One More Thought

I have recently learned that I do have at least one reader. Thank you. I must re-double my efforts and try to make this endeavor better each day. I think it will be fun.

Politician Formula

Another interesting thought I have had yesterday and today is that politicians certainly have an interesting formula for dealing with this. If you are a politician, you know the American people are tired of the constant, reactionary bickering that prevails between Democrats and Republicans. You know we are tired of the blame game and the constant partisan fighting. You also know that this is a real financial crisis we are facing and if there was a time to set aside partisan fighting and petty selfishness, this would be that time. But you simply cannot resist. So being a politician, this is what you do. "The Republicans caused all these financial problems, and especially Pres. Bush, but we are going to pass this bill together and prevent a crisis and then make sure another one does not happen." "I cannot believe Sen. Pelosi made that speech that cost all those votes, but we need to work together and solve this problem." "Sen. Obama did not do anything to help bring more Democratic votes to the bill, but we need to move beyond politics and pass a bill that will help America." "Sen. McCain could not get a single representative from Arizona to approve the bill, but we need to come together as a Congress and pass this bill."

You see the formula? Blame (insert Democrat/Republican), but we need to stop fighting and work together. I am tired of the blaming and the fighting and I say a pox on both your houses.

I should say that most, but not all, of the politicians I have heard react in this way. There are a very limited few, Democrats and Republicans, that are more mature and serious, but it is a very limited few.

It is times like this that I am reminded of the words of John Adams.

... [W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with
human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition,
revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a
whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and
religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any
other.

Results

Did you think the bailout was a bad idea? Then yesterday you got your wish. What was the result? The biggest loss in the market. . .ever . . . ever in history. That is big. The financial estimates I heard said about 1.1 trillion dollars in capital were lost yesterday. This is the amount lost because the bailout did not happen. I must say that 700 billion is a big number, but I think 1.1 trillion is bigger. And where did that 1.1 trillion come from? It came from ordinary people like you and me that have money in a 401(k) and other, similar investments. Can that 1.1 trillion come back? Sure, but it will probably take years to actually get it back, and that is if the bailout still happens.

Another financial analyst I heard said something I thought funny. Everyone is so upset that there are so many executives out there whose companies will go under, but their "golden parachutes" will basically protect them from the fallout. The funny part is that the bailout legislation had a provision against "golden parachutes," so by not passing the bill, Congress (and the public that told Congress not to pass the bill) saved those golden parachutes for the executives.

I also found it interesting that world markets reacted badly to the news that Congress did not bail out the financial market. I was a bit surprised to see the Australian Prime Minister on American TV asking Congress to pass the bill. Apparently, we are still the world economic leader, which is a thought that gives me pause.

The other good news for those that did not like the bailout bill is that any similar bill will certainly not be passed for a few more days. It will be interesting to see what the markets do in the meantime. This piece from the New York Times says stocks were mixed today, and even rebounded slightly. The interesting thing to me is the reason that was given: "The action of the markets reflected optimism that Congress will act this week to approve an economic rescue plan." I guess we will have to wait and see. I am not holding my breath.

To Bailout Or Not To Bailout

As most Americans today, I have been trying to follow the information about the actions, or in-actions, of Congress with regard to the bailout. One of the best articles I have read about it is from Dean Barnett. Another great source in my opinion is Hugh Hewitt's blog (see blog list on this site) and all the links Prof. Hewitt provides. My bottom line is this. The "bailout" may not be an accurate description of the legislation because the bad loans the government would buy are "low" right now, but could very well rebound and even make taxpayers money when/if the real estate markets rebounds. The reason the government would buy these bad loans is to get them off the books of the various financial institutions and because the government is the only organization that can absorb and ride-out this type of bad investment. I also happen to think the government probably should do this since it was government action, specifically laws passed by Congress, that got us into this mess. The bottom line is that a lot of the real financial experts I have heard or read say we need to pass the legislation that would prevent this crisis, or lessen this crisis. As for the politicians, I think the Democrats and the Republicans are currently acting like children. This is the time to fix the problem, not try to fix the blame. I have seen too many Democrats and Republicans engaging in partisan fighting while a real problem grows and grows. Shame on them all.

