be on the hook to not get their money back in time, and all the middlemen, servicing agencies, and investors need to accept such bi-lateral intervention (as negotiated in mathematical formulation by the FFT [Fannie-Freddy-Treasury] guidelines and agents) regardless of how much money they stand to lose-- BECAUSE THEY ARE JUST MIDDLEMEN! Investors, sorry, but tough turkeys, you put money on those bets, were told the money was at risk, otherwise the SEC and FBI can arrest the brokers for non-disclosure... that said I think most licensees put investment disclosures on their business cards (a financial industry joke). The Government should tread very lightly in using its power to "renegotiate" existing agreements, and that said it is the Lenders right to refuse a renegotiation and foreclose... otherwise we strip Rule of Law (and contracts).

E. Stimulus. See my article on what we can do with the money we save by ending the War. more... more....

Just my two cents.... you can pay me later.

Another Moment in Time

At the end of the film by John Cromwell, entitled Abe Lincoln in Illinois, Raymond Massey, whose portrayal of Lincoln is considered one of the most accurate by people who had actually seen the man himself, quotes the truism sought by the Asian Emperor to apply to all things at all occasions, and he somberly looks into the camera and says, "And this too shall pass."

That scene portrayed outside (a set of the) same Illinois State house that I watched (as did many other political junkies) President-elect begin his improbable campaign, resonates as a comparable historical moment in time. And much like that relatively less than recorded moment in time (meaning fewer digital devices, and fewer people, surely) my age and wisdom informs me that like all else, as remarkable as this evening and the symbology of what it signifies and represents to not just American people, or for that matter those American people who are descendant from the slaves who toiled to build our nascent nation, "this too shall pass."

Obama is just a man; he is a lawyer; he is a politician; he is a Democrat; and he has even admitted he's not perfect.

That said, I am either so absolutely revolted by the current administration's policies, lack of competency, and our failed economic Trickle Down Theories, or I am actually still young enough of a man to permit myself to believe that the American people may have selected enough of a scholar, diplomat, and leader that they are willing to actually work very hard for in order to pull our collective American assess out from the fire without landing into the frying pan to say, "but its nice to have seen and been with."

(I know its poor form to end on a preposition, but I actually enjoy imagining my English teachers spinning in their beds, graves, or crypts from which they roust in order to suckle the blood from English students-- that said I will be offering some scathing commentary on our Economic mess in the near future.)

The King is Dead, God Save the King!

(P.S. I tried finding the exact scene from the movie, but alas, only found a 1940's Hollywood Martial Arts display)

Playing the "Hail Mary," for the Halftime Scoreboard

John McCain has stepped up some very negative imagery. No, not his stumbles, goofs, and foot-in-mouth whereby he shoots himself in the foot to barely escape suicide.... He is on the offense throwing some long bombs to the end zone, even though his team is down by just two touchdowns and its only a minute before half time.

The crowd likes the near misses, the forty yard sprint dashes, the stunt plays... but why open this up now?

Dont the Pubs usually keep their powder dry until the last quarter?

My theories:

(1) McCain is officially desperate. The Obama obsession in the MSM is like a shiny object flying in the sky. Even though its scary, they aren't sure what the UFO is, it is fascinating. Never mind that something like 70% of the coverage (of which he probably gets only 10 ~ 20% more coverage than McCain, and that McCain's coverage is about half positive/half negative) can be interpreted as neutral or even negative... kinda like, "will the aliens eat us when they land?" Or as McCain recently goofed his attempt to describe the example of loaded or begging question, 'when did you stop beating your wife?' In Obama's case there is a litany of viral and implied begging questions such as "why is he not a Muslim?" (For point of reference, not one word in the MSM about McCains free pass on his declaration on being a "Baptist.")

(2) McCain finally hired someone who gets the power of the new media, albeit a rather sinister disciple of Rove, or some other Sith Lord. By spending a million dollars on the production and airing of a local/regional yet ludicrous advertisement (not to be confused with a lude interlude by Ludacris on Obama's behalf), and then having the MSM pick up the loaded question, for instance "why isn't Obama like Brittany and Paris?" The ad dollar is stretched out very well.

