2004 Chevrolet SSR For Sale By Owner/Sold

Right click pics for full size






This truck has 43,000 miles and is in excellent condition. It is the 1SB option pack without chrome wheels. This option pack includes carpeted and "wood" stripped bed, side saddle bags, cargo net, storage bag for toneau cover, and hide away hitch and 6CD Bose stereo and gauge pack. This is the 5.3L 300HP w/4 speed OD auto and 3.73 "Posi" rear.

Serious inquiries contact cbutcherATbakervalleyDOTnet

$20,000

Where Now, Libya

It would appear that the Qaddafi era in Libya is drawing to a close, not done but ending. It will probably close messily, but with that guy out if not dead. The immediate challenges are to keep the necessary infrastructures functioning, electricity, garbage collection - the stuff that keeps the place from being unlivable. There may be no real political structure within Libya but there is a structure that supports the day to day life support system. It will be a challenge.

The piece that has pundits and pols disturbed is the political outcome. There doesn't seem to have ever been any sort of political system in Libya, political in the sense of opposing points of view being somehow accommodated. There certainly has been a system of cronyism, propaganda, repression, and militarism but nothing properly called politics. This lack of traditions or actual systems has folks in an uproar.

You would think to hear them that they are regarding a pack of monkeys or something as informed as that. Despite all the propaganda and the rest, Libyans seem to have been able to figure out that not only was something wrong but that there is something to replace that wrongness. It is repeatedly pointed out that Libya is tribal and regional, as though that means that none of those folks have had to get along with each other and competing ideas and agendas. That is flatly ridiculous. What they do not have is the experience of an established political system.

I'm not so sure that is an actual drawback. They do not have the experience of a history of, say English Common Law to fall back on but they do have an idea of fairness violated. Putting together a system doesn't mean you have to a previous system you've lived under to use as an example. What you need to do it successfully is to understand that your point of view isn't the only one to be considered. (Maybe our government could learn that) It is also necessary to understand that not everything is open to consideration. Another Qaddafi is not open to consideration, for one example. Government has to be able to change, it has to be able to meet new conditions with new answers. It also has to leave all its inhabitants feeling as though they have a stake in its continuation. (another consideration for our own) It is not all that difficult to keep a privileged few from taking over the place with the examples of others to look at (ahem).

I think it will be much more difficult for a place like Egypt to overcome the faux political system than it is for Libyans to create one. There certainly are those who have a lot to lose without Qaddafi to keep them on top and they certainly won't like it. The absence of a faux system to keep them protected could easily turn into an advantage - or a bloodbath - or both.

I'm not silly enough to predict any outcomes in Libya but I would like to stand up to the doomsayers. I'd also like to stand up for people, actual people as opposed to the elite who seem to think they're destined to run any damned place that exists. I've found that people in general seem to be able to figure things out when they're not stultified by generational bullshit.

NO - this is not a foray back into goddam politics.

Oh No, I've Had A Relapse Into Politics

Damn blast it, I've had a slip and paid attention to politics. I could feel it coming, shoot, saw it well before the collision. In point of actual fact, I picked up the remote and pushed the button that brings up the channel menu and chose ... holy cow ... Rachael Maddow. Sure, I think she's a sweetie, but it wasn't for her personality - it was the damn politics that I went for. My blasted drug sucked me back in and what did I get for my trouble? Things like the FAA shut down.

Should I really re-think my decision to get the hell out of that addiction on the basis of politics that shut down an agency like the FAA and cost $200M/wk put 70,000 people out of work and involves things like ... for pete's sakes ... going through the skies at hundreds of miles an hour in a metal tube and putting it on the ground at 3 or more times the speed limit in any state?

The hell with that noise; and it is noise - there is no crisis of any magnitude beyond the GOPers desire to break unions.

Oh hell, there is other stuff on the show that is about as stupid but if I think about it too much there'll be no going back so the menu got pointed at the Sirius Network's BB King's Bluesville and clicked. Jimmy Burns is now bopping my night and making way more sense singing about a "train" he'd like to "ride." Euphemistic sex beats political jabber and I'm back on the road to recovery. (for now)

Blue Collar Prejudice

* Posted previously and I thought maybe it needed saying again...

I bet you're thinking, 'What???' Let's take a look at this like it might actually exist.

Name a television entertainment program with a blue collar male that is something other than a dolt, an "Archie Bunker." Or try to find one where such a character isn't based around sloth and irresponsibility. I can think of 2 programs, "Made In America" and "Dirty Jobs" both of which are "reality TV." Regarding sloth and irresponsibility, productivity has increased virtually every year for 20 years. Workers today are getting more done in a work day than in the "good ole days."

Here's some reality to go with TV mindlessness, over a 20yr period most blue collar job wages have remained static or declined. Yes, working harder and better and making less. In that same period corporate profits have increased over 700%. Working for the same employer for an extended period is increasingly unlikely. Blue collar jobs are relentlessly dangerous and harmful to health, lower income health problems are frequently blamed on poor lifestyle choices, the reality is that the nature of the work is frequently the base problem.

A large percentage of skilled blue collar workers require a 2 income household to keep a family of 4 above the poverty line. This is not about extra income to buy expensive toys, this is about reliably keeping a roof, food, and transportation and these people are one health problem from disaster, if they have health insurance (unlikely) they face deductibles nearing 1/2 year wages which is very nearly pointless to have.

Blue collar workers face increasing employment competition with illegal hires. This competition takes two forms, one is direct hiring competition and the other is wage depression. This competition is largely ignored in any debate regarding illegal workers. The divorce between blue collar workers and their fellow citizens is increasingly evident. Debates arise concerning product pricing at market and the legality of the employees producing the product, statements are made to the effect that produce prices would skyrocket if legal hiring were in place, which ignores the fundamental fact that labor is one of the smallest portions of a product's price at market and that the associated costs of illegal employment far exceed the savings of illegal hiring. The educated "progressive" elements commiserate with the plight of illegal aliens and ignore the steady depredation on legal blue collar families. Apparently the ignorant buffoons of TV land are unworthy of concern.

No doubt voting patterns have influenced this trend. There is an apparent disregard of their own economic interest by blue collar voters as they have trended Republican. While this conflict in interest is obvious, many of its roots are not. There has been no evident economic policy benefiting blue collar over the last 20 years and that period is not all Republican. It is not difficult to see blue collar workers regarding their economic best interests as a hopeless case and voting some other interest that feels close to home. When a person has very little, perceived assaults on the few things they do hold are taken very seriously. One of the side effects of the gun control debate was to tell the blue collar worker that he is too ignorant and too irresponsible and too criminally inclined to own a firearm. His "betters" disapproved of the gun owning lifestyle. Accurate? Possibly not, politically potent? You bet.

These people trade their time and their bodies for income, they work long hard hours and get little for it. Little pay, little respect. Many jobs that 30 years ago were held in high esteem are now little regarded. It is not as though the work has changed, it is the point of view that has changed. Maybe it's time to give it a re-think. Maybe it's time to look around and see the things produced with the hands and backs of your fellows and give some regard to their value, all those paper assets and banknotes are derived from those things.

Sometimes You Out Grow A Thing, Like A Bike

I previously mentioned my friend Phillip and his 650 one lunger. What I didn't mention was that he just got his motorcycle endorsement late last summer and it is the bike he learned to ride on - sort of. Phillip started riding with me in late spring and there was a lot he needed to learn and in the process of nearly 3,000 miles up to now he did. He also found that the bike wasn't designed for hundreds of miles at highway speeds and that he'd gotten all he could from it.

Soooo... we took a ride over to High Desert Harley Davidson in Meridian, ID - the folks who've taken care of my bike. This is Phillip's 2011 Wide Glide, 96 inch six speed in Burnt Sienna and Black.

***click to enlarge


Our bikes make a pretty colorful piece of scenery. Better yet, it does everything Phillip needs in a bike, it is stable and powerful - also loud and beautiful.



I've always considered the Dyna frame one of the nicest rides Harley makes and the Super Glide family one of the best deals. The Wide Glide with the rake on the forks looks like it should be going a million miles an hour sitting still. Phillip is a pretty understated kind of a guy, but this thing is breaking that mold. He uses Phillip in place of his Chinese name and he was born and raised in Hong Kong and owns, big surprise, a Chinese restaurant and lounge. He is a friend and has turned into a great riding partner ... and he now has an extremely cool motorcycle.

A Dinner Run, A Long One

My friend Phillip and his wife Gina, myself and my wife Scottie took a little ride for dinner. This involved OR7 to the Dooley Mt Hwy OR245 to US26 east to Ontario, OR and Mackey's Irish Pub and great food. Dooley Mt Hwy has a huge number of curves and this shot is on one of them and the blue grey bike is Phillip's 650 Suzuki Savage one lunger. It sure isn't much of bike but it is something to learn on, which he's done. Yes, my Harley is that much bigger.

***click pic for full size


From Ontario we took OR201 to Weiser to I-84W to Cement Plant Rd (old US 30) into Baker City. This shot is one I've tried to get for years, sunset over the Elkhorn Mts above Baker City. Really, click it to enlarge.


Oh yeah, 218 miles round trip.

