etheror

For the last 8 years, I have been hearing how Bush is not a uniter, he is a divider.

Well how come Biden got all the applause when he brought up Bork. Wasn't that the genesis of the current divide in Washington?

I abhor the partisan undercurrents in everything political these days. However, it probably isn't that different from the past. But whatever the cause, putting this on Bush just doesn't fly.

Well the issue of the day is Sarah Palin. This has weirdly come up three times in the past week. Not social security, not terrorism, not taxes, not the fucking economic meltdown, but whether or not someone with a suspect pedigree can be Vice President.

Frankly, in a perfect world, Palin would have a few more years. She lays the pap on a little thick sometimes and I think this takes away from her seriousness. She could use a few more facts in her head and a few more skills at dealing with Couric and her ilk.

But four years of Obama's race baiting socialism is too grim to contemplate. We need McCain now and Palin comes with.

So here are a couple of things that I like about her:

• While her manners are not exactly my cup of tea (I am an effete intellectual after all,) My sense is that she is a genuinely nice person who is trying to do good. While her toughness may be overblown, she is reminiscent of the Frances McDormand character from Fargo -- effective, tenacious, and loving.
  
• I don't think she is stupid. She may not pronounce nuclear properly, but she sure knows how to say naivete.
  
• Leadership is about wisdom not intelligence. Leadership is about ethics, confidence, and an understanding of how the world works. Time and time again I see smart people get stymied in the decision making process.
  
• Ivy leaguers are usually part of the problem, not the solution.
  
• I think her worldview is coherent, just, and more or less in line with mine.
  

The left has savaged her. They have ceaselessly mocked her "stupidity", they have baselessly accused her of crimes in her role as both Mayor and mother, they have invaded her privacy, and undermined her with a whisper campaign of lies. That is life in modern politics, if Sarah expected the media to be unbiased or the Democrats to be decent, she should drop out now.

Why do liberals hate her so? This piece by Kahane is probably the best I've seen. The left is jealous that they don't have a saucy librarian of their own. She takes on the abortion aesthetic head on. She revels in Americanism. Lets face it, to a liberal a cannibal is a more sympathetic character than an unrepentant American.

Concocter
Illeist
Unctuous
Non-sequitur
Repetitioner

Gwen launches her Lehr impersonation. Exact same impersonation speech.

Sarah is jumping out aggressively: "can I call you Joe."

------

"Neither the worst of Washington. Wall St. run wild."

Oversight. Homeowners. Main St. Make sure the CEOs don't benefit. Blame Bush and deregulation.

------

Kids soccer game.

Q: What is the pin above the flag.

Pretty good first answer. Looking into the camera a little too hard.

--------

Genocide in Bosnia? Asks permission to address Sarah.

-------

No hesitation defending Mccain. Has a good answer.

Team of Mavericks. Ugh.

96% along party lines. This is a good point. I wish she had mentioned the fact that Mccain is 80% Republican.

------

Predatory lenders. Corruption. Strict oversight. Never again.

------

Obama warned against subprime. JM is a good man. He defended deregulation.

JM wants to deregulate the healthcare industry.

MC needs tax relief.

-------

Darn right we need tax relief. Largest tax increase industry. 94 times.

BA wants to increase taxes on family making as little as $42mm a year.

-------

JM voted same way as Obama. 477.

Did not answer the question of deregulation.

------

Talk straight. I lowered taxes.

Tobacco and campaiagn finance.

-------

Raise taxes on rich.

Middle class is struggling. "Households to be precise." 95% will get a tax break.

Pay no more than under Reagan.

-------

Tax healthcare benefits.

Small business owners.

Paying taxes is not patriotic. Govt is too often the problem.

Good answer.

More taxes and more spending is backwards.

Are you interested in defending Mccain's healthcare plan? Universal healthcare is scary.

-------

Giving money to my people is not re-distribution it is fairness.

Mccain will tax healthcare to give you a $5k plan. Will go straight to insurance. 20mm will be dropped.

Ultimate bridge to nowhere.

Q: I'm not familiar with Mccain's healthcare plan.

----------

What promises will you not be able to keep.

Foreign assistance. Taxcut proposals.

Not going to slow on healthcare, education.

--------

One thing to one group and another thing to another group.

