massachusetts

Much has been said and will be said about the senate vote in Massachusetts, but in reality the outcome was not unexpected. Especially not in light of what happened earlier in Virginia and New Jersey. And even less so when you hear the talk inside the beltway. Democrats are bracing for a loss of up to 30 seats in midterm elections. Clearly they know something is up. Some of the more prominent ones have already preempted a defeat by declaring they won't run again.

There is no doubt that this string of losses is a rebuke to Obama. The new president's popularity is low compared to that of his predecessors. He barely tops Carter and comparisons with Carter are sure to follow. Unfortunately a lot of it is of his own doing.

The keys to defeat lie in the unrealistic expectations that were only topped by the even more unrealistically high fundraising. Both are coming home to roost.

I agree with Krugman at the NY Times that Obama made serious mistakes. The stimulus was too small and it did not reach the intended beneficiaries. The bankers got bailed out without so much as a slap on the wrist, while middle class families are losing their homes, their retirement, and their savings. It is obvious Obama is in bed with Wall Street. I pointed this out before and predicted it would cause major problems.

I also agree with the Rutten at the LA Times that the administration did not do a good job explaining healthcare. While it addresses the 30 million uninsured, it appears to offer little or nothing to the 270 million who have insurance. All they can see is more deficits that they know they will have to pay for. Never mind that their coverage could lapse, that they might be bumped when they need it, or that they will find out it does not cover their expenses. For now it appears to them that things are OK.

But Rutten goes further. He points to the anger that he says is due to the fact that American middle class families are worse off than their parents. Some of that may be a factor. The American economy is not so much a wealth creator as it is a wealth shifter. It has shifted massive amounts of wealth from the poor and the middle class into the hands of the few. In doing so it has bankrupted over half the population. The shifting is running out of resources to shift.

Everything was done by deceptive means. US style capitalism appeals to people's worst behaviors such as greed, lust, pride, envy and gluttony while making fun of altruism, cooperation, and moderation. It pits people against their friends and neighbors. It uses fear and anger and preys on feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. It relies on illegal immigrants and workers on job-related visas that have no bargaining power and can be used to undercut the wages those who seek a decent living. It uses layoffs to boost quarterly earnings, and promote job-insecurity in workers.

It has promoted women, not because it believes in feminism, but because additional lower paid workers helped create an environment that is aversive to organizing, unionizing, and bargaining power. It also helped create a false sense of wealth and that drove more consumption.

It uses open markets and tax payer subsidized oil to bring in items from abroad, where labor laws are lax and environmental issues of no concern. It treats many parts of the world as colonies to be stripped of resources and valuables.

Furthermore, the unfortunate situation is leading to a country that is becoming ungovernable. The State of California has already reached that impasse. Soon the nation will follow. Like Rome before it, the American republic may soon become a dictatorship or go down in anarchy.

the lure of war

President Obama, the man who consistently voted against the Iraq war, is now going out on a venture of his own. Perhaps he tried to stay true to his word that the real war was in Afghanistan, but if so, he surely lost track of the context and timing. It was true that the 9/11 masterminds were, at one point, hiding in Afghanistan, and that the Bush administration could have found them there if they had been serious about their quest. At this point however, it matters very little.

It seems obvious that Bush was never interested in Bin Laden. Finding Bin Laden would have created nasty problems for the man who is close friends with the Saudi leadership. Dragging the lost son of a prominent Saudi family in front of blood thirsty revenge seeking crowds and eager news media was a scene George and Dick preferred to forgo. Angry as they may have been at the insult hurled at America, these men were first and foremost practical schemers, who were much more interested in using this great opportunity as a way to get control over Iraqi oil reserves. So after a token action in Afghanistan they quickly turned their attention to what they saw as the real prize, Iraq.

