Thanks to some mis-firing brain cells and a certain actually good reason I moved to Michigan, Rick Snyder's Michigan. It seems that there is some buyers' remorse setting in. Gov Rick is polling underwater at 56% sucks to 37% approve. I guess I have a couple thoughts... and they're not exactly complimentary to my "fellow" Michiganders.
Which one of you assholes who is sorry now failed to notice the goddam (R) after his name?
Which one of you sorry idjits couldn't be bothered to notice that the (R) designation means "hate unions" among hate other things?
Is it any consolation for you sorry bastards that a whole bunch of those who share your "sucks" sentiment didn't vote for him and get to live with the stupidity of your vote?
Hey, union brothers and sisters who voted for this guy... you really suck bad and I hope you're really, really satisfied with yourselves. Tell that butthead next to you just how pleased you are he isn't paying dues along side you. Yeah buddy, that'll teach them Unions to be nice to gays and browns.
There are enough assholes anywhere without you adding to the quota of stupid ones.
You don't like that kind of talk? Kiss My Ass, I was smart enough to live in Oregon when you elected this twit and his fellow traveler twits. Yeah, they've tried this crap there... nope.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
National Review Gets Sued, Finally Some Good News?
Once, in the dark ages before Blogs, I took a six month subscription to The National Review with the idea that maybe something Buckley had a hand in wouldn't be intolerably stupid. The writing was childish (you get better here, if that's saying anything) and Buckley's only contributions were some sort of "Emeritus Letters" that clearly showed the man was well past whatever prime he had. The subscription ran out... thankfully since that meant that I didn't need to read the waste of my money. It isn't so much that I disagreed with them (I do, pretty much unequivocably) but that I don't care to pay for and read HS Freshman thinking and writing. At NRO the ability to string words together has improved somewhat, but the logic and thinking still approximates the three year old's, "I want this now, don't tell me about facts!" screaming. (I've had kids and I know they don't talk like that)
Now Michael Mann, a Penn State climatologist, is suing NR for libel and defamation of character.
It seems it has:
To be sure, the profit their investors are looking for isn't from $$$$s generated under that "Masthead" but from the benefits of keeping the marks in line and on script so "not profitable" works for them. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with the "Market" they're always on about - it has everthing to do with manipulating politics to subsidize their betters - the antithesis of their individuality fetish. NR is essentially paid advertising for all the rest of the RW grifting and their plutocratic overlords. They're not pointless, that machine managed to get a Mitt Romney sort of close. You only have to think about that in relation to everything else going on for about a minute to be very frightened... or at least a bit ill.
Anyhow, it is an early Xmas gift.
Now Michael Mann, a Penn State climatologist, is suing NR for libel and defamation of character.
filed in District of Columbia Superior Court, Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, claimed that a July 15 article not only falsely accused him of misconduct, but crossed a line by comparing him to Jerry Sandusky, the former Penn State football assistant coach convicted of child molestation. He also sued the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a think tank that ran a piece about Mann on its staff blog, OpenMarket.org.This place right here doesn't worry about calling somebody like Rick Santorum names or even saying Mittens is a liar. Some of that has to do with the fact that they deserve it, but I'm sure I can get away with it because they're quite public enough in their assholery for me to be shielded. I'm afraid that Mann has been enough of a public face on his own hook that NR could pretty much call him any damn thing they pleased, and just claim satire. The part about accusing him of fraud may cause them a bunch of difficulty.
It seems it has:
As many of you know, National Review is not a non-profit — we are just not profitable. A lawsuit is not something we can fund with money we don’t have.You may not know much about NR but I'm pretty sure you do know that they are great whacking bangers of the "Free Market" drum. They are not a news magazine any more than this site is so they don't have the excuse of running a large information gathering staff eating their income. What they have are opinion writers that the market doesn't value highly enough for them to earn a profit. That market would be the right-wing grifting machine that has given us Newt and his plastic wife earning a fine lifestyle and Dick Morris not looking at all as if he's missing meals. You could run down a pretty fair list of right-wing noise makers (Rush?) that don't seem to be poor, though begging is big with all of them. Somebody/s are being over-paid, there is that little matter of deficit spending or even the Right To Work For Less.
To be sure, the profit their investors are looking for isn't from $$$$s generated under that "Masthead" but from the benefits of keeping the marks in line and on script so "not profitable" works for them. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with the "Market" they're always on about - it has everthing to do with manipulating politics to subsidize their betters - the antithesis of their individuality fetish. NR is essentially paid advertising for all the rest of the RW grifting and their plutocratic overlords. They're not pointless, that machine managed to get a Mitt Romney sort of close. You only have to think about that in relation to everything else going on for about a minute to be very frightened... or at least a bit ill.
Anyhow, it is an early Xmas gift.
Conservatism With Age?
I've heard over the years that men tend to become more conservative with age. I have to admit that I'm a bit more chary of some risky actions - I really don't want to go into just how crazy I was when young, my mother reads this thing (she's already past grey, but...). Really, short of reducing the chances of my physical destruction and that of others innocently involved I've not noticed any particularly rightist thinking creeping in. It is generally found that the youth cadre is more liberal in its outlook than the general population and I've watched this with a certain interest.
What I've found is that the young set is not anywhere more liberal than I am. Now to be sure my experience is not a predictor or predicate of anything. I am, however, a bit disturbed. What bothers me is that statistics say this cadre will grow more conservative with age. I admit to being well left of most elected Democrats and, obviously, most Democratic voting people.
While you can make a significant arguement that the voting and dialogue's shift right is not followed in attitudes when stripped of political trappings that does not change the rightward reality. If this is the case, what does the future hold in political policies if these folks do shift right? I do not find this cadre a bit to the left of those of us who were leftish in the 60s and 70s and we are where we are today (it would be easy to over estimate the size of that group).
I don't know, I sure the hell hope people just reaching and just past voting age will do a hell of a lot better running the show when they age than has been managed by the cadre who were young when I was.
What I've found is that the young set is not anywhere more liberal than I am. Now to be sure my experience is not a predictor or predicate of anything. I am, however, a bit disturbed. What bothers me is that statistics say this cadre will grow more conservative with age. I admit to being well left of most elected Democrats and, obviously, most Democratic voting people.
While you can make a significant arguement that the voting and dialogue's shift right is not followed in attitudes when stripped of political trappings that does not change the rightward reality. If this is the case, what does the future hold in political policies if these folks do shift right? I do not find this cadre a bit to the left of those of us who were leftish in the 60s and 70s and we are where we are today (it would be easy to over estimate the size of that group).
I don't know, I sure the hell hope people just reaching and just past voting age will do a hell of a lot better running the show when they age than has been managed by the cadre who were young when I was.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Patriot And Hacks - Guess Which Is Susan Rice
This is what a patriot looks like...
and this is what camera hogging partisan hacks look like.
As for the media... piss on that bunch of weasles.
and this is what camera hogging partisan hacks look like.
As for the media... piss on that bunch of weasles.
Mississippi On The Great Lakes
Many of you (a few) know that until mid-Oct I lived in Northeast Oregon, and then moved to Northern Michigan - Petoskey, to be exact. For those of you not from here and know something about geography the title N MI may confuse you with that big old chunk of Michigan north of here also known as the UP - Upper Peninsula. OK, so here's the deal - this place is socio-economically... divided is a polite word. The Mitten (you get that, right?) is split up into the urban South, the farmlandish central and the lake splattered wooded cooler north of tourism/summer residency. You can get to the UP from the rest of Michigan by boat or The Bridge. The UP was timber and mining, now more toursim but it is sparcely populated and heavily wooded. Frankly it is a socio/economic-geopolitical nightmare. My political pals from Oregon will recognize a bit of this stuff, but here it is really a mess and you can drill even deeper down by noting that the western part is... conservative/farmland.
As you might guess, the more rural the area the more GOPer infested it is. I know my friends from E OR would consider the area I'm in something other than rural considering how many people there are here per square mile but there simply are a bunch of quite small towns. Petoskey is the big town in the area with a population of about 6300 (year around - triple in "the season").