Running mate voted for that.

Too bad she didn't mention Al Gore's lockbox.

What, have I been on this 5 weeks.

--------

America wants a windfall profits tax.

-------

Bankruptcy. Corruption and greed on Wall St. FNMA + FHLMC.

Main St. / Wall St.

Obama voted against it. Mortgage holders paid the price.

Chapter 7 to chapter 13. ????

Obama sent a letter 2 years ago. 2005. Who supported FNMA.

Adjust the principal that you owe?

-------

Palin dodges the question. I'm not sure what Biden is talking about. (1) I don't think the govt should pay peoples mortgages. (2) Won't help failing banks.

Nonsensical position that we aren't producing oil.

--------

Climate change. Pretty good answer. Subcabinent. All of the above approach.

-------

Clearly man made.

China is polluting. We agree here.

JM thinks the only answer is only drill, drill, drill.

--------

It is "drill, baby drill."

Senator "O'biden."

Raping the outer continental shelf. No such thing as clean coal.

I do support capping carbon emissions.

--------

Biden: same sex benefits to couples.

Constitution. It is only fair.

-------

Re-defining marriage. Tolerant of people choosing their partners. Diverse family.

Merely tolerant.

"Straight up."

----------

"Faiths" Not governments business.

Rights. We agree.

--------

Iraq: surge. Exit plan. American hero. Pushed hard. Opposed funding for troops.

Biden called out Obama. But Biden did it himself.

Move troops to Afghanistan.

Shia extremists. Hmm.

-------

Obama has offered a clear plan. Same plan as G. Bush.

Mccain voted against funding the troops. Timeline???? JM voted against a timeline. We voted the same way but we think there must be a timeline.

"Iranically."

-------

"white flag of surrender."

Iraqi can govern and secures. Victory is in sight.

"Not ready to be commander and chief."

Respect your son in National Guard.

----------

JM voted against funding for the troops.

JM and Dick Cheney have been dead wrong.

---------

Nuclear Iran or unstable Pakistan.

Focus on Pakistan. Iran is not close to getting a nuclear weapon that can be deployed.

Not Iraq.

Eyes look weird. Plastic surgery?

-------

Central war on terror on Iraq: ask Petreus and Bin Laden.

"Stinking corpse."

Meet without preconditions. Naivite and poor judgement. She knows how to pronounce naivite.

-------

Baker, Kissenger, Powell.

Diplomacy is great. Can't meet with them on a presidental level.

--------

Obama will not sit down with Ahmadinijad.

"Talk, talk, talk."

Incoherent.

Won't talk with Spain.

---------

Big smiles. She is looking more tired.

Israel. blah blah.

----------

Bush policies have supported Hamas and Hezbollah.

Closer to a bomb. Isn't that inconsistent with his earlier point that they were years away?

------------

Abject failure, Gwen helpfully asks?

"We both love Israel." Biden hiss breath?

-----------

How will Mccain be different from Bush.

-----------

What is the trigger for nukes. Just doesn't answer the question.

Surge principal on Afghanistan.

Obama's reckless comments on Iraq.

----------

Surge will not work in Afghanistan.

Af needs infrastructure.

"Let me say that again." 3weeks vs. 6.5 years.

JM does not support nuke test ban treaty.

---------

Mcclellen? More huffing.

More money to Afghanistan. JM says it succeeded.

---------

Darfour. American has stomach for success.

Bosniacs?! This might be the correct name for the ethnic group.

---------

Divestment in Sudan.

------------

Capacity to change?

Look at JoeBiden.com.

-----------

Who said what at what time. Jm knows how to win a war. Knows what evil is.

------------

Heartbeat away. Disagree on principals.

Cary out Obama's policies. Preach. Make sure.

Biggest election since 1932.

-----------

Disagree on ANWR. Has never asked me to check opinions at the door.

Team of mavericks. What do you expect.

Main St! Shut up!

She blinks a lot. But not that much more than Biden.

-----------

Say it ain't so Joe. Doggone it.

Education. Her reward is in heaven.

Teachers.

Laying it on pretty thick.

No child left behind isn't doing the job. Empahsis on the profession of teaching.

---------

Lame attempt at a joke. Preside over senate. A bit more authority?

Lead with energy independence. Special needs.