McCain's Plan?

If this plan works as described by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, it would be quite the victory for Sen. McCain. It would also clearly demonstrate the difference between Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama. The election could become very interesting very quickly.

No Spin on Financial Crisis

This article from Steven Pearlstein at the Washington Post is about as clear and concise as it gets with respect to the financial crisis. Congress needs to act, and act now.

Case Against Bailout

Here is a great article about why we should not bailout the financial market. I wish I knew enough about economics to really know whether the bailout was a good idea or not. At times like this I tend to fall back on the idea that this is why we have a representative government and I will just have to deal with whatever decision the government officials make. Also, it looks like Congress may actually be agreeing to the bailout anyway, so I will just accept that. In some ways, I am not sure it makes much difference. I have no doubt that bailing out the financial markets will have negative consequences, and I also have no doubt that not bailing out the financial markets will have negative consequences. It is definitely a pick your poison choice. I do tend to doubt that the economy would simply collapse the way so many seem to predict. I do not want to believe the economy is that fragile.

The Other Side

The tone of this article by Dan Balz at the Washington Post is amazing. The article does a relatively good job of presenting the opinions and views of both Democrats and Republicans, but there are a number of things that bother me. Does anyone really believe that the next President of the United States, be it Sen. McCain or Sen. Obama, is not needed in Washington right now to work out a response to the financial problems facing this country, especially since both candidates happen to be Senators with direct input regarding any bill proposed and because both are supposed to be the "leaders" of their respective parties? And why is Sen. McCain's decision an indication of being selfless or reckless, while Sen. Obama's reaction is clearly intended to "show calm" in a crisis? Perhaps most importantly, is there anyone who thinks a presidential candidate debate is more important than the looming financial crisis? I can only speak for myself, but it is hard to imagine someone being more worried about a possible debate as compared to a financial crisis, which is going to affect every American in one way or another even if it is averted today. On a lesser note, Republicans (anonymously) critical of Sen. McCain's decision are mentioned, but there are not any Democrats critical of Sen. Obama's reaction? Perhaps Mr. Balz missed Pres. Clinton defending Sen. McCain's request to postpone the debate. I do not get the opportunity to say this very often, so I will now. I like the fact that Pres. Clinton is not trying to find any reason possible to criticize Sen. McCain. Good job Pres. Clinton, at least in this respect.

McCain Is A Leader

I think recent events show more than anything else why Sen. McCain should be the next president and Sen. Obama should remain Senator. I also think Bill Dyer, guest-posting at Hugh Hewitt's blog, may have the best explanation of those recent events. I have really enjoyed reading Mr. Dyer and having him with Prof. Hewitt makes Prof. Hewitt's blog a must-read even more than before.

The Choice

I have been posting a bit on the bailout and how I think Congress does need to do it, but this is simple and persuasive. Again, Prof. Hewitt certainly knows what he is talking about.

Biden in Ohio

I would love to read Prof. Hewitt's reaction to this article about Sen. Biden in Ohio discussing foreign policy. I think I have a good idea of what it would say, but I love reading Prof. Hewitt and I am sure he would have some great comments about Sen. Biden in Prof. Hewitt's home state. Perhaps Biden is a Browns fan?

Obama - Ayers

If you want to know about the real relationship between Sen. Obama and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, you should read this post from Powerline. It is one of the reasons I read Powerline quite often.

Financial Crisis - Bailout

After some thought about this I have decided I am not against the bailout of the financial market and I think I have a good reason. It was Congress' fault anyway. Congress passed all the regulatory laws requiring banks and lending institutions to make loans to people that really could not afford them, all so more people could actually own a home. I think that is a great goal, but it still has to be accomplished in a fiscally sound manner. Now that all those questionable loans are causing huge problems for the financial market, Congress should bail them out. Congress mandated the loans. Congress should help pay the penalty. That is why I am just as upset about the Senate balking at the bailout as I am at Congress for getting us into this mess. Congress should be willing to clean up its mess. And where was all this caution and concern, this need for details and accountability with regard to the laws that caused this mess?