One Of My Favorite Short Rides

Union Oregon is north of Baker City and it is the mid-point of one of my favorite shorter rides. Just outside Baker City north is OR203 known as Medical Springs Hwy. This picture is taken on the plains outside Baker City.

***click pic for full size


This picture is shot north east into the Wallowa Mountains and was taken in early July. At Union you will find Poppa's Steakhouse and Saloon and on Thursday night you can get smoked prime rib and Friday smoked ribs and the smoking is in-house and beyond excellent. The route is OR203 to Union from Union south on OR237 to North Powder and US30 back to Baker City. It is a round trip of 85 miles with a really swell meal in Union. The roads are excellent and the traffic light to non-existent.

Now That I Know What It Means To Be A Democrat

As I stated previously I was quite willing to hold fire about bills regarding debt ceiling bills, I have done so. I now know what it is that defines Democrats at the national level with control of the Senate and the Presidency. Knowing that, I'll say what it is, it is the slower path to GOPer wingnuttery. It is a matter of getting to today's version of TeaParty stupidity and plutocratic agenda in a decade rather than a couple years.

I'll be blunt - I'll not be a party to such horseshit, I'll let those who love excuses and cowardice take the reins, or load, or act as though they give a good goddam. I simply cannot continue to divide my thinking between what works and is right and what isn't "as bad as." You like "not as bad as" you can help yourself to as much as you please.

I've had a (D) behind my name since 1971 and I was of that persuasion from time of Kennedy and Nixon, well previous to being able to register anything. I've watched what happened to the "Democratic Brand" for all those decades and I've done what I could to affect the direction of drift - including being willing to try for the US House so things could be said. I'm stubborn about such things and I've been stubborn for a damn long time in the face of all evidence.

The so-called middle has won the day, it has made itself clear that GOPerism is the way. I'll let that go if not actively help it happen. By rights I ought to be a part of advancing the GOPer way and get done so people can see what it means. But what I can't do is be an active part to harming my fellow citizens so I'll just let it go. I don't know if I'll even bother to vote, that's well up in the air, but I do know that if the public wants what the GOPers offer, they ought to have it and get to live with it. That certainly means that I'll have to struggle a lot harder to support the Plutocrats in the manner they desire and have a lot less left for me and mine. What I can do is join the great unwashed ignorant masses in not giving a damn and ignore and be unaffected by the scoffing middle-way Democrats in their self-satisfied "not as bad as" theme.

This blog thing has become immaterial and irrelevant. Maybe I'll post pictures or
stuff but look elsewhere for politics because I simply can no longer stand to give a damn. My affiliation with the Democratic Party is at an end, I probably won't even bother to change the registration seeing it as further exercise in pointlessness.

I'd like to thank the political readers I've had, take care and do whatever seems right to you.

Good night and good-bye.

Outcomes Matter

I know there are actually a pretty fair number of "progressive" US Senators and a good percentage of House Democrats are as well. This, of course, depends heavily on what progressive means (or hell - Democratic). I'll get along with some generic generally understood "progressive" rather than a named Caucus, still a doubtful exercise, but one has to start somewhere. Anyhow, I'll just postulate that there is a pretty large percentage of national Democratic legislators who could be called progressive. Now that's thrashed out...

You might think that would have some meaning. You'd be FOS if you did. Take a look at legislation passed. What the Democrats managed to do was to pass a previous decade or two GOP legislation. Now, the Democrats only control the Senate and the Presidency. The President manages to advocate for the stuff of one or two decades previous GOPerism. Sure, I have the luck to live in Oregon and having 4 of 5 House members as Democrats and passably progressive to go along with Sens Wyden and Merkley and all that means is ... well, what we've gotten.

It is easy enough to see that President Obama is far less harmful to Democratic ideas than any of the GOPers and I suppose that can be presented as a reason to vote for him. There is a problem with that, the Democrats tried that in 2010 and to a significant extent it didn't work (a whole bunch of Bluedogs found out). The President I worked for and voted for in the Primaries and General has turned out to be the best of the bunch and about what I expected (a bit more of what I expected, maybe). When you toss the reality of LIEberman, Bauchus, and Nelson you get something that you have to try pretty hard to call Democratic. It comes down to the most important people in the room are hardly recognizable as Democrats and you get what we've gotten.

The President and Speaker Spoke

And what did we get? The President almost kicked the GOP in the teeth all the while proposing GOP policy. The Speaker managed to start out with lies and then a major FU. It seems that the GOPer policy of holding the economy hostage will either succeed or kill the economy. Somehow we're supposed to believe that something Democratic will be included in this while the President takes the GOP approach called the Reid plan with no revenues.

Maybe you can start to understand that we're not talking about pissing off the Left, we're talking about doing the GOP dirty work and calling it compromise. It is not compromise to do what the other side wants, period. This was a speech by a Democratic President? This is a proposal by a Democratic Senate Majority Leader? I won't call compromise a dirty word, but I'd call this a dirty deal by cowards.

Where the hell does that leave most people who'd call themselves Democrats? (I don't mean my lefty friends) As this plays out I am assessing my affiliation. I don't like what I'm watching.

Wanna Make Any Bets?

So after all the bullshit around the debt ceiling ends, what will that look like? I have no faith that anything that looks remotely Democratic will be the outcome. If that is how it goes, who gets blamed?

Bachmann And Migranes

The Daily Caller (no link, ever) published a bit of a hit piece on Rep Michelle Bachmann's migranes. Of course this went all over the internet. It seems she controls this debilitation with medication, as do many others. If you're new and drawn in by the 'google' let me assure you that I think Bachmann is a clown with an attitude - no I don't like her.

The "Caller" is a GOPer organ so one has to wonder to whose benefit this story was designed for. I don't think those enthralled by Bachmann's craziness would be much put off by such a story, but considering the publisher and their agenda it is obvious that it is supposed to work to some one's benefit. It is pretty safe to doubt that Mittens is their guy, and Pawlenty is a bit too soft for them. I'd guess this is an opening salvo for the TexAss godliness governor Perry. There is no way Perry and Bachmann can share the same oxygen in a GOP Primary - they simply split that god-botherer vote and marginalize each other.

Tucker Carlson's vanity publication going after Bachmann says something about the state of the bunch running as of now and how the GOP feels about it. The shapeshifter Mitt doesn't do much for the GOPers other than to assure the monied interests that somebody will look out for them with some modicum of sanity. Pawlenty has proved he couldn't punch his way out of a wet paper bag and the rest are just jokes. This means Bachmann, in the absence of someone else, starts to look like a credible player in the Primaries. Barring a serious mishap for Obama, Michelle looks so poor against him as to cost the GOP not only in a General Election in 2012 but in future elections and that might be the why of "migraines."

If the idea of this is to benefit Perry, you really have to feel pretty amused by what passes for the GOP in today's world. Oh hell, you have to be amused by them or be horrified - anyhow.

Debt Ceiling Resolution?

Since I've managed to carp pretty strongly about this "budget" resolution to the debt ceiling I'll go ahead and step up with my predictions of how it actually goes from horrid to just bad and unlikely.

Horrid is the one where House GOPers manage to put us into defualt. I'm sure the plutocrats don't want that, but how much leverage they have with the lunatics is open to question.

The next one in the steps up from lunacy is where Democrats let all the pain fall onto those who can't take much more resulting in nothing in results to deficit - essentially a cave to House GOPer near loons.

The least likely outcome is a ceiling increase without strings, or one that makes it appear that the President is responsible (McConnell). The only way this happens is if the plutocrats make it clear to the loons that they'll crush them flat for not letting it happen - and making them believe it. It might be best for the nation of all alternatives, even if it is correct.

Oh hell, I'll be more clear. If it would be good for the nation as a whole it has no chance and if it is good for corporatism and plutocracy it is likely. Without a major shock to the electoral system that is the course set for us. Since Congress and the President have managed to kick the can of the BushCo tax cuts down the road this day has been coming - quicker and quicker - and at some near point reaching this kind of debacle for the simple reason that the US was spending way too much without revenue.

Look, between wars, corporate swilling, and waste the tax revenues have been way short for quite awhile and this recession pushed the whole show over the brink. I have never been and am not much in the line of a deficit hawk but everyone saw this coming and it can't go on and ... we'll continue to pour money into Middle Eastern Wars as though nothing else matters. Even raising taxes won't do the job any more so stuff has to be cut. The question is whose ox gets gored in the cut regime. The answer, my guess is, whoever can't afford lobbiests and doesn't vote regularly. There ya go, we're really screwed and the recourse seems to be handing the tiller over to the lunatics or more of the same GOP policy dressed up as Democratic policy.

Chambliss And Nelson ???

So John King of CNN has Chambliss and Nelson on as champions of the "Gang of Six" plan? That is just wonderful, Right and Righter as champs. Maybe you can figure out why legislation today winds up to the right of '70s GOPers. You got a health care reform plan right out of the GOP opposition to Hillary Care that is now Obama sCare and banking reform that is that in name. Go down the damn list and tell me why I should listen to a single thing Nelson has to say as a Democrat.

Democrats will define themselves for pretty much a generation with what they do. Wanna make any bets?

