https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Category: Economy

I get the most amusing (or irritating) emails

I’ve managed to get on a couple of, um, conservative email lists, so it’s interesting to see what gets tossed over the transom. This one came Don Wildmon’s AFA: A…

I’ve managed to get on a couple of, um, conservative email lists, so it’s interesting to see what gets tossed over the transom. This one came Don Wildmon’s AFA:

A call to action from former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and U.S. Senator Jim DeMint to stop ACLU supported bill 

Democrats vote to discriminate against Christians and people of faith 

Oh, don’t be silly, guys. DeMint’s a jerk, but Gingrich is just playing political games here. Note, by the way, the clever “hot button” dropping of the ACLU’s name.

Dear Dave,

Nice to be addressed so familiarly. (Not limited to Right-wing political mailings, of course.)

President Obama’s stimulus bill discriminates against Christians and people of faith. The stimulus bans universities and colleges from using funds to renovate buildings where students engage in “religious worship.”

U.S. Senator Jim DeMint made the following statement after Democrats voted 43-54 against his amendment to strike from the economic stimulus bill language that discriminates against people of faith. Senator DeMint’s amendment would have eliminated a provision that bans any university or college receiving restoration funds, from allowing “sectarian instruction” or “religious worship” within the facility. This would in effect bar use of campus buildings for groups like Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Campus Crusade for Christ, Catholic Student Ministries, Hillel and other religious organizations.

Wow, that sounds pretty dire? Is it true? (No, it isn’t. See below.)

“This is a direct attack on students of faith, and I’m outraged Democrats are using an economic stimulus bill to promote discrimination,” said Sen. DeMint. “Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for siding with the ACLU over millions of students of faith. These students simply want equal access to public facilities, which is their constitutional right. This hostility toward religion must end. Those who voted for this discrimination are standing in the schoolhouse door to keep people of faith from entering any campus building renovated by this bill.

Next thing you know, it’s Scarlet Crosses on their school uniforms and everything! The horror! And … look, other gratuitous ACLU slam!

“This is now an ACLU stimulus designed to trigger lawsuits designed to intimidate religious organizations across the nation. This language is so vague, it’s not clear if students can even pray in a dorm room renovated with this funding since that is a form of ‘religious worship.’ If this provision remains in the bill, it will have a chilling effect on students of faith in America” he continued.

No prayer in dorms! Eek! Next think you know, the ACLU (again!) will be installing CCTV in all dorm rooms to make sure that nobody’s praying in there! That’s just the sort of thing they’d do, those organized disregarders of human rights!

“Our culture cannot survive without faith and our nation cannot survive without freedom. This provision is an assault against both. It’s un-American and it’s unconstitutional. Intolerant and it’s intolerable.”

Note it’s only when their freedom ox is gored that this contingent cries about how it’s un-American and unconstitutional. The rest of the time they’re busy talking about “our Christian nation” and “people who nitpick over fringe interpretations of the Constitution.”

This funding restriction is unconstitutional. In the 2001 Good News Club v. Milford Central School Supreme Court decision, the court ruled that restricting religious speech within the context of public shared-use facilities (or schools) is unconstitutional.

Though the ACLU (since we’ve dragged them into this) filed an amicus brief in favor of the school, its concerns were not with the the presence of “religious speech within the context of public shared-use facilities (or schools)” — indeed, the brief notes that they’d favored not restricting such speech in the Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District case (1993) — but over issues as to when such speech arrangements become tantamount to the public facility actually endorsing such speech.

Pages 164-165 of the stimulus contain the following prohibitions on the use of $3.5 billion available for renovation of public or private college and university facilities.

(2) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. No funds awarded under this section may be used for – (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or construction of new facilities.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich urges Christian activists and other conservatives to e-mail and call their representative and senators demanding that the language discriminating against people of faith be removed.

Aha! We actually see the text involved here and … it doesn’t say anything like what it’s being accused of. Instead, it basically says you can’t spend Federal bail-out money to work on church schools, churches, or buildings for religious higher education — or on buildings which are largely used for religious missions. It also says you can’t build any new facilities with the money (religious or not).

Nothing about preventing Hillel from meeting in a classroom after hours, or the Campus Crusade for Christ gathering at the student coop conference room, or even the Christian Rainbow Coalition having a meeting in someone’s dorm room. Unless those rooms, or buildings, are purposed toward religious groups, worship, etc., in which case, yeah, I suspect the AFA would rather not pay federal tax dollars for roof repairs on the Wicca Wig-wam, or new air conditioning at the local madras.

[…] Christians have not expressed enough outrage focused on the concept that people of faith are being taken advantage of by the stimulus bill during a time of crisis. They are being stolen from them when they are down and out and looking in good faith to the government for help. Instead of the stimulus we need, the liberals are getting the pork that they want — for themselves, their families, and their friends. They are pickpockets and thieves preying on the down and out.

Right. The only people “down and out and looking in good faith to the government for help” are all good, Christian, “people of faith.” No liberals (who I guess are the opposite of “people of faith” according to the AFA) are suffering; they’re all “pickpockets and thieves.” Nice. 

Etc., etc., please write your senators and send us money. Of course.

Looking at the passage in broader context shows that it also prohibits spending money on college athletic facilities, auditoriums, and theaters (“modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public”). Clearly part of the Liberal War on Sports and Theater, too. And clearly that will have a chilling effect on colleges, such that students who toss around a football on the Quad will be at risk of expulsion lest the school lose all it’s federal moolah.