As you can tell my cynicism and pure observation (intention is as intention does) informs me that it is more of the latter that has the QB for McCain's team airing out long bombs to the endzone in hopes of tiring out the backfield defense. But there are some problems with this strategy as well.

(a) McCain prima facae does indeed look desperate. As much as he has temporarily short circuited the dialogue betwixt the factions by begging the question, his questions are clearly inherent fallacies: Obama rejects my superficial Gas Tax Holiday, Tax Prices are rising, therefore Obama is responsible for gas prices; Obama is a celebrity, many celebrities today are vacant mental space, therefore there is something unsubstantial about Obama; and now we have Obama speaks with inspirational rhetoric, the bible is filled with inspirational rhetoric, therefore Obama thinks he is a biblical figure. These are all undistributed middle fallacies, with a touch of the ole straw man for good luck.

As you can see, McCain is fond of this illogic, and even made a DOUBLE UNDISTRIBUTED MIDDLE FALLACY; A. (Right wing) elite professors inhabit Hyde Park. B. Obama lives in Hyde Park. C. Obama is a Liberal Senator. Therefore, these (A) Elite are (C) Liberals, and (B) Obama is (A) Elite. Obama may be a Liberal who lives amongst Elitists, but that does not prove him an Elite. Also, Just because these (Right Wing) Elitists live in the same neighborhood as a Liberal Senator does not make them "liberal."

From a strictly logical point of view it seems McCain has conceded the high ground to Obama in terms of Logic.

(b) America loves violence and aggression. Problem is that you better believe it would be very very very easy to make a goofy old man highlight reel of McCain (and its pretty much been out there since March). The difference is that most of that anti-McCain stuff has been through surrogates. What is shocking that McCain would go so schoolyard dirty so very early. It can very easily come back to haunt him with an equal and parallel violence, only closer to election day.

(c) An expansion of that last point, if the debates were going to be a tough slog for McCain before, he now will have to stand there, grimmace, and repeat the lines from the commercials which are (i) illogical, (ii) lame, and (iii) will have been thoroughly hashed out by the time of the actual debate.

I believe the Pubs have fumbled in the greater context.

They have surrendered the high ground, and now accuse Obama of playing the race card to drag him down.

They have lost the battle of logic and persuasion by logical means, so they are now at name calling and spreading rumors.

McCain will have to have a stellar 97 days of quick wit, full thought, and reasonable temperament-- none of which he is particularly known for-- in order to regain these losses.

Dont forget that for every Hail Mary play that the DB's and Safeties have to run, so do your receivers, backs and line men.

Maybe this is McCain's last stand? If so expect murkier and uglier depictions of the straw man McCain thinks he is running against for POTUS.

BETTING LINE: Watch for Team Obama's rope-a-dope by the second debate where these chickens come home to roost.

3 Scenarios

Interesting stuff from 538 showing that there are only eleven realistic battlegrounds based on the polling data (flawed, subjective, and not a real final predictor of anything more than the current psyche of America). It states that the eleven states are technically McCain's to lose, but these states are definitely buckling under the momentum from the Obama-DNC machine v.2008.

I assume first, Obama wins these eleven plus those leaning, trending, or already in his court; then I look only at the historical election trends; and finally the eleven plus those already in McCains court.


407 – 131 Obama: Democrats Best Case;




289 - 249 Obama: Trend Predictor using this data, and giving FL to McCain (which seems could trend either way);




286 - 252 McCain: Republicans Best Case;




Conclusion:

If case #2 is the average of what can be more or less expected in november then Republicans have a natural 15% deficit to overcome. That said in terms of the popular vote, McCain would need to be polling to win by no less than 3% in order to feel safe... or safer.

Its a tall task as that would mean he has to make up a 7-point gap just to appear competitive... let alone be much for anything approaching inevitable.

At this time, it is clearly Obama's to lose... a truly ugly situation for the future of the republicans.

Election 2008 Metric: 5'9" -v- 6'1.5"

I am the same height as Obama, and don’t consider myself a height-ist, as my 5’1” mother would call it, but I know it can at times be advantageous.