I'm enough of a foreigner that I can't do real specific political analysis, but frankly the urban part of the state is pretty fractured politically. This state was hit hard in a socio-economic sense by urban flight and a bit after that the collapse of manufacturing. The Michigan that was such a driver in Unionism and progressive policies hasn't existed for some time. Charlie Pierce has taken to referring to this place as Michissippi, which I'd have used in the title other than not liking to do complete rip-offs.
I could go into the post-WWII influx of southerners and particularly the rise in black employment as some of the drivers of what is going on here. If you're not particularly aware, while the Unions were busy being a part of the vanguard of social progressivism a good sized chunk of the rank and file were busy voting GOPer dogwhistling, fag bashing, and hippie kicking... and fleeing to the suburbs. Yup, in a lot of ways this place is a lot more Mississippi than it is what you've thought of as Michigan. If you gave me a choice between living here and shit on a stick I'm afraid I'd opt for the stick but for a pretty good reason I'm stuck here. It looks as though the only path to some sort of peace of mind is to learn to ignore the doings of my betters and just not care.
yeah, right.
As you might guess, the more rural the area the more GOPer infested it is. I know my friends from E OR would consider the area I'm in something other than rural considering how many people there are here per square mile but there simply are a bunch of quite small towns. Petoskey is the big town in the area with a population of about 6300 (year around - triple in "the season").
I'm enough of a foreigner that I can't do real specific political analysis, but frankly the urban part of the state is pretty fractured politically. This state was hit hard in a socio-economic sense by urban flight and a bit after that the collapse of manufacturing. The Michigan that was such a driver in Unionism and progressive policies hasn't existed for some time. Charlie Pierce has taken to referring to this place as Michissippi, which I'd have used in the title other than not liking to do complete rip-offs.
I could go into the post-WWII influx of southerners and particularly the rise in black employment as some of the drivers of what is going on here. If you're not particularly aware, while the Unions were busy being a part of the vanguard of social progressivism a good sized chunk of the rank and file were busy voting GOPer dogwhistling, fag bashing, and hippie kicking... and fleeing to the suburbs. Yup, in a lot of ways this place is a lot more Mississippi than it is what you've thought of as Michigan. If you gave me a choice between living here and shit on a stick I'm afraid I'd opt for the stick but for a pretty good reason I'm stuck here. It looks as though the only path to some sort of peace of mind is to learn to ignore the doings of my betters and just not care.
yeah, right.
Tuesday, December 04, 2012
How To Cure GOP Demographic Blues
If you read this maybe you could explain to me why it is that the GOP has Them Old Time Demographic Blues.
“I see that the way we will get the Hispanics and the other groups, the Asians, as part of the Republican Coalition is to get them first part of the great American Coalition. Make them think of themselves, not make but, persuade them to think of themselves primarily as Americans. Restore the overarching, all-encompassing concept of an American identity, which we used to have, which we knew how to bring about and which in the last 20 or 30 years very largely as a result of the democrats wanting to emphasize ethnicity rather than American-ness. We have lost that and frankly one of the reasons we have not regained it and doing very badly at the moment is because the Republicans have neither had the imagination nor the courage to think how they could appeal to these other ethnic groups as Americans and craft an appeal that won them over. They have got to do that.”I think they may be onto something (or maybe on something). You really don't expect me to comment on this... do you?
Saturday, December 01, 2012
GOP And Taxes
Just to get people to think about just how damn difficult this tax and budget business is going to get, I'd like to propose this:
Getting the GOP to agree to tax increases on the rich and not gutting social security and medicaid/medicare is like trying to get a Fundamentalist Christian to acknowledge Evolution or one of you to become an entirely different religion.
You are not dealing with facts and numbers here, you're dealing with a religion. You can't go so far as to call it an ideology because of the faith backed nature of it. Listen up, the Earth was not created six thousand years ago and supply side economics does not work. Neither of them works because they ignore reality and facts in favor of faith. Now why in the hell supply side has become a religion is way beyond me, but then Creationism is also. Now I suppose that since there have been a couple books around for thousands of years that talked about the Garden there is some damned excuse for Creationism still being around, but for Cripes Sake this supply side nonsense only has St Ronnie, not God on its side.
None of that matters because it still is a religion and pushing the GOPers out of it is going to take a hell of a lot more than being nice to them. What it is going to take is a choice between damnation and survival - most of them are way too big of cowards to chose martyrdom. Now, you figure out what that is going to take. Mr President and fellow Dems?
Getting the GOP to agree to tax increases on the rich and not gutting social security and medicaid/medicare is like trying to get a Fundamentalist Christian to acknowledge Evolution or one of you to become an entirely different religion.
You are not dealing with facts and numbers here, you're dealing with a religion. You can't go so far as to call it an ideology because of the faith backed nature of it. Listen up, the Earth was not created six thousand years ago and supply side economics does not work. Neither of them works because they ignore reality and facts in favor of faith. Now why in the hell supply side has become a religion is way beyond me, but then Creationism is also. Now I suppose that since there have been a couple books around for thousands of years that talked about the Garden there is some damned excuse for Creationism still being around, but for Cripes Sake this supply side nonsense only has St Ronnie, not God on its side.
None of that matters because it still is a religion and pushing the GOPers out of it is going to take a hell of a lot more than being nice to them. What it is going to take is a choice between damnation and survival - most of them are way too big of cowards to chose martyrdom. Now, you figure out what that is going to take. Mr President and fellow Dems?
Thursday, November 29, 2012
How To Ruin The Job Creators
The President-elect ran a campaign determined to mine enthusiasm for raising the top marginal tax rate from 35% to 39%. The GOP has assured us that such behavior will mean economic Armageddon through the ruination of the people who "create" jobs. Some sort of magic occurs at 35%.
I do not and no one I know hires a fourth person to do three people's work, that is just stupid. Everyone I know of that hires people hires someone because three people can't do four people's work, which means that there is that much demand for the product. If you're going to follow along on this "job creators" theme you're either telling people that rich people having some more money means they will gratuitously hire or that they spend enough money in the market place to drive that kind of demand. I think we've dealt with the gratuitous hiring part but the demand part is ought to be as easy, 2% of the taxpayers do not buy all that much of anything (well, most yachts).
So what is the real impact? Let's start with what marginal rate means - anything above an amount. So, $250,000, after deductions, is taxed at the previous rates and anything above gets hit. This would mean that of $260,000 after deductions $10,000 would be taxed at 39%. Follow along, 10,000 x 0.39 is 3,900 and 10,000 x 0.35 is 3500 which is a grand total of another $400. Holy shit, your taxes on Adjusted Gross Income of $260,000 will go up $400 and with that you will buy... what? OK, sure we all know this is more about millionaires than than that 250K bunch so here's that number (assuming - ridiculously - that you somehow have $1M in ordinary income) $750,000. Alrighty, more simple damn math: 750,000 x 0.39 is 292,500 and 750,000 x 0.35 is 262,500 so your 750K costs you $30,000 more. That will buy one car that these people won't be seen driving or at the Federal Minimum Wage of $7.25 earning you $1580 at 40 hours for 52 weeks a whole $15,080, just less than two jobs washing the cars they actually would buy. (no, we're not talking take-home pay) Why does that millionaire need two additional minimum workers? Nobody will tell you, they just squeal "job creators."
If people don't have goddam money they don't spend it on products and services. Those people are called consumers and they produce jobs by consuming. If 80% of the consumers are competing for 7% of the wealth there isn't going to be a lot of consuming going on out of that share. What is actually the case is that the "job creators" are destroying jobs by sucking every last cent out of the economy. It isn't the conservatives' bug-a-boo government that is sucking the life out of the economy, it is their protected class that is doing it. It is real damn simple - the money is not moving around in the economy.
You can feel free to call it socialism, communism, or "punishing success" to advocate using the one tool the governement has at hand to change economic behavior, taxation, to address this concentration of wealth - but real simply, capitalism can't survive under the current conditions. Most of the country can do pretty well under capitalism, those who can't can be addressed with an adequate safety-net, but we have today the Reaganism version of capitalism to live with and it ain't working. Welcome to The Gilded Age aka Robber Baron Era.