It’s not even like this is some unique formulation that was stuffed in here as a new, covert way to kick off the Obama-bin-Ladin War on Christians. It’s practically boilerplate text for federal spending bills.

Funds appropriated under a certain higher education grant program “may not be used…for a school or department of divinity or any religious worship or sectarian activity”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode20/usc_sec_20_00001068—e000-.html 

Funds appropriated under another program “may not be used…for a school or department of divinity or any religious worship or sectarian activity”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode20/usc_sec_20_00001103—e000-.html 

Limitation contained in program to help historically black institutions: “No grant may be made under this chapter for any educational program, activity, or service related to sectarian instruction or religious worship, or provided by a school or department of divinity.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode20/usc_sec_20_00001062—-000-.html 

Grants for work-study programs may “not involve the construction, operation, or maintenance of so much of any facility as is used or is to be used for sectarian instruction or as a place for religious worship”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00002753—-000-.html 

Money used under a specific community development program subject to limitation that “no participant will be employed on projects involving political parties, or the construction, operation, or maintenance of so much of any facility as is used or to be used for sectarian instruction or as a place for religious worship”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00009807—-000-.html 

Aid under program providing grants for volunteer service projects may not be used for ”projects involving the construction, operation, or maintenance of so much of any facility used or to be used for sectarian instruction or as a place for religious worship.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00005001—-000-.html 

No energy resource graduate fellowships “shall be awarded under this subchapter for study at a school or department of divinity.”
uscode/html/uscode30/usc_sec_30_00001325—-000-.html 

Religious organizations participating in the “Community Schools Youth Services and Supervision Grant Program Act of 1994″ “shall not provide any sectarian instruction or sectarian worship in connection with an activity funded under this subchapter.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00013791—-000-.html 

Funds used under grant program for tribally controlled schools “shall not be used in connection with religious worship or sectarian instruction.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode25/usc_sec_25_00001803—-000-.html 

Another construction program: “Participants shall not be employed under this chapter to carry out the construction, operation, or maintenance of any part of any facility that is used or to be used for sectarian instruction or as a place for religious worship (except with respect to the maintenance of a facility that is not primarily or inherently devoted to sectarian instruction or religious worship, in a case in which the organization operating the facility is part of a program or activity providing services to participants).”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/usc_sec_29_00002938—-000-.html 

And that’s because I don’t particularly feel that religious schools or religious groups and buildings within other schools need or should get my federal tax dollars. Heck, that sounds like a positively conservative statement, or at least old-school (so to speak) conservative.

What chaps my hide on this is that it’s not even trying to argue the economic merits of the stimulus. Instead, it’s just rampant fear-mongering and public-point-making, trying to make the Democrats and the president look like they’re about to pass laws tossing Christians to the lions next, when in reality it’s simply Just. Not. So. It’s either delusions from ignorant fear, or lying for political gain. I’ll let you decide.

Sandbagged

Um … the following would seem to indicate that something is seriously unstable and unsustainable in our economic system. The Treasury opened its window to help. They pumped a…

Um … the following would seem to indicate that something is seriously unstable and unsustainable in our economic system.

The Treasury opened its window to help. They pumped a hundred and five billion dollars into the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts, and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic and there. And that’s what actually happened.

If they had not done that their estimation was that by two o’clock that afternoon, five-and-a-half trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.”

It would have been the end of our political system and our economic systems as we know it.

That’s the chair of the Capital Markets Subcommittee, Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), talking to C-Span.

Which makes me think of a house on a hill, where the hillside is about to be washed away by and collapse under a storm today, saved only by the National Guard throwing a ton of sandbags on it. We’d generally speaking call the homeowner crazy if they kept living there, under the assumption that the National Guard will always be able to throw sufficient sandbags to save the day in future storms.

So … when are we going to stop being crazy?

(via BoingBoing)

Money well-thrown-away

These guys really don’t get it. They have no idea how close they are to mobs with torches and pitchforks storming their gates. Citigroup Inc., targeted by lawmakers for…

These guys really don’t get it. They have no idea how close they are to mobs with torches and pitchforks storming their gates.

Citigroup Inc., targeted by lawmakers for paying $400 million to put its name on the New York Mets’ new ballpark, and seven other banks that received government funds may face questioning by Congress for spending $845 million on stadium sponsorships.

Bank of America Corp., which like Citigroup received $45 billion in government funds, is paying $140 million to have its name on football’s Carolina Panthers stadium. JPMorgan Chase & Co., which received $25 billion from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, is spending $66 million for branding Chase Field in Phoenix, home to baseball’s Arizona Diamondbacks.

Ohio Democratic Representative Dennis Kucinich, who last week urged the Treasury department to cancel Citibank’s deal, called spending by banks for naming rights “frivolous” and said Feb. 3 that he plans to hold hearings. Companies that received TARP funds are under scrutiny as President Barack Obama and lawmakers respond to public outcry over executive bonuses and questionable expenditures.

I mean, yeah, from one perspective, just like the Vegas junkets and the lavish bonuses and the private aircraft, as a percent of the taxpayer money spent it’s trivial. From another perspective, it’s a public slap in the face to … well … the public. It’s like having your kid beg you for money for the bills this month, then discovering he spent a portion of it going out for a chi-chi dinner, or blew some of it at the track. And it raises the issue whether the other money — the vast bulk of it — that’s been given over is being similarly pissed away.