If you think the plutocrats will be in the least inconvenienced by anything Chambliss and Nelson won't oppose or that the poor and working class won't get the knife in the process you are an optimist of real proportions.

OK, I'll hold fire ... for awhile. I know DC gives a damn if I just up and quit.

BTW - "Gang" is probably charitable as an appellation.

GOPers And Debt

The GOPers seem to be in hostage taking mode or in the position of dead hostages don't matter. Either position works for opposing Democrats. Now it does seem as though almost all economists are scared spitless of default and yet a good sized piece of the GOPers are stating publicly that it just doesn't matter. Another piece simply don't seem to be able to follow the numbers from the BushCo tax cuts sufficiently to have reason get into play.

The dead hostage bunch likes to make the case that the President has the ability to decide who gets paid, which is true. The problem is that a ten percent whack to the GDP will result in a serious crash no matter who gets paid what. They will tell their ignorant true believers that the crash happened because the President made the wrong (ie socialist) choices. They win with their nut-base no matter what when the crash comes.

The hostage takers are betting that the President and Democrats will blink (or more correctly swerve in the game of chicken). What they ignore at their peril is that Democrats would be committing electoral suicide to swerve. Not just some, but almost all of them, and the polls are real clear. They also manage to ignore that doing anything about the deficit without taking back some of the gifts to the plutocrats is impossible. Electorally the consequences to them depend on whether they can continue to successfully play their "job killing tax increases" mythology to their base and some "middle" voters in the face of what history says since BushCo did it.

It is my guess that the President and a bunch of Democratic legislators believe some sort of reason will seap into the ranks of the GOP. I see a complete lack of evidence of such a thing. Most of us have zero ability to do anything to prepare for the consequences of a failure of that optimism. It seems the results will be either a car crash involving a tree or a long fall off a cliff depending on default or cave in and the same 27%ers* will be cheering - despite what happens to them.

*Those who'd be crushed by drastic cuts will also continue to not vote - either from GOP disenfranchisement or apathy. The GOP** knows it and counts on it.

**So do the "Ben Nelsons" of the Democratic world.

'Faux' :News Corp And Murdoch In Trouble?

You'd get the feeling from watching the news lately that 'News' Corp might be in a bit of difficulty over the junk they got up to at News Of The World over in England. It certainly has stirred up the Brits to find out just exactly how corrupt the relationship between their government and Murdoch's Empire has been. Now, it certainly is a valid question to ask just how it is that it has taken this long. Consider that they have published headlines claiming credit for the election of a party?

The Brits and their political parties have pretty much just plain ignored real obvious evidence that something has been broken for some time. Once you face up to that, you find that what broke things loose was a specific piece of wrong doing - not the fact that the system was flat out corrupt. It just isn't a problem that Rupert Murdoch runs their political system, it is about a dead girl and hacking.

According to Murdoch, himself, the problem was with 1% of his empire. He's shut that down and shifted the business to one of his other papers at the cost of 200 some jobs. Pretty much meaningless in terms of business. The BSkyB purchase may be off the table for now; and that is now. At this moment politicians are running away from their buddy Rupert, but neither he nor his empire have gone away, the back door to 10 Downing or whatever will still be open once the furor dies down. Keep in mind that everyone is looking right now and that won't last.

The horrifying consolidation of media in the US continues, essentially unopposed by anyone with actual power. Only the most blindly stupid don't consider NewsCorp a defacto GOP enterprise - or possibly the GOP a defacto NewsCorp enterprise. GOPers and FauxNews fans still consider the NYT and WaPo and ABC, CBS, and NBC to be liberal news propaganda - despite their corporatist fluffing exercises and stenography as balance.

Short of some memo from Rupert approving bribes and hacking the "I had no idea" crap will carry the day. Too many politicians in this and other countries owe NewsCorp big time and the public doesn't want truth or fact based analysis since that might challenge their ideological mythologies. The masters of the universe know that control of information is the trump card in dominance and the public flatly doesn't give a damn as long as they're not challenged or crushed in one fell blow.

Rupert and NewsCorp will be just fine and will continue to win the GOPer hearts and the rest of the media will continue to be useless to informing the public because those who care about it have power and money and those who'd oppose it have squat. Maybe if everything just completely crashes...

Not even then, bet ya.

Motorcycle Service Fun (Sarcasm)

Some of you know that I own an FXSTSSE3 and that I ride - a lot. (in English that's a 2009 Custom Vehicle Operations Screaming Eagle Springer Soft-tail) Riding a lot means that Harley-Davidson's 2 year unlimited milage warrantee expired this mid-May and the bike just rolled over 40K miles. That expiration means that I feel free to do my own maintainance. I know a company can't make you use their service centers to honor warrantees, but I also know that this is an expensive bike that gets way more miles than Harley anticipated and conversations that start and end with "your people are the only ones who ever touched it" cut a lot of wiggles out. Yes, I own the actual Harley service manual for that motorcycle.

So, back to my tale. I am mechanically adept, I am damned good with tools and with reading, understanding, and following instructions. I cannot do anything with the computerized bits but that is outside the perview of service. Some of the service is complex, partly because the bike has a springer front end but it isn't beyond me or anyone competent. The last service was done while I was on the road back from FL and it seems that somebody managed to not understand torque specifications. To change the oil in the primary case you pull the drain plug in the bottom and then remove the primary cover to replace the oil. The drain plug was no problem, the #27 torx head screws in the primary cover were an issue, well ... two of them were. The specification are 84-108 inch pounds which isn't a lot. The top two screws refused to move with a hardened tool steel socket and 1/4 inch rachet. The torx grooves on the top one simply started going away, even with tapping with a light brass hammer and that is what it took for the next one left to it. The top one took being driven loose with a chisel, a bad thing, but I did get the cover off and the oil replaced. I will have to replace those once I can get to a dealer. I was not happy.

The next problem point was the oil filter, no filter wrench I could put on it would budge the damned thing. Not the light rubber strap wrench which should easily have removed it, and not even the Harley wrench borrowed from a local motorcycle shop. This filter is to be torqued 1/2 to 3/4 turn from gasket contact by specs. That is a bit more than you could manage with your bare hand, but it isn't a heck of a lot. I wound up driving a screw driver into the filter and cranking on it - not once, but three times for a total of 3/4 turn and then the Harley wrench barely got it off. At that point the gasket was squealing as it turned. I don't know how much beyond gasket contact that thing was turned but it was a lot and with holes through the side of the filter a lot of oil ran out on the engine.

The engine and tranny in these bikes go through a very wide temperature range, they get darned hot and they are subject to vibrations and that is a consideration whenever messing with one. But way tighter is not way better. This is what Harley publishes torque specifications for, that difficult environment. By the time I was done with these problems I was pretty unhappy - swear words were involved.

The oil all looked good which in nice and having nice fresh oil in the bike is very good - and better yet, I won't have this mess again.

What Did Anybody Think Would Happen?

The jobless numbers went up last month because the jobs added simply were well short of population growth. The stark part was the break out between public and private sectors. The private sector added 60K jobs and the public sector shed 40K getting a net of plus 20K.

Low tax rates on the rich have not resulted in jobs, not since GWB got them, vast profits for favored industries have not produced jobs, in point of fact the housing bubble was the job driver for GWB while everything else went to hell. Why people can't manage to see that the GOP policies have not produced spit is beyond me.

The actual numbers exist that demostrate that the GOPer policies are bad for the economy and bad for the general citizenry and yet... well, we're talking about the damned debt ceiling and crashing the economic clown* car.

*if you don't think this economy deserves that level of derision ... well ...

GOPers And Their Pledges

Michelle Bachmann got herself into some hot water with her signature on the Family Something Pledge thanks to its reference to black children being more likely to be raised by two parent families under slavery than under Obama. It is a part and parcel with the GOPer Grover Norquist stupidity in relation to taxes. To be sure there is a lot of other noxious stuff in the pledge she signed, just as there is in the Norquist idiotology.

What they seem to see is the hanging plum of getting a segment of voters on board without seeing the actual meaning of the stupidity they're signing onto. To be sure, a Christian Taliban may not seem like a problem to a Bachmann just as subsidies for targeted favorite companies aren't a problem for some. There are consequence, though.

I don't think potential Bachmann voters are much bothered by the slavery thing or the rest of it and I don't think potential Paul Ryan voters are much bothered by hedgefund managers paying less tax percentage than actually poor people. The problem for the GOPers is that these folks get to be their public face to a public that might pay attention.

Democrats Will Define Themselves

Thanks to the bullpucky argument about the debt ceiling (this is debt not new expenditures) the deficit hawks and others in the GOP will force Democrats to define themselves. I'd say it is the case that Democrats don't want to define themselves as shown by their behavior over the past couple years (or hell - decades). I don't suppose there's much debate that the GOPers have defined themselves as the Party of Theocracy and Plutocracy with their voters opting for one or the other of those defining features.

While the Democrats have shown little inclination (through results) to do something other than coddle the Plutocrats, there has been a continuing mythology that it is the party of the ordinary citizen. What the GOPers have managed with the debt ceiling nonsense* is to force, through the application of a gun to the head approach, the Democrats to actually take some kind of public stand. It seems the GOPers are unwilling to let them weasel out of the defining business.

