Month: September 2008

Alan Jacobs recently finished Jane Mayer’s new book. He has some questions:

I have seen almost no response to this book in the conservative press. What’s up with that? The Dark Side has been reviewed in most major newspapers and magazines, but not from any of the conservative organs I’ve seen. Have I missed something? And if not, what are we to make of this silence? Do conservatives think Mayer’s book is so bad that it’s unworthy of response? (If so, they’re wrong.) Are they just trying to avoid acknowledging uncomfortable truths, and would prefer not to think about what the Bush administration has done in prosecuting its war on terror? Or — perhaps the most interesting possibility — do they agree that Mayer has accurately described the administration’s actions but simply judge those actions very differently, as necessary and even commendable responses to the Islamist threat?

There are two options: they are in denial; or they know that their administration has committed war crimes and simply cannot face it. Neither posture can last much longer, methinks.

I’ve been really impressed by David Frum’s candor during this election. If I say so again, his career on the right might be hurt, so I’ll shut up for a while. But here he is lauding features of Dodd’s bailout proposal while scoffing at McCain’s stipulation that: "The senior executives of any firm that is bailed out by Treasury should not be making more than the highest paid government official.”

Scoff away, David. And stay rational. No one in Camp McCain seems to be.

Republican spin of the day:

U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman said the massive government bailout of failing financial institutions is not only necessary but could make money for the federal government. “The government could make 10 or 20 times what it pays on this, possibly,” Coleman said during a campaign stop at Christy’s Cafe in North Mankato Saturday morning.

As John Cole writes "the Iraq War will pay for itself!"

Megan argues against seeing the financial crisis as Americans living on borrowed prosperity. She also details why we need a bailout:

There is no benefit from a "tough love" strategy for anyone that even begins to approach the catastrophic consequences, for everyone, of a massive and rapid contraction.

My fear is that a massive and rapid contraction is now inevitable, and that this bailout won’t stop it. It will merely throw even more of our money down the drain. Roubini:

We are observing an accelerated run on the shadow banking system that is leading to its unravelling. If lender-of-last-resort support and deposit insurance are extended to more of its members, these institutions will have to be regulated like banks, to avoid moral hazard. Of course this severe financial crisis is also taking its toll on traditional banks: hundreds are insolvent and will have to close.

The real economic side of this financial crisis will be a severe US recession.

Financial contagion, the strong euro, falling US imports, the bursting of European housing bubbles, high oil prices and a hawkish European Central Bank will lead to a recession in the eurozone, the UK and most advanced economies.

European financial institutions are at risk of sharp losses because of the toxic US securitised products sold to them; the massive increase in leverage following aggressive risk-taking and domestic securitisation; a severe liquidity crunch exacerbated by a dollar shortage and a credit crunch; the bursting of domestic housing bubbles; household and corporate defaults in the recession; losses hidden by regulatory forbearance; the exposure of Swedish, Austrian and Italian banks to the Baltic states, Iceland and southern Europe where housing and credit bubbles financed in foreign currency are leading to hard landings.

Thus the financial crisis of the century will also envelop European financial institutions.

Tom Holbrook does the math:

…the norm is for very little swing in candidate support following debates. Across all thirteen presidential debates the average absolute change in candidate support was 1 percentage point. There are a few notable exceptions, of course. Two that stand out are the second debate in 1992, following which George H.W. Bush lost 2 points, and first debate of 2004, after which George W. Bush lost 2.26 points. Other debates with above average ( but still small) vote shifts are the first debate in 1996 and the second debates in 1988 and 2000.

The two most honest commentators so far in this surreal campaign have been Joy Behar and now, Chris Rock. Many of the real pundits should just quit their jobs. Watch Rock tear apart Bill Clinton’s transparent hope for a McCain victory, expressed on The View and Letterman. Genius.

Truth to Power!

Los Angeles, California, 6.45 pm.

The McCain campaign has inserted itself into the Alaska legislature’s Troopergate investigation in order to stymie transparency before the election. Bit by bit, they are aggressively trying to shut down all means of inquiring into the reality and record of their mystery candidate. From the Juneau Empire:

The presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin has taken effective charge of the Alaska state government’s response to the legislative investigation into abuse of power allegations against Palin. An investigation that began on a bipartisan basis with several pledges from Palin to participate, is now being manipulated to protect Palin by campaign attorneys who appear to be directing the Palin administration’s response, top legislators say.

The law is always politicized by these kinds of Republicans, as you can see from the Gonzales Justice Department. And their lip-service to federalism is always preferred to any actual deference to local or state bodies to do what they deem best – if Republican national power is at stake.

Finally, the networks face the bullies down:

TVNewser has learned all the networks were prepared to ban the use of pictures and video from Gov. Sarah Palin’s meetings at the UN today. The ban was in protest of the McCain campaign’s restriction on editorial presence.

We hear the networks had arranged for a pool camera to cover all the meetings, and at least three journalists were to be present as well (one print, one radio, one TV). Earlier today, the McCain campaign said it would allow just one editorial person inside. Later, the campaign limited it to a camera only.

Within the last few minutes, the campaign reversed course and will allow a CNN producer in to the meetings.

The press is beginning to resist the incredibly sexist handling of Palin by the McCain campaign. There is a simple point here: any candidate for president should be as available to press inquiries as humanly possible. Barring a press conference for three weeks, preventing any questions apart from two television interviews, one by manic partisan Sean Hannity, devising less onerous debate rules for a female candidate, and then trying to turn the press into an infomercial for the GOP is beyond disgraceful.

Fight back, you hacks! Demand access. Demand accountability! It’s our duty. If we cannot ask questions of a total newbie six weeks before an election in which she could become president of the country, then the First Amendment is pointless. Grow some!

Several of Hershey’s products no longer meet the definition of "milk chocolate":

Blind taste tests revealed that consumers also didn’t notice a difference in taste between the chocolate and the “mockolate.” So, I thought I would try it for myself. I went down to my trusty neighborhood convenience store and bought a Whatchamacallit – the package read, “rich chocolatey coating.” Honestly, I can’t taste the difference, but still – where are the antioxidants? And why doesn’t it melt in my mouth as smoothly? I feel betrayed…At least Hersheys kept the cocoa in their Hershey’s Kisses and Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups. Still, I think it’s time for a brand change – back to M&Ms and Snickers for me.