These are the sorts of companies that complain most bitterly when the government sticks their noses into their business. But, having come hat-in-hand to beg for bail-outs, it’s amazing that they are so tone deaf as to continue to pull these stunts. Even if they don’t mean it, a period of contrition and austerity would really be a good idea right now …

(via Les and The Consumerist)

Playing for points

The GOP Congresscritters have clearly decided that they are more interested in scoring points than in helping people. It’s not just a matter of fiddling while Rome burns –…

The GOP Congresscritters have clearly decided that they are more interested in scoring points than in helping people. It’s not just a matter of fiddling while Rome burns — it’s blocking the door to the hose so someone else doesn’t take credit for helping get the fire under control.

Fear not America. The Republican Party is focused on the real problem — money for honeybees. And just for the record, the “honeybee insurance” — which is actually livestock disaster insurance for all sorts of farmers (via Drum) — is 0.0001% of the proposed stimulus plan.

So let’s review. It’s not just that the GOP is focusing on a minuscule fraction of the stimulus bill. It’s not even that they’re misrepresenting what that minuscule fraction of spending would do. It’s that they’re doing all of this to hold up a massive stimulus bill aimed to help millions of unemployed and frightened people.

I know they’ve got the big head right now, but Fortune is fickle, and this nonsense could blowback on them rather quickly. People are hurting out there, and the GOP is doing absolutely nothing about it other than fighting for tax cuts for rich people.

 

Granted that the stimulus package is imperfect, and granted that there are broader policy debates that could take place over the “best” way to get the economy moving, the GOP (which has zero chance of getting a bill of its own passed — sorry folks, that’s what happens when you lose the presidency and both houses of Congress) has decided that it’s better that everyone loses rather than the Democrats “win.” Never mind what happens to people out there without a stimulus bill — they’ve made a calculated gamble that the voters will have forgotten all this in two years, and any points they score now (by keeping them away from the Dems) will count for more in the next election then than any folks crushed in the staggering economy.

It’s an ghastly zero-sum game. The GOP thinks the only way they win points is if they take them away from the Dems. The consequences today, this week, next month, next year — all of that is meaningless, so long as Rush doesn’t call them names and they can high-five each other in the cloakroom.

There’s a reason they lost power. The problem is, they seem eager to drag us after them.

More on the honeybee controversy. Disgusting.

Best and Brightest?

 Les passes on some of the pissing and moaning from executives about the Obama-proposed $500,000/yr cap on executive salaries for companies that accept TARP money. As news of the plan leaked…

 Les passes on some of the pissing and moaning from executives about the Obama-proposed $500,000/yr cap on executive salaries for companies that accept TARP money.

As news of the plan leaked last night, wealthy Wall Street went into panic mode, insisting that the caps would ruin the financial industry. It’s “a nightmare for any financial institution,” CNBC host Joe Kernen proclaimed this morning, while Fox Business host Alexis Glick said it was evidence of Obama being “a little anti-business.” Others insisted that the “draconian” caps would drive the “best and the brightest” away from Wall Street and that Obama’s anger over executive bonuses was misplaced:

“That is pretty draconian — $500,000 is not a lot of money, particularly if there is no bonus.” [James F. Reda, founder and managing director of James F. Reda & Associates]

“If I didn’t pay [bonuses], the people were going to go. … These people didn’t choose to cure cancer. These people didn’t choose to do public service work…These people chose to make money.” [Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric]

“The consequences of it are going to be a massive brain drain of senior talent from those companies that have taken TARP money to those companies that have not.” [Donald Straszheim, managing principal at Straszheim Global Advisor]

“Companies that need the most talented people to fix their problems won’t be able to pay them.” [Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer]

Since the yahoos in place are the ones who are getting these salaries and have driven companies to the point of needing TARP money, it doesn’t seem that they are either the “best and brightest” or the “most talented people to fix their problems.” 

And if that means a “brain drain,” not only are those the brains that need to be drained, but it sounds like a fabulous opportunity for some hungry up-and-comers to prove how they can turn major companies around, even on the starvation diet of $500K.

I mean, they can’t do worse than the Gang of Idiots already there, can they?

Now, if you really want to liven things up, then sweeten the pot — cap it at $500K for N years after receiving federal bail-out money — with some outrageous bonus to be paid at that time. If the company is still in business, that is. Of course, some Boards may cheap out and try to fire the bum before he can get his bonus, but if s/he’s actually keeping the company afloat and prosperous, then they’d be idiots to do so.

Meantime — welcome the six figure salary, guys. You’ll still be making thirty times what a minimum wage worker does. And just think of how much you’ll save on taxes!

Change

An editorial from The Nation, titled, “A Farewell to Republicans”: For twelve years the Republican Party has been in power. During ten of those years it controlled the executive and…

An editorial from The Nation, titled, “A Farewell to Republicans“:

For twelve years the Republican Party has been in power. During ten of those years it controlled the executive and legislative branches of the government. When, a few years hence, an attempt is made to minimize the disaster of this last quadrennium, and to point to a preceding eight year period of material development and growth, let it be noted that in a purely material sense the American people are much worse off today than they were twelve years ago. Far more than was gained has been swept away. Savings have been dissipated, lives have been blasted, families disintegrated. Misery and insecurity exist to a degree unprecedented in our national life. And spiritually the American people have been debauched by the materialism which made dollar-chasing the accepted way of life and accumulation of riches the goal of earthly existence. The record of Republicanism must be judged as a whole, although, in fairness, the consequences of the war and the major responsibility of the Democrats for putting the United States into it must not be forgotten. […]

Moreover, economic disaster has been only a part of this sterile decade’s legacy, the burdens of which will descend to unborn generations. Our worthiest traditions have been impaired; vital tenets of American life have been destroyed. What has become of that fundamental American axiom “salvation by work”? In all our previous history it has been taken for granted that ours was a land of opportunity, and that rewards bore some relation to initiative, effort, and ability. Granting the large mythical content of these beliefs, they were more nearly valid in America in the first century and a half of our national existence than anywhere else on earth. They are no longer true today. The promise of American life has been shattered — possibly beyond repair. [..]