---------

Money was left behind.

Get things done in Senate. Legislative initiatives. Sit in the room for major decisions.

Also opening the kimono a bit more.

---------

Executive branch vs. legislative for vice president. Not sure about this. A lot of flexibility here.

My experience will be put to good use.

------------

Cheney is the most dangerous VP in US history.

Article 1 is about the legislative branch. I think he meant article ii.

------------

We represent a perfect ideal.

-------------

JM voted against violence against women act.

Beautiful house.

Wife and daughter died.

Looking for help.

----------------

JM represents change. He's a Maverick.

Diverse support for Mccain.

Got to win the wars.

---------------

Voted for Bush's budget. Voted against healthcare.

He has not been a maverick on the war.

Voted against the oil assistance.

--------------

Judiciary committee: nominee had judicial temperment and good student. Ideology makes a big difference. Fought against Bork.


-------------

Passed budgets that I didn't like. Never compromised.

A missed opportunity to attack Biden on Bork. Bidens cowardly attack on Bork is the genesis of the problems we have between the parties.

-------------

JM would acknowledge that I would change my parties mind. I'm very bipartisan.

Don't question the motive.

--------------

Diverse family.

--------------

Tough question without the filter of the MSM.

Fight for America.

--------------

Need for fundamental change. Re-establish the certitude that everything is possible. Get up together.

Barak Obama is ready.

=================

Again, lots of answering the question. This is weird.

SP didn't embarrass herself, but she left a lot on the table.

If there is no bailout and we force the financial system to take its medicine, what is the worst that can happen?

I don't think anyone really knows. Our economy is so complicated and so interconnected with the rest of the world. However, I think it represents a failure of imagination to think it might not be that bad.

Here are a few things that I fear could happen:

• Real Estate markets would essentially freeze. Most mortgages would go into default. Lenders would go out of business or charge usurious rates or both. The government would need to step in to protect either homeowners or banks.
  
• The housing industry would collapse. No new housing would be built. The construction industry would fail taking with it several other industries.
  
• The cost of insurance would double.
  
• Unemployment would go as high as 40-50%.
  
• The ranks of the uninsured would swell swamping the government healthcare system.
  
• The deficit would skyrocket.
  
• The dollar would fall.
  
• The stock market could lose 50% of its value.
  
• A large chunk of the population would either become homeless or squat on the property that they used to either own or rent.
  
• Prices would fall. Companies that rely on large inventories like autos would fail.
  
• The tax base would dwindle to the point where entitlements would be affected.
  
• Domestic civil unrest would be rampant and difficult to predict. It would surely involve terrorism.
  
• The crime rate would explode.
  
• If you don't care for the idea of government intrusion into the secondary mortgage market, how do you feel about the level of government activity that will be required to ensure a semblance of law as the economy collapses? Firearms will be confiscated, hoarding will be forbidden, speech and assembly rights will be curtailed. Government food banks will feed 30% of the population. Gasoline, electricity, and water in some places will be rationed.
  
• Most government actors will be honorable and judicious under even the most extreme circumstances. But more powers will be accumulated by law enforcement and there will surely be abuses.
  
• While domestic agriculture would be relatively stable, foreign agriculture and most foreign trade would halt altogether.
  
• Globally, there would be widespread revolution, war, famine, and disease.
  

While technology, management, and our basic acceptance of collectivism in crisis will keep some of the worst aspects of the great depression from recurring, I think in some ways it could be worse. Almost all industries are somehow dependent on industries that are directly threatened by this crisis. Infrastructure in the 30s meant roads and clean water. Things are much more complicated now and it won't take much for one tiny failure to cascade.

I admit that this is a nightmare scenario. I don't think everything described above will necessarily happen if we don't pay Wall St. $700bn. But I don't think we can be blase about it either.

Did I leave anything obvious off the list?

I'd love to see a historical analysis of this type of situation if anyone has a recommendation.

Stalwart defenders of the public coffers like Barney Frank have objected to the cash infusion going directly into the pockets of some of the richest human beings on Earth.

I hate to admit it, but I can see his point.

However, how can this be actionable? You can ask a CEO to resign and forfeit their compensation package, but a lot of these golden parachutes are negotiated up front. While a sense of honor and sacrifice actually may motivate some Wall St. executives, this is not the rule.

