Who won the third (and last) debate last night? I don't know. but I know who won the media war of political spots based on the debate:
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Shame
The Supreme Court yesterday refused to review the conviction of Troy Davis, the Georgia man who's execution was stayed three weeks ago, two hours before he was scheduled to die. The state is now free to set a new date for the execution and, unless the Georgia Board of Paroles and Pardons has a sudden (and unlikely change of heart), Davis will be put to death soon.
You may recall that there is no forensic or physical evidence against Davis, and seven of nine eyewitnesses have recanted their testimony. If he were given a new trial, there would be no realistic chance of a conviction.
Davis' lawyers took the bold position that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the execution of the innocent. (I have not read the briefs and therefore I do not know if they also argued that the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process is offended by the legalized killing of an innocent person; that seems to me--without the benefit of several years of thought about the matter that counsel have--more logical.)
If you are not a lawyer, the proposition that innocence should prevent execution is probably so obvious that you cannot conceive of how the law could rule otherwise. It shames us to know that our legal system could permit a result such as the Supreme Court has ordained.
And it shames us even more that not one of the justices of the Supreme Court dissented from the refusal to hear Troy Davis' appeal.
The noblest figure in this sad tale is Davis himself. According to the NY Times, his sister quotes him as saying, 'Even if they succeed in killing me, it will dismantle the death penalty system in Georgia because people are tired of injustice.'
You may recall that there is no forensic or physical evidence against Davis, and seven of nine eyewitnesses have recanted their testimony. If he were given a new trial, there would be no realistic chance of a conviction.
Davis' lawyers took the bold position that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the execution of the innocent. (I have not read the briefs and therefore I do not know if they also argued that the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process is offended by the legalized killing of an innocent person; that seems to me--without the benefit of several years of thought about the matter that counsel have--more logical.)
If you are not a lawyer, the proposition that innocence should prevent execution is probably so obvious that you cannot conceive of how the law could rule otherwise. It shames us to know that our legal system could permit a result such as the Supreme Court has ordained.
And it shames us even more that not one of the justices of the Supreme Court dissented from the refusal to hear Troy Davis' appeal.
The noblest figure in this sad tale is Davis himself. According to the NY Times, his sister quotes him as saying, 'Even if they succeed in killing me, it will dismantle the death penalty system in Georgia because people are tired of injustice.'
Monday, October 13, 2008
A mystery explained
I consider myself a reasonably well-informed person, although like John McCain business and finance aren't my strong points. Still, I thought I had a general handle on the esoteric instruments that seem to be at the heart of the financial crisis. But as I was driving yesterday, I heard an episode of This American Life (apparently first broadcast late in September) that explained one part of it about which, as it turned out, I was wholly ignorant. That is the credit default swap.
Turns out that the credit default swap started as an instrument that was pretty much what you might think from its name: For a fee, someone would insure a security (say one of those mortgage-backed securities that we've hard so much about) against default. Given how over-rated those bonds turned out to be, the issuance of insurance on them would have been bad enough, leaving the insurers open to huge claims. But that doesn't begin to tell the story. Some few years ago, people started writing swaps (that is, insurance contracts) for bonds that the purchasers did not even own. In other words, purchasers would pay good money to cover the chance that the issuer of a security they didn't have in their portfolios would go belly up.
There's a name for that kind of contract: A bet. It's the kind of wager that you'd expect from Sky Masterson, the high-flying gambler in Guys and Dolls, not from supposedly respectable financial institutions. And, apparently, there are 50 or 60 trillion dollars or more of these things out there--ten or twelve times the value of the mortgage-backed securities that are out there.
Now you can get some idea of why the crisis is so bad. Indeed, with trillions and trillions of dollars in actual or potential liabilities out there, the rescue that has received so much publicity looks like a shot in the dark.
And, as you've probably heard, these swaps are not regulated. Indeed, federal law (thanks to John McCain's good friend and financial adviser former Sen. Phil Gramm) forbids regulating them. Even the insurance aspect is not regulated. (State insurance regulators--for reasons I won't go into here, the federal government has never regulated insurance--would normally impose minimum capital requirements on such contracts.)