Behind the Administration […] have been the real rulers of America […] It was a Grand Old Party — for them — while it lasted. Makers and beneficiaries of our politico-economic system, these are the men whose failure is now written large in the towering empty edifices that scrape the New York sky, in the hundreds of thousands of “For sale” and “To let” signs which adorn our cities, in the closed banks, in the foreclosed farms, in the whole picture of devastation which has come under their rule.

Have these captains and kings departed — not to return? The epoch of their wanton and repulsive leadership is ending. Their incompetence and their betrayal are manifest. But much of the evil they have done lives after them. The coming years will see the struggle to purge America, to reassert the promise of American life, to validate, in consonance with the changed times and conditions, the high aspirations of the founders of the nation. The new president has the opportunity to be the leader of this renaissance, but he will have to forge as his instrument a wholly different Democratic Party from that which so long has been indistinguishable from the Republican.

Of course, that was (with a couple of snips and just two minor edits) their editorial from 1933, just as FDR was being sworn into office.

(via Obsidian Wings) 

Incentives

People are, by definition, influenced to do something by incentives, and influenced against doing things by disincentives. As these NYT Op-Eds demonstrate, last year’s financial system series of collapses and…

People are, by definition, influenced to do something by incentives, and influenced against doing things by disincentives. As these NYT Op-Eds demonstrate, last year’s financial system series of collapses and crises came about basically because everyone was incented to take larger and larger risks and nobody was disincented … because the prospective disincenters (e.g., the credit rating agencies, the federal oversight organizations) were themselves disincented from doing anything about it. 

Everyone had everything to gain from shutting up and throwing another quarter into the slot machine (or not saying anything when everyone else did), and nothing to lose by letting it go on.

Until we all lost, of course.

The End of the Financial World as We Know It – NYTimes.com
How to Repair a Broken Financial World – NYTimes.com 

The most coherent description of how things went south I’ve seen, and the best suggestions for actually doing something about it (Rule #1 – When you are in a hole, stop digging). 

Required reading (not something I say lightly).

VP Debate

First, the semi-liveblogging Event/Moderator   Biden   Palin   Gwen Ifill intro. Strong and well-spoken. 5 minute segments, 90 seconds initial, then follow-ups. Questions by her.   Smiling pol.  …

First, the semi-liveblogging

Event/Moderator Biden Palin
Gwen Ifill intro. Strong and well-spoken. 5 minute segments, 90 seconds initial, then follow-ups. Questions by her. Smiling pol. Smiles. Blow kiss. “Can I call you Joe?” “Thank you.” mic carries.
Bail-out bill and Congressional mess. Worst or best of Washington . 1. Thanks. Pleasure to meet you, Governor. Ties back to this Administration, lack of Administration. Lots of looking at notes. Palin is looking down at her notes while Biden speaks. Gives Obama’s stance – what he called for. Voice sound hoarse. He was coughing after he came on. Middle Class! 2.  Thanks. privilege. Looking at the camera! Go to a kid’s soccer game – how are you feeling about the economy. Fear, I’ll betcha! Fear about losing investments. Biden is watching her. Government hasn’t been giving firm oversight. Looks nervous. John McCain has been all about warning bells and reform of financial markets for years. His bipartisan efforts to bring folks together this past week, even suspending his campaign!
Being VP? How reducing polarization? 1. Been doing that whole career – VAWA, more cops on street, genocide inBosnia . Have been able to reach across the aisle. Then returns to previous question. McCain “fundamentals are strong” and “made great economic progress” – then backed down within hours. Doesn’t make him bad, just out of touch. 2.  John in referring to fundamentals talking to/for the American work force. They’re spiffy! As a mayor and governor, record of reform, team of mavericks, putting partisan politics aside. Obama has only voted along party lines – 96% of votes. Tired of the old politics, with all due respect, respect your years, but people are craving something new and different. Maverick of the senate.
Subprime lending meltdown/ Who’s at fault? 2. 2 years ago Obama warned about subprime problem. McCain said at the same time he was surprised by it. McCain was saying that he was always for cutting regulations. McCain thought lettingWall St running wild was right – deregulate. Republican response. And wants to deregulate the health care industry like he did the financial industry. High prices of gas – anecdote about someone.

4. Charge not true. McCain voted the same way as Obama, didn’t raise it. Standard by governor, McCain voted 477 times to raise taxes. But she didn’t answer questions of deregulation and John McCain supporting it.

 1. Starting. Predator lenders deceiving, greedily. Corrupt Wall Street. We have that commitment to stop that. Still looking at camera. Blink. Blink. Blink. Joe Sixpack, Hockey Moms, resolving we’ll never be exploited again.  And we need to be responsible about not getting into debt, too.

3. Darn right we need tax relief. Obama and Biden are in favor of largest tax increases inUS history, siding on the people’s side, 94 times voting to increase or not support decreases. Government has to live with less. Increasing taxes for families making $42K.