People have serious doubts that the President can stick to his 39% rate which will do spit to address the problem and are worried about the safety-net... Christ on a pogo stick. Liberals seem to think this recent election did more than stave off absolute disaster. Can this nation get any stupider about its plutocrat enabling?
The short answer, of course, is - Yes.
I do not and no one I know hires a fourth person to do three people's work, that is just stupid. Everyone I know of that hires people hires someone because three people can't do four people's work, which means that there is that much demand for the product. If you're going to follow along on this "job creators" theme you're either telling people that rich people having some more money means they will gratuitously hire or that they spend enough money in the market place to drive that kind of demand. I think we've dealt with the gratuitous hiring part but the demand part is ought to be as easy, 2% of the taxpayers do not buy all that much of anything (well, most yachts).
So what is the real impact? Let's start with what marginal rate means - anything above an amount. So, $250,000, after deductions, is taxed at the previous rates and anything above gets hit. This would mean that of $260,000 after deductions $10,000 would be taxed at 39%. Follow along, 10,000 x 0.39 is 3,900 and 10,000 x 0.35 is 3500 which is a grand total of another $400. Holy shit, your taxes on Adjusted Gross Income of $260,000 will go up $400 and with that you will buy... what? OK, sure we all know this is more about millionaires than than that 250K bunch so here's that number (assuming - ridiculously - that you somehow have $1M in ordinary income) $750,000. Alrighty, more simple damn math: 750,000 x 0.39 is 292,500 and 750,000 x 0.35 is 262,500 so your 750K costs you $30,000 more. That will buy one car that these people won't be seen driving or at the Federal Minimum Wage of $7.25 earning you $1580 at 40 hours for 52 weeks a whole $15,080, just less than two jobs washing the cars they actually would buy. (no, we're not talking take-home pay) Why does that millionaire need two additional minimum workers? Nobody will tell you, they just squeal "job creators."
If people don't have goddam money they don't spend it on products and services. Those people are called consumers and they produce jobs by consuming. If 80% of the consumers are competing for 7% of the wealth there isn't going to be a lot of consuming going on out of that share. What is actually the case is that the "job creators" are destroying jobs by sucking every last cent out of the economy. It isn't the conservatives' bug-a-boo government that is sucking the life out of the economy, it is their protected class that is doing it. It is real damn simple - the money is not moving around in the economy.
You can feel free to call it socialism, communism, or "punishing success" to advocate using the one tool the governement has at hand to change economic behavior, taxation, to address this concentration of wealth - but real simply, capitalism can't survive under the current conditions. Most of the country can do pretty well under capitalism, those who can't can be addressed with an adequate safety-net, but we have today the Reaganism version of capitalism to live with and it ain't working. Welcome to The Gilded Age aka Robber Baron Era.
People have serious doubts that the President can stick to his 39% rate which will do spit to address the problem and are worried about the safety-net... Christ on a pogo stick. Liberals seem to think this recent election did more than stave off absolute disaster. Can this nation get any stupider about its plutocrat enabling?
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
How To Become A GOP Foreign Policy Leader
If you want to lead a Party on foreign policy there seem to be some pretty specialized qualifications, not easily obtained by just anybody. You should start out by being an Admiral's son, then you can learn to crash jet airplanes without ratting out your fellow prisoners. If that seems a bit threadbare and only suited to making you famous, there is actually more. You need to throw bar-b-ques for reporters and spend lots of time talking to them... about not much of anything, until you get a reputation as a reasonable guy in the face of what you actually propose and vote on. If you've managed that, run for President with a particularly noxious version of know-nothing Alaskan and lose that rather badly. Part of the bona-fides for running to have that office should include assertions that the invasion of Iraq will be easy and that we'll be welcomed as liberators and while campaigning singing about bombing Iran or ... well various things as silly as announcing that we're all Georgians now (not the one with Atlanta) or maybe the other Rice, Condi... If all that worked out pretty good you'd be named Sen. John McPOW McCain.
If you'd like to waste time looking back into foreign policy and security difficulties for this nation you will find McPOW on the wrong and stupidly wrong side (short of torturing our prisoners) in damn near every instance. I don't mean wrong morally or some such, just plain old factually wrong.
Since the Senator is going to term limit out of the one important committee he sits on it might help if he could get a Watergate type special committee going to sit on, though the Sunday morning talk shows can't seem to get enough of him, now. It is puzzling how Susan Rice (no, the other Rice) became such a lightning rod other than the obvious - female, black, Pres. Obama... She's been the UN Ambassador for some time now and they're not pointing at what she did in that job, but repeating the intelligence (loosely applied) agencies' talking points. I guess it is enough that she has been out in public to make a good coathook for McPOW. Don't get me started on Lindsey Graham and Kelly (who???) Ayotte - 2012 NH O/R 52/46 might say... publicity is important. Of course, Lindsey (uh-huh) may be having primary problems.
I don't hold any brief for Susan Rice for any office or appointment, if the President wants her for something I figure he has good reasons and ought to get his way unless there's something outrageously bad lurking. If there was something, I'm pretty damn sure he'd avoid her like the plague - he knows how to do that. If this doesn't demolish the credibility of these three, well... this is the US and we're Exceptional(ly stupid).
If you'd like to waste time looking back into foreign policy and security difficulties for this nation you will find McPOW on the wrong and stupidly wrong side (short of torturing our prisoners) in damn near every instance. I don't mean wrong morally or some such, just plain old factually wrong.
Since the Senator is going to term limit out of the one important committee he sits on it might help if he could get a Watergate type special committee going to sit on, though the Sunday morning talk shows can't seem to get enough of him, now. It is puzzling how Susan Rice (no, the other Rice) became such a lightning rod other than the obvious - female, black, Pres. Obama... She's been the UN Ambassador for some time now and they're not pointing at what she did in that job, but repeating the intelligence (loosely applied) agencies' talking points. I guess it is enough that she has been out in public to make a good coathook for McPOW. Don't get me started on Lindsey Graham and Kelly (who???) Ayotte - 2012 NH O/R 52/46 might say... publicity is important. Of course, Lindsey (uh-huh) may be having primary problems.
I don't hold any brief for Susan Rice for any office or appointment, if the President wants her for something I figure he has good reasons and ought to get his way unless there's something outrageously bad lurking. If there was something, I'm pretty damn sure he'd avoid her like the plague - he knows how to do that. If this doesn't demolish the credibility of these three, well... this is the US and we're Exceptional(ly stupid).
Governor Chris Christie Fer Christ's Sake
Gov. Christie is running for re-election to be Governor of New Jersey - that would be Republican Governor of that Blue State of New Jersey. That would mean that he will have to run for that re-election as a Republican governor of a blue state with policies designed to win in a blue state, a northeastern blue state. There has been talk about Gov. Christie running in 2016 for the GOP Presidential election.
Uh...
The GOP Primary voters really didn't like Mitt Romney, you know - the Blue State Republican Governor - but he did manage to money bomb and campaign competence bomb his rivals into extinction after his 180 on being a Republican Blue State Governor - barely (see Santorum). Consider that damn near anybody breathing polled higher than Mittens for awhile. The GOP ran a fairly democratic Primary this last time and the results were... disappointing for the GOP.
I'm sure the GOP can manage to jury rig the Primary process to get something closer to their desires but I'm not sure they can tilt the field enough to get the Confederate Party of Republicanism to swallow Christie, even as abrasive as he can be. Tough talk isn't going to cover the realities of being a blue state governor - especially not in The Old Confederacy (and The New Confederacy). Well, the Media needs something to talk about...
there's always Jeb BUSH
ahahahahaha, please do that.
Uh...
The GOP Primary voters really didn't like Mitt Romney, you know - the Blue State Republican Governor - but he did manage to money bomb and campaign competence bomb his rivals into extinction after his 180 on being a Republican Blue State Governor - barely (see Santorum). Consider that damn near anybody breathing polled higher than Mittens for awhile. The GOP ran a fairly democratic Primary this last time and the results were... disappointing for the GOP.