Remember that a few months ago, credit default swaps were considered to be cutting-edge finance, the most sophisticated aspect of a new kind of capitalism, too advanced for ordinary human beings to understand.
Not for the first time, the smart guys turn out to be incredibly dumb. Unfortunately, when the smart guys control huge amounts of money, their stupidity winds up costing the rest of us.
Thinking about this, I realized that I--like almost everyone--bought into the idea that the end of the Cold War was the triumph of capitalism, that for all its idealism, socialism had proved to be unworkable. I still believe that the market is the best way to allocate resources and set prices, but how supremely ironic that capitalism's great failure has ushered in a new era of socialism!
Turns out that the credit default swap started as an instrument that was pretty much what you might think from its name: For a fee, someone would insure a security (say one of those mortgage-backed securities that we've hard so much about) against default. Given how over-rated those bonds turned out to be, the issuance of insurance on them would have been bad enough, leaving the insurers open to huge claims. But that doesn't begin to tell the story. Some few years ago, people started writing swaps (that is, insurance contracts) for bonds that the purchasers did not even own. In other words, purchasers would pay good money to cover the chance that the issuer of a security they didn't have in their portfolios would go belly up.
There's a name for that kind of contract: A bet. It's the kind of wager that you'd expect from Sky Masterson, the high-flying gambler in Guys and Dolls, not from supposedly respectable financial institutions. And, apparently, there are 50 or 60 trillion dollars or more of these things out there--ten or twelve times the value of the mortgage-backed securities that are out there.
Now you can get some idea of why the crisis is so bad. Indeed, with trillions and trillions of dollars in actual or potential liabilities out there, the rescue that has received so much publicity looks like a shot in the dark.
And, as you've probably heard, these swaps are not regulated. Indeed, federal law (thanks to John McCain's good friend and financial adviser former Sen. Phil Gramm) forbids regulating them. Even the insurance aspect is not regulated. (State insurance regulators--for reasons I won't go into here, the federal government has never regulated insurance--would normally impose minimum capital requirements on such contracts.)
Remember that a few months ago, credit default swaps were considered to be cutting-edge finance, the most sophisticated aspect of a new kind of capitalism, too advanced for ordinary human beings to understand.
Not for the first time, the smart guys turn out to be incredibly dumb. Unfortunately, when the smart guys control huge amounts of money, their stupidity winds up costing the rest of us.
Thinking about this, I realized that I--like almost everyone--bought into the idea that the end of the Cold War was the triumph of capitalism, that for all its idealism, socialism had proved to be unworkable. I still believe that the market is the best way to allocate resources and set prices, but how supremely ironic that capitalism's great failure has ushered in a new era of socialism!
Interesting numbers
If you've been watching the polls, numbers like this aren't a surprise:
Obama: 51%
McCain: 43%
But in MISSOURI??????
Obama: 51%
McCain: 43%
But in MISSOURI??????
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Another bloc heard from
You've heard about Barack Obama's appeal to the young. But what about his appeal to the old? Not only the old, but the Old Nun Vote. Yep. Indeed, the very old nun vote.
Reason to change?
Do you see any reason why a voter would change his or her mind to vote for John McCain? Even the latest change--to tone down the hostility that has been so marked at McCain rallies--is not going to convince any undecided voter that McCain should be President.
Not that McCain has been helped by the administration's shifting positions on the economic crisis. As of today, it appears that Secretary Paulson has embraced the idea of "injecting capital" into banks, i.e., having the government purchase stock. This is an approach that many economists have favored, but that was rejected by the administration just a week or so ago. To make matters worse for McCain, the idea is anathema to that part of his base that views such a step as socialism.
Still, you would think that there are enough professional operatives in McCain's campaign that they would be able to present some argument for their candidate. But no. If McCain dials back on the fear appeal, there's nothing left.