5. I’m gonna talk straight to the American people. Reduced taxes every year as mayor, and reduced taxes as governor. McCain is known for pushing for stronger regulations. Biden smiling.
Taxes. Dems raising taxes on those over $250K. Class warfare? GOP taxing health benefits, taking it out on the poor? 1. It’s about fairness. The middle class is struggling under McCain’s tax proposals. Households get no break in taxes. Nobody under $250K will see taxes increase. And most under $150K will get a tax break. middle class is the economic engine. Now he looks at the camera. McCain wants to cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations, but nothing for middle class. He looks a bit pale. People will pay no more than.

3. Where to start. It’s not redistribution of wealth to not give Exxon a $4bn tax credit, that’s fairness. 95% of small business make < $250K – no increase in taxes. Giving, but also taking. McCain pays for his $5K by taxing as income the health care benefits. $5K plan will go straight to the insurance company, replacing a $12K plan for the 20mn who will be dropped from health care. Ultimate bridge tto nowhere.

 2. Redistribution of wealth principle. Obama’s plan to tax increase – forgetting the millions of small businesses that will be hit by those taxes. You said that paying higher taxes is patriotic – middle class disagrees, government is the problem, Joe Sixpack says. Increased tax formula and trillion dollars of spending. And McCain’s health care plan is detailed, and here are some talking poins. $5K tax credit, while Obama will mandate universal government run program. Evil Feds! Evil! Laugh. McCain suggestion is budget-neutral. Artificial lines between states, competing between states.
What promises – given the bailout plan – will yo not be able to keep. 1. May have to slow down commitment to double foreign assistance. And will nto go forward with McCain tax proposals and the existing ones ($130bn this year alone), and all the other bns of tax cuts. Will not hold up on incentives by new jobs with an energy policy, education, nor affordable health care. Stumbling in speech to cover all his points. Oh, yeah, $100bn tax dodge to move post office boxes offshore to avoid taxes, and *that’s* unpatriotic.

3. Obama voted for an energy bill that had support for alternative energy. He voted to eliminate tax breaks, while McCain did not. Why is McCain adding into his budget more tax cuts for ExxonMobils? Yeah, Palin supported a windfall profits tax. We want to do the same thing. McCain does not. he wants to give tax cuts on top of their profits. Hope she can convince McCain to do it.

 2. McCain doesn’t tell one thing to one group and another thing to another group.

Back to the energy plan. Obama voted in 05, that’s what gave those energy companies those tax breaks. And I had to take on those oil companies, no greed in my state! Corporate CEOs are not my favorite fans! The people come first! Value to the people ofAlaska ! No tax breaks to multinationals when it affects the people who live there. I had to undo what Obama did in my area of expertise, energy.

No, there’s nothing that I’ve promised I’d have to give back – because I haven’t had time to do more than to promise to be a paragon of virtue and a hard fighter. And McCain will keep all his promises, too. Yay!
Congress passed bankruptcy reform. McCain supported … 2. [Moderator: Biden voted for it, Obama against it.] Only 10% of people affected from Chapter 7 to 13 … we disagreed on it. But Obama pointed out 2 years ago that there was a subprime mortgage crisis, and warned treasury. McCain just last year said he was surprised by the crisis. What should we be doing about bankruptcy? The bankruptcy courts should be able to adjust the rates and principal owed. They don’t support that, nor does Bush, even though it would help people. 1. Yes, I would have supported it. But there have been such changes and revelations of corruption onWall St . McCain was calling for reform even back then! We have him to tank for warning people, and bringing in a bipartisan effort, putting the campaign aside, to fix the problem, the crisis, the toxic mess onMain St affectingWall St .

3. No, that’s not true. But … energy! I want to talk about energy policy plan! We have to consider how we let this nation become energy-independent. We have domestic supplies of energy, and east coast politicians keep patriotic Alaskans from tapping into those resources, helping those foreign countries that don’t like us to mock us! Evil! Energy independence! Energy plans are not just about tax breaks.
Energy issues. Climate change. What’s true and false? 2. Clearly manmade. Biggest difference between all of us. If you don’t understand the cause, you can’t come up with a solution. It’s man-made. That’s the cause. We have 3% of the reserves, we consume 25% of the oil. McCain has voted against alternative, clean energy sources. By investing in clean coal and safe nuclear we can build wind and solar and export that stuff – but we could export that technology toChina to help that pollution, and it would create jobs. McCain has voted 20 times against alternative energy sources. Drill we must, yeah, but 10 years for any of that oil to flow.

3. Clean coal. My record is supporting it for 20 years. I was talking about exporting that technology toChina . If the only answer is oil, how does that cap carbon emissions?

 1. As the natoin’s only arctic state,Alaska sees the impact moreso than any other state, we know it’s real. I won’t attribute the changes all to man, but part is cyclical climate changes, but there are real changes. Don’t want ot argue the causes. How do we “positively affect the impacts”? First governor to have a climate change impacts. McCain agrees with this. We have to be energy independent. We rely on other countries that pollute more than we do! Tap into alternatives, conserving petroleum products and hydrocarbons so we can babble babble babble.

2. Caps on carbon emissions, McCain supports. Chant is drill baby drill. People are hungry for those domestic sources. Even inAlaska we have millions of barrels of oil.

Clean, green natural gas. (!) Pipeline. Obama/Biden — offshore drilling is raping the continental shelf?! It’s safe to drill! McCain also voted for alternatives.

Nucular! Clean coal – you said no!