What about the American taxpayer? Good question. This is the price of a representative government. If you do not like the results you get from the government, you need to make changes. You need to change the people being sent as your representative. I cannot say I follow national politics nearly close enough to comment on each representative from each state, but this is why we are supposed to be paying attention to what they are doing. Also, it seems to me that I keep hearing the same names over and over again, especially when it comes to Senators. Yes, I think term limits for Congressmen and Senators would be a good idea, but we the people need to make sure we hold our representatives accountable for their actions.

As a side note, I was watching the second half of the big English Premiership match (soccer) between Chelsea and Manchester United. Manchester United's major sponsor happens to be AIG, and the commentator for the match, an Englishman, made the comment that Manchester United was more consistent and/or technically sound than its sponsor. I cannot get away from financial commentary even during a good football match. The match ended in a 1-1 draw. I wonder if there is a good financial comparison I could draw?

UPDATE: Here is a similar article from David Limbaugh at Townhall providing some good information and background.

Financial Crisis

I would be the first to admit that I am no expert on the economy, or financial matters. The whole banking crisis does not make sense to me, until a great article comes along that seems to really ring true and provide the background to understand the cause. It does not come as any surprise that Congress is at the bottom of all this. People ascribe a lot of government activity to the President, but Congress is really the branch of government with the power, the power to tax, the power to spend, the power to regulate. I don't think they know what to do with that power.

Attacks on Palin

The attacks on Gov. Palin seem incredible to me. I do not remember when a political figure has been savaged the way Gov. Palin has. As an example, ABC News has a story by Justin Rood about Gov. Palin's personal email account. The focus of the story is an allegation that Gov. Palin should not be using a private email account to conduct any type of government business. While I can certainly understand this concern, I have two problems with the story. First, I have yet to find any issue where both sides of the aisle do not have the same problems, i.e., I am just as sure that there are plenty of Democrats doing the same thing. Second, and most importantly in this story, the story completely ignores the fact that hacking into Gov. Palin's personal email account is a violation of federal law. The article mentions that the McCain-Palin campaign has responded to questions by stating that the hacking is a "violation of law," but the article does not address that issue in the least. I am reminded of the idea of straining at a gnat.

Also, Heather Mallick has an article in Canada that simply attacks Gov. Palin and her family in a very personal way, and includes personal attacks against Republicans in general. I will not be linking to the article because of the crude, vulgar references. The one question I would have for Ms. Mallick is, "Why do you care?" Ms. Mallick lives in Canada. Why would she care that much what happens in American politics? I suspect it is because Gov. Palin does not fit the liberal idea of "feminist" and so hyper-liberal women resent Gov. Palin for her success. Ms. Mallick writes, "I'm a feminist who understands that women can nurse terrible and delicate woman hatred." Perhaps Ms. Mallick does understand that her column is hateful and directed at Gov. Palin simply because she is a woman.

Constitution Day

Since today is Constitution Day, it would be a good time to read not only the Constitution itself, but this great speech about the Constitution given by Pres. Ezra Taft Benson. The Constitution is indeed an important document and we need to understand it better so we can defend and preserve it better. I would also recommend Dr. W. Cleon Skousen's book The Making of America as a great source for learning about the Constitution. I should also take a moment and thank Prof. Hugh Hewitt. Despite my mediocre grades in his Constitutional Law class, Prof. Hewitt and Prof. John Eastman (now Dean Eastman, and I got better grades in his First Amendment class) instilled a wonderful curiosity and interest for the Constitution. I consider myself very lucky to have studied the Constitution under both of them. Thank you both.

Financial Explanation

At townhall.com Walter E. Williams has a great article about taxes, jobs and the economy. Even an economy-challenged individual like me can understand this. If you want a free market, you have to take the risks and troubles that go with it.

