I could write for pages about the stupidity of the real estate industry during the past five years. Suffice it to say that when I was looking for a condo I could afford (I had a down payment, but no permanent job, so I thought I'd be modest) my realtor looked me in the eye and said, "You know, we could just get you a four-unit building and you could live in one."
No job, and he would have been able to find me a million dollar loan. No wonder the lending industry has the problems it has.
So with elections coming up and adjustable-inflation loans, well, adjusting, just like they are supposed to, what's the White House doing? Talking about freezing the interest rates on those loans, and turning to the taxpayer to make sure the poor investors who backed those insane loans don't lose any money.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071130/us_nm/usa_housing_hazard_dc
Part of me is really bitter. I mean, I decided to pay a higher interest rate for a fixed-rate, fixed-term conventional loan. Now I find out I should have just been irresponsible, gotten in over my head, and waited for presidential candidates - desperate to A) Look like they're helping out Middle America and B) Actually bail out Wall Street - to come to the rescue.
But you know what? It's the same crap that Corporate America pulls on a daily basis - digging into the taxpayer's pocket to rescue it from its latest bad decision, poor investment, or just to line its pockets a little more.
So maybe I should be glad that in election season, at least the candidates have to pretend to include the middle class when giving away the bank. As we all know, telling Americans that they've made dumb decisions and will have to pay the consequences of those decisions is an excellent strategy for not getting elected.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Stickin' It To the Voting Public
BANGKOK (AFP) - Parliamentary candidates in Thailand's upcoming election are trying to buy the votes of elderly men by passing out free Viagra, a local government official said Friday.
No comment necessary ...
No comment necessary ...
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Quit Fighting, Already
I'm tired of headlines that read, "Smith, Jones Spar At Debate."
First, it raises unrealistic expectations. The only thing I can think of that would be more entertaining than hitting a politician would be kickin' back, eatin' popcorn and watching two or more of them smack each other around. If that happens, my money's on Hillary.
Secondly - and this is important - political leadership shouldn't be about fighting. I don't want any more arguments. I want solutions. I don't want to feel good about my candidate "beating up" someone else. I don't want to hear any more shouting.
I want quiet, reasonable people to talk to me like an adult. Is that so goddamned much to ask? Why is this so impossible?
First, it raises unrealistic expectations. The only thing I can think of that would be more entertaining than hitting a politician would be kickin' back, eatin' popcorn and watching two or more of them smack each other around. If that happens, my money's on Hillary.
Secondly - and this is important - political leadership shouldn't be about fighting. I don't want any more arguments. I want solutions. I don't want to feel good about my candidate "beating up" someone else. I don't want to hear any more shouting.
I want quiet, reasonable people to talk to me like an adult. Is that so goddamned much to ask? Why is this so impossible?
Monday, November 26, 2007
Strange bedfellows in the GOP
Crazy GOP candidate Ron Paul got an unlike endorsement from the owner of the BunnyRanch brothel in Carson City, Nev., apparently due to some fevered, er, lobbying by bow-tied right-wing TV gasbag Tucker Carlson.
(Really, MSNBC reports. You can't make this stuff up.)
Seems that while traveling with Paul, Tuck -- famously deflated by losing a battle of political wits with comedian Jon Stewart -- called up a pal, the owner of the brothel. "Dennis Hof is a good friend of mine, so when we got to Nevada, I decided to call him up and see if he wanted to come check this guy out," Tucker said. My buddy the pimp. Really, he said it.
Hof showed up with two of his ladies, Brooke Taylor and a woman known as Air Force Amy, and all three were wowed. (The ladies didn't quite endorse; Amy perhaps balked because she supports the troops and Paul is anti-war.)
Now, for a true libertarian this would be no surprise. But Paul quite famously believes the US government is constitutionally prohibited from regulating anything EXCEPT a woman's womb, which could mean career trouble for the trio.
But Hof has endorsed him, just as Tucker Carlson apparently endorses the BunnyRanch. And shoot, who'd know more about GOP politics these days than a trio of pros -- except maybe a page or two.
(Really, MSNBC reports. You can't make this stuff up.)
Seems that while traveling with Paul, Tuck -- famously deflated by losing a battle of political wits with comedian Jon Stewart -- called up a pal, the owner of the brothel. "Dennis Hof is a good friend of mine, so when we got to Nevada, I decided to call him up and see if he wanted to come check this guy out," Tucker said. My buddy the pimp. Really, he said it.
Hof showed up with two of his ladies, Brooke Taylor and a woman known as Air Force Amy, and all three were wowed. (The ladies didn't quite endorse; Amy perhaps balked because she supports the troops and Paul is anti-war.)
Now, for a true libertarian this would be no surprise. But Paul quite famously believes the US government is constitutionally prohibited from regulating anything EXCEPT a woman's womb, which could mean career trouble for the trio.
But Hof has endorsed him, just as Tucker Carlson apparently endorses the BunnyRanch. And shoot, who'd know more about GOP politics these days than a trio of pros -- except maybe a page or two.
Tyranny of the truly insane
So I was looking at some computerized "What kind of politics do you believe in?" matrix on a motorcycle racing bulletin board and realized that, as always, Dilbert was right.
Reality is controlled by the most insane.