What I have decided to do is to let this month's nonsense play itself out and see just how the Democrats do define themselves. Since they've already caved to the idea that the existing debt/debt ceiling is the budget I don't have a lot of optimism for what that definition is going to be.**

*you can certainly include WI, OH, FL, & ETC

**certain definitions could make me willing to join the the ranks of "as if it matters"

Don't expect much in the line of posts... Heh - you already don't.

GOP Economic Sabotage

It appears that some in some form of national Democratic leadership have brought themselves to the point of stating that the GOP is engaging in economic sabotage. Now, it has been my position since St Ronnie that economic sabotage was being conducted on the American public. That public hasn't been willing to engage in that discussion - not as long as it was the poor, working poor, and blue collar who were getting their throats cut - it seems enough of that public is willing since those reluctant Democrats are speaking up.

You bet, I'm just being mean and expecting waaaaayyyy too much - well other than this - have you heard any of this up until now? It isn't like this is something real new or that the Democrats haven't gone along with much of it all the way up to now. Will it stop here? Hah...

Not Too Many Posts...

You may have noticed a spate of posts and then an entire lack. Some work came my way. Then there is the matter of what has passed for politics lately ... yes I do actually mean lately. I'm more impressed by an elementary playground riot than what is passing for politics over the last couple weeks.

The outrage meter burnt out, circuits fried. Along with the meter the humor reservoir dried up. I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time in our history outside the Civil War that things have gotten this out of hand but that's not much consolation to living in it.

How is it I'm supposed to give a damn about something that is just plain stupid? Sure, I'll wait and see how this summer plays out, but I don't have high expectations when one Party is out to lunch and the other is trying to do reasonable deals with them.

Moderate Republicans - Bill Clinton Mentions Them

So, they must exist? Bill, to paraphrase, said that a moderate Republican could give Obama a real run. I'm not sure which political landscape the ex-Pres is watching, but the one I'm seeing on display is the one where the moderate Republican's name is Barack Obama - even if he is running under the blanket of a (D).

Don't misunderstand that - in today's climate the President is practically a progressive radical. I don't pretend to mind read the President, out side my pay grade and capabilities - what I can do is look at outcomes. So can you.

It has been demonstrated to my satisfaction that there are no "moderate" Republicans at any national level and none at most state levels. You could argue about NY, but that is NY.

I'm sorry Pres. Clinton - you, sir, are FOS.

The Constitution and Debt and Congress

I present for your perusal Art 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. I give full credit to Bruce Bartlett and Lawrence ODonnell for bringing it back to my consciousness in this mud fight over the debt ceiling.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Since most of you readers know where my sympathies lie I won't bore you with that. The Article seems pretty clear to me, the debts incurred by the US are its debts and won't be questioned. It doesn't seem in the least odd to me that debts incurred by the US are its debts and the US is responsible for them as legally entered into contracts and must be honored. That, in itself, is the reason why most think it would be catastrophic to default on that debt and it is the reason people are willing to let the US assume debt. Whatever it is that you think about government spending, that spending has been done on the authority of the citizenry of the US whatever their political leanings.

Setting a budget is certainly the business of the Congress, primarily the House, but obligations are not subject to political high-jinks. It is not the business of Congress to hold hostage the debt and obligations of the United States for any reason. There is a difference that seems to have evaded the Congress of the US.

and a few others...

GOP Movie Fantasy World

Sure, some of us noticed that Michelle Bachman got John Wayne's birthplace wrong, not Waterloo, IA, and that caused some giggles. That isn't what matters, not even a little bit.

What matters is the theme she was hitting, she wants to live in John Wayne's America. That America is a Hollywood Production, it does not and never did exist. John Wayne was only a brave dedicated soldier on the movie set, he only played a part in movie sctipts that had little to do with history. The pictures and dialogue from the screen are just that, they are not reality, they are not a true picture of America at any time other than very exceptionally and John Wayne's flicks are not among the exceptions.

This is not a Michelle thing, it is practically the foundation of the Modern GOP. As you pick through their policy stands you find almost nothing that reflects reality or even a return to some previous reality. Their ideas and policy ideas are the stuff of fantasy. They sell their voters on the concept of a return to some previous foundation of morality. Gays are scarcely something new, not being closeted and scared to death is fairly recent. Movie stars that were idolized in those halcyon days turn out to have been ... well, really queer. That fierce warrior John Wayne never served a day in his life, while somebody like that goofy likeable Jimmy Stewart certainly did. St Ronnie, of revered GOP mythology, never saved a wagon train or served or own a chimp - he was a figment of Hollywood imagination now set into cement as a Great President.

There were no Happy Days, the Fifties sucked really bad for an awful lot of Americans, WWII was an ugly nasty brutish affair, you could go on and on about the taming of the West, the Revolution, the Gilded Age and most of American History. That's not about hate America - that's about love the real thing and understand how and why we are here today. There were real and astounding accomplishments during the Gilded Age and there were horrid conditions and actions accompanying them. You cannot understand the Gilded Age unless you know what it was and how it worked out - and that isn't available from a Hollywood Movie Script. You just cannot address today on the basis of imaginary images. You cannot, for example, set a tax policy that works based on the idea that cutting taxes increases revenue if it just never happened except in your fevered imagination. You cannot do anything about the outcomes of slavery by pointing to scripts rather than the reality of racism and institutionalize poverty to just deny it exists or is justified.

I like movies, I'm willing (if it is any good) to suspend disbelief for awhile and let the fantasy be momentary reality. I sure the hell don't expect to see hobbits and wizards out there saving civilization from the orcs.

I'm So Wrong On Economics...

For quite some time now I've had some things to say about tax rates and the rich and ultra-rich that involve dissuading them from wringing every last cent out of the economy. Awhile ago I was gratified to see that somebody with qualifications was tracking along where I'd been. The plutocratic right, quite naturally, pushed back.

Well, Robert Reich was having none of it. Not even a little bit of it. Yes, he has more and better credentials than I do and he used actual numbers but he said what I said. Let's try to pay attention and not act as though the GOP bullying is going to get them anywhere. Um, Democrats?

Why do I have the distinct impression this is wishful thinking?

Hey, See That Comment Button?

Yeah, you're allowed to use it, even encouraged to use it. Please do.

This'll be around for awhile.

In Honor Of Congress A Tasteless Photo Of Self

I won't even bother to try to deny to the media that it's me.

I don't suppose sex is the first thought that occurs...

ah well

You Can Tell The GOP Something But It's Probably Pointless

Hey, Family Values Guys:

I know in relation to gay marriage you like to portray me and others like me as dedicated to the destruction of marriage and modern civilization. I am aware of the tradition of asserting a homosexual agenda.

Let me assure you of the Family Values persuasion - I don't give a good goldamn if Hank and Harry want to get married any more that I give a rat's patoot if John and Mary want to get married. I don't know them and I'm not invited to the nuptials or the more fun reception. I don't care! I have NO agenda and I have no approval of any of their proposed unions. I have no idea whatever if they should get married, if they're doomed to divorce, spousal beatings, or any other damn thing about it.

What I do know is that I am firmly of the belief that each and every law-abiding citizen should have the same rights and responsibility as any other citizen. There are some good things that are connected to getting married and there are some serious responsibilities that go along with it as well. Ask anyone getting divorced if that isn't the case. I am a married hetero-sexual male and there is nothing in the marriage of anyone else that is going have the least affect on that.

When I have straight friends getting married I have hopes for them to be happy and successful in their union. I have the same hopes for my gay friends. This is because I know these people and have a reason to care about their marriage. I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why I should care about some anonymous marriage or make it any of my business and I have no intention of randomly encouraging it (or for that matter - discouraging it).

I do not give the least bit of a fat rat's ass if anybody I don't know gets married or not. Now we get to the crux of the issue, because I do want law abiding citizens to have the same rights and responsibilities I do very much give a damn if they can get married.

Now do you understand?

No?

I thought not.

Democrats Lose By Joining Cuts Jabber

Congress and then the White House have budget difficulties to deal with along with a looming debt ceiling problem. There sure are a lot of issues at play in this mess but one thing is real clear, spending and revenue are out of joint - pretty seriously. You sure can try to address such a problem from only one edge, but that does mean that half results ensue or unacceptable consequences ensue.

The second Democrats start to talk about cuts, sensible cuts, or any kind of cuts without taxation reform they have accomplished two things that are bad for them and the nation. First they have ceded to the one side approach and the two prong approach simply disappears. Secondly by engaging in cuts dialogue they put themselves into comparison with the GOPer while admitting that cutting is the way to go.

Any approach that involves simple humanity in relation to cutting by itself will result in virtually nothing and assuage no one concerned with the budget without slamming military spending (not gonna happen). Democrats cannot with any conscience or hope of electoral success slam hell out of people who are already over the edge or going over and the GOP gives a damn. The Democrats cannot look as though they are doing anything and will at the same time make quite a few lives just enough more difficult to take a lot of heat. Some people will notice that wealth makes out and poverty increases and the only people who will care an iota aren't voting GOP.