Obama may have been right trying to point this out to America, even at a time when doing so was distinctly unpopular. So unpopular in fact that veteran politician Hillary Clinton decided to go along with the majority and "fight the terrorists in Iraq." However right Obama may have been -or maybe he was just trying to distance himself from George and the Republicans- he is doubly wrong today. That is, if he is really in control, which I doubt very much.

Today's fight is, lest anyone forget, is not about Bin Laden, or 9/11, or terrorism, or any such eye catching headlines. The fight in Afghanistan is and has always been about TAP or some similar plan, or scheme to access the riches of the Caspian gas fields. In that sense it is no different from Iraq. Once again America feels it would be better to have more direct control over an important energy resource. Just as Bush would not trust Saddam after his invasion of Kuwait, so the current power mongers no longer trust the Taliban after their support for Al Qaeda.

In both cases, we are talking about a relationship gone sour. Cheney made many visits to Saddam and as long as the dictator was in our camp, we eagerly and anxiously supported his every move. That included "killing his own people." When he became a threat however we wanted to remove him as quickly as possible. Bush Sr. may have been smart to stay out of the Iraqi quagmire and stop short of Baghdad, but that never sat well with the real oilmen who wanted Saddam over with.

The same applied to the Taliban. While we were never so intimate and cozy with those wild natives, Bush did invite the Taliban leadership to his Texas spread to show them our goodwill and support. Although Afghanistan does not have its own oil, it is an important transit point. Its support for a key American venture, the Trans-Afghan Pipeline or TAP is worth the effort. When the Taliban leadership openly defied Bush after 9/11, he had to teach them a lesson and he quickly did. But as soon as Karzai was installed, Bush and Cheney turned their attention to more important unfinished business. George and Dick quickly forgot about the Afghan natives and focused on Saddam instead.

Now Obama is left to clean up after George Jr. just like George Jr. was left to clean up after George Sr. The Taliban have regrouped and they are threatening the frail Afghan puppet government of our buddy Karzai so something needs to be done to ensure TAP will fly. The energy hawks are fuming and Obama may well be president, but he isn't the one calling the shots here.

So it is that America is once again getting mired in a civil war with no clear outcome. This one, unlike Iraq, has all the trappings of a second Vietnam. In the end, there is no other solution for Afghanistan than the Taliban. The irony however, is that this time around the infamous domino theory may well apply. If we are not careful, Pakistan could fall as a result of our Afghan venture. But that will be something for the next administration to worry about.

environmentalism, Berkeley style

I bet most of the country thinks of Berkeley as a leader in environmentalism. A bastion of the greens; and no doubt this is one honor UC is shooting for. Especially now that "green technology" is such a must-have. It is so cutting edge, and with the new administration in Washington, something that is officially endorsed.

Speaking of the new administration, we won't mention how Barack Obama flew to New York for dinner and a Broadway show. How's that for saving the environment? There are no restaurants in DC worthy of the President? How about that vegetable garden that Michelle started?

UC is following in the President's footsteps here. In an expensive looking brochure -no doubt printed on recycled paper with soy ink, I didn't check;) - UC is trying to highlight how it is focusing on the environment. The cutting edge research may raise a few eyebrows. At least, it should raise a few eyebrows. Hopefully it does more than that!

UC is working on gas saving phones. The project has a killer name: Mobile Millenium. It is a collaboration with the US Departments of Transportation and corporate partners. This obvious consumer angle should not be overlooked. What the MM project is aiming to do is to use volunteer's cell phones to help monitor congestion on side roads as well as on major highways. And here comes the pitch (in bold no less): "If 3,000 users shave 30 hours a year from their commute times, the project will save more than 70,000 gallons of fuel, says the research team."

Applause please !

Or how about this cutting edge idea that is run in collaboration with Google? I quote: "Imagine that your thermostat and appliances are so "smart" they can adjust to peak energy costs throughout the day and night to save you money--and help save the planet." Say that again? Who or what are we trying to save here? How about you become so smart that you turn off your appliances and use less energy? How's that for a killer cutting edge research idea?