I'm sure the GOP can manage to jury rig the Primary process to get something closer to their desires but I'm not sure they can tilt the field enough to get the Confederate Party of Republicanism to swallow Christie, even as abrasive as he can be. Tough talk isn't going to cover the realities of being a blue state governor - especially not in The Old Confederacy (and The New Confederacy). Well, the Media needs something to talk about...
there's always Jeb BUSH
ahahahahaha, please do that.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Turkey Day
Sometimes nice things happen to you, even in Northern Michigan, on Thanksgiving. This picture isn't real good, but I was squatting on the center line of US31 on T-day with my camera phone.
It was almost 70F and the sun was shining and it was behind me when I got to this spot. Today, the next day, at 3:30pm it is 30F, snowing hard - sideways. Yeah well, welcome to N MI. That is looking west onto The Big Lake, aka Lake Michigan, just south of Petoskey, MI where I now live.
It is blowing hard enough to cause the wall mounted bathroom exhaust fan external flappers to clap - that is making my landlady's dog, I'm dog sitting, crazy. He is a Jack Russell so... I hope everybody had as good a T-day as I did.
It was almost 70F and the sun was shining and it was behind me when I got to this spot. Today, the next day, at 3:30pm it is 30F, snowing hard - sideways. Yeah well, welcome to N MI. That is looking west onto The Big Lake, aka Lake Michigan, just south of Petoskey, MI where I now live.
It is blowing hard enough to cause the wall mounted bathroom exhaust fan external flappers to clap - that is making my landlady's dog, I'm dog sitting, crazy. He is a Jack Russell so... I hope everybody had as good a T-day as I did.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
To Pay Taxes, Or Not To Pay ...
There is no doubt in my mind that more Americans should be paying Federal Income Taxes. The operative word in that sentence is "should." There is a damn good reason why the word isn't "can" without severe economic consequences. It has everything to do with how the economic pie is carved up and what the reality of Taxes, in general, is in this model of economic dysfunction.
The first thing to address is what those non-Fed paying are paying and one my move out of Oregon has emphasized to me. Most Americans pay sales tax and depending on the model in operation in a State, just how much the low and middle income pay for their State's operation. This mess of a tax seems to range from about 5% to 7+% and though what is subject varies, food groceries are mostly out, every day needs are hit along with the more major purchases like vehicles and this hits a much larger share of income for low and lower middle income groups than anybody else. There is an unholy mix of sales tax along with State income taxes and most of them are pretty damn regressive.
If you take a wage or salary anything up to $110,000 is subject to a tax of about 14% and there is no deduction on that (that rate can easily revert to the 15.3% rate). You can go ahead and consider Mitt's published rate of about 14% on his millions of income. Unless you're a church or favored Corporation you pay property tax and whether you own, "own", or rent you're paying these. There are, of course, all kinds of specific taxes and fees like gas taxes and maybe the most insidious and nasty where tip receiving employees have their minimum wage slashed.
If you look at wages and salary that have been flat or falling versus inflation over the past 30 years you begin to get a sense of the impact of Federal Income Tax. But that is really only a small part of what is going and talking about a symptom wealth distribution and, yup, taxes. In 2007 the top 1% had 43% of the financial wealth in the US compared to the lowest 80% at 7% of the wealth. Take into consideration that conditions have severely worsened since then. There are structural reasons for this and there are policy and tax reasons for this. I believe you can make the case that the structural reasons have much more to do with policy and tax policy than world conditions and even if they do not they are huge contributors.
It is frequently asserted that economics is not a zero sum game, as though this somehow mitigates conditions and quite basically ignores that at any given moment economics is exactly a zero sum game. At any given moment there is exactly so much wealth within the system and how that wealth is distributed has everything to do with whether or not people earn money and spend that money and get taxed on those earnings. If 80% of the population is competing for 7% of the wealth the system produces they are going to take small portions and have small portions of a system that supports us all.
I really don't care what economic model one hews to from communism to unfettered libertarian capitalism the simple fact is that wealth is produced and protected by the infrastructure and various agencies. These systems must be paid for, somehow, money has got to be put into creating and maintaining them. If not enough people can afford or are willing to pay the piper the thing falls apart. If you cut the share in wealth of the general population they cannot afford to support those essentials and if you allow the small percentage of the population to refuse the thing is broken. The reason you have inability and the ability to refuse is all about the share of wealth. If you concentrate sufficient wealth at the top you give them the ability to keep it that way and refuse responsibility through application of minor amounts of that wealth to the political system.
It has taken decades to get to this point and trying to do something real about it in a sudden manner, even if possible, would have undesirable consequences to the economy. Forcing wealth back down into the general population will take time even if it is seriously addressed. The problem is the the will to do it will take an awful lot work and time - the thinking that has led to this mess has been inculcated over decades and become some perverted common sense. Waiting for politicians is simply foolish, they will react to common sentiment not common sense and worse yet - that sentiment has to overcome the political advantages of wealth. Yeah, I think most Americans should pay taxes and that involves being able to pay them and that means that the real Takers in the economy have to give up quite a lot. A hell of a lot which is just chump change in their world. So don't hold your breath or any stupid like that...
By the way, if you're not in the top 1% or even better 0.1% you're getting hammered by percentage of income paid in taxes compared to them. Absolutely hammered.
The first thing to address is what those non-Fed paying are paying and one my move out of Oregon has emphasized to me. Most Americans pay sales tax and depending on the model in operation in a State, just how much the low and middle income pay for their State's operation. This mess of a tax seems to range from about 5% to 7+% and though what is subject varies, food groceries are mostly out, every day needs are hit along with the more major purchases like vehicles and this hits a much larger share of income for low and lower middle income groups than anybody else. There is an unholy mix of sales tax along with State income taxes and most of them are pretty damn regressive.
If you take a wage or salary anything up to $110,000 is subject to a tax of about 14% and there is no deduction on that (that rate can easily revert to the 15.3% rate). You can go ahead and consider Mitt's published rate of about 14% on his millions of income. Unless you're a church or favored Corporation you pay property tax and whether you own, "own", or rent you're paying these. There are, of course, all kinds of specific taxes and fees like gas taxes and maybe the most insidious and nasty where tip receiving employees have their minimum wage slashed.
If you look at wages and salary that have been flat or falling versus inflation over the past 30 years you begin to get a sense of the impact of Federal Income Tax. But that is really only a small part of what is going and talking about a symptom wealth distribution and, yup, taxes. In 2007 the top 1% had 43% of the financial wealth in the US compared to the lowest 80% at 7% of the wealth. Take into consideration that conditions have severely worsened since then. There are structural reasons for this and there are policy and tax reasons for this. I believe you can make the case that the structural reasons have much more to do with policy and tax policy than world conditions and even if they do not they are huge contributors.
It is frequently asserted that economics is not a zero sum game, as though this somehow mitigates conditions and quite basically ignores that at any given moment economics is exactly a zero sum game. At any given moment there is exactly so much wealth within the system and how that wealth is distributed has everything to do with whether or not people earn money and spend that money and get taxed on those earnings. If 80% of the population is competing for 7% of the wealth the system produces they are going to take small portions and have small portions of a system that supports us all.
I really don't care what economic model one hews to from communism to unfettered libertarian capitalism the simple fact is that wealth is produced and protected by the infrastructure and various agencies. These systems must be paid for, somehow, money has got to be put into creating and maintaining them. If not enough people can afford or are willing to pay the piper the thing falls apart. If you cut the share in wealth of the general population they cannot afford to support those essentials and if you allow the small percentage of the population to refuse the thing is broken. The reason you have inability and the ability to refuse is all about the share of wealth. If you concentrate sufficient wealth at the top you give them the ability to keep it that way and refuse responsibility through application of minor amounts of that wealth to the political system.
It has taken decades to get to this point and trying to do something real about it in a sudden manner, even if possible, would have undesirable consequences to the economy. Forcing wealth back down into the general population will take time even if it is seriously addressed. The problem is the the will to do it will take an awful lot work and time - the thinking that has led to this mess has been inculcated over decades and become some perverted common sense. Waiting for politicians is simply foolish, they will react to common sentiment not common sense and worse yet - that sentiment has to overcome the political advantages of wealth. Yeah, I think most Americans should pay taxes and that involves being able to pay them and that means that the real Takers in the economy have to give up quite a lot. A hell of a lot which is just chump change in their world. So don't hold your breath or any stupid like that...