Can the government compel its supplicants to void a pre-existing contract?

House Republicans are offering an alternative to the Paulson plan involving a mortgage insurance. I don't understand this idea and I don't think House Republicans have thought it through either.

Is this an offering to insure something that is already failing -- something with a pre-existing condition? Would banks keep the assets on their books?

How is this different than the CDS market? If this insurance costs less than the equivalent CDS, isn't it a bailout?

Most of the toxic assets covered by the Paulson Plan are MBS structures called CMOs or Collateralized Mortgage Obligations.

The way securitized products like CMOs work is that about a thousand sub-prime mortgage loans are grouped together. Imagine that when these thousand borrowers pay principal and interest each month it all flows into a bucket with a spigot. If there is only one spigot, well that is like a giant loan and the resulting bond (spigot) will have the aggregate effect of all the loans.

This is nice, but it is not reliable enough to attract investors looking for guaranteed cashflows. Businesses like insurance companies and pension funds want cashflows that they can count on.

So instead of one spigot, imagine two. The first spigot is turned on while the second spigot is kept closed. Only when a predetermined amount of principal has flowed through is the first spigot closed and the second spigot opened.

That first spigot (or tranche) is a much safer investment. Some of those thousand borrowers will certainly default and most will eventually prepay. However, it is unlikely that all thousand borrowers will default immediately. So for some period of time, the cashflows are extremely predictable.

The second spigot is much more risky. The investors for the subordinate tranche are attracted by higher yields. In good times, these speculative investments can be much more lucrative. However, if there is an unprecedented upturn in mortgage defaults, the subordinate bond holder is not going to get their money back.

The Paulson plan or something like it will be necessary to forestall a complete shutdown of the global financial system. I hate to endorse a massive increase in the economic authority of the federal government, but a meltdown would likely precipitate a New Deal-like expansion of government activities as well.

Bush and others have made the point that these bonds are irrationally depressed, will bounce back, and the government investment is likely to be recouped or even make a profit. This position overlooks the fact that these products are hierarchical by design. While the senior tranches will indeed survive and pay some principal and interest to the bondholder, they do so at the expense of subordinate tranches. Those subordinate tranches will likely be mature without returning their owners a penny.

The details of this plan are crucial. If the government uses a reverse auction as has been discussed, that might work. However, offering to take any bond regardless of quality at a fixed price is a hand out.

My proposal: Use the ABX as a guide for bond prices. MarkIt Partners publishes a CDS index. This is how Wall St. firms are currently marking their MBS bonds since the limitations of their complex financial models have already been exceeded. Using the credit rating at issuance and the vintage of the bond, one can determine which of the ABX is an appropriate marker.

A BBB- tranche issued in the first half of 2007 would correspond to ABX.HE.07-2 BBB- and would therefore be priced at 5.13 (5 cents on the dollar). On the other hand a AAA bond from the first half of 2006 (ABX.HE.07-2 AAA) would be priced at 70.79.

There is a separate index for commercial real estate.

This would provide a relatively fair way to price the toxic assets that are choking our financial institutions.

America has finally found someone [Sarah Palin] stupider than they are.

Bill Mahr. Nice.

This is it. For all the marbles. We'll see if JM can keep it together.

Jim Leher lays down the law. Runny nose and all. HDTV is a bitch sometimes. So is Lilly. Sometimes.

Dang BO is a tall man.

BO great voice. Did he used to smoke.

Two wars? Odd that he'd bring that up.

Wall St. Main St goes to BO. Minus one point.

Proposals? This is the first that I've heard he has proposal.

BO is wearing the flag tonight. If JM pings him on it.

Shred regulations?!

Get him John.

------

JM brings up Kennedy. Lion of the Senate?

Mccain looks weirdly good. Has he had surgery or just really good makeup.

Lose their credits?

JM does not go after Obama. He had ample opportunitities to be mean in response to BO and went out of his way to do that.

-------------

Lax regulations again.

We're going to have to intervene. There is no doubt about that.

Regulation is not always the answer.

------------

Mccain fails to attack again.

Discusses war and responsibility.

Called for Cox resignation.

Greed is rewarded. Corruption is rewarded.

-------------

What's good for wall st. but not whats good for main st.