UC doesn't stop there. They have a section on "Hatching Green Ideas." Printed in green ink no less! Here we learn that scientists "are experimenting with cutting edge photovoltaic materials to make solar prices "dirt cheap." Cutting edge as in silicon, aka dirt? The dirt cheap is a nice touch.

UC hopes that this will "lead to more impactful products reaching the marketplace," and thereby stimulate more unbridled consumption (that last part is mine)?

The common theme is clear: whatever it is you are doing is good, needed and essential. You HAVE to drive, you HAVE to run your appliances, you HAVE to use energy all the time. You need to buy and consume. That is a given. What our green technology is trying to do is make it so you don't have to feel guilty about it!

We will remove the inefficiencies. Because, you see, the problem is with inefficiencies. If there were no traffic jams, we would have no global warming. If everyone had a "smart" thermostat there would be no environmental impact. And if everyone chartered Airforce One and a fleet of limos to go halfway across the country to eat at a restaurant, then we would all be green heroes.

Cheers America! Let the green begin!

stress tests

Let's all rejoice now that our financial system has passed the stress test. Sure the bigger banks need some more money, but fundamentally -whatever that means in this context- they are fine. Unlike the auto-industry, my friends, our banks are essentially well-run businesses led by the best and the brightest our country (aka the world) has to offer. That is why we keep on paying them these huge bonuses. Because, god forbid, what would happen if they ran away? Where would that leave us?

Let me make two observations: the banks and financial institutions caused this crisis. It wasn't the government that said the banks were wrong, it was the market. The "free" market, in case you wonder. Fraud, misbehavior and in general irresponsible management practices got us in this mess. All the while, those same bankers paid themselves huge salaries and bonuses and they threw lavish parties. They still do.

Yet for all their bad behavior the banks were hardly chastised. Even when they continued to pay themselves exorbitant bonuses, the government did not intervene. The Obama camp continued to give them funds and they are planning to give them more. The Obama camp even sat down with them to prepare a stress test. Just like your teacher sat down with you in high school and told you the answers to your exams? Oops got that wrong!

Now take the car makers. The car makers were badly run for sure. They were in trouble. Yet look at how the government responded to them. Obama fired the CEO of GM. He is prepared to let the auto makers go bankrupt. He is withholding funds and beating up auto makers and their unions to renegotiate contracts. The UAW, unlike the Wall Street Bankers has to make concessions. And in this case we are not talking about paying back some undeserved bonuses. We are talking about people forgoing cost of living increases, health care and their retirement benefits. Of course these people are not the geniuses that we need to keep around to run our economy!

You think this is fair? You think this shows leadership in Washington?

Take a look at the donor lists for the presidential campaign. Look at the donor list for Congressional campaigns. Who paid for the lavish parties and the "historic" inauguration of our new president? Are you surprised at what is happening?

Unfortunately it doesn't stop there. By failing to intervene and fix the banking system, our government has all but assured that the crisis will continue. Maybe not immediately so, as the financial wizards can surely cook up another bubble of prosperity. But it won't last. At some point we will have to pay the piper. And the longer we wait the more we will have to pay.

Right now we are seeing the money bubble. Instead of building, we are printing.

The government is printing money at an ever increasing rate. Money that is essentially promissory notes. Ever wonder what will happen when people no longer want all that paper? When people suddenly lose trust? You think it can't happen? Remember how housing prices could never go down either? Think again (and buy some gold. You may need it to buy food one day).

limbaugh logic

I saw the infamous Rush on CSPAN the other day. His speech to Republican faithful. In it he said, no whining. He is a real man. He doesn't whine and he doesn't think his followers should either. Maybe they use opioids for the pain?

In any case, not too long after his famous no whining statement, which he repeated several times for emphasis, he explained what he really wanted and why he had said he wanted Obama to fail. Why? Simple, because he wanted America back. He wanted to have the America that he grew up in, back. 