In order to end DADT and get a START treaty the Democrats let the BushCo tax cuts get extended. In order to get a treaty nobody opposed for any principle whatever and to get a policy that affects a vanishingly small minority of the nation revenue was decreased. Any attempt to cover that lost revenue will badly harm a hell of a lot more people who cannot take it than DADT would over years of extension. If you think I in anyway ever supported DADT you're ... well, way wrong. But that is now the proposition Democrats face if they go to cuts alone. The plain politics of it is that they would lose a lot more votes than they gained. Was DADT flat wrong, yes - was the mechanism also flat wrong, yes; and that is what you get when you do deals with the Devil.

Our tax code is so completely skewed to the favor of absolute wealth that leaving it in that state is damn near criminal and will continue to crush the economy of this nation. It is simple enough to understand that wealth will always do well short of fires and murder. It is not difficult to stay wealthy in a system that operates with capitalism at its base and I don't have a real big problem with that since most of us can benefit as well. We do not benefit as well, but the operative word is can. The fault is not with a system based on capitalism, it is the matter of making sure that not even crumbs fall off that capitalistic table. This is the crux of what Democrats face - well that and the reaction of wealth.

Democrats pretty much take anyone left of Obama for granted as voters because they have nowhere else to go and the alternative is generally nasty enough to get them to vote. It may be the case that the 2010 election results showed Democrats that a campaign of "not as bad as" can have bad results. There is also the aspect that the results of 2010 scare the hell out of anybody left of Genghis Khan. I would not want to bet on how that tension plays out and I'd sure think Democrats sure shouldn't unless smashing the country to teach us a lesson is part of the thinking.

I don't think many Democrats expect much in the line of taxation reform and that they'll go along with essentially half-measures. What I don't see them going along with is absolutely nothing done other than a ball bat taken to the poor, disabled, and disadvantaged. It no longer matters how many lies the GOP tells about "job creators" in the wealth category, only a few deluded souls believe it.

I'd like to see President Obama re-elected and Congress in responsible hands other than GOPers but there really should be some reason to do it.

Hot Dog, He's Gone And We Can Stop Talking About ...

See ya, Anthony.

After today's frenzy over the resignation maybe the media and Democrats can talk about something that matters a hill of spit. The GOP sure doesn't want to talk about anything that actually matters and they might miss having a Weiner to put in their bun.

A person can have hopes and all - can't they?

Say Hello To The 19th Century

I'm sorry to have to say it, the return of the Gilded Age (also known as Robber Baron Era) is upon us. Well, it is short of its denouement where the nation was starting to come apart in violent conflict. Oddly enough this mess is being Presided over by a Democrat rather than GOPers.

I don't know what the best the Democratic Party could do for elected officials and I don't short the quantity that exist that don't desire a return to those golden days but outcomes matter. That the GOP is hell bent on resurrecting the Robber Baron Era is scarcely a newsflash and that they want all of it back is pretty obvious by the theocratic anti-science stances they take along with the plutocrat sexual relations they have. (sorry for that mental image - heh)

You'd be hard put to find something in the government that directly affects economics that isn't run by one of the Masters Of The Universe other than those that aren't run by anybody since exceptions can't get confirmed. Now maybe a couple people are surprised that outcomes in any economic issues favor the plutocrats and those that don't just don't get anywhere. I can't think why that is so, other than some sort of blind stupid loyalty to personality/Party. The people who are surprised would tend to be liberal, the GOPers just plain don't see it at all and their blind stupid loyalty to personality/Party is awesome.

The risk the GOPers run in their drive to cut social safety nets is that what ended the Gilded Age was just that, starving homeless people aren't reasonable and enough of them is bad news for the plutocrats. Some of these cretins might bother to look at history that isn't millennial past and doesn't feature gods.

Iowa Pointless To GOP Primary?

Tonight Rachael Maddow made the point that Iowa is pointless in GOP Primary circles because she said the Iowa GOP has radicalized itself out of relevance. I agree with her that in regard to a General Election that segment of the GOP is meaningless. I don't agree that they're so far outside that GOP voters other places won't go in their direction. Even Mark McKinnon bothered to note that SC has similar voters.

I don't think that this year the GOP is all that hot for an establishment candidate. I do think they've self-obsessed sufficiently to block out the reality that a hard core candidate would play poorly against the President. A real large number are convinced that they are a part of some grand sweeping movement. There is also the matter of the CU decision and the groups, including Koch outfits, who don't like what they see in the "establishment" candidates. There is a closed little world composed of FauxNews, Rush (and ilk), the CU enabled bunch, and '10 elected GOPers that doesn't see past its narrowly defined limits.

Maybe Rachael and some of the other pundits didn't notice that it was GOP Primaries that ran Christine ODonnel, Sharon Angel, and a host of loons that did win and don't even come close to GOP establishment credentials. Now maybe you'd like to make the point that Sharon and Christine didn't win and that it was Blue Dogs that lost or just poorly run campaigns that lost to the loons. That does not matter. There is a usurper in office, that guy is in our House. It isn't just racism, it is socialism, communism, liberalism, whateverism that is different from the GOP Americanism narrative of the past couple decades.

The GOP has managed to stir itself into a complete frothing foaming fit over Democrats. The BushCo theme of fellow travelers traitorous defeatist liberals was only the opening salvo, now their old white guy POW got handed his ass by that usurper and only the principled obstructionism of GOP Congresscritters has save the nation from ... something horrible. What didn't sink in to the GOP establishment while they were busily fomenting fear and loathing was that frightened angry people don't think long term and strategically and vote for ... Mittens (or whatever establishment type they settle on). It isn't just imaginary devils scaring these folks, unemployment is high and threatening and wages suck and the country's demographics are changing and hell, a lot is changing. Many many people resist change and not much matches what they think it ought to.

I'd like to see a rational political landscape, I'd sure like to see an election where the centrist Obama doesn't look like a left wing nut next to their candidate because there is a hell of a lot of reasonable ground to the left of Obama. I'm sorry Rachael, you're giving way to much rationality credence to the GOP today and you're far from alone.

Speaking Of Bigotry Rep King...

A Congressional Hearing on prison radicalized Muslims? I don't know a whole hell of a lot about being in prison but I was under the impression that there are really dangerous groups other than just Muslims - some reallllly lily white... Not maybe as politically useful dogwhistling as ... you know ... Muslims.

Ah gee whiz, the other is such good fodder for political dogwhistles and somebody there to cheer it on. You'd think there was nothing of import going on in this nation to address.

Thinking may be over-rated...

GOPers On Display? (offensive video)

I had left this be except elsewhere. It seems to be getting around real thoroughly so I'll have this to say. This thing is offensive and outrageous on so many levels that racism, sexism, violence, and outright lies only sort of covers it. I don't cover or comment on Stormfront, Aryan Nation, or any of the other bigotry plus outfits, but now that this thing is wayyyy out there...





I'm not infuriated by it because it is a reflection of something so stupid and senseless and politically immaterial as activism as to be laughable. It won't get voters that wouldn't have anyhow, it won't do anything other than point up that there are sufficient numbers of GOPers of this school to bother making it. Well, it got somebody attention...

Every society has its resevoir of bigotry and there really isn't much to be done about that - apparently, historically. There is the part of pointing out that it is stupid and ignorant so that hopefully fewer do it or fall prey to the dogwhistles but this group is impervious to appeals to decency or humanity.

Now I can't afford to lose my mind over every demonstration of bigotry by bigots of whatever stripe and every race, religion, and etc. has its own resevoir of bigotry. I will lose my mind when such stuff is mainstreamed and particularly when I see dogwhistling attempted. Closet bigotry and unacknowledged bigotry concerns me a whole lot more than this kind of pathetic exercise for the simple reason that the obscured bigotry has real potential to drive our relations.

Maybe you think I ought to be ranting, I think it is a heck of a lot more effective to point to the GOP and ask if this is really a good thing for them. If it is a good thing, why is that? In fact, why would somebody even think it would work within the GOP realm?

Well, they do have their Fattman and all...

Way Too Early Presidential Race Prognostication

It is soooooo early in the 2012 election process that crystal ball gazing would probably be about as good me trying to analyze - but I'll go ahead anyhow.

Looking at what composes the GOP field currently and maybe prospectively I tend to think Bachman is going to be a lot more of a factor than some other guessers. Mitt has a supposed lead, but Bachman just announced and is just actually starting to campaign. That Mitt lead is real soft and what it amounts to is that his name has been around for awhile with nobody sniping at him.

I'm a real sceptic of Mitt, all his flipper-floppering around puts him in doubtful regard and his Mormonism isn't going to fly well with the Christian Right. I have no opinion on his religion, they do. Romney's Massachusetts record just won't square with today's GOP and he can only fool about with it just so far - in the face of actual believers like Bachman. His absolute only hope is that St Ronnie's 11th Commandment carries his day. Pawlenty stubbed his toe rather badly on that one.

Pawlenty has no hope, he doesn't fight and his laughable budget policy just won't produce any heat in a Primary Election. In regards to the President he doesn't sound any different than anybody else so he just isn't a stand out. He is faced with Mr Businessman Mitt on one side and true believer Michelle on the other and looks like nothing in particular.