Only two 20th century Presidents have been 5’ 9” or less: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heights_of_United_States_presidential_candidates

It’s not that McCain (5'9") can not win because of his height, rather that the height factor will work against him as it relates to perceptions of strength and power when compared side by side with Obama (6'1.5").

Another reason that Obama should accept the invitation to Town Hall Meetings (with the proviso that its not a fixed crowd; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/12/mccain-stacks-fox-news-to_n_106881.html) aside from the probability of being able to perform equally or better than McCain, would be to allow the inherent tendency for people to interpret height as power to be demonstrated.

More States In Play Than The Media Would Have You Think

We can see (http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do) from fundraising activities the “voting with the pocketbook,” when juxtaposed with current polling data that a clear, if not much more chaotic, picture of the oncoming battles comes into view.


I. Fundraising Leader Board (Notables only—not all states listed):

07Q2;

Obama – KY, TN, VA, MO, ND, MT, and CO
McCain – NH
Clinton – WV, OH, IN, OK


07Q3;

Obama – KY, IN, WI, NH, ND, SD, NE
McCain – MN, MI, OK
Clinton – FL, NC, VA, WV, IA, MO, AR, LA, TX and CO


07Q4;

Obama – WI, IA, and MN
McCain – Only LA, and AZ (notable in its own right)
Clinton – GA, VA, WV, IN, MO, AR, and CO


08Q1 (All Listed);

McCain – FL, MI, MS, LA, MO, and AZ
Romney – UT
Clinton – AL, AR, OK, and NE

Obama – ALL OTHERS


II. The Money Map:

Number of DEM STATES; 40
Number of REP STATES; 10


III. NEW Regional Winners (redefinition of the regions by money-winner);

DEMOCRATS

Pacific (AK, HI, WA, OR, CA) = Obama
Select South (GA, NC, VA, KY) = Obama
Great Lakes (PA, OH, IN, IL, WI, and MN) = Obama
Great Plains (MO, IA, KS, NE, and ND) = Obama
Liberal Mountain West (CO and MT) = Obama

Gulf (TX, OK, AR, LA, AL, FL) = Clinton
Clinton Country (WV, MD, DC, NJ, RI, and NY) = Clinton

Delaware = Biden

New Mexico = Richardson


REPUBLICANS

Romney Country (UT, NV, ID, WY) = Romney

McCain Country (AZ, MS, and SC) = McCain

South Dakota = Giuliani

Tennessee = Thompson

Michigan = Romney



IV. If we now default all Republican Winners to McCain, and Democratic Winners to Obama, and then compare with (http://www.electoral-vote.com/) today’s polling data (deducting opposite, close, and statistical dead heats) we have the following potential Toss-Up States:

AK, NV, SC, TX, OK, AR, LA, AL, FL, WV, GA, NC, KY, IN, KS, NE, ND, MT, and what looks to be the belle of the ball MI.


V. By Party the following Contested States where Money Winners through 08Q1, but are dead heat or losing the polls;

DEM: AK, TX, OK, AR, LA, AL, FL, WV, GA, NC, KY, IN, KS, NE, ND, and MT

REP: MI and SC


VI. Starting first with Money Leader board, then overturning by Poll results we have the following Electoral College Estimate:

Obama: 317
McCain: 221


VII. Defining the Battles by Region:

Pacific: Obama may be able to make AK competitive, as part of a Grand Pacifica strategy, but his time would be better spent sucking already Dem-leaning NV into a Continental Pacific Time Zone sweep.

Romney Country: McCain can’t afford to take for granted NV, or AZ, for that mater, being surrounded by Obama states to the West and Southeast.

McCain Country: He has a battle in South Carolina and the South in general.

Gulf: As Obama begins to actually campaign there, watch the battle in FL drain the McCain coffers… he can’t afford to lose FL—a big market with lots of media expenses.

Clinton Country: Obama will let WV go in exchange for VA and SC, but if he can create an effective Appalachian strategy he may be able to convince WV to swing with his version of Hillary’s programs and even put up a fight in KY.