Mommy! I want my America back! I want things to go back to the way they were! I want to be a baby again and have you take care of me!

How's that for not whining?

Detroit green (and red)

Cadillac just introduced its version of a green car. The Escalade hybrid, a $72,865 monster with a 6.0 liter, V8 engine. Its gas mileage rating is 20/21 mpg. Even the Wall Street Journal thinks the monster is so overloaded with junk that its gas mileage suffers. That should tell you something.

Chrysler too, launched its solution to greenhouse gases. The 2009 Aspen Hybrid 4WD. At $45,570 it is a whole lot cheaper than the Cadillac shoebox, but energy wise, it is a serious competitor. It has a 5.7 liter V8, that gets an amazing 20/22 rating.

You should know that hybrid technology is really a hoax. See some of my earlier postings for more on that. Nevertheless, most hybrid makers do try to save gas in some ways and that is helpful. So hats off to Toyota!

Detroit on the other hand does not even try. And that is why we should let the go out of business. We, the taxpayers should say no to the whiners from Michigan.

Here is failure number one about to happen, for the Democrats and the Obama team. Most likely they will decide they need to save the car makers. Not because it makes any sense whatsoever, but because their constituents and donors at UAW will force their hand. Saving the "big three" is a dumb thing to do, even from a purely economic point of view.  But for Obama, who made energy policy and climate change a big campaign issue, it is a litmus test. Even in these dire economic times, he should stand firm. Especially now.

He should stand firm because climate change is real and it will cost real jobs. There are no two ways about it. It will cause pain and suffering, and if Obama or anyone else for that matter, can't do it in a situation were it makes economic sense, what can we expect in other situations?

The sad truth is that Obama raised a record $750 million to win this campaign. While this is universally praised and admired, it is a setback of unheard of proportions. Not to be too cynical and call it a shame.

So, get ready for step one in the grand dance of paybacks. Saving dinosaurs who day in and day out prove to us that they deserve to go under.

When Cadillac disappears from the face of the planet, it will be a great day for all.

follow the money and other tales

Those looking for change may be in for a surprise. If Barack Obama wins, which now seems all but certain, his successful fundraising may come to haunt his presidency. According to the latest numbers, Obama has raised well over $650 million and that is more than any other presidential candidate ever. And no, these are not the little $25 contributions coming in over the internet, as the party would want you to believe.

Fully three-quarters of Obama's fundraising is big money donations. Big, big money. The type of big money that is looking for favors. And who is there you may ask? How about those investment bankers in need of a government bailout and in fear of more regulation? Some of the people who got Wall Street into trouble may be advising McCain, but the people running those banks, the "greedy Wall Street bankers" are the ones filling Obama's coffers. Those same bankers were more than a little bit ticked off at McCain's language of late.

The GOP depends on two constituencies that have little in common: the fundamentalist christians, and the superrich elite. The elite provides the money, while the christians make up the bodies. McCain may be a maverick but he should know better than antagonize the money men. Sarah maybe delivering the christians but without the money it won't matter much. Those money men have already run over to the other side. They weren't too thrilled with all the talk about "cleaning out Wall Street."

What that also means is that Obama may soon do a Bill Clinton on that tax break for the middle class that will be funded by milking the superrich. We have heard all these promises before. All that talk about change is nothing new. The only thing that ever changes is the "face" in the White House. As I have indicated before, that face is just a face. An actor or puppet, beholden to the puppeteers who hold the money strings. It appears this will soon be more true than ever. $$$

carbon tax

With the upcoming presidential elections, some are worried, while  others think it is about time we should have a carbon tax to fight global warming. But what is a carbon tax other than higher gas prices? And we all know how well that went. Everybody is already rejoicing the fall in gas prices. As soon as gas hit a paltry $4 a gallon, Americans were crying foul.