Look, Palin is not running, The Newt is lizard toast, Cain is black and a nobody, Huntsman thinks the GOP of yesteryear still exists, and Santorum is ... well, Santorum and Ron Paul thinks he's a Libertarian and that it means something. Oh hell, Perry is just Bachman with a Texas accent and is ... cripes ... Texan. Um, deficit?

OK, sure, in a rational political landscape Huntsman ought to be the shoo-in since he won't scare anybody, has been fairly consistent, and he isn't a real liberal. Not a damn chance. Did I mention Mormon, again?

Michelle Bachman is crazy time and she'll say things she ought not - but her gaffes will be passable amongst the GOP as forgivable and be spun as hostile media manipulation. What Michelle brings are honest conservo-GOP credentials. As crazy as I think she is, she has been consistently there and vocal. I do think that the GOP has made the mistake of being so damn partisan and demonizing of anyone else that she is now the voice of most of the Party's electorate. This is not the Party of reasoned debate and compromise and has effectively demonstrated it. The idea that they can now switch gears and go 'middle' isn't reasonable. Their actions over the last decade have precluded the 'middle' candidate.

Right now the President has his own sets of difficulties. While he never promised to be some left progressive, he did create an image of hope and change that is naturally undercut by the compromises any President would have to make which leads to a certain amount of lack of enthusiasm. The fact that this President never pretended to be left will not please or assuage the left in the face of the plutocratic gains made under him. I don't know that means they'll stay home but the left of the Party does ordinarily get out on the ground despite political disregard. There may be a limit.

The President has an economy that ... well, polite words don't suffice, but sucks. How long the voters will go with pointing at GWB and GOP constructed economic framework is open to question. Very little policy other than the Stimulus has kicked in at this point or will before 2012 and that's a problem. Health Care is little more than a dirty word in most people's experience because not much more than the rhetoric is in their experience. Deficit fever is not going to work in Democratic favor, anything they do in the regard of cutting will simply be compared to the GOP's more aggressive stances and for the most part the consequences will be negative. If the Democrats play along, they will simply be GOP-lite and once again with no clear agenda other than "not as bad as."

Compared to any GOP candidate the President will be the smartest and most reasonable person in the field. That's real good except that may not be the electorate's mood. People who are sick and tired of something don't want to be reassured they want something done (even if it's impossible). I don't have a rightwing bone in my body but I also don't want my damned head patted and that's bad.

Where the President comes out in a General Election fight may come down to who the GOP puts up against him or if the economy tanks. Michelle may scare the hell out of 'ordinary voters' and that's good for him. A tanked economy versus about any real Primary contender is real bad news. Asking me what the economy will do beyond suck for everyone other than plutocrats is just too much.

I pretty much laugh at the idea that the GOP will nominate a responsible person - they ceded that quite awhile ago and their try with the POW didn't work out as the base has really noticed. I have watched the pundits talk up the Mitt or Huntsman as though they are pretty much how it will go. This is not the GOP of four years ago and nothing I've seen brings me into the view that reasonable or even qualified is going to work whatever the desires of whatever they think is the GOP establishment.

Feel free to mock this late fall 2012.

Gasoline Prices A Bit High, GOP Responds

Aw I just can't do it, the crap is over my waders. I'll let McClatchy tell you the dirt on the US House. Speculation is the name of this game.

Economy Not A Zero Sum Game

The GOPers and other psuedo-libertarians and real libertarians are real fond of pointing this out. As far as I can tell, they're right about that. Well, right and FOS at the same time.

The problem is that if the top takes enough out all by themselves some are going to find themselves at zero or even negative. If you were to bother to look at how the top is doing right now in this generally acknowledged crapped out economy you'd not find any losing going on. Your job may be gone, your home gone, your health care access gone - they're making a lot of money, doing better in fact.

So, be happy that this isn't a zero sum economy.

You wouldn't want your betters to suffer, too - would you?

I really think legislation is a better way than pitchforks and torches (or bullets, bombs, and various more nasty things) but I'm not sure I'm all that adverse given the state of lawmaking and lawmakers today...

Would it really be more unpatiotic and treasonous to put a pitchfork into some of these cretins than for them to KILL GRANDMA? I didn't ask about legality since it certainly would be legal for them to do in Grandma. Just ask 'em. Oh, you don't have to - they held a vote.

*It is necessary to quibble quite a lot to talk about doing to them what they are trying to do to you and yours and not get your ass arrested. Really, it is - just ask 'em. Patriot SomethingOrTheOtherACT.

No kidding, they've been telling you for decades how they'd do things and you just thought they were talking.

Remember Capital Gains Taxes?

I hope you remember all the economy building and jobs creation that was coming from the continuous slashing of Capital Gains Taxes. You do remember? Notice any of either?

What you may have noticed is that the share of wealth held by the very top surged and everybody else lost. Well, you would have noticed if you'd paid attention. Everybody with lots of money sure noticed and paid attention - enough attention that Capital Gains Taxes are once again strangling growth...

You suckers suck so bad that you make sucking eggs look like and accomplishment.

Gee, it's not real hard to find, the IRS has all of it, just without detail on the top 0.01%ers. Somebody needs to point and laugh - I'm just having trouble doing it through all the tears.

Fiction Reprise

A couple people emailed me awhile back that they were interested in this pit (bit, I meant BIT) of fiction I was working on after I first posted it. I left "Fawn" alone and put a couple other studies together. A bit of "Fawn" to save you time if you just don't care:
****
Fawn David made a deal with the devil or perhaps not that but a twisted fallen angel. There is no simple way to make the acquaintance of such a being, the route to an encounter with such an entity by needs be complex and unlikely – it might even involve a cardboard refrigerator box moving of its own accord and a heart too soft for its own sake. The box was twitching and rustling as Fawn rounded the corner into the alley that held the door to the staircase leading to the upper story of the unsuccessful appliance store housing her mean apartment. She had a gait that was not quite a waddle, a heavy set woman of a light chocolate color remarkable only for a smile that expressed sweetness to any on whom it was bestowed and soft eyes that could deny no injured creature they held in their gaze.

This will take you to the jump where "Fauwn" first appeared.
***
It will require some jumping back and forth but here's somebody you aren't supposed to like:
Character Study – Billy Williamson
Billy Williamson was a bad man, that is to say a very not nice man. His entire life was an exercise in being very not nice, bad. By the age of six he was torturing small animals, people we wont to blame his poor confused parents, but really no one had an idea why as he progressed in age and nastiness. Billy was not particularly large or strong and he certainly was not attractive. Billy Williamson was mediocre in all respects but one – meanness. If he managed a bit of charm it had only one end and that was an unkindness, and worse – it needed have no point, no rationale beyond that it brought someone or something pain. It is sometimes said of a person that they are a waste of skin or a misuse of oxygen – in a rational universe Billy Williamson would have had neither, unfortunately the universe does not enforce rationality.

Billy Williamson after jump

If you're still playing along you can go to Jamie

If you're this far you have patience for a longer bit, Duane Jacobs.

I'm interested in your comments if you spent the time to read this stuff. Rest assured, these people all have things to do and they are all connected. I have thoughts about how I'll pull this all together that aren't quite traditional in format but this is a work in progress. Please use this post to comment.

Breaking News = Weiner Has Innocent Conversation

Damn I'm so sick of Rep Weiner sucking the air out of poliitcs that I'd like to see him resign for no other reason than that. But then. there is the aspect of his staying and keeping the panty-sniffers in an uproar that appeals to me.

The only thing about the whole mess I give an actual damn about is getting back to talking about things that actually matter ...

Oh darn, I have to admit I talked about Newt now don't I...?

Let's move onto something really important ... the last stupid thing Sarah said.

Was there something about killing Medicare, is unemployment (reported not actual) at over 9%, are the rich making money hand over fist while the rest of us get a knife in the back, does anybody in this forsaken place give a rat's ass that as a society we're sinking into a hateful greed obsessed morass?

Are We Really At This Point?

TPM points out statements by MA GOP state rep Ryan Fattman that ...
I'll be damned if I'll paraphrase this kind of thing:

Asked if he would be concerned that a woman without legal immigration status was raped and beaten as she walked down the street might be afraid to report the crime to police, Mr. Fattman said he was not worried about those implications.

“My thought is that if someone is here illegally, they should be afraid to come forward,” Mr. Fattman said. “If you do it the right way, you don’t have to be concerned about these things,” he said referring to obtaining legal immigration status.

You'll have to excuse me if this makes me want to throw up, illegal immigration is worse than having a rapist run loose. WTF is wrong with this country that anyone with the least pretence of running for any office or holding any office would say such a thing? That this nation has managed to spawn enough people like this for such a thing to be said makes me feel like telling the whole show to stuff itself up *an un-named orifice.

*My mother told me I was being too rude awhile ago - and at age 58 I still pay attention to her because she is right a lot.

Hells Canyon Motorcycle Rally - Baker City, OR

Thursday the bikes started rolling into town and though I don't have anything like a count I'd guess around 100 and that's well ahead of the weekend Rally. I've put over 38,000 miles on my 09 FXSTSSE3 (25 months) so I've been around a bit. I have not been anywhere with better riding for roads, traffic density, and scenery. Yes, it is my home and I'm a bit ... prejudiced, but I'm pretty confident that if you tried us you'd not be disappointed or feel over-sold.