Select South: Expect this to be the next place where McCain, if he expects to be competitive, has to fight a real ground battle with real dollars. Obama has a shot at all but KY, even though he has been in the Money over and over again there, and McCain needs to run a clean sweep for any hope at a Republican victory.

Great Lakes: McCain really hopes to hurt Obama here (his home court) especially if we include MI. IN will be competitive, and the RNC hopes to put MN in play with convention location.

Great Plains: First Major Battle Ground Zone. MO, IA, KS, NE, SD and ND could break either way as individual states with specific needs.

Mountain West (including Romney Country): Second Major Battle Ground Zone. CO, NM, MT and NV in the one corner and UT, WY, and ID in the other (and AZ in McCain’s column barring total meltdown).


VIII. The Emerging War

McCain’s only real Attack:

(A) Clean sweep of the (old definition) “Mason Dixon Line” South, including VA, FL, and SC
(B) Full attack of the (old definition) “Rust Belt” to win PA, OH, and/or MI
(C) Defend (old definition) “Marlboro Country” (MT, NV, NM, and CO)


Obama’s Defense:

(A) Expand the Liberal Mountain West to include NV, MT, and maintain the momentum for pickups in NM and CO

-and-

(B) Take at least one Southern state such as FL, GA, SC, NC, or VA
(C) Or win 50% or better of the Great Plains (IA, MO, SD for instance)

-and-

(D) Hold the Great Lakes and North East (with or without IN)


IX. Battleground States to Watch

FL, MI, VA, PA, OH, NV, IA, SC, NC, IN, MT, CO, NM, MO, SD, NH, GA and I would also argue that LA may come into play sooner or later.



X. CONCLUSION:

Barring a major lapse in judgment from his opponent, McCain has to draw battle lines upon the old ways and methods to have any real chance of winning an Electoral College Majority. He is outgunned in fundraising, and probably outclassed in Campaign Management, Ground Game Organization, and Message. Therefore, expect to hear a lot of the old appeals to gun owners, anti-abortionists, and family values in order to attempt a last hurrah at seeing things in terms of South and North, Liberal Elite and Working Class, and don’t count out some of the ugly tongue-in-cheek de facto racial elements designed to distract to rear their heads once or twice before November.

Obama has to continue to use the new definitions of a borderless society (Internet), which does not confine or define its citizenry by gender, race, or class and run a positive and “hope-based” campaign. If he can stay on message without major missteps or miscalculations, then this is his War to lose.

Second Example (of American Logical Fallacy)

From:
http://redstate.com/blogs/thesophist/2008/jun/02/senator_obama_is_a_man_of_principle
(Fallacies in Parenthesis)

Senator Barack Obama, by withdrawing from Trinity United Church, has shown us all that he is a man of uncompromising principle.

Obama took care to praise Trinity's work to "help the hungry and homeless and people in need of medical care" and said he had "tremendous regard" for Moss.

"But it's clear that now that I am a candidate for president, every time something is said in the church by any one associated with Trinity, including guest pastors, the remarks will be imputed to me even if they totally conflict with my long held views, statements and principles," Obama said.

What character! What resolve! What manly courage to hew true to his principle in the face of difficulty. (Ad hominum AND Fake precision)

That principle, of course, is the principle of self-promotion. (Illicit Process)

Obama may profess any number of principles and values, but it is clear now to all Americans that his highest value is himself, and his firmest conviction is in self-promotion. There is no storm that Obama will not weather, no battle he will not fight, no challenger he will not stare down in order to be true to his principle of Obama Shall Prevail. (Non Causa Pro Causa)

Let us review.

This is the man's church for over twenty years.

The pastor that he renounced is the man he called his spiritual mentor, who married him and his wife, who baptized his children.

He is resigning the church, not because of fundamental schism with the theology of the church, but because of politics:

Well, you know, after the National Press Club episode, as I said, I had a long conversation with Michelle and also had a long conversation with Reverend Moss. We prayed on it and you know, my interest has never been to try to politicize this or put the church in a position where is subject to the same rigors and demands of a presidential campaign. My suspicion at that time, and Michelle, I think, shared this concern, was that it was going to be very difficult to continue our membership there so long as I was running for president.