By the way, if you're not in the top 1% or even better 0.1% you're getting hammered by percentage of income paid in taxes compared to them. Absolutely hammered.
Friday, November 09, 2012
Dealing With The GOP
I've already laughed at the idea of GOP reassessment so one need not fear I'm going to repeat that. I've listened to two of John Boehner's blatherings now and while I appreciate the cheekiness of offering to compromise all the way to the President's opponent's position on taxes and spending, it is pretty silly to think a bunch of Democrats will get along with it. A bunch of media is all aflutter with fiscal cliff themes which is a serious over statement of what is going on. There is not only no damn rush to deal with it, it is strategically stupid to do anything before we topple over... er actually, step down the slope.
Mitch McConnell managed to tell the President that he could go ahead and offer up a Republican House Bill.... Now, admiring the cheekiness of Orange John is a bit different than saying something nice about complete and utter lunatic ramblings by Mitch One Term McConnell. The House is not "Republican" it has a Republican majority which is a bit of a different thing. It is quite possible for the Tea Baggers to stay loyal to their idiotology and fringe while other GOPers come out to play. That of course depends on just how scared the rest of them are of Teabaggery.
The GOP has proved itself willing and adept at taking hostages so being put in the position of step forward or have the edge of the cliff crumble under them whould turn on some lights. They're perfectly aware of the efficacy of making the choice of going along or facing the absolute wrath of the citizenry and the plutocratic interests. The plutocrats might not much like paying higher taxes and in another deep recession could probably buy up even more of what's left, but payment to those pissed off peons could be real bad - like pitchforks bad. Not to mention that some of the wealthy actually do depend on doing actual business, you know, the making of or doing things which you don't do in a crashed economy.
I don't propose that the President and Democrats march into Congress and insult the GOP, as deserving as they are, but that they put them into corners that force reasonableness onto them. I am, however, real tired of hearing about "middle ground" where the GOPers will meet the President. The GOP can be dragged or forced into meeting the Democrats on their side of the divide, otherwise all the talk about not just being red/blue but the United States will simply end in RED. The real trick will be to get the media past the wishful thinking of magical Bipartisanship.
Mitch McConnell managed to tell the President that he could go ahead and offer up a Republican House Bill.... Now, admiring the cheekiness of Orange John is a bit different than saying something nice about complete and utter lunatic ramblings by Mitch One Term McConnell. The House is not "Republican" it has a Republican majority which is a bit of a different thing. It is quite possible for the Tea Baggers to stay loyal to their idiotology and fringe while other GOPers come out to play. That of course depends on just how scared the rest of them are of Teabaggery.
The GOP has proved itself willing and adept at taking hostages so being put in the position of step forward or have the edge of the cliff crumble under them whould turn on some lights. They're perfectly aware of the efficacy of making the choice of going along or facing the absolute wrath of the citizenry and the plutocratic interests. The plutocrats might not much like paying higher taxes and in another deep recession could probably buy up even more of what's left, but payment to those pissed off peons could be real bad - like pitchforks bad. Not to mention that some of the wealthy actually do depend on doing actual business, you know, the making of or doing things which you don't do in a crashed economy.
I don't propose that the President and Democrats march into Congress and insult the GOP, as deserving as they are, but that they put them into corners that force reasonableness onto them. I am, however, real tired of hearing about "middle ground" where the GOPers will meet the President. The GOP can be dragged or forced into meeting the Democrats on their side of the divide, otherwise all the talk about not just being red/blue but the United States will simply end in RED. The real trick will be to get the media past the wishful thinking of magical Bipartisanship.
Thursday, November 08, 2012
Why The GOP Lost, So They Say
A couple things about GOP loss excusing were pretty obvious years ago and so were included today to nobody's surprise featuring the oldie goldie:
Conservatism cannot fail, only be failed...
ie: Mitt sucked at being conservative
But for real gold you had to mine fine minds like Hannity and O'Reilly, Bill O' started his evening off with a mantra I later learned is the new GOP talking point - the election was bought by O'Bama (heh, couldn't resist) from the over 50% that want their gubbmint free stuff. This was the center piece of his little peroration that went from the opening theme to the pre-commercial announcement of his guests which induced uncontrolled gagging on my part and a quick click to the XBox that was idling for just such an eventuality. There were some other bits surrounding the lazy no good takers part that I won't credit Bill with since what I remember may be confused with some other GOPer stuff. He sure didn't like the demographics, St Ronnie hadn't had that problem.
I returned from the fictional XBox endeavors to the alternate reality of Hannity who also opened with a title screen to first commercial sermon, and to my less than great surprise its center piece was the failing of the gubbmint teat sucking Americans to act in a moral way and elect the rMoney guy. This one also brought in an oblique "more later" reference to the Librul Media efforts on behalf of that not Irish Obama and some extensive going on about the dirty campaign run by "that guy." The words lying, sliming, and defaming in regard to Mittens' self were in emphatic usage as was the qualifier "the most... in memory" I'm happy to point out that Hannity has a very short memory and extremely selective attention span. In Hannity's case I was willing to stick around for the after commercial first guest Ann Coulter, despite what better sense told me.
The first order of business was to get Ann to agree that the moral failings of the teat suckers had to be corrected in order to... hmmm, it gets a bit sticky here... achieve happiness through self-reliance and return the Hannity version of Conservatism to power... or something like that. Ann's short, "I agree," sentiment seemed to contain a bit of annoyance at having Hannity put words in her mouth while using up her on air time. Ann managed to sort of apologize for drifting off reservation with her Christie/Romney/we loose jabber earlier on. She'd thought - well after some fourth grader political analysis - that (do you have any idea how difficult it is to sort of repeat Ann Coulter and be sure you're making any kind of sense in what you're relating?)... anyhow, that incumbents are hard to beat and O'Bama (ooops, wrong show) Obama is popular and so was Christie and, aw geeze, free stuff and lies and rMoney was really a good candidate and Sandy screwed the works and...crap, the hell with it.
Both BillO and Hannity were pretty much in agreement that there is no problem with GOP right wingery and both seemed to wax philosophical about how America would come running to them to right the insults to Americanism of the O'Bama crowd and seemed to think '14 should do pretty well as a time line and their crowd had best not despair... ayup, conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. Oddly enough a day later and they were still holding fire on rMoney although O'Reilly had some fairly harsh criticism of the staff for not making their point strongly enough and surging back after Sandy and he did want Axelrod.
So, what we've got here is that with the help of the compliant liberal media the sinning suckers were bought with cheap trinkets and lies about the fine fellow Mitt who was let down by his shitty staff while being ambushed by a hurricane named Sandy to the point where the non-traditional electorate of loser types would fail the conservatism that would come roaring back to save them when through the ministrations of some undetermined agency they would return to their senses after the Democrat Party failed them and we go bankrupt while being killed by the foreign boogeymen and what did O'Bama know and when did he know it...
Or - in short - most Americans are shitty people who failed a shitty campaign and both failed Conservatism but not to worry, it's coming back... soon.
Really, in a sad sick way they were damn near as funny as the Comedy News guy John Stewart. Well, there is the part where he is deliberately being funny... and he's waiting for the laughter when he says really stupid stuff.
Have I mentioned that watching people talk about the GOPers re-assessing and returning to reason leaves me ROTFLMAO?
Conservatism cannot fail, only be failed...
ie: Mitt sucked at being conservative
But for real gold you had to mine fine minds like Hannity and O'Reilly, Bill O' started his evening off with a mantra I later learned is the new GOP talking point - the election was bought by O'Bama (heh, couldn't resist) from the over 50% that want their gubbmint free stuff. This was the center piece of his little peroration that went from the opening theme to the pre-commercial announcement of his guests which induced uncontrolled gagging on my part and a quick click to the XBox that was idling for just such an eventuality. There were some other bits surrounding the lazy no good takers part that I won't credit Bill with since what I remember may be confused with some other GOPer stuff. He sure didn't like the demographics, St Ronnie hadn't had that problem.