The weather is looking a bit iffy, which is pretty much the norm for the second weekend in June around here. Road conditions are good, winter gravel is mostly gone and the surfaces wintered well. It is quite green thanks to lots of rain - rain I'm sick of.

We'll show the kind of hospitality that'll impress and make you want to come back. I hope it's plenty nice weather, looking forward to seeing you all.

*Update
I regard to weather guessers in this area - today (Fri) was forecasted day before yesterday to be sunny and warmer - reality of today was rain all morning and leaden skies. The forecast now has only some resemblence to two days ago - so who knows ... sunny Sunday. Who knows what they'll say this evening.

Being Mean To The Newt?

The last couple posts might seem like I'm not only piling onto Newt but also gloating about his ... difficulties. I'm pretty sure there is an element of that. Look, I loath that guy as one of the worst examples of a politician. He is an intellectual light weight with delusions of grandeur, he is about as fake an example of Family Values horse-pucky possible, and his political ethics flat out suck eggs - bad enough that he resigned the House thanks to his ethics (non-sex related, too). I don't think there is a modern pol I have a lower opinion of - and I have a damned low opinion of quite a few.

Whatever any of the rest of GOPer Primariers are, in these catagories they're pikers. The longer this piece of work is around the more disgusting politics gets. I sincerely hope this not only is the end of Newt in national politics but also the end of Newt Is Important Inc.

You Can Only Fake Running For So Long

A point was made by Rachael Maddow about The Newt and a Presidential run being a matter of only being able to pretend or threaten to run for just so long before Newt Inc quit making money. He was, she asserted, either going to run or be outed as a fake. When he finally got the ball rolling, I had the same thought, that it was simply a "Hey, I'm relevant" sort of thing. His problem now is that he may have killed off Newt Inc with his performance.

Now if one takes this analysis to be pretty accurate, you're going to have to look over at Sarah. She has her own version of Newt Inc - call it Sarah Grifting Inc - to look after. She's parlayed her VP performance into a modest fortune and a dedicated fan-club. This thing works as long as she holds some appearance of relevance to her followers and that means looking like she's viable and willing as a candidate.

I'm pretty sure that goofy bus vacation thing was all about getting media attention to keep the rubes happy and hopeful. I'm also real sure that she'll continue to thrash around in this Primary mess until the point where she'd actually have to run. Then it will be a matter of some sort of conspiracy of Lame-street Media and Sell-out Old Boy Network that kept her out. Given the nature of her fan-club she can probably get away with the ground covered by The Newt's previous non-candidacies this time around. That will give her another four years to plow the grifting ground and reaping the money sown by her believers. But four years will not be real kind to her looks and put her in the same position as The Newt this time around. She cannot go eight years on her looks and by 2016 if she doesn't go for it her people will begin to cease to believe and there goes the Bucks. The problem with running in '16 is that it would put her under the FEC rules and they're not easy to putz around with, so the move then may be to fake it as long as possible once again and let it go at that as far as the money machine goes. With good planning winding it up just before the '16 drop dead date should leave her financially .... wonderful.

So if you're really tired of hearing about Sarah now, there is hope - sometime in 2016 she'll be pretty much done...

One can hope...

Idea Guy Newt Hits The Wall

The Newt, our favorite lizard, has hit a pretty serious wall with his top aides and managers quitting today - en mass. The money has been run through and the GOP isn't on his side (whatever that is lately). Newt is really impressed with his intellect and the GOP has fed this delusion for years and years. He's been extolled as their Idea Guy for a long time.

It doesn't matter that his Ideas on policy have been damn near universally stupid and even un-Constitutional. What The Newt did for the GOP that they liked was raise money and put together The Contract On America (cheap shot, I know). That amounts to ethically challenged methods of getting cash and propaganda. It isn't as though the GOPers are adverse to propaganda - hell the Ryan Plan is just that, it isn't serious policy.

What happened is that The Newt continued to believe his press releases and thought he could say something negative about the Ryan Plan. He forgot about the propaganda part of his resume and got paid for it. The Contract wasn't taken seriously by the GOP as any more than propaganda any more than the Ryan Plan is, but in order for such propaganda to work it must be seen as taken seriously by concerted whole-hearted support. Newt missed that boat with his comments on Ryan's Plan.

Ooops, there went Newt taking himself seriously. Not to be done in the GOP.

The only way this is really a disaster for Newt is if it interferes with his ability to grift money out of politics.

It might...

Historical Stupidity = It Ain't Just Sarah

It's been a hell of a lot of fun watching Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and assorted other GOPers mangle American History and get caught out as speaking idiocy. The real big problem is that as McClatchy points out - it ain't just them. A really sad state of affair exists.

It would be the easiest thing in the world to make this about Sarah Palin.

She makes mistakes like Apple makes iPhones, so there is a temptation to catalogue her recent bizarre claim...

Funny stuff, but serious soon ensues:

Where history is concerned, this is fast becoming a nation of ignoramuses and amnesiacs.

The alarm bell has been ringing for years. Consider “Losing America’s Memory: Historical Illiteracy in the 21st Century,” a 2000 study by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, a Washington-based advocacy group. Researchers found that the majority of seniors at the nation’s best colleges could not identify the words of the Gettysburg Address or explain the significance of Valley Forge. They did not know, the study concluded, because they had not been taught. History, the study said, was no longer a requirement in the nation’s top schools.

And then, there is a 2006 assessment by the Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics, often called The Nation’s Report Card. It found that nearly 40 percent of 12th graders could not identify the purpose of the Lewis and Clark Expedition and only 14 percent could identify and explain a factor leading to U.S. involvement in the Korean War.

Now I've teased you, go read it and think about what it means to be headed down this particular road.

Voter Fraud, How About Fake Candidates - GOP?

The Wisconsin GOP pushed through some of the most regressive voter ID laws there are all in the name of stopping non-existent voter fraud (honestly, to disenfranchise Democratic voters). Now the Wisconsin GOP is running ... wait for it ... Fake Candidates. Yes, in order to delay recall elections they are running Republicans in the recall as Democrats - currently three of them - to force Primary elections. They are openly soliciting signatures to get these Republicans on the ballot as Democrats.

Next time these cretins mention voter fraud somebody will point at this and laugh.

Oh Sure. IOKYAR

While You Were Looking At Sexting...Pawlenty...

Poor old boring Timmy Pawlenty had to do something to not look like ... well, anybody sane. He proposes a 5% GDP growth while slashing taxes and federal spending. One way is to cut the government out of anything you could Google as a service. I guess the FBI is gone since a quick google will find you private investigators and certainly that evil EPA can be replaced by Waste Management. There will be two tax rates, 10% up to $50K and 25% thereafter. Estate tax gone and corporate taxes cut to 15%.

You'd be well informed to understand that the last time the growth was 5% for even two consecutive years was 1973-4. The top Fed income rate was 94% and capital gains were at 77%. He proposes something historically unlikely driven by something factually contradicted.

Where does the rest of that field go from there? What nuttiness is Mitt pushed into advocating in order to keep up? These folks are doubling down on all the crap that directly led to where we got to in 2007. Is anybody paying attention and doing spit to deconstruct the lying bullshit that passes as GOP economics?

There is actually talk that the GOP could make a run of it in the 2012 General... That sure gives the Democrats lots of room to play at "not as bad as." It must be plain old masochism that keeps me interested in politics.

In A Distracted Land

In this country it is worth a couple weeks of news coverage to parse a Congressional sexting. This same country regularly elects and re-elects politicians who directly vote against the economic interests of their constituents in order to pursue some "Values" agenda, and in fact will re-elect ones who directly violate that "Values" agenda just because they continue to spout that nonsense. A Palin or Bachman can say things that would never pass muster if uttered by some horse-faced pudgy woman. I could go on and on about things that would best be described as voyeurism.

I have no idea of how to address this crap other than to point and laugh. The national car was driven off the road and smashed into a ditch at the edge of the cliff it rolled over to and now as it teeters on that crumbling edge filled with us as passengers ... we spend time on whose underpants and what text messages...

The clown show that is the GOP House and GOP "Greatest Hits Primary" is busy rocking the wrecked economic vehicle as if to see how big a smash it can make after the fun of watching it fall and every body's eyes are focused on some other shiny object. The nation may deserve what is happening to it, but there are a hell of a lot of people here that don't.

Despite what the children running this country think, it is not a crash car that you snap back together after exploding it on a wall. It has taken at least three decades of the St Ronnie theme to put us here and a couple terms of the hapless fidgeting of the Obama sort are not going to do spit to turn things around or even stop the crashing. President Obama may be the best we could elect now and may be doing the best anyone could right now but that doesn't mean laying down and taking it is the least bit sensible. While it would be stupid to try to replace or harm the current President it is not time to just hand out a free pass to any of our politicians on the basis of "not as bad as". In a nation this easily distracted keeping a push going on where the dialogue is at count heavily if doing better in the future is going to happen.

Or we can just watch the thing drop and smash and giggle.