Yes, I support capping carbon emissions.
Support same-sex benefits to couples as in Alaska ? 1. Absolutely, positively. No distinction form a constitution and legal standpoint between same-sex and hetero couples. constitutional issue. It’s only fair. We do support that committed couples and same-sex marriage have same constitutional benefits for insurance, visitation, etc

2. We do not support gay *marriage*. That’s a decision for faiths. Take the governor at her word that there should be no civil rights distinction. If that’s the case, we have no disagreement.

 2. Not if it goes closer and closer to “marriage.” I would certainly be tolerant of people choosing their partners and relationships. I have diverse family and friends, and some dear friends don’t agree with me. but nobody would ever propose in our administration to prohibit visitations in hospitals. But I don’t support defining marriage etc etc etc. Being straight-up (ha!) with Americans.

4. Yes, I don’t support gay marriage.
Foreign policy. Sons in or on the way to Iraq . Clear plan to exit strategy. 2. I didn’t hear a plan. Obama has offered on. It’s what the PM ofIraq and Bush are negotiation. The only one left out is McCain. And Obama not funding? McCain voted the same way, when it had a time table in it, and he voted against funding for it. Barack and I agree that you need a time line to draw down troops, shift responsibility, spending tons of money. We will end this war. For McCain there is no end in sight.

4. John McCain voted against funding the troops – he voted against a bill I had put together that had NRAPs for protecting troops because it had a time line. McCain / Cheney, when I was saying that this war would be a mess, were saying that everything would be happy there, we’d have oil to pay for it, he’s been dead wrong, I love him, but he’s been dead wrong, and Obama has been right.

 1. Glad we have a good plan. Surge! Yay! Petreus! Yay! Mccain! Surge opposed surge! Opposed funding troops! Respected Biden when he called him out on it. Obama said he would not, and he turned around and voted against it. We have a plan for withdrawal. Not early! No, we have to win! But the surge thathas worked, we are at pre-syurge numbers, and we can put more troops inAfghanistan , and we have to grow our military, and fight Shia extremists, and we cant’s quit!

3. Um … your plan is a white flag of surrender. Our troops don’t need ot hear that! You opposed the surge, and won’t admit it worked. We’ll know when we’re finished whenIraq can do it themselves, and our commanders will tell us when. And Biden said you’d be willing to run on McCain’s ticket! You also said Obama was not ready to be C-in-C. Respect for your family having a son in the national guard. Any one who can cut off funding for troops, evil!
Iran andPakistan – nuclearIran or unstable Pakistan ? 1. Both dangerous. I;ve focused for a lon g time onPakistan because they have nuclear weapons. Iran would be dangerous, but not close to getting it. Both would be dangerous. John keeps saying the central front on terror is inIraq – but if another attack happens, it will come from alQuaeda inAfghanistan andPakistan . We need to support those governments. We should be building them schools, not madrassas. And we’ll get Osama. 2. Petreus said that the central front inIraq . Believe him. So does alQaeda. Nucular-armedIran is toooooo dangerous. Cannot allow. Israel in danger! Iran is mean! Can pronounce Akmandinijad. But not nucular. Obama will meet with preconditions. That’s not naïve, that’s dangerous! Those bad guys should not be met with without preconditions.
Baker, Kissinger, Powell, etc., have all advocated engagement with enemies. Are they wrong? 2. This is just not true. obama didn’t say he would. McCain is goofy saying Akmandinijad controls the security apparatus. It’s nifty that they want to bring our friend sna allies along, but they’ve been saying we should sit down and talk, and Mccain will go along with an agreement but won’t sit down and talk down and talk with our enemies. Even Bush is doing that! And Mccain said he wouldn’t even sit down with the government ofSpain ! 1. I had a great conversation with Kissinger recently. His passion for diplomacy. We’d do that. But with these dictators who hateAmerica and freedom and women’s rights and stuff. They cannot be met with as Obama said he would be willing to do, etc. etc. etc. But diplomacy is hard work, sanctions lined up, friends backing up.
Israel ? What has this administration done right or wrong? 2.  Nobody has been a better friend ofIsrael than Joe Biden (3rd person). Obama is the same. This administration has been an abject failure; Rice is trying to turn around a bad series of policy decisions by the Administration. Iran is on the march, including inLebanon andGaza . We will backIsrael in negotiating.

4. Past is prolog. How different will McCain policy will be different than Bush onIran , orIsrael , orAfghanistan , orPakistan . (Great lines!) And we know where that has taken us. We will make significant change so that we are the most respected nation in world.

 1. Two state solution ins the solution. Secty Rice is trying to forge that peace. That needs to be done. And that will be a top of the agenda item. We need to assureIsrael there will never be a second holocaust, despiteIran . We want a two state solution, and building an embassy inJerusalem . That commitment is there.

3. No, this Admin hasn’t been an abject failure. But glad Biden loves Israel.  Lookning backward and blame game, people will get tired of that.  Yeah, blunders in the past, but change means looking forward, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Government on the side o the people, no partisanship, McCain rah! Maverick! Biden loves him! Change is coming!
Interventionism. Nuclear weapons. When? 2. Afghanistan . Facts matter. Our commanding general there said today that the surge Will Not Work There. That’s not Biden. That’s the commander there. We need more troops, spending. We spend more money on combat iniraq in 3 weeks than the last 7 years inAfghanistan . Repeat. Arms control and weapons – nuclear weapons require an arms control regime. McCain voted against the test ban treaty. He’s opposed inspections in the treaty. Obama, first thing he did, raced across the aisle to Dick Luger about preventing nukes to terrorists, they put together legislation, and McCain oppoed.