Furthermore, Obama wants us to back off:

I don’t think anybody can suggest that I have really tried to make this work because I have cared about my relationship to the people of that church, who I care for very deeply.

O rly? Watch me. I suggest that you don't care about your relationship to the people of that church. I suggest that you would sell every single one of your fellow congregants down the river if that would get you one more vote. Oh wait! You just did that! (Appeal to Consequences)

I have a fractious relationship with my church, a fairly liberal congregation in the PCUSA. I won't resign it, though, and I haven't been there for TWENTY years. Because the Church is more than just what the pastor says. The church is a collection of people, men and women who I'm getting to know better every week, who I've gotten to know. We have a relationship together based on our common faith -- even if we should have theological differences from time to time.

The church, Senator Obama, is not a social club. If you are really a Christian, then the church is an incredibly important spiritual community. It isn't easy to find one, but once you do, it had better be something damn important to make you leave it. (No True Scotsman)

The ONLY valid reason to leave a church is when you feel that your faith demands it of you. When the teachings of the church, when the beliefs of the community of believers, are so out of whack with what you believe religiously, spiritually, that the church endangers your relationship with God and imperils your immortal soul. (No True Scotsman)

You left your church of TWENTY YEARS over... politics? Over your campaign for President? Because the ministers said vile things you don't agree with? (Assuming that you're being honest about your shock, shock at finding anti-Americanism in your church, that is.) (Begging The Question)

This was your spiritual home, man. Your spiritual family. Your brothers and sisters in Christ. (Emotional Appeal)

Or... maybe not:

That’s not the role of church. My — again what I want to do in church is I want to be able to take Michelle and my girls, sit in a pew quietly, hopefully get some nice music, some good reflection, praise God, thank Him for all of the blessings He has given our family, put some money in the collection plate, maybe afterwards go out and grab some brunch, have my girls go to Sunday school. That’s what I am looking for.

Senator Obama is a man of principle.

He will not flinch to make the tough decisions to further his principle. If that means ditching your spiritual home of 20 years, in order to advance the principle of Obama Uber Alles, then he can, will, and in this case, has done it. (Argumentum ad Nazium)

My question is... if he can ditch his church, his spiritual home for twenty years, filled with friends and coreligionists with whom he had prayed and worshipped over two decades, and he can do that over poll numbers... what will he NOT ditch for politics? (Question-Begging Analogy)

What will he not abandon to uphold his principle of self-promotion and self-glorification? (Anecdotal Fallacy)

Senator Obama is a man of principle.

-TS

First Example (of American Logical Fallacy)

From: http://redstate.com/blogs/ericka_andersen/2008/may/29/sen_obama_dont_go_if_you_are_not_coming_home_with_the_truth
(Fallacies in parenthesis)

I’m not sure why it took this long for someone to make a big deal of the fact that Barack Obama has only visited Iraq one time over two years ago. (straw man argument) It’s no surprise he has chosen not to meet with Gen. Petraeus, visit our troops or get a personal assessment of the situation on the ground overseas. (Style over substance fallacy) He knows, from seeing other anti-war politicians like Dick Durbin and Hillary Clinton – that it is impossible to deny the progress and positive change when you are faced with it head on. Those two, among others, admitted the truth – that we have done well. (Proof by assertion)

To admit such liberal blasephamy would hamper his purist no-Iraq war image. (Tu quoque ) Perhaps after he’s snagged the nomination for real, it’s a safer bet. But even then, he will look a distant second to John McCain’s seasoned war experience, close relationship with Petraeus and heroic reputation as a war hero. (Appeal to flattery)
What changed America? 9/11. And who does America want in charge when 9/11 strikes again? There is no greater threat to our society. It’s most important right now to have a commander in chief who understands that. (argumentum in terrorem) Barack Obama does not. He cannot. Literally, he cannot. (ad hominum) And he knows that he can’t have any authority on the situation so he caved to McCain’s request to join him in a trip to Iraq. (Wishful thinking ) Well, half caved. There’s no way he’d hop a plane with the one who could pull the presidency from his grasp in a few short months.