Funny Thing About Sex

It probably has to do with sex being a primary drive of our species and something to do with our desire to hang a drape over that but it doesn't pass belief just how stupid we can be around the matters of sex or sex fanatasy. The only thing I can think of worse than lying about being stupid about sex is pretending to adhere to one set of values and enforcing them while practicing something entirely different.

Both are forms of lying, but only one pretends to have a right to enforce a standard.

Really it is bad enough to be stupid about sex, being stupid about being stupid is just plain ... stupid.

The Economy And Politics

I just caught the end of some CNN Money program where an ostensibly reputable economy sort made the statement that (paraphrased) 'our economy is not about politics.' I'm trying pretty hard to give this guy some kind of benefit of doubt and let that be about some kind of 'the President can't wave a wand at it.' The overall tenor makes me think he meant the economy is somehow outside politics. This does seem to be one of the themes of a certain set of economic apologists.

The shape of our economy is almost entirely political. Everything from tax policy to trade agreements to labor laws is the outcome of political activity. There are all kinds of blather about free trade and free markets which flatly have never existed. Everybody who talks about the economy has an agenda and their pet. The very act of negotiating a contract or seeking employment is simply politics at its most local. The objective is that I want the most of whatever for the least of whatever and that exchange involves power and wealth. If I want a good price on materials I tell a supplier that I'll buy lots from him versus his competition if he gives me a better price, if I'm a worker and unionized or working in a short market I can demand more ... money, better working conditions, etc. If I'm a politician virtually everything I do will have a broad effect. Tax policies easily affect the direction of flow of wealth and the uses of wealth. (that wealth can be minimal or maximal or monetary or physical) Trade agreements are pretty obvious, but so is anything related to physical or mental health or race relations or education or ... just about whatever government gets up to and those are political choices.

If a politician leaves you in doubt as to the basic thrust of his economic viewpoint in relation to policy regardless of whether the word economy is brought up, you will be ignorant of what the economy is going to do to you. Abortion access has a direct impact on economics even though it would seem to be another question altogether. Where money flows as an outcome is an important piece of the puzzle whatever the policy in question. This does not mean the first dollar moved, it is the movement of the dollars as an outcome.

It is pretty easy to point to the GOP as the party of plutocracy, it gets a bit more controversial to point to the Democrats as belonging to the same club, differences in degree being what's at issue. It isn't real complicated to take most issues apart and see where money flows if you're willing to go past the very first dollars in that analysis. Our economy is in the state it is in today not as a result of some inexorable world condition but as a result of political actions taken previously.

They Don't Really Mean Capitalism

One of the recurring buzz words of the GOP and libertarian wing of the GOP is the word Capitalism. This word is presented as the foundation of "our high standard of living" and "Prosperity." Like most buzz words it has the problem of being meaningless and in that, a lie. They would have you believe that when they say that word, they are talking about the One True Capitalism.

There is not now, nor has there ever been a system of true capitalism. What has existed from the time of Adam Smith's dissertation on the subject is managed capitalism and the word managed is quite important. Smith, himself, stated the unfettered capitalism would be an evil. The GOP does not mean such a thing, they do mean managed capitalism and the argument of how to manage capitalism has been ... well ... nasty since Jefferson and Hamilton went hammer and tongs over it (that argument resulted in Hamilton's death in a duel).

The second the magic word "managed" enters discourse you understand that the system is being rigged. Now since the entire concept of Capitalism depends on just what it says, capital, the system is rigged in that direction so rigging it isn't exactly a strange concept. The Republican establishment knows better but they're entirely happy to have the voters wander in ignorance. They mean managed capitalism quite thoroughly though they'd rather just not deal with that. The question has always been in whose favor the rigging is done.

The entire concept of markets depends on competition and yet capitalism contains within it the seeds of destruction of competition through sufficient acquisition of the assets of a market - yes we call that monopoly. There is nothing inherent to capitalism in corporations or for that matter unions. Both are constructions designed to increase leverage in markets through pooling of resources and both are the results of legislation. Both are products of managed capitalism. Wall Street and Banks are the products of legislation and exist thanks to legislation.

What the GOP wants to hide is that their agenda has spit to do with Capitalism and everything to do with whose favor the system is rigged. That is what the argument is with everybody that supports managed capitalism. Ever since St Ronnie the plutocrats have been winning on class warfare - all the while claiming the "other side" is doing it. As long as shared goals are not present in the discussion managed capitalism does mean class warfare.

Oh sure, like this would make even a dent in a true believer's skull...

I'm not sure the electorate doesn't deserve the crash we're in and a worse one based on the GOPer plutocratic thuggery. I'm not too pleased to know better and get dragged into it anyhow.

(D)s,
Before you get all damned puffed up - there may be a significant difference in how much the two Parties are willing to screw the public, but really...

A Broken Contract

Coming out of the Depression and following it a new social economic contract was established in this country. Although there are a great many factors, a couple feature prominently - the shared social and economic disaster of the Depression and the shared sacrifices of World War II. The case can certainly be made that some few greatly profited from both but that does not negate the nearly universal sharing. This resulted in a nation that not only deserved but also believed it deserved to share in the benefits of the economy and society in broad terms. This means more than just unionization and moderate compensation for upper management and some restrictions on the tools of wealth, it also led to the successes of the Civil Rights movement and what success feminism had.

The 1950s and '60s were the era of big things, and not just cars. Unions built power bases, government put together large programs, manufacturing output soared, and general participation in society and economy exploded. A social and economic contract of shared work and shared benefit became the norm. This scarcely means inequities didn't exist or weren't tolerated but they were greatly reduced from any previous periods. None of this was free of conflict and backlash and yet this is the reason those conflicts even existed.

By the 1970s the very successes of the 'new contract' began to create fractures. Union membership was falling, welfare resentment rose, racial resentment broadened, economic gains by labor began falling and a distance began to grow between labor and white collar in perception of 'place' in the economy and society. By the 1980s a theme grew that government (and by extension - unions) was a problem. Taxes became seen as an evil rather than a necessary sacrifice and as a tool of unfairness to success. The Reagan era began and with it the work of dismantling the contract. Greed was the new contract and those not winning were seen as 'at fault.'

This brings us to today. In this sad state of affairs the ending of DADT and a corporate welfare health care 'reform' are great achievements in a social contract while the drivers of deficits like taxation rates, militarism, and out-sourcing are ignored in favor of gutting what programs of social equity exist. The drivers of discussion are somehow fairness to the greatest beneficiaries of a broken contract and the disaster of supporting those left behind in this broken economy. The social contract has become 'greed is virtue' even in the smallest sense of demonizing public employees and shifting the burden of being old onto the old. The winners are somehow deserving and those who didn't deserve misery so that anything else is socialism.

When a social contract is broken there is fallout and it will involve more than just a broken economy. Misery does not necessarily breed good decisions.

Patriot Act ... Horse****

It seems that something has changed since Democrats opposed the absolute police state provisions of the Patriot Act. Nobody seems to know exactly what that is. It is Harry Reid's position that trying to do something endangers the US. That would be the same Harry Reid who opposed it previously - when it was a BushCo issue.





I don't really much give a damn about political party identification when it comes to stomping on civil liberties. I particularly don't give a damn when the law is in response to an occurrence where the failures had not a damn thing to do with the cures.





Nothing in the draconian nonsense enabled by the "Patriot Act" (patriotism is something else) addresses the failure of the FBI to continue with the results of ordinary police work nor the failure of agencies to communicate information - all of which led to 9/11 investigations dead ending before 9/11. Nothing extraordinary was required to unravel the conspiracy, just plain old already available law enforcement tools.





Security at any cost does mean the eventual end of civil liberties, their very existence in this country ran counter to the desire of virtually every government preceding and the root of that was the security of those governments. That the autocratic GOP loves some civil liberty stomping is no surprise, that the Democratic Party rolled over and ran with that ... sadly isn't a real big surprise.





So, is the difference between the parties simply a matter of degree to which they're dedicated to screwing the citizenry? Maybe the deficit issue will tell you all about that.

To Really Honor The Fallen

Memorial Day - flags, flowers, and patriotic rhetoric abounds and it seems that what gets left out is that the Fallen got into that position through decisions made by those with little or no 'skin' in the game. These people fell in battles of others' choosing, people whose motives may have had little to do with the patriotism of risking your life for your country's needs.

In that selfless risk of health and life there resides a terrible gamble, the proposition that the end is deserving of the sacrifice, not to the soldier who has no choice in the matter, but to the nation which asks it. Regardless of the actual need or stupidity of the decision to go war these men and women will go. It behooves this nation to consider what it asks in that regard.

I begin my analysis of any proposition to go to war from a pacifistic point of view, that warfare is a horrible cruel enterprise dedicated to breaking things and killing people. I need to be convinced that other options have been exhausted and that the issue merits death and destruction ... and that future analysis will not judge that a mistake.

The very best way of honoring the fallen is to ensure that their sacrifices will be judged as worthy of this nation. Never forget that what we honor is their selfless self-sacrifice for this nation and we need to deserve that sacrifice.

Keith Olberman

IN case you haven't been paying attention you can get a version of Countdown. I like KO; which is not to say that I think he always gets it right.

Anyhow, it's a link and the site does provide you with a zip code entry to find where "Current" is available.