I returned from the fictional XBox endeavors to the alternate reality of Hannity who also opened with a title screen to first commercial sermon, and to my less than great surprise its center piece was the failing of the gubbmint teat sucking Americans to act in a moral way and elect the rMoney guy. This one also brought in an oblique "more later" reference to the Librul Media efforts on behalf of that not Irish Obama and some extensive going on about the dirty campaign run by "that guy." The words lying, sliming, and defaming in regard to Mittens' self were in emphatic usage as was the qualifier "the most... in memory" I'm happy to point out that Hannity has a very short memory and extremely selective attention span. In Hannity's case I was willing to stick around for the after commercial first guest Ann Coulter, despite what better sense told me.
The first order of business was to get Ann to agree that the moral failings of the teat suckers had to be corrected in order to... hmmm, it gets a bit sticky here... achieve happiness through self-reliance and return the Hannity version of Conservatism to power... or something like that. Ann's short, "I agree," sentiment seemed to contain a bit of annoyance at having Hannity put words in her mouth while using up her on air time. Ann managed to sort of apologize for drifting off reservation with her Christie/Romney/we loose jabber earlier on. She'd thought - well after some fourth grader political analysis - that (do you have any idea how difficult it is to sort of repeat Ann Coulter and be sure you're making any kind of sense in what you're relating?)... anyhow, that incumbents are hard to beat and O'Bama (ooops, wrong show) Obama is popular and so was Christie and, aw geeze, free stuff and lies and rMoney was really a good candidate and Sandy screwed the works and...crap, the hell with it.
Both BillO and Hannity were pretty much in agreement that there is no problem with GOP right wingery and both seemed to wax philosophical about how America would come running to them to right the insults to Americanism of the O'Bama crowd and seemed to think '14 should do pretty well as a time line and their crowd had best not despair... ayup, conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. Oddly enough a day later and they were still holding fire on rMoney although O'Reilly had some fairly harsh criticism of the staff for not making their point strongly enough and surging back after Sandy and he did want Axelrod.
So, what we've got here is that with the help of the compliant liberal media the sinning suckers were bought with cheap trinkets and lies about the fine fellow Mitt who was let down by his shitty staff while being ambushed by a hurricane named Sandy to the point where the non-traditional electorate of loser types would fail the conservatism that would come roaring back to save them when through the ministrations of some undetermined agency they would return to their senses after the Democrat Party failed them and we go bankrupt while being killed by the foreign boogeymen and what did O'Bama know and when did he know it...
Or - in short - most Americans are shitty people who failed a shitty campaign and both failed Conservatism but not to worry, it's coming back... soon.
Really, in a sad sick way they were damn near as funny as the Comedy News guy John Stewart. Well, there is the part where he is deliberately being funny... and he's waiting for the laughter when he says really stupid stuff.
Have I mentioned that watching people talk about the GOPers re-assessing and returning to reason leaves me ROTFLMAO?
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
Goodbye Mr rMoney - Please...
I would hope, that after 7 years of running to be POTUS, that Mr rMoney will take what I consider to be a very well earned retirement from politics. For god's sake Mitt, go concentrate on scraping the last cent of value out of companies or even better dancing horses. I really don't want to hear any more about this guy being the head of the GOP. It is bad enough that I have to listen to Orange John repeat your Mittens' tax plans as though somebody elected you. There are car elevators to be ridden, speed boats to be driven, and dogs to be strapped on roofs (no, don't do that one) and I'm sure the LDS can use some of your help and expertise to... something.
I don't want or need any more of your version of political speech which was debased enough prior to your campaign. I can get your idea of discourse any time I'm willing to insult my intelligence with Rush Limbaugh or half of the House GOP Caucus. It is quite possible to take a measure of Corporate Spending on your failure and wonder just how many products at what price could have been made or employees hired or (horrors) given raises. Business bemoans the insurance costs of the employee mandated insurance and yet were the drivers of the demise of a public model and threw even more money away on a corporate raider as though he was experienced at adding value to the economy.
Mitt's failures as a candidate were manifold as were the GOP failures as a campaign machine and resulted in Electoral College disaster and popular vote loss. But those failures of charisma and machinery were nothing next to nothing compared to the failure of messages. Racism will work in some House districts and even in a lot of the Confederacy but in the nation at large and most larger states it just flatly sucks - and your scared white vote just isn't big enough any more to do the job. St Ronnie's demographics are gone (at least partly due to his Amnesty) and America is reaping the "benefits" of the voodoo of Reaganomics. It is beginning to look as though the results of voter disenfranchisement efforts may be backlash and upped vote enthusiasm from those groups - though hard numbers to back that feeling will be near impossible to garner - and those insulted by those efforts will most likely never support the bastards who did it.
I expect 2016 to be a replay of of 2012 and even 2008, though probably the racism directed at the actual candidate will be a bit lesser, mostly because I don't see another dark skinned candidate in the wings although female isn't out of the question. The racism regarding policies Democrats support won't be lessened, probably even heightened since there is so little room to go another direction. The plutocratic politics will not be touched because while the GOP can't remember history in any accurate manner, they can read checkbooks.
G'bye Mr Mitt, please go much farther away and much quieter than Sen McPOW. I won't miss you.
I don't want or need any more of your version of political speech which was debased enough prior to your campaign. I can get your idea of discourse any time I'm willing to insult my intelligence with Rush Limbaugh or half of the House GOP Caucus. It is quite possible to take a measure of Corporate Spending on your failure and wonder just how many products at what price could have been made or employees hired or (horrors) given raises. Business bemoans the insurance costs of the employee mandated insurance and yet were the drivers of the demise of a public model and threw even more money away on a corporate raider as though he was experienced at adding value to the economy.
Mitt's failures as a candidate were manifold as were the GOP failures as a campaign machine and resulted in Electoral College disaster and popular vote loss. But those failures of charisma and machinery were nothing next to nothing compared to the failure of messages. Racism will work in some House districts and even in a lot of the Confederacy but in the nation at large and most larger states it just flatly sucks - and your scared white vote just isn't big enough any more to do the job. St Ronnie's demographics are gone (at least partly due to his Amnesty) and America is reaping the "benefits" of the voodoo of Reaganomics. It is beginning to look as though the results of voter disenfranchisement efforts may be backlash and upped vote enthusiasm from those groups - though hard numbers to back that feeling will be near impossible to garner - and those insulted by those efforts will most likely never support the bastards who did it.
I expect 2016 to be a replay of of 2012 and even 2008, though probably the racism directed at the actual candidate will be a bit lesser, mostly because I don't see another dark skinned candidate in the wings although female isn't out of the question. The racism regarding policies Democrats support won't be lessened, probably even heightened since there is so little room to go another direction. The plutocratic politics will not be touched because while the GOP can't remember history in any accurate manner, they can read checkbooks.
G'bye Mr Mitt, please go much farther away and much quieter than Sen McPOW. I won't miss you.
A New GOP?
The media seems all a-flutter with the theme of a GOP civil war and how the GOP is going to address the President running the table on the so-called swing states and a pretty clear majority vote. The first things to look at are the numbers in Congress. The Senate gains by Democrats were unexpected by most a year ago but it falls far short of stopping filibusters and the House is still... well, I can't think of a polite adjective - Republican. Then there is the electorate, that infamous 27% number makes up over half of the GOP and if this election cycle didn't make their point of view clear, I'm unsure just how big a hammer it takes to get your attention.
Regarding the Senate elections, the Democrats picked up seats (sort of - considering who some of them are) thanks mostly to the GOP Primary results. If you think there is a lesson for them in that, I'd like to point you back two years and the results of GOP Primary voting that time and the balance in the Senate. New Senate rules could have some effect on pure obstructionism, but don't hold your breath on that happening.
At one time the Senate was the much more stable entity and the House the volatile one, thanks to gerrymandering that is no longer true with Senators facing a state wide popular vote threshold that includes sufficient mixes of Party loyalties and other sensibilities to elect something other than lunacy in enough states and the House candidates getting their predetermined mixes. When people like Bachmann are able to hang on for cycle after cycle you know that something is seriously amiss. The House GOP lunatic caucus has proven safe and whatever sort of pragmatism John Boehner might like to practice, they'll have no more part of that this time around than they did the last two years and their numbers are not inconsiderable for Boehner. I don't like Boehner and I think his politics stink but they're less egregious assholery than his colleagues' idiotology but he has essentially no levers to move them with and is scared spitless of them. Any House GOPer to the left of wingnuttery knows their wing will Primary them into extinction if the break rank.