I have said it many times. If we had just one politician worth his or her salt, they would be calling for $5 a gallon gas minimum. $10 would be much better. That is the best way to discourage wasting oil and gas. It is also the only way that works to reduce greenhouse gases. This past summer, driving was off almost 10%, airlines were cutting back flights, and conservation was on everyone's mind. Our greenhouse gas emissions showed a decline for the first time in 30 years.

Where are our politicians when you need them? At least McCain is open about it and has no trouble admitting he isn't serious. There is something to be said for honesty, even if it is honesty to pander to popular demand.

McCain wants to drill his way out of the "problem." Never mind that it won't work to reduce gas prices or to remove our dependence on foreign oil. What it does, is admit that we do not care more about greenhouse gases and global warming other than saying we do. If we did we would realize that high gas prices are the solution not the problem. If he did, Al Gore would move out of his 35 room mansion and go live in a sensible house.

Obama, the professor and self-proclaimed conservationist, just wants to increase fuel efficiency. We all know -or should know- how that works. It doesn't. Fuel efficiency has made enormous strides over the past 25-30 years, yet we keep on consuming more gas. Fuel efficiency just encourages people to drive bigger cars and drive more. It encourages car makers to load up cars like stuffed McMansions on wheels.

The "other" Obama remedy is technology of course. Green technology. Technology that will help us use more energy and produce less waste and pollution. Never mind the physics, my friends. If you demand it, the great Obama will show his magic and lead the way to greenhouse utopia.

By the way, it is shameful that candidates have now raised almost $1 billion to pay for their election campaign, while decrying the waste and greed on Wall Street. It is more than the bail-out package for big banks.

Yes, Mrs. Obama and McCain, have jointly received about $1 billion in support, about $700 million and $300 million respectively. Wait until all those donors come to the White House to ask for favors. See what will be left then to do the right thing. Why worry about democracy in the Middle East? How about America, folks?

culture war

The WSJ has a piece today on what it calls "Culture War" in the 2008 presidential campaigns. Similar pieces have appeared in the Journal and other media throughout the week. The Journal has had more, given its solidly pro-Republican stance, but even so-called liberal media have dealt with this issue. The issue is Sarah Palin and what she represents and why she exposes Obama's weak spot. A weakness so great, it may cost him the election. 

As soon as the McCain camp announced Palin as their running mate and I was able to see her picture and read a bit about her background, I knew there was trouble. BIG TIME trouble for the Democratic ticket. I said so to many of my friends but they shrugged it off. They pointed out she had no experience, she was a redneck, she was against abortion and gay rights, etc. etc. An endless list, that like much of the official Obama response entirely misses the point. Not only is it irrelevant but every time a critic points out one of Sarah's perceived flaws, it only strengthens the McCain-Palin ticket. Sarah's weaknesses are her strength! 

Putting Sarah in the hot seat and making her sweat can only turn thousands of voters to her rescue. The analogy to Hillary shedding tears in the primaries is stunning. Only -as I pointed out before- Sarah is much better at this than Hillary. It comes natural to her.

In Thursday's editorial Lynn Forester de Rothschild, who admitted being a Democrat, said Democrats need to shake their "elitist" tag. And for those who do not understand what that means and point out how Barack grew up in a poor family, she goes on to explain that "elitism is a state of mind, a view of the world that cannot be simply measured by one's net worth." That same day, he-who-cannot-be named in Democratic circles also made similar points in his editorial "Obama Can't Win Against Palin."

If Obama wants to win he will need to do all the following (and maybe more):

-Stop attacking Sarah Palin. Many have pointed out that he is running for President while she is not. Stepping down to her level or elevating her to his level is asking for defeat.

-Have his party stop attacking Palin. This is less obvious and many believe Obama should focus on McCain and let the others attack Palin. However attacking Palin, esp. the way it is done now, only makes her and the McCain ticket stronger.