Better Response

Harvey Mansfield has a great article that provides a better response to comments like that from Shauna Moench (posted below). Shouldn't feminists be glad their ideals have reached the GOP, even if just a little?

Subjective Humor

This SL Tribune editorial by Jim Shea attempts to be funny. I think the only thing it really shows is the liberal-elite's visceral contempt for rural, small town, working-class people.

Call Truce and . . . Fire!

The Salt Lake Tribune has another interesting editorial by Shauna Moench asking for a truce in the "mommy wars." I think the article is very interesting. Ms. Moench claims that the GOP has betrayed its own principles by nominating Gov. Palin for VP, specifically, the important principle that mothers should stay home with young children. Ms. Moench wants us all to agree that motherhood is an important role and that men and women will work side-by-side in all types of careers, and then Ms. Moench wants us to set up a "village" to help make sure all kids are raised successfully. The part I do not understand is if the GOP has "betrayed" its idea that motherhood is important, what is the GOP's new position? Also, how does Ms. Moench know the GOP does not support pre-school, after school programs, higher pay for teachers, quality and affordable day care, etc.? Especially, since these are appatently the ideas upon which she is basing her vote. Perhaps what disappoints me most is the lure that we should end the "mommy wars," followed by the hook that I need to vote for Obama/Biden or I do not really support children. I would agree that the constant fighting between political parties over seemingly every issue needs to stop, but this editorial does nothing to advance that idea.

Interesting Point

I love this article by Michelle Malkin. Al-Qaida has been trying to make sure they get the "credit" for 9/11, but no one wants to believe them. Too many want to blame American first, and then the Jews. When you really look at it, that just does not make any sense.

Credit Where Due

This editorial about Mitt Romney's political career in the SL Tribune is really good. I think it would be impossible to say that religious bias did not play any role in this campaign, and the emergence of Gov. Palin effects many things.

Another Great Article

Prof. Hewitt has another great article, as usual. Spoiler Alert: if you like Gov. Palin, you will love this article.

Minnesota Temple Fire

Someone attempted to set fire to the Minnesota Temple. The Utah newspapers, Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune, both have the AP report that says the authorities "suspect arson" and "don't believe the case is a hate crime." I have to admit that "no signs of forced entry" makes me pause. This would certainly be a fact that tends to negate a finding of arson, so what facts were present (besides the fire) that make arson suspected? Did someone just light a fire at the door, without making it inside the entryway? Is there some indication as to how the fire started? The facts are a bit sparse, so I think I will wait for more information before deciding it is a hate crime. However, it seems to me that if it is arson, the person(s) who set the fire did not like Mormons, or their temple.

Learning About Palin

The best article I have read with details about Gov. Palin and her political background comes from a British paper. Gov. Palin is becoming a better choice every time I learn more about her. She obviously knows how to set a goal and achieve it.

Facts on Judgment

This is a great article about Sen. Obama's "judgment." Facts are hard to deny.

UPDATE: Another claim that someone other than Sen. Obama is responsible.

Hard Habit to Break

The Salt Lake Tribune editorial is becoming a hard habit for me to break, and yes, I am humming the Chicago song. A recent editorial claims the Republicans are using a "resentment strategy" for this election. It is based on the idea that Gov. Romney, Mayor Giuliani, and Gov. Palin should not be able to claim they are against elitism because of their own elitist characteristics, and that the right is angry. And why is the right so angry? Some of it is because of Roe v. Wade and evolution being taught in schools, but most of the anger is based on the perception that Democrats are elitist, for which "no evidence" exists.

Personally, whether some Democrats are elitist makes no difference to me because I am sure there are plenty of Republicans that are elitist, and I do not care what most Democrats or Republicans think of me. I do care about Roe v. Wade, abortion, national security and Supreme Court judge appointments. So I would be inclined to be much more exercised about those things than any claims of elitism. I think it is quite a stretch to say that most, or even a part, of conservative "anger" comes from the elitist claims.