It may be a fact that if the GOP wants to win statewide and national elections outside the Confederacy and Confederate sympathisers it has to change directions, but that does not mean there is any Primary impetus to do so. That 27% is not subject to the reasoned discourse that involves something outside their ideology and compromise means doing that and winning those big elections means doing it. They do not want to win at the cost of betraying that hard core ideology and believe in their hearts that they'll start winning by sticking to it and even going harder in that direction. Their Conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. While all the long term developements look for the GOP just about like they did for the Confederacy versus the Union that war didn't end before the almost utter destruction of their ability to function, either. Faith is a peculiar thing and not particularly subject to reality's intrusions.
UPDATE
This also includes the idea of making the GOP something other than the Confederate Party of Republicanism ie: Racism.
All this is a pretty long way of looking at this GOP civil war idea and saying, "Please pick my laughing my ass off self off the floor."
Regarding the Senate elections, the Democrats picked up seats (sort of - considering who some of them are) thanks mostly to the GOP Primary results. If you think there is a lesson for them in that, I'd like to point you back two years and the results of GOP Primary voting that time and the balance in the Senate. New Senate rules could have some effect on pure obstructionism, but don't hold your breath on that happening.
At one time the Senate was the much more stable entity and the House the volatile one, thanks to gerrymandering that is no longer true with Senators facing a state wide popular vote threshold that includes sufficient mixes of Party loyalties and other sensibilities to elect something other than lunacy in enough states and the House candidates getting their predetermined mixes. When people like Bachmann are able to hang on for cycle after cycle you know that something is seriously amiss. The House GOP lunatic caucus has proven safe and whatever sort of pragmatism John Boehner might like to practice, they'll have no more part of that this time around than they did the last two years and their numbers are not inconsiderable for Boehner. I don't like Boehner and I think his politics stink but they're less egregious assholery than his colleagues' idiotology but he has essentially no levers to move them with and is scared spitless of them. Any House GOPer to the left of wingnuttery knows their wing will Primary them into extinction if the break rank.
It may be a fact that if the GOP wants to win statewide and national elections outside the Confederacy and Confederate sympathisers it has to change directions, but that does not mean there is any Primary impetus to do so. That 27% is not subject to the reasoned discourse that involves something outside their ideology and compromise means doing that and winning those big elections means doing it. They do not want to win at the cost of betraying that hard core ideology and believe in their hearts that they'll start winning by sticking to it and even going harder in that direction. Their Conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. While all the long term developements look for the GOP just about like they did for the Confederacy versus the Union that war didn't end before the almost utter destruction of their ability to function, either. Faith is a peculiar thing and not particularly subject to reality's intrusions.
UPDATE
This also includes the idea of making the GOP something other than the Confederate Party of Republicanism ie: Racism.
All this is a pretty long way of looking at this GOP civil war idea and saying, "Please pick my laughing my ass off self off the floor."
Monday, November 05, 2012
Getting Here
Truck speed limit is 25 mph and follow distance of 100 feet so it wasn't much of a risk to shoot these pictures through the windows while moving. Yeah, this is a damn big bridge that connects the "UP" with "The Mitten." Despite a lot of Michigan north of here in the the UP, this is referred to as Northern Michigan. They make a lot of maple syrup here and tourism is huge especially if water is involved.
I've got to tell you that a seriously loaded 26' bed U-Haul with a K5 loaded to the gunnels with tools on a trailer behind is quite the show, longer than a lot of semis. Using the words gas mileage in any other respect than connected with horrid doesn't address this mess. There was a vacume gauge on the dash that had green for best mileage and red for 'there's a vast hole in the bottom of your tank', it spent little time out of red and when out of it just barely. One two hundred mile stretch involved the wonders of just short of 5mpg, yeah - that's about 75 cents per mile for gasoline - though I did get around 8mpg other times and even saw 10mpg which would get it down to forty cents a mile. Did I mention 2200 miles and four days?
For all of those wishing me a good trip, no crashes or other disasters. A couple eye widening and jaw dropping moments, though. The horse in the opposite lane just over a hill at 60mph at dusk in MT was a surprise. Drove through several snows, enough to stick to the road in a few places and in the UP I got a real surprise.
Cresting a rather long hill in the UP at 60mph I found the whole show 45 degrees left on the road looking out the passenger window at the center line and I thought, "I can handle this." I cut back into the slide and nothing at all happened until I gassed it. That worked a bit too much and I was 45 degrees right and same thing with nothing happening till I gassed it and yup, right at 45 degrees and I thought, "This really sucks, my stuff will look stupid scattered in the trees." I cut it back as soon as it started coming around and got the vast improvement of 20 degrees right and managed to use the shoulder to get it pointed in the right direction. All that was, uh, disconcerting black ice is... difficult.
Arrived here in a driving rain and the radio talking about flash flood warnings, spent the night in a motel and the next day unloading in... rain. Everything except the dining room table made it in good shape, the table required extensive repair and while not perfect, is pretty good now. The important thing, the Harley, made the trip unscathed. I really like the landlady and the house is quite nice, if a lot smaller than the one I left. Living in the actual country is pretty darn nice and since I sit on a hill I have a view - and wind.
I've got to tell you that a seriously loaded 26' bed U-Haul with a K5 loaded to the gunnels with tools on a trailer behind is quite the show, longer than a lot of semis. Using the words gas mileage in any other respect than connected with horrid doesn't address this mess. There was a vacume gauge on the dash that had green for best mileage and red for 'there's a vast hole in the bottom of your tank', it spent little time out of red and when out of it just barely. One two hundred mile stretch involved the wonders of just short of 5mpg, yeah - that's about 75 cents per mile for gasoline - though I did get around 8mpg other times and even saw 10mpg which would get it down to forty cents a mile. Did I mention 2200 miles and four days?
For all of those wishing me a good trip, no crashes or other disasters. A couple eye widening and jaw dropping moments, though. The horse in the opposite lane just over a hill at 60mph at dusk in MT was a surprise. Drove through several snows, enough to stick to the road in a few places and in the UP I got a real surprise.
Cresting a rather long hill in the UP at 60mph I found the whole show 45 degrees left on the road looking out the passenger window at the center line and I thought, "I can handle this." I cut back into the slide and nothing at all happened until I gassed it. That worked a bit too much and I was 45 degrees right and same thing with nothing happening till I gassed it and yup, right at 45 degrees and I thought, "This really sucks, my stuff will look stupid scattered in the trees." I cut it back as soon as it started coming around and got the vast improvement of 20 degrees right and managed to use the shoulder to get it pointed in the right direction. All that was, uh, disconcerting black ice is... difficult.
Arrived here in a driving rain and the radio talking about flash flood warnings, spent the night in a motel and the next day unloading in... rain. Everything except the dining room table made it in good shape, the table required extensive repair and while not perfect, is pretty good now. The important thing, the Harley, made the trip unscathed. I really like the landlady and the house is quite nice, if a lot smaller than the one I left. Living in the actual country is pretty darn nice and since I sit on a hill I have a view - and wind.
The New View From My Window
A couple weeks ago I made a rather long move - like a 2200 mile move - from Baker City, OR to Petoskey, MI. I'm still trying to fit a three bedroom house with a garage/shop into a one bedroom with storage. Packing, driving, unpacking, and suffering from geo-social shock explains my absence from this blog.