Not that McCain has been helped by the administration's shifting positions on the economic crisis. As of today, it appears that Secretary Paulson has embraced the idea of "injecting capital" into banks, i.e., having the government purchase stock. This is an approach that many economists have favored, but that was rejected by the administration just a week or so ago. To make matters worse for McCain, the idea is anathema to that part of his base that views such a step as socialism.
Still, you would think that there are enough professional operatives in McCain's campaign that they would be able to present some argument for their candidate. But no. If McCain dials back on the fear appeal, there's nothing left.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Elephants sending text messages, and other news
How do they use those little keyboards with those big feet of theirs? Well, it's not exactly like that.
An interesting instance of high-tech helping to save a small part of the planet.
Here's another one, from NBC:
An interesting instance of high-tech helping to save a small part of the planet.
Here's another one, from NBC:
Some wisdom on obscure financial instruments
From Kevin Drum, formerly of Washington Monthly, but lately at Mother Jones. One of the clearest thoughts I've seen lately about what we could do to prevent future instances of the chaos we're now experiencing.
The wisdom of crowds
I've noted before, I believe, that the letters page of the NY Times is a fount of wisdom. A couple of gems worth noting appeared in yesterday's paper.
William C Ibershof noted:
William C Ibershof noted:
Doyle Stevick wrote in to comment on John McCain's oft-repeated claim to be a maverick:As the lead federal prosecutor of the Weathermen in the 1970s (I was then chief of the criminal division in the Eastern District of Michigan and took over the Weathermen prosecution in 1972), I am amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child.
Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen.
Because Senator Obama recently served on a board of a charitable organization with Mr. Ayers cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago.
The debate about whether John McCain is a maverick misses the point.
Senator McCain embraces the image, but what is a maverick? Not a follower, but not a leader either. If people followed him, he would, by definition, be a leader, not a maverick.
The presidency is an executive position. Do we want leadership, or a ticket proud of wandering off on its own?
Report from the Northwest
As I mentioned last week, TONE was off to visit family in Portland (OR, not ME) last weekend. I am happy to report that there are more Obama signs, bumperstickers and buttons in Portland than even in Boston. We did make a trip to Mt. Angel, a Benedictine abbey about 40 miles south of Portland, and in the small town at the base of the mount McCain/Palin signs were thick as .... But it's clear that Oregon and Washington are not swing states.
We met a couple of women--one perhaps in her 40's, the other probably her mother, from Northern Virginia who described themselves as Obamacans--former Republicans backing Obama and not sure where they go from here. In the absence of some increasingly-improbable event that turns this race upside down, Obama looks likely to re-draw the political map the way FDR did in 1933 and Regan in 1980--that we'll be hearing about Obama Republicans, or some such term, for the next decade or so.
By the way, Portland--which is a very nice city on its own--has a priceless asset in its proximity to the Columbia River Gorge, which runs east from near the city past Bonneville Dam and Mt. Hood. It is a magnificent area, easily accessible from the city. If you find yourself in Portland, take a day and drive up the gorge. If the weather is good, go to Timberline Lodge on Mt. Hood (it is actually on the treeline) and wander back on some of the side roads.
Speaking of driving, it may not be much comfort to GM, but I was impressed by the Chevy Cobalt that we rented. Even with an automatic, it gave decent response to the throttle (I didn't push it), the handling seemed tight and responsive and it rode well. In the few days we had the car--mostly in the care of the hotel's valet parking--I noticed no defects in the build. If I were looking for a new car (I'm not) and willing to look beyond hybrids, I might check out a Cobalt (with manual transmission, of course). I'm not saying I'd buy one, but for me even to consider a Big-3 product means that either American manufacturers have finally changed or I have.
We met a couple of women--one perhaps in her 40's, the other probably her mother, from Northern Virginia who described themselves as Obamacans--former Republicans backing Obama and not sure where they go from here. In the absence of some increasingly-improbable event that turns this race upside down, Obama looks likely to re-draw the political map the way FDR did in 1933 and Regan in 1980--that we'll be hearing about Obama Republicans, or some such term, for the next decade or so.