He’s going alone. For what purpose? (Subject/Motive Shift) He’s going to “talk to the troops and commanders” but what if they tell him what he doesn’t want to hear? What if they tell him the opposite of his message? A man whose never served in the military and wants to COMMAND our troops in battle having only once stepped foot on their fields? It’s shocking that this could be our reality. (Ipsedixitism)

Do you think he plans on reporting the good news he hears? (Special pleading) Hell no. But I guarantee you now, he WILL hear good news. He will hear that violence is down, that deaths are down, that the democratically elected Iraqi government is finally taking control of themselves, that al-Qaeda exists now in record lows. Do you know why? Because we were there. (No true Scotsman) But Obama’s gone too far to come back now. He can’t backtrack when half of the country is getting off on the delusion he’s created by way of heartsoaring speeches and words of bipartisan rhetoric. He can’t take the dream away now, can he? (petitio principii) Well, he could. But he won’t.

Sen. Obama, don’t go to Iraq if you are not coming back with the truth. Don’t do that to our troops. Don’t do that to the Iraqis. Don’t do that to us. It’s never too late to start doing the right thing. (Hasty generalization) And usually that begins with the truth.

One Man's (Humble) Opinion: Regarding Who Obama Picks for VP

I am not a bettor. I enjoy watching sports when I haven’t made a bet, and in the rare instances I have bet (or “punted” as the British and Aussies would say) on sports, I tend to enjoy the game so much less.

Nothing could be higher stakes right now than our Government here in the US. Therefore, I will not hold back, nor will I bet; I feel it important to make my (one man’s) perceptions known, simply as a matter of record—if not simply for my own piece of mind.

First my political affiliation: I am a social Moderate, and a Fiscal Conservative. I actually registered Republican to vote for Paul, and have been sorely disappointed by some of Paul’s inability to follow through and capitalize on the real grass roots energy behind a true conservative campaign, which would reduce the role of government in the economy and people’s liberties. I consider myself a quasi-Green-Socialist-Libertarian-Progressive, but I think like many thinking adults that I am not easily defined by either of only two parties.

I endorsed Obama in March, when the Clintons clearly were using race as a tactic to divide the electorate, and Paul was by then a non-factor. I would have withheld some judgment would McCain version 1999 have been in the race with non-Bushee advisors. But ‘tis not so, and that horse long left the barn.

That out of the way, I am determined that Obama be free from the Politics of the Past, and his administration be given every chance to recreate the possibilities of American Civil Society, Citizenship, and Liberty… even if I may not totally agree with him on tax policies among several other potential items.

Vice Presidential selection will say a lot about whom Obama is, or more accurately those he already surrounds himself with and whom they would deign to find the most politically economical choice.

I believe this means he cannot pick Hillary Clinton, and should avoid anyone from the Clinton administrations. The Clinton’s and their ilk have proven so divisive that they are essentially a third rail for Obama personally and politically.

In my opinion, no Senators should be up for the Veep job with another Senator. Aside from already losing last cycle as the VP, that would preclude Edwards.

Although tempting, recent converts to Dem ideology should also be ruled out. So, double-plus un-good for Webb, and all his baggage .

I like the thought of a military Dem, but could only find a list of four reasonable candidates. Maybe because I do not know who is who in the Military, but some non-Clintonian Dem with tons of Executive Military experience would seem to be a very good choice. I identified the following Clintonian Military Candidates;

Barry McCaffrey
Wesley Clark
Louis Caldera

And the semi-non-Clintonian (sort of) candidate is Anthony Zinni . However, I feel his political chops are probably not quite ready for prime time, and he is my choice for Secretary of Defense.