It's no longer about appealing to the majority. It's about appeasing the minority who have wrapped their little hard-wired brains around one core idea so tightly that they see the world through that filter only. Vote against my interests, I'll probably never know. I'm trying to earn a living. Worst thing'll happen is that I'll just ignore you and maybe vote for your opponent. But vote against their interests and they spend every last waking moment of their lives trying to destroy you, your family, your career. They'll spread innuendo about the orientation of your dog. Who are you going to cross, me or them?
And does it matter how many of each there are? A single true-believing "Them" can cause a politician or anyone else far more grief than a thousand busy-with-real-life "Me"-type characters.
It always works that way. An NFL-size team of loons decides to blow up some buildings in the U.S., and hundreds of millions in greatest nation in the history of history are reduced to shuffling shoeless through the airport, clutching their laptop computers, sphincters stretched out, yet grateful that the customs officer was so dedicated to making sure the bomb wasn't up there.
It's not about those of us who can see things from multiple points of view, consider multiple interests. It's about those of us whose entire lives revolve around making one thing happen - and who are willing to sacrifice personally to make that one thing happen.
Look, I'm all about dedication and hard work. I'm just not going to hold the rest of the country hostage to my political, religious, social and sexual views. And that puts me at a political disadvantage to those who will spend their weekends locked to their computers, firing off anti-whoever rhetoric into the electronic ether, and chain-calling congressional offices to make sure their views are heard and the consequences of crossing them clear.
So I'm penalized for having a life. A bit disenchanted? You could fuckin' say so. I guess there's another presidential campaign going on. I'll just say it right now - I'm voting for the guy with the widest stance. Ah, democracy ...
-- posted for M
Reality is controlled by the most insane.
It's no longer about appealing to the majority. It's about appeasing the minority who have wrapped their little hard-wired brains around one core idea so tightly that they see the world through that filter only. Vote against my interests, I'll probably never know. I'm trying to earn a living. Worst thing'll happen is that I'll just ignore you and maybe vote for your opponent. But vote against their interests and they spend every last waking moment of their lives trying to destroy you, your family, your career. They'll spread innuendo about the orientation of your dog. Who are you going to cross, me or them?
And does it matter how many of each there are? A single true-believing "Them" can cause a politician or anyone else far more grief than a thousand busy-with-real-life "Me"-type characters.
It always works that way. An NFL-size team of loons decides to blow up some buildings in the U.S., and hundreds of millions in greatest nation in the history of history are reduced to shuffling shoeless through the airport, clutching their laptop computers, sphincters stretched out, yet grateful that the customs officer was so dedicated to making sure the bomb wasn't up there.
It's not about those of us who can see things from multiple points of view, consider multiple interests. It's about those of us whose entire lives revolve around making one thing happen - and who are willing to sacrifice personally to make that one thing happen.
Look, I'm all about dedication and hard work. I'm just not going to hold the rest of the country hostage to my political, religious, social and sexual views. And that puts me at a political disadvantage to those who will spend their weekends locked to their computers, firing off anti-whoever rhetoric into the electronic ether, and chain-calling congressional offices to make sure their views are heard and the consequences of crossing them clear.
So I'm penalized for having a life. A bit disenchanted? You could fuckin' say so. I guess there's another presidential campaign going on. I'll just say it right now - I'm voting for the guy with the widest stance. Ah, democracy ...
-- posted for M
Friday, November 9, 2007
If the president does it, it's not torture. really.
If the president does it, it's not illegal. That's the Nixonian defense of breaking and entering and wiretapping, among other things. Luckily, at the time, Democrats (and more than a few Republicans) had the sense to say 'no.'
It's a given, of course, that President Bush thinks the same way as Nixon. When it comes to wiretapping and waterboarding, if he orders it, it's OK. But when did we get a Democratic congress that agrees with him?
This week, they confirmed an attorney general who claimed he didn't really know what waterboarding was, or if it was really torture. Where's he been? He didn't anticipate he might be asked about it? This has been a method of torture since the Inquisition; as ABC News and many others have pointed out, the U.S. has long condemned this as torture when done to our guys.
Only in politics can someone testify to this sort of ignorance with a straight face and still get confirmed. I mean... really? If Al Queda tortured a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan with water until he thought he was drowing, the AG wouldn't know if that was a violation of international law?
Still, this AG did get confirmed. The Democratic Congress, which has already agreed that spying on Americans isn't illegal if the president does it, has approved an AG who isn't sure that waterboarding is all that bad and who apparently thinks it's not torture if the president orders it.
A new low in American law.
It's a given, of course, that President Bush thinks the same way as Nixon. When it comes to wiretapping and waterboarding, if he orders it, it's OK. But when did we get a Democratic congress that agrees with him?
This week, they confirmed an attorney general who claimed he didn't really know what waterboarding was, or if it was really torture. Where's he been? He didn't anticipate he might be asked about it? This has been a method of torture since the Inquisition; as ABC News and many others have pointed out, the U.S. has long condemned this as torture when done to our guys.
Only in politics can someone testify to this sort of ignorance with a straight face and still get confirmed. I mean... really? If Al Queda tortured a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan with water until he thought he was drowing, the AG wouldn't know if that was a violation of international law?
Still, this AG did get confirmed. The Democratic Congress, which has already agreed that spying on Americans isn't illegal if the president does it, has approved an AG who isn't sure that waterboarding is all that bad and who apparently thinks it's not torture if the president orders it.
A new low in American law.
Talking back to the news
Every time I heard our failed president jump up and down screaming "I'm relevant, I'm relevant," and watch our Democratic Congress give him his way, I want to shake the screen and yell 'why.'
Here goes.
Here goes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)