Healthcare system that is broken. Energy is not working.

Fundamentals of the economy are not sound.

-----------

JM: you let me down with the mainst crap.

Consolidation of regulatory agencies.

Again, JM fails to attack.

-----------

Spending! Yeah baby.

Veto.

932mm pork barrel spending. Citizens agains public waste. Runaway spending. The first real ping.

-------------

Earmarks is broken BO concedes.

$300b tax cuts vs $18b earmarks.

I do not understand this point.

Tries to tar BO w Bush.

-----------

Goes after him again with the pork. Corruption.

-------------

Are you allowed to interrupt?

How to stop overseas jobs?

Healthcare. Great.

------------

What is with Leher trying to get these guys to talk to each other?

------

Ireland vs. US. I think this is a good, clean argument.

Pork again.

2000? 2000 earmarks.

What is the definition of rich? 95%. Yay! I'm rich.

---------------

Taxes are high only on paper. Again, BO is attacking JM where JM seems to refuse to go on the attack.

JM wants to tax heath benefits.

--------

Walking the walk. Vs. talking the talk. Ick.

Existing tax code vs. new tax code.

------

Oil companys get $4b tax breaks.

-------


Obama seems to have a little Regan in him.

-----------

Mccain won't look at Obama.

------------

FINANCIAL RESCUE PLAN

---------

Must have energy independence. Must have healthcare. Keep up with the Chinese. Rebuild the infrastucture. Energy grid.

-----------

Spending. Good but not great. What spending will be cut.

Ethanol subsidies.

Defense spending. Cost plus contracts.

I may be naive, but I'm getting erect nipples.

People ended up in federal prisons? I don't understand.

-------------

Components on first issue: energy will need to be eliminated. Not good for old BO.

Again doesn't answer the question.

Calls John "Tom." Senior moment from the Jr. senator from Illinois. Good thing it was not Mccain who said this.

-----------

Hatchet vs. scalpul. good one.

Pull our troops out of Iraq.

-----------

$700b to countries. Offshore drilling and nuclear. Good one.

Climate change. Go nuclear!!!

----------

Did Roosevelt really purchase homes?

------------

Handing healthcare over to federal govt.

I love this man!

$800b new spending for the leftist on the left (my right Mccain's left).

We owe China $500b.

------------

Maverick. He is really angry.

----------
IRAQ

Lessons of Iraq.

Need the right strategy.

Victory and Honor. Stable ally in the region. Increased Iranian influence. Wider war.

This is not a homerun answer.

---------

Should not have gone into Iraq in the first place.

Much less money than the fiscal crisis. 4000 lives -- is that the worst that you can do.

We did not use the military wisely.

------------

The next president will not need to deal with whether or not we should have gone into Iraq.

JM goes for the juggular! I'm very excited.

I don't think that his lack visit to Iraq is the best point.

-------

Petreus: brilliant job.

Joe Biden is the Iraq guy on the team.

Weapons of mass destruction. Violence between Shiite and Suni. You were wrong. That is a counter punch.

--------

Tactic vs. Stratgy.

"Let us win. we don't want our kids coming back here."

Obama mutters while Mccain is talking.

Voted to cut off funds to troops.

-----------

Blank check to George Bush.

We need more resources in Afganistan. Reconstituded al Quadea. War on terror needs to end there.

End Iraq war responsibility.

------------

Petreus and Bin Laden agree that central battlefield is Iraq.

Another smack with wildest expectations


------------

AFGANISTHAN

Over a year. Quickly as possible.

Attacking from the border. It seems like he is implying that bad guys are coming from Iraq. not such a great communicator after all.

Nothing in Iraq has to do with Al Qadea.

Got to deal with Pakistan.

-----------

Mccain regrets not helping Afganisthan after Russians were driven out.

Aiding Pakistan. George Schulz? I agree with the point, but to quote that douche.

You don't say that out loud.

Not been governed since Alexander the great.

Same strategy he condemned. Harsh. Nicely so.

Intermarried with Al Quada. This is actually a good point.

-------------

BO advocates violating international law. Cross border attacks. Sweet!

Pings Mccain for singing "Bomb Iran."

Coddled Musharef.

-------------

Failed state when Musharef came to power.