I also love it when people say there is "no evidence" for an assertion. Usually, there is some evidence. It just depends on how much influence or weight you give that evidence. For example, some people look at the order of the universe and the complexity of the human body and see the hand of God. Others see the Big Bang and evolution. I can see "evidence" of both, so the question becomes how do you interpret that evidence. Now on to the editorial's claim that "no evidence" exists to suggest that Sen. Obama and the Democrats do not think much of Wasilla, Alaska or small-town mayors. I can see how statements made by the Obama campaign can be interpreted that way, i.e., Gov. Palin does not have enough experience to be the VP. Claiming such lack of experience does imply her previous experience is not sufficient. That is the point of the statement from the Obama campaign. Accordingly, the Obama campaign statement does imply that Sen. Obama and/or some Democrats do not consider small-town mayor a very notable experience.

All in all, the SLTrib editorials have provided me a good laugh because of the strained and unfounded arguments, and that good laugh does make it a hard habit to break.

Palin's Religion

KSL is reporting about a statement made by the Utah Democratic Party that Gov. Palin is/was a "devout member of an anti-Mormon denomination." The denomination in question is the Assembly of God. Gov. Palin has not identified herself as a member of this church since 2002 and the church says it does not have a stance on Mormons specifically.

For starters, since when did the Utah Democratic Party care about anti-Mormon bias? Also, I have heard in the Mormon rumor-mill that the story included a claim that Gov. Palin tried to stop the LDS temple in Anchorage. I have not found any real evidence for that as of yet, but being a member of the LDS church, I know how fast and pervasive such rumors can be. My guess is that the Assembly of God made some statement, or even attempted some action, to prevent the LDS temple in Anchorage, and this was somehow attributed to Gov. Palin.

It seems to me that religion is used way too often, by both sides of the aisle, to try and score political points in one way or another. It should be a non-factor. As my uncle used to say, "Why wish for a loaf of bread when you can wish for the whole grocery store."

UPDATE: See this related article. Mr. Medved has a great explanation about the fact that all religions seem unusual to those not familiar with them, and I can certainly empathize being a member of a religion many deem unusual. (Although some consider my interest in soccer unusual, I was referring to my being LDS.)

Great Articles

Here are a couple great articles definitely worth reading. David Limbaugh does a great job of exposing the double standard. Hugh Hewitt has a fantastic explanation of Gov. Palin's impact on the electoral college. Enjoy.

Lawyer Joke in Reality

Even being a lawyer, I have to admit Dr. Hanson makes a great point.

Straining at a Gnat

It is now apparent to me that what really bothers me about the way mainstream media is questioning and discussing the nomination of Gov. Palin for VP is that they are straining to make a "story" or a "concern" out of very little. It does not strike me as odd that any politician in any office for just about any amount of time is going to have critics, and going to have instances that seem questionable, or even hypocritical, to others. So the question becomes which issues are more important? Are you more concerned about Gov. Palin's pregnant daughter or Sen. Obama's view on abortion? Do you want more detail on Gov. Palin's attempt to get her ex-brother-in-law fired or Sen. Obama's relationship with William Ayers? Do you think it reflects more poorly on Sen. McCain's judgment if his choice for VP did not get properly vetted, or Sen. Obama's judgment for his choice to employ Mazen Asbahi? I have no problem with the mainstream media asking questions about a candidate, but it seems clear that the mainstream media has no ability to prioritize or discern an important story from a mediocre one.

Missing the Point

The Salt Lake Tribune has posted an editorial by Helen Thomas today. Ms. Thomas has certainly missed the point to McCain's choice for VP. Ms. Thomas is quick to claim that Gov. Palin does not have much experience and comes with "unexpected baggage," such as a 17-year old daughter that is pregnant, unduly influencing a public servant to fire an ex-brother-in-law, and working to get earmarks for her town. First of all, I would not agree with a family member being characterized as "baggage." Second, Ms. Thomas has missed the point that despite any perceived negatives pointed out by political opponents, Gov. Palin brings positives that far outweigh any negatives. And since any choice for VP (i.e., Sen. Biden?) comes with some negatives, the point seems to be picking someone that can help your presidential candidate, and Gov. Palin has clearly done that for Sen. McCain. The political narrative is almost exclusively directed toward Gov. Palin and Sen. McCain, and Gov. Palin has brought an energy that is impossible to deny.

