Today's WTF

From The Agonist:

SUMMARY: for most of the past week it looked like the White House might be winning its gamble that public pressure on House Republicans was paying off, in terms of apparent voter outrage about Medicare and Social Security cuts in the Ryan Budget. But a Gallup Poll released this morning shows the public favors the Republican's over the Dem's approach to the budget by 48% to just 36%.

Weak leadership on the Dem side plus a strong and consistent message from the Repubs, and we get - what?  What do we get?



Same ol', same ol'.  Repubs run around saying all manner of scary things about what's bound to happen if we vote for Dems, or if we don't go along with whatever nutty idea they've come up with lately - and somehow it seems like we always just go along.  But in 2006 we kinda found our balls and voted for a big bunch of Dems even tho' Darth Cheney warned us that the terrorists would attack us if we did that.  We did it anyway and  the terrorists didn't attack.  Then they told us voting for Obama would encourage our enemies, and our taxes would go up, and the economy would fall off a cliff, and, and, and.  Did any of that happen?  No. Why?  Because they're lying.  Can you point to anything these sacks of shit have predicted in the last 10 years that actually panned out?  Can you point to anything they made a big deal out of in that same time period that turned out to be A TOTAL FUCKING LIE!?!

But here's the real point, made pretty well by a commenter on The Agonist's post:

At least the supporters of Austerian economics have the courage of their convictions. If you don't know which of two paths is the better one, but the guide to the path on the left is a timid uncertain coward who won't even go with you, most people will follow the guide for the path on the right. Unfortunately he will rob, rape and kill you at the first opportunity. But sometimes that seems like a kinder fate that the death by 1 million disappointments and betrayals that Obama Reid and Pelosi have in store for us.

Sweet screamin' Jesus, Democrats.  Ya gotta get up on your hind legs once in a while.

Keynes vs Hayek II

Not to be too wishy-washy, but I think we need to be shooting for something more or less in the middle here.

This fight between Keynes and Hayek sounds like it's just more of the same old crap where we're being told that we can only choose between one extreme or the other. I reject the notion that the world is strictly binary.



Here's my basic position:
I'm a Capitalist because God's a Capitalist, but I believe in Appropriate Regulation because that's what God believes in.

By way of example (as a kinda of simplistic microcosm), my body requires a certain Income - I have to eat. And I have to eat enough to create a surplus (profit) so that I have the energy necessary to go out and find my next meal.

But, in order to stay healthy, my body functions have to be in balance, so God gave me a hypothalamus to regulate my body temperature, and a pancreas to regulate my blood sugar, etc.

As with everything I can think of, it's a matter of avoiding the logical extremes.

There's A Difference

Violent spring weather rolled thru parts of the American South a couple of weeks ago killing at least 16.  It happened again yesterday, when a bunch of tornadoes stomped the crap out of some places across at least five states.  The number of dead this time is reported at 270, and the people who are supposed to know about such things expect it to go up from there.  There's also of course billions of dollars in property damage and lost productivity at a time we can least afford to have more people on the sidelines.

All of that seems pretty normal somehow - aside from the feeling that we shouldn't be getting all this kinda weather so early in the year.  (I'll forego the usual snark about Climate Change denial)

What doesn't feel quite normal right now is that I'm not hearing much about, "Those dumbass rednecks are prob'ly all sittin' around waitin' for a gubmint handout."
--or--
"Maybe they should call their buddies over at The Council of Concerned Citizens, or the local Chamber of Commerce if they need help."
--or--
"They shouldn't be livin' where there's bound to be tornadoes anyway".

Something else we're not hearing is a bunch of horseshit about Milton Friedman, or a Market-Based Recovery approach, 'cuz hey - it worked so well for Nawlins, it seems like we should be cloning it for just this occasion.

While we're at it, maybe somebody could ask Glenn Beck about those FEMA Relocation Camps that had him spooked not too long ago.

So no, we're not hearing any of that crap this time.  What we've heard is a president who interrupted his own announcement of a major re-ordering of his National Security team to tell people to hang on, help is on the way.

"We can't control when or where a terrible storm may strike, but we can control how we respond to it and I want every American who has been effected by this disaster to know that the federal government will do everything we can to help you recover and we will stand with you as you rebuild," Mr Obama stated at the White House.

Next time some bozo starts harpin' about how "all them politicians're alike anyways"; first you'll have to resist the overwhelming urge to throw dense heavy objects at his head, but then just try to remember what we talked about today.

Yeah - there's a difference.

Today's Keith

Know Your Market Niche

Up On The Roof

The Nylons

Birth Certificate Reax

James Fallows almost gets it.

Here we have a wonderful real-world test: if "actual knowledge" mattered, the number of people who thought Obama was foreign-born would approach zero by next week -- with exceptions for illiterates, the mentally disabled, paranoid schizophrenics, etc. My guess is that the figures will barely change.

But wait just a dang minute - did he just say the Repub Base is a bunch of mentally challenged, illiterate paranoid schizoids?  I think he did.  Wow.

The Long Form Birth Certificate

And there it is.  So we move on to the next questions:

• Why did they release the thing now?
• Are they trying to hide something else?
• Will they challenge Trump to reveal what's under that comb-over?

The only thing I can think of right now is that Obama & Company see a chance to split the opposition in a big way.  ie: peel off a big chunk of the Repub base.  They're betting that a bunch of the wingnuts will reject the evidence (and just get nuttier) and that the Repub leadership will be faced with having to choose between two or more equally bad alternatives.  

If they back away from that part of their base in any substantial way, they'll lose the Ground Support that gets their people out to vote.  But if they don't figure out how to make it look like they're pushing back towards the center, they'll lose the Moderates and Independents.  Either way, they stand to lose the 2012 elections - HUGELY.

I wonder also about where the Repubs will put all the unidentifiable money they get to spend.  I'm almost willing to bet that they'll put the emphasis on State and Local races, kinda ceding the Federal level to the Dems, with the strategy of pitting "the plucky local patriot against Big Bad Centralized Power".

As always, we'll have to wait and see, but this makes me think something important is happening.

Follow The Money

It never fails.  I don't know why we have to re-learn this particular lesson every fuckin' time.

Here's the short version:  There are hucksters here.

Whenever you start throwing large piles of dollars around, you can expect large numbers of people to show up who have recently (and suddenly) discovered they have a great passion for doing whatever it is you're spending all that cash trying to do.

Sometimes, those hucksters are perfectly well-meaning solid citizens who just kinda get caught up in the frenzy, but in the end, it's always mostly the same old story of greed, ambition and groupthink.

Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic:

Earlier this year, a reporter at a small community newspaper got the answer to a question she'd been asking for months: "Are there really 33 terrorist organizations in St. Paul, Minnesota?" That's what her county sheriff claimed in the budget reports he submitted to his superiors. According to her investigation, however, his anti-terrorism unit had been squandering taxpayer money for months on end, and getting away with it by pretending to be guardians of homeland security.

Is this man villainized in the press for his behavior? The subject of a federal inquiry by hard charging investigators? Nope. In the War on Terrorism, wasting funds in the name of security is so commonplace that the allegation isn't even surprising.

Subversive

Once upon a time, this music was considered dangerous and disruptive. Now it's just nostalgic and even a bit trite.