4. Yes, he did say that. And while we’ve been calling for more money fand troops forAfghanistan , McCain says we’ve succeeded there.

 1.  That would be be-all, end-all of too many blather blather incoherency. We have a deterrent, safe, those country likeNorth Korea , we need to put economic sanctions, friends, allies, to make sure they don’t acuiqre, proliferate, use nukes.

Afghanistan . The surge principles ofIraq need to be implemented inAfghanistan . Reckless comments from Obama – we’re doing keen things and helping children and puppy dogs and we’ll win.

3. McClellan did not say the surge principles wouldn’t apply. The conditions are different. But the counterinsurgency principles could work. [Yes, he did.] [Could not hear what she was saying because Margie was yelling at Palin.]
Biden – interventionist in Serbia, Iraq, nowDarfur . Will American public back? 1. America will support success.Bosnia saved 10Ks of lives. McCain opposed it. People didn’t believe it would work, but it has. InIraq , I voted for the power to let Bush have the power to continue sanctions, etc., but argued against the war, but McCain said it would all be okay. Darfur – we can impose a no-fly zone, we can lead NATO, I’ve been there, horrible suffering, we should rally the world to act, and demonstrate it by helping. 2. I’m aWashington outside, obviously – you voted for it, but now you’re against it. Americans want straight talk. You supported McCain’s war strategies before this candidacy. And Obama cut funding for troops! I agree onDarfur . What I’ve done is we’ve taken a fund and divested funding fromSudan … or will, once the legislation has passed..
When do we decide to go in? 1. When we have the capacity to act. When a country does these evil things, that country forfeits right to not be intervened on. But I never supported McCain’s strategy on the war, which were the same with Cheney. I said that war would be a real mess. I said all these things. McCain wa sin lockstep with Cheney. Not just whether to go, but support for the conduct of the war. 2. Disagree. Did you support Obama or McCain … we listened to the debates and we’ll have some fact checking in the morning. McCain knows how to win a war, he’s had the experience, etc. he will now how t implement strategies, listening to commanders, taking the politics out of war issues.
Heartbeat away. You disagree on some things with your principles. How would your admin be different. 1. God forbid. A national tragedy. I would carry out Obama’s policies. Supporting middle class, even break, health insurance, etc. etc etc. Energy policy, jobs, foreign policy to ends war and gets bin Laden and engages our allies, rejecting the Bush Doctrine (and what it is, nice!). This is a critical election, most important since 1932. I believe in every major initiative he is suggesting.

2. Go downUnion Street , folksy stuff. Ask about economic and foreign policy has helped them, and if McCain really differs from them, and they don’t think so. People in my neighborhood get it. Walk with me in my neighborhood,Scranton , steel town. Middle class has gotten short end, wealthy etc.

 2. Heaven forbid, for either party. Team of mavericks will not agree on everything. I will keep pushing on ANWR. He wants healthy debate. I would continue the good work he is commited to, government on the side of people, ending greed and corruption,Wasilla Main Street . Every-day working class Americans, get out of the way, don’t take my money and tell me what to do. Support a ticket that creates jobs and end war. Vs. a party that increases taxes.

4. Looking backwards! Not Bush Administration! Look ahead. Education, yeah, important, love your wife, yeah we need to focus more, ramp up funding in schools, pay teachers more. My family was school teachers. We need to increase standards, we need flexibility in No Child Left Behind. Public school. Need to ramp it up.
Palin – what does VP do? Biden – would not be VP. So, what is it worth now. 2. Education. John isn’t supporting any funding for anything.

Role of VP – had a long talk like the governor did. I have a history of getting things done in the Senate.  I’m the point person for legislative initiatives. Want help with governance to give best advice. He’s president, not me. Wants someone with independent judgment and freedom to disagree, and that’s my reputation.

4. VP Cheney is most dangerous VP in Americna history. Article I defines the role of the VP, he’s in the executive branch. The number one role is to support the president, and to preside over the senate to break ties. That’s the only authority for legislature, the whole idea is bizarre to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive.e

 1. It was a lame joke, so was yours, too. Preside over Senate (thankful). And John and I have had good conversations about how to lead in his agenda, government reform, energy independence, special needs families. That’s where John wants me to lead.

3. [Is the VP not executive?] The founders gave the Constitution a lot of flexibility to the VP. We will do what’s best for the etc etc etc – lots of flexibility, will do what we have to do, my executive experience as a governor and mayor and regulator and business owner.
Conventional wisdom. Lack experience (Palin) or discipline (Biden) 2. I’m not going to change.  People can judge who I am.  I will place my and Barack’s record of change against anyone.  Crime bill, VAWA (McCain voted against), intervention inBosnia . Single parent. I know about a family . I am well off, I have a nice house, but (choking up) I understand.  People are looking for help, not more of the same.

4. Love McCain, but he’s been no maverick on meaningful thigns. 4 of 5 times for Bush budgets. Voted against SCHIP.  Not supporting college funding.  War.  No maverick in anything that really affects what people talk about around the table.  He voted against heating oil support! yeesh!

 1. my experience as an executive willb e put to good use, a governor of a great energy producing state, energy independence, etc. Connection to heartland, a mom, son in the war, paying for tuition, etc. etc. etc. we know what other Americans are going through. That world view with John McCain –America is a nature of exceptionalism, shining city on hill as Reagan said, and unapologetic as a perfect ideal of democracy and tolerance and freedom and equal rights, force for good, rah rah rah! Team! Making a difference! Track record!