Ms. Thomas also seems to be very disappointed that Sen. Obama did not choose Sen. Clinton as his running mate. In reference to Sen. Obama's VP choice, Ms. Thomas rightly asks, "Where is the audacity?" Apparently, Sen. McCain is the one with audacity, and now momentum.

Ms. Thomas makes the point that Gov. Palin will be one heartbeat away from the presidency. I would clarify that right now Gov. Palin is one election and one heartbeat away from the presidency. Sen. Obama is one election away from the presidency, but Ms. Thomas does not appear concerned at all about Sen. Obama's qualifications. Maybe that is because a direct comparison of Sen. Obama's executive experience and Gov. Palin's executive experience demonstrates that Gov. Palin is far and away better prepared.

I do have to give Ms. Thomas credit for her candor. Given the success of last night's speech by Gov. Palin, I was expecting more editorials and comments like this one from the SL Tribune. The direct attacks on Gov. Palin have backfired, so it is much safer to question her "temperment and knowledge" to be VP, imply that she has stange ideas about what constitutes "God's work," and merely suggest that we need to know more about Gov. Palin.

My conclusion: I thought Gov. Palin was a good choice when the choice was made; I think Gov. Palin is a fantastic choice now. I think she definitely has the "temperment and knowledge" to be the VP, or even the President. I like the fact that she really does understand, and communicate her understanding, of small town people and regular families. This election just became very interesting. The war hero and the pitbull with lipstick against the elitist and life-long politician.

Senator Hatch on Hugh Hewitt Show

Senator Hatch just concluded an interview on the Hugh Hewitt show. Sen. Hatch is commenting very favorably on the executive experience of Gov. Palin, especially as compared to Sen. Obama. Sen. Hatch makes a strong comparison between the media's treatment of Gov. Palin and Judge Bork during his confirmation hearings. Sen. Hatch also comments about how attacks on Gov. Palin by the media will only backfire and strengthen the support of Gov. Palin, and not just among women.

Good interview with Sen. Hatch. As always, the Hugh Hewitt show is worth the time to listen.

Nothing Up My Sleeve

Another SL Tribune editorial today that I simply cannot let pass. The editorial is titled: "Palin's daughter: The politics of teenage pregnancy." The combined news that a relative unknown like Gov. Palin is chosen as McCain's VP candidate and Gov. Palin's 17-year old daughter is pregnant, planning to keep the child and marry the father is described as "dizzying." It sounds more like "life" to me (except that most of us are not chosen as VP candidates). It is hard to imagine someone that is not affected directly, let alone indirectly, by a teenage, unwed pregnancy. Yet this concept is treated as "dizzying."

I am glad to see a leader like Gov. Palin leading strongly, competently and by positive example. I think a lot of voters are going to be impressed as well.

Same Story, Different Day

A SL Tribune editorial demonstrates again the strange lengths to which some people will reach to make a strange point. The Tribune claims that hurricane Gustav helped the GOP, despite shortening the GOP convention, by allowing McCain to look presidential and by providing the means to abbreviate the time Pres. Bush would spend at the convention and address the convention.

The Tribune contrasts McCain's visit to the emergency operations center and McCain's presidential appearance, with Pres. Bush's supposed bungling during hurricane Katrina. The Tribune then criticizes Pres. Bush for appearing to tend to the emergency of hurricane Gustav.

Maybe the point to be made about the preparation for Gustav and the conduct of emergency relief agencies is not that the GOP was able to benefit from the "spin" it generated from Gustav, but that everyone learned some valuable lessons from Katrina and those lessons were applied in a positive way. Republicans and Democrats, government agencies and citizens all worked together to avoid a more serious disaster.