Against Lebanon. For Gulf 1. For Bosnia. For Kosovo. Opposed Somalia. Record of being on both sides of war. Doesn't want to do wars that don't make sense.

If we commit troops, let them win.

The war I was in, we were defeated. It was hard to recover. Won't come home with defeat and dishonor.

--------------

I've got a bracelet too.

Nobody's talking about defeat in Iraq. You don't muddle through the central front on terror.

This is a bogus point. Afghanistan is lawless hill country.

-------------

We take up the issues when I'm on a subcomittee. That is a little nasty.

Never been to Afhanistan.

-------------

IRAN

Nuclear weapons. Existential threat to Israel.

We cannot allow a 2nd holocoust.

Russians are preventing action in security council. Use a league of democracys (circumventing UN) affect Iranian behavior.

--------------

Consistently agrees that republican guard is terrorist organization.

Thinks that Iraq has caused Iran to grow in power and influence.

Nuclear Iran is a game changer.

Israel is a stalwart ally.

Must have some help with Russia and China -- not democracies.

By not talking to them, we are not punishing them. A defensible point.

-------------

Legitimize someone who promises to exterminate the state of Israel. Encourages illegal behavior.

Preconditions involve not legitimizing criminal regimes.

-------------

Ahmandinajad is not the most powerful person in Iran. Good.

Invite them over for tea.

Brings up N. Korea! What a gaffe!

Bush administration reversed course to talk.

PM of Spain.

--------------

Not going to set the WH visitor schedule. Don't even have the seal yet! BOOM!

Not just naive. Dangerous.

Broken every agreement.

Conversation breaks down a little here. Jim lets them play.

------------------

RUSSIA

BO Russian invasion of Georgia unacceptable. Pronunciation confident.

Cannot return to cold war posture. Nuke proliferation.

"Seeing his soul." Again, Obama seems to want to debate Bush.

---------------

Both sides out to show restratint. Naive ping again.

Its all about the oil. Again, I love it.

-------------------

Does Mccain have a spittle problem?

Mccain has historicaly voted agains wind and solar.

--------------------
911 TYPE ATTACK

Safer. But still not safe. Another missed opportunity.

-----------------

Suitcase nuke.

Pro missile defense? I'm not sure I understand.


BEST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE EVER!!

While the Palin pick will not affect how feminists at all, there is a potential hidden upside for Republicans. Democrats attacking Palin will inevitably offend the feminist constituency. The sexist, condescending, and personal attacks will offend feminists worse than they do Palin.

Here's hoping that this friendly fire takes some of the enthusiasm out of the chosen one's campaign.

Before everyone flips out over another hurricane, keep in mind much of the conventional perceptions of Katrina could not be more wrong.

More here.

So, we have mocha-jesus running with the gasbag against the geezer and the naughty librarian. Should be the most interesting race in decades.

We have two diversity candidates in the race and they're both a little green.

The VP role is a little more pertinent in this election. One of the candidates for president has a slightly greater chance of asasination. The other is already at the median age of death for American males.

Palin will induce exactly zero Hillary supporters to vote for Mccain. However, republican women who might be tempted by the historic Obama candidacy will have a reason not to defect. The fact that Palin is a more by-the-book conservative will also help with the base.

Many, many liberals are in the familiar position of defending the Russians.

The Russian invasion is:

• A blood-for-oil scheme same as Iraq,
  
• Provoked by the U.S. backed Georgian elites,
  

This doesn't make any sense. If Bush=Hitler, surely Putin should be in for some criticism.

I see some pretty big differences between the American invasion of Iraq and the Russian invasion of Georgia.

• Sectarian tensions in Iraq were revealed by the U.S. invasion. Similar tensions were the pretext for the Russian intervention.
  
• The goal of the U.S. invasion of Iraq was to reshape the middle east so that Islamic militancy, such as that responsible for 9/11, would be weakened. The goal of the Georgia invasion is imperialism. It is all about wealth and power.
  
• When a democracy attacks a dictatorship, it is different from when a dictatorship attacks a democracy.
  

Now I don't think we should start a nuclear war over Georgia. But there should be consequences.

At least we know that wasting 6mos on international consensus building will not be necessary in the future. It didn't help us in Iraq and it doesn't seem to have hurt the Russians in Georgia.

http://www.helium.com/items/1149667-iraq-georgia-russia-south-ossetia-war-abkhazia-invasion-putin
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gg.html

What the hell?