3. People are looking for change. Consumate maverick! Me, too! Bipartisan state governor. Look at McCain’s supporters – Lieberman, Giuliani, Romney, etc.  These are tumultuous times.  Etc. Repeat. Etc. Cannot allow partisanship inWashington , regardless of who’s in charge.
Single issue you changed to accommodate changed cirucmstnaces 1. On judiciary committee. Only thing that mattered was wheathr a presidential nominee was simply not a criminal.  But realized that ideology makes a difference. Led charge against Bork.  First chair of the judiciary that it’s important to know judicial philosophy. 2. As mayor and governor passed judgement and didn’t veto, but realized had to work with legislature and needed to move along.  Wanted to cut taxes, budget. But no major changes in principle, compromise, bipartisan, but working together, no matter who gets credit.
Bipartisanship? How do you change the tone? 1. I have been able to work across the aisle and work to change my party’s mind and the Republicans.    Anecdote. Never question motives, just judgment, and so have been able to work so well with others.  Fundamental change that Obama and I will bring. 2. You appoint people regardless of party affiliation. My family is diverse politically.  As long as we all work together. But the policies nad proposals have to speak for themselves.  And now here’s a political generalization and attack on the other ticket.
Closing statements 2.  This is the most important election in our lives.  Eight years, deep hole in economy and foreign credibility.  Fundamental change. Progress isn’t based on how well CEOs are doing or how well we cut regulations, but based on whether people can pay for their mortgage or send kid to college, etc. etc. etc.  My neighborhood – dignity and respect, belief in self, work hard, you can accomplish anything.  That’s why we’re running to make that possible. It’s time forAmerica to get back up, and we are ready, and etc.  God bless American and, selfishly for both of us, our troops. 1. Thanks! Such an honor, and chance to meet you, Joe.  Like being able to answer these questions without the MSM filter, just want to talk to the people. [So why haven’t you?]

We will fight for American family, we are a great country, etc., proud to be American, need to fight for freedoms.  Reagan! Freedom! Need to fight for that freedom every generation.   Future without freedom! There is only one man in this rece who has realy fought for you!  McCain!
After Thanks! Thanks! Nervous chuckles.

 

Post-debate … it was interesting that both families got up there, chatted, shook hands. Very different from McCain’s terse handshake with Obama and immediate shifting to hugging his wife and gladhanding the crowd …

Overall assessment:

The questions were okay. They hit most of the major points — but didn’t hit much on any controversial points (at least viz Palin). I mean, yeah, we got the gay marriage and the global warming questions … but no actual challenges to legitimacy, to experience, to creationism, to abortion …

Palin did okay, presence, glib. Not very strong on policy, more talking points … she didn’t blither too much at too many points. Lots of McCain rah-rah-rah. Some odd points (expanding the power of the VP, putting the US embassy in Jerusalem, facile answers, more than a few fact-checkable items). Shifted subjects at will, rather than reliably answering the questions (which she freely admitted). Didn’t talk much substance, much more rhetorical. And, of course, lacking (or dodging) direct challenges, she was able to let her coaching carry her along.

Good presence — none of that deer-in-the-headlights fumbling from the past interviews. Folksy (sometimes so much I could spew), and that will play well with some. What was funny is that she was willing to criticize Bush when she was being all “mavericky” (thank God that word wasn’t in the drinking game, or else I’d be on my way to the hospital), but whenever Biden did so, she chided him for dwelling on the past (in a Rovean fashion that was immensely irritating).

She talked to the camera, thus the audience.

Never really talked about about the specific differences between McCain and Bush — just that McCain’s a maverick, except for all the things on the war that McCain has always supported and is right about because Petraeus! Surge! Yay!

Nobody challenged her directly for not answering the questions more often than not.

(And for all the discussion of the Maverick Reformer, and despite her promise to Couric, I don’t think we heard any actual, specific, reforms that she was attributing to McCain.)

So if Palin wants to “avoid the MSM filter” and “just talk to the American people,” how is she going to do that? I mean, it’s not like either Gibson or Couric were shouting questions at her rat-a-tat. If that means she just wants to dialog without people following up with further questions — well, yeah, that I can believe.

Biden did a sober, calm, workmanlike job, growing stronger at the end. Policy-wonky, and a traditional debater. Sometimes stumbling over himself to hit all the points he wanted to get. I suspect there will be some fact-checking (less than Palin). He did focus most of his attacks on McCain, as advertised — but I almost wonder in retrospect if that was an error (the attacks on McCain were to be expected, and though reasonable will not change any minds); with Palin doing better than expected, he left that part of the field to her.

He spent too much time looking at the moderator, not the camera.

So, who won? Hrm.

For the Democratic faithful, Palin will not impress any further. Biden was reliably solid, not saying anything particularly goofy.

For the Republican faithful, Palin’s lack of self-destruction will probably be a huge sigh of relief. Some folks will probably be a bit fired up, others will simply be glad she didn’t embarrass the GOP ticket any further.

For the undecided, though … I don’t think this will shift many votes in one direction or another. Those who were worried about Palin will be marginally reassured, but I don’t see this adding any bump to the McCain ticket; at best (and this is non-trivial), she prevented any further losses based on her.

If nothing else, short of future melt-downs, she may have just saved her future political career. But any assessment of this as a “win” is only because it was less of a “loss” than practically every other interaction she’s been shown in since her ghost-written speech at the convention.