That leaves Governors. I think only Governors on their last Term should be considered, with solid Democratic replacements, and some political advantage to gain. Some small state governors are also off my list, and also a couple of the older less charismatic ones don’t show up here either. That leaves:

(Female Governors)
Jennifer Granholm
Janet Napolitano
Kathleen Sebelius

(Male Governors)
Bill Richardson
Mike Easley
Ed Rendell
Phil Bredesen
Tim Kaine


A good list to choose from, but Rendell and Easley are Clintonians—throw the babies out with the bathwater. I like Granholm, but she was born in Canada.

THE LIST:

1*. Bill Richardson. Absolutely the most experienced of all the choices, and would only be trumped in that category by Al Gore himself. Would help to shore up the Catholic Vote; Consolidatse the West, but has the same issue as Napolitano (NM is already leaning towards Obama, and a Western governor may only serve to solidify the votes in WA, OR, CA, NM, and CO)— no real pick ups except maybe NV and MT; Possibly he could be the Latino Galvinzator, so to coin a phrase, to help win FL and dare I suggest TX? Negatives: Like Al Gore he is technically (Clinton) Old Guard; He also has made enemies of the Clintonians, and the idea of not picking a Clintonian is to also not pick someone potentially offensive to that Clinton Old Guard; and finally, although I truly think he would be quite an excellent choice (why I listed him as number one with an asterisk), he does not assuage the de facto racists . But the question is do we need to try to assuage them ? My pick for Secretary of State.

2. Kathleen Sebelius. Fits the profile: Non-Clintonian that has not offended the Old guard; (White) Female who can reassert some of the gains Hillary made for shattering the glass ceiling (and possibly heal some of the rifts between Clinton and Obama supporters); A unifying force in a Red State with a good and well documented bi-partisan track record; and can help to shore up the Catholic Vote while solidifying the Mid-West (IA, KS, maybe MO, others [IN, MI, WI]) states. Like most governors who are not Bill Richardson, we have the downside of no real International Experience. My choice for VP.

3. Tim Kaine. Probably this is one of the safest possible choices, as he has extensive Executive experience. He would not lose votes, may help shore up Catholics, some Southerners, and to a lesser extent that “white male” voting block. Most clearly one could expect he would shore up VA… maybe SC and IN. International Experience is again the downside. Anyone for Webb should rethink and consider Kaine instead, unless they like the military credentials then go back to Zinni—just not Webb !

Honorable Mention

4. Janet Napolitano. Excellent and as experienced as she may be, she is not as charismatic in my humble opinion as Sebelius or Richardson, who cover the blocks (Female or West) better. They are Catholics, and she is a Methodist… not that it matters all that much, but the North East Catholic block seemed to be elusive to Obama in the Primaries. Like Richardson, if he weren’t to have traction with Latinos, she doesn’t represent enough of a pick up, because states she might assist in like CA, NM, and CO are already leaning or in the Dem camp… so AZ (maybe… remember McCain is from AZ) becomes the only (potential) pickup, unless she can help swing NV and MT. She is my pick for Sect of Interior.

5. Phil Bredesen. Another “safe” Southern-White-Male pick. He is not as Experienced as Kaine, he’s not Catholic, and we already had a VP from TN (think vague Clintonian afterglow). This choice may only help to offset some potential Southern prejudice, maybe assisting in picking up TN, MO, SC and maybe some Appalachian bump for OH and PA.

Obama's Cabinet Suggestions

Obama's Cabinet (First Term [IMHO])

VP: Kathleen Sebelius

Secretary of State: Bill Richardson

Secretary of Treasury: Edmund Phelps

Secretary of Defense: Anthony Zinni

Secretary of Peace (new): Dennis Kucinich

Attorney General: Jerry Brown

Secretary of Interior: Janet Napolitano

Secretary of Agriculture: Tom Harkin

Secretary of Commerce: Mark Warner

Secretary of Labor: John Edwards

Secretary of Health: Howard Dean

Secretary of Housing: David Gottfried

Secretary of Transportation: Gary Locke

Secretary of Energy: Wesley Clark

Secretary of Education: Chris Dodd

Secretary of Veteran Affairs: Max Cleland

Secretary of Homeland Security: Joe Biden

EPA Administrator: James Gustave Speth

World Bank President: Jeffrey Sachs

UN Ambassador: Jody Williams