The guy admittedlykilled three people and hijacked a plane. He may have planted a bomb which killed eleven others.

This is the #3 reason why we need the death penalty.

More details.

Full disclosure: Terry McTigue is a friend of mine.

So, in my spare time, I'm going to learn Mandarin.

Why, you ask?

1. I'm curious
   
2. Most of my colleagues are Chinese, and I wish to understand them more fully.
   
3. I think China is going to be the center of many important events in the near future.
   
4. An understanding of China and Mandarin may give me some interesting career options.
   

Plan:

1. Start working with Rosetta Stone
   
2. Read a Chinese novel, 3 kingdoms, with an eye towards understanding the places and the names
   
3. Podcasts on the walk to work
   

Resources:
<a href="http://www.clearchinese.com/english-chinese-dictinoary.htm>An excellent dictionary.</a>

Conservatives are atwitter that FNMA is poised to be a larger financial disaster than Enron.

It is true that FNMA has many Democratic advocates (like Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, and worst of all Paul Krugman) and it's function represents yet another government intrusion into the economy, It is foolish to throw out the baby with the bath water.

While I understand conservative motivations here, I think that they are at least partially wrong headed:

1. The larger the percentage of Americans who own their own homes, the better. Government incentives towards home ownership turn renters into home owners and this makes them more likely to give a crap. This is one of the things that is unique about America. FNMA is a huge part of the U.S. strategy on incentivizing home ownership.
   
2. It is better to do things in the private sector. As a GSE, FNMA has a government mandate, requirements, and regulations. However, it is not run by government employees.
   
3. FNMA's woes stem from being associate with mortgages right now. This does not mean that their portfolios are full of non-performing loans. About 15% of the mortgages that they own or guarantee are subprime. Yet, the stock is down 90% in 12 months. Probably an over-reaction. The bailout is likely an over reaction as well.
   
4. The Enron crisis was an outright fraud. FNMA is at worst a run on the bank.
   

In fact, FNMA was a lot more like Enron back in 2004.

And another thing regarding Delahunt.

In the CNN blurb, they linked to news stories about al Qaeda and Addington. However, they had no linkage to Delahunt.

To remedy this . . .

• Delahunt's wikipedia page.
  
• Delahunt is one of the idiots behind the Venezuelan oil (Citgo) to American poor stunt. He considers Hugo Chavez a "close friend."
  
• Delahunt seeks criminal charges against those fighting the war on terror.
  
• He is against ANWR drilling and for biofuels.
  
• Delahunt is roomates with Chuck Schumer.
  

Whenever someone accuses a liberal of hating America, there is always great indignation. "How dare you impugn the character of a blah blah blah."

However, the exchange between Delahunt and Addington the other day is truly remarkable.

Our friends at the Huffington Post have kindly provided a transcript:

DELAHUNT: Oh I can understand why [the President] doesn't talk about it.

ADDINGTON: Because you gotta communicate with al Qaeda. If you do -- I can't talk to you, al Qaeda may watch C-SPAN.

DELAHUNT: Right. Well, I'm sure they are watching, and I'm glad they finally have a chance to see you, Mr. Addington.

ADDINGTON: Yeah, I'm sure you're pleased.

Warning: Scroll down to the HufPo comments section only if you have a strong stomach.

Delahunt's point can only be:
(1) He hopes al Qaeda targets Addington.
(2) He is rooting for al Qaeda to win the war on terror.
(3) He views al Qaeda as having a legitimate grievance against Addington.
(4) He got tripped up trying to make a witty retort.
(5) That if al Qaeda realizes that it is only a small bad of Bush croneys that are persecuting them, we'd be fine. The rest of America hates Bush as much as al Qaeda.

Addington's actions during the war are not above question. How ruthless we should behave with al Qaeda prisoners is a legitimate question. However, we are all in this together. In the war against al Qaeda, both Democrats and Republicans are legitimate targets.

From Delahunt's own words, he can only believe that Addington is a legitimate target.

I don't think you can be a public official, not even a congressman, if you think that al Qaeda has a right to target anyone for death in the U.S. regardless of their political orientation.