If the Democrats want to attack Palin they should change their strategy. But I recommend they lay off. Palin is weakest when ignored.

-Obama must give answers and not just point out what is wrong with the country. He must stand for something, something other than "Change." I am sorry to say, Mr. Obama, but change is now associated with Palin. She represents change in way that no words can undo.

-Obama needs to explain what he wants to do in simple terms. Not just tie McCain to Bush, because it is obvious now that he will be different. Provide solutions, simple solutions, like cut taxes. Not cut taxes for so and so and raise them for someone else. That just doesn't fly as a slogan. If he wants to raise taxes on the rich, he should do so later when he is in office. 

-Obama and the Democrats need to understand that an election is like a sale. You don't need to expose your weaknesses and not everything you say has to be complete and true. It doesn't matter if the media "exposes" you. Just do what W. did and keep repeating the same mantra, even if everyone says it is false. Repeating a simple and appealing message with direct connection to the voter is key.

You need to highlight important points in a SIMPLE manner and coin phrases that stick in people's minds and evoke favorable images. You need to promise people what they want even if it cannot be done, or is physically impossible to do so. Remember the calorie-free energy drinks?

-Make sure the solutions are simple and do not contain three-syllable words. Make sure they do not have a number of alternatives or exceptions and special cases, and other confusing stuff.

-Stick to speeches in large venues, where Obama is great and refrain from doing too many interviews. When doing interviews, make short statements in sound bites, that use simple words instead of droning on an on like he usually does.

-Understand the difference between a speech and a conversation. Don't talk down to people. Don't be the smart-ass senator who has all the answers and will tell you what is good for you.

-Mingle with the common folk and be seen, filmed and photographed in that capacity.

-Change his dress from smart-Harvard lawyer, to a more Palin-like can-do, roll up your sleeves style.

My 2c.

obama's change

I wonder if the democrats realize what kind of change Americans are looking for. After having swept the country with his "change" campaign, Barack Obama is now suddenly finding it hard to believe that McCain and especially Palin have successfully hijacked his campaign slogan. What is even more hard to believe is that he does not seem to understand why that is, and his arguments "I don't understand" and "this is just more of the same" just show how he misses the point. (More cynical persons might say, how his elitist stance is disconnected from the real America)

Americans it appears want not so much change to something new, but a change back to the past. They want to turn the clock back. They want to change things back to where they were. Back to the good old times, when gas was less than a $1 a gallon, when they could fly and drive all over the place and when they did not have to worry about greenhouse gases, endangered species, and all those other "nasty" items that interfere with their daily consumerist happy-go-lucky attitude.

Sarah Palin is the perfect embodiment of the kind of change Americans are looking for. The more we hear about her so-called shortcomings -or what the opponents perceive as shortcomings- the more she becomes the ideal candidate of change. Her small town, no-nonsense, hard core religious, hockey-mom, all-american image is exactly the kind of change Americans are so desperately yearning for. Everything about Sarah Palin, from her hairdo to her glasses cries out change.

Furthermore, the Obama camp now seems puzzled and the very fact that they are illustrates why they are so vulnerable. In essence they are disconnected from the middle America that they need to win the election. 

And yet it is so obvious what their problem is because they faced it before. When Hillary sat down with the blue-collar folk to shoot the breeze, she won and she won with great margins. And even though Hillary is very good at this, she is no match for Sarah here. 

But Hillary's move came too late. By then, the game was already lost. Maybe that is why the Obama folks were able to brush it aside or did not pay attention.

Well, my friends, it is back. But this time bigger and better than ever before. And if Obama could afford to ignore the lessons of Hillary drinking beer and pressing the flesh, he cannot afford to ignore the Palin magic. Better scramble and do something quick.

Let's face it America, what sounds better to you. Going moose hunting with John and Sarah or having lengthy discussions about the finer points of the law with Barack and Joe?

And therein, my friends lies the outcome of this election.