Looking somewhat SW from my sliding window in the living room. Petoskey is over in that general direction, past the hill and on the edge of northern Lake Michigan. Depending on which side of town you're trying to get to it is about 5 miles. (Click Pics For Full Size)
Out to the NE is my landlady's house and my '74 K5 Blazer. Previous to the move I sold "the fleet." While I have no use for it, I'll sort of miss the old '50 Chevy COE. I'll much more miss the '62 Chevy II and for driving and gas mileage the '04 SSR is a real loss. I needed money and I needed to not have a huge insurance bill. I've driven the '78 K20 Chevy work truck longer than any other vehicle I've ever had, but I could move one vehicle and a utility bed truck that could get all of 8 mpg and seat three tightly just wasn't in the cards. The driveway is very light colored because it is sand, if you scrape the ground anywhere around here you get sand and it takes some work to not track it all over the house...
Since you can't go much over 10 miles in any direction with out running into water, lakes, I figured I probably needed something that floated better than the Harley which is parked in the garage past the "hole in the water you throw money into." This thing is a '94 18' Four Winns with a 5L 215HP Ford V8 and it can scoot - the test drive showed it making 50 mph, which is darn fast on the water. While I was paying for it and doing the paper work the shop winterized it - so I have a large expensive yard decoration that, unlike the Harley, I can't ignore... all damn winter. Yeah, it's 11AM and 39F and over cast which isn't too bad for the last two weeks - at least it isn't raining or snowing, like it has been. Baker County is semi-arid - which means a couple less inches precipitation and you've got desert - did I mention shock?
There are a number of reasons why this move happened and not a bit of it had to do with wanting to leave my friends and the country side of Baker City. I shut down the construction contracting business last fall since I couldn't afford to subsidize it any more and this summer my wife and I decided to divorce which meant selling the house since she was moving and neither of us could afford to buy out the other. All that and my mother's age of 85 years and the closest child 3 hours away made it seem that with little employment opportunity it sort of fell on me to get within her neighborhood. Mom's place is about 25 minutes away, close enough that I can help her out whenever she needs it and still far enough that she can - heh - still like me.
It is odd and kind of claustrophobic to ride the country roads and not be able to see anything unless you're topping a hill. The humidity is sky high compared to Baker City, though most places aren't that dry. The air does smell clean and 'The Big Lake" is present - in damn near everything. The snow fall is an issue, the lack of it the last couple years - but I think I'll have to do it to judge exactly what they mean by "lack." I lived near here for a while 30 years ago and the lake effect snow fall was considerable.
I'll make new friends and get used to the climate. There are a lot of roads to ride and it is rural (well, crowded compared to Baker County) and I'll have plenty of water to fish and play on. Large change is never easy and I've not only lived in Baker City for the last 24 and change years but also 22 years in my house there after never living in one place in my adult life for more than a couple years.
Maybe I'll start putting stuff on this page a bit more regularly. Anyhow, hi to all my readers.
Oh yeah, I won't suffer political shock of any big degree, this area is as "Red" as OR2 - lots of NObama and Defeat Obama signs, I guess with rMoney it's hard to know what to be for...
Looking somewhat SW from my sliding window in the living room. Petoskey is over in that general direction, past the hill and on the edge of northern Lake Michigan. Depending on which side of town you're trying to get to it is about 5 miles. (Click Pics For Full Size)
Out to the NE is my landlady's house and my '74 K5 Blazer. Previous to the move I sold "the fleet." While I have no use for it, I'll sort of miss the old '50 Chevy COE. I'll much more miss the '62 Chevy II and for driving and gas mileage the '04 SSR is a real loss. I needed money and I needed to not have a huge insurance bill. I've driven the '78 K20 Chevy work truck longer than any other vehicle I've ever had, but I could move one vehicle and a utility bed truck that could get all of 8 mpg and seat three tightly just wasn't in the cards. The driveway is very light colored because it is sand, if you scrape the ground anywhere around here you get sand and it takes some work to not track it all over the house...
Since you can't go much over 10 miles in any direction with out running into water, lakes, I figured I probably needed something that floated better than the Harley which is parked in the garage past the "hole in the water you throw money into." This thing is a '94 18' Four Winns with a 5L 215HP Ford V8 and it can scoot - the test drive showed it making 50 mph, which is darn fast on the water. While I was paying for it and doing the paper work the shop winterized it - so I have a large expensive yard decoration that, unlike the Harley, I can't ignore... all damn winter. Yeah, it's 11AM and 39F and over cast which isn't too bad for the last two weeks - at least it isn't raining or snowing, like it has been. Baker County is semi-arid - which means a couple less inches precipitation and you've got desert - did I mention shock?
There are a number of reasons why this move happened and not a bit of it had to do with wanting to leave my friends and the country side of Baker City. I shut down the construction contracting business last fall since I couldn't afford to subsidize it any more and this summer my wife and I decided to divorce which meant selling the house since she was moving and neither of us could afford to buy out the other. All that and my mother's age of 85 years and the closest child 3 hours away made it seem that with little employment opportunity it sort of fell on me to get within her neighborhood. Mom's place is about 25 minutes away, close enough that I can help her out whenever she needs it and still far enough that she can - heh - still like me.
It is odd and kind of claustrophobic to ride the country roads and not be able to see anything unless you're topping a hill. The humidity is sky high compared to Baker City, though most places aren't that dry. The air does smell clean and 'The Big Lake" is present - in damn near everything. The snow fall is an issue, the lack of it the last couple years - but I think I'll have to do it to judge exactly what they mean by "lack." I lived near here for a while 30 years ago and the lake effect snow fall was considerable.
I'll make new friends and get used to the climate. There are a lot of roads to ride and it is rural (well, crowded compared to Baker County) and I'll have plenty of water to fish and play on. Large change is never easy and I've not only lived in Baker City for the last 24 and change years but also 22 years in my house there after never living in one place in my adult life for more than a couple years.
Maybe I'll start putting stuff on this page a bit more regularly. Anyhow, hi to all my readers.
Oh yeah, I won't suffer political shock of any big degree, this area is as "Red" as OR2 - lots of NObama and Defeat Obama signs, I guess with rMoney it's hard to know what to be for...
Thursday, October 04, 2012
Well, I Watched The Debate...
If you were a Democrat it sucked, if you were an Obama fan it really sucked. I realize it can be pretty difficult to counter someone who lies every other sentence and presents about a dozen alternate reality versions of himself - but... really? I know being a Democrat is a fairly complicated proposition and reality has an unfortunate tendency to screw with our desires - but... really?
I have one piece of advice for the President to use in the upcoming debates: Whatever it was you thought you were doing, STOP IT!
I have one piece of advice for the President to use in the upcoming debates: Whatever it was you thought you were doing, STOP IT!
Wednesday, October 03, 2012
Polling The 47% Statement
NBC/WSJ did some polling and one of the questions was how did Mitt's 47% comment affect your view of him?
The media loves "a moment" in campaigns, the ones that change everything, so this thing takes on a life as one of them. The slow drip drip of GOPer bullshit from the Primaries on to now as an r-Money definer seems a lot more reasonable backed up by what this poll says. This is the guts of what I find offensive by the "a moment" theme in this case. If the definition continues on, what will happen is that r-Money gets the blame as a clueless bumbler for a loss that was avoidable minus this particular fumble.
If you think some really charismatic person could sell the bill of goods that Mittens has been peddling I'm really frightened for the America of that vision.
More positive ......................................................... 23
More negative ....................................................... 45
Not much difference .............................................. 24
Don’t know enough ............................................... 8Despite the media's obsession with this tape and its effects this thing shows what I've been dismissing. Yeah, a 45 more negative view isn't helpful, but look at the rest of it, if you add the rest together you get 53% that aren't pushed Obama's direction. I'm more than happy to go with the idea that the statement froze some leaners in Obama's camp, but that is far from agreeing with the idea that the statement is persuading people into voting for him that weren't already there. I'd be more inclined if that "more negative" number was in excess of Obama's general polling but it isn't.
The media loves "a moment" in campaigns, the ones that change everything, so this thing takes on a life as one of them. The slow drip drip of GOPer bullshit from the Primaries on to now as an r-Money definer seems a lot more reasonable backed up by what this poll says. This is the guts of what I find offensive by the "a moment" theme in this case. If the definition continues on, what will happen is that r-Money gets the blame as a clueless bumbler for a loss that was avoidable minus this particular fumble.
If you think some really charismatic person could sell the bill of goods that Mittens has been peddling I'm really frightened for the America of that vision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)