By the way, Portland--which is a very nice city on its own--has a priceless asset in its proximity to the Columbia River Gorge, which runs east from near the city past Bonneville Dam and Mt. Hood. It is a magnificent area, easily accessible from the city. If you find yourself in Portland, take a day and drive up the gorge. If the weather is good, go to Timberline Lodge on Mt. Hood (it is actually on the treeline) and wander back on some of the side roads.
Speaking of driving, it may not be much comfort to GM, but I was impressed by the Chevy Cobalt that we rented. Even with an automatic, it gave decent response to the throttle (I didn't push it), the handling seemed tight and responsive and it rode well. In the few days we had the car--mostly in the care of the hotel's valet parking--I noticed no defects in the build. If I were looking for a new car (I'm not) and willing to look beyond hybrids, I might check out a Cobalt (with manual transmission, of course). I'm not saying I'd buy one, but for me even to consider a Big-3 product means that either American manufacturers have finally changed or I have.
Friday, October 03, 2008
Off to Portland
TONE will not feature new posts for the next few days, as the lovely Diane and I are off to visit family in Oregon. We'll be back in time for Tuesday's debate. Best wishes for a lovely weekend.
End note
I'm not going to comment on what went on during last night's VP debate. You probably saw it, and if you didn't you've heard about it. But I made one observation that I have not heard comments about in the media: After the thing was over, the candidates shook hands and the families came on stage in what has become the norm. And there were a lot of people up there ,with the Palin family and her father (maybe her mom, too), and Biden's wife, children and grandchildren. But as I went to turn of the TV before I imbibed much of the post-debate commentary, I noticed that Palin and Biden were standing in the center of the stage, surrounded by the families, chatting. Not just a quick hello/goodbye, but they looked like they were actually talking to each other.
A real contrast with the way McCain treated Obama after their debate. I wonder how many other people caught it.
A real contrast with the way McCain treated Obama after their debate. I wonder how many other people caught it.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Which side are you on?
Best news I've heard in a LONG time:
In Blacksville, West Virginia, 440 miners closed their mine by staying home. Why? Because a film crew from the National Rifle Association showed up and tried to get them to say bad things about Barack Obama.
Think about that for a moment. Miners in West Virginia closing the mine and missing a day's pay, because they wouldn't say bad things about a black candidate to a film crew from the NRA. Something new is happening in the nation--or maybe something old is happening again.
In Blacksville, West Virginia, 440 miners closed their mine by staying home. Why? Because a film crew from the National Rifle Association showed up and tried to get them to say bad things about Barack Obama.
Think about that for a moment. Miners in West Virginia closing the mine and missing a day's pay, because they wouldn't say bad things about a black candidate to a film crew from the NRA. Something new is happening in the nation--or maybe something old is happening again.
Come all of you good workers
Good news to you I'll tell,
Of how the good old union
Has come in here to dwell.
Chorus:
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
They say in Harlan County
There are no neutrals there.
You'll either be a union man
Or a thug for J.H.Blair
Chorus
My daddy was a miner
And I'm a miner's son
And I'll stick with the union
Till ev'ry battle's won.
Chorus
Oh workers can you stand it?
Oh tell me how you can.
Will you be a lousy scab
Or will you be a man?
Chorus
Don't scab for the bosses
Don't listen to their lies.
Us poor folks haven't got a chance
Unless we organize.Which Side Are You On?
Florence Reece
Food for thought
From TPM:
REALIZATION
We're debating whether being part-time mayor of a small town in Alaska qualifies you to be president.
Josh Marshall
A regrettable development
From today's NYT's account of last night's Senate session on the bailout--or "fiscal stability," as I think it's been renamed:
From everything I've read--I'm no scholar on the era--JFK and Nixon were never close, not even casual friends, and certainly they were not political allies. But for a few seconds they could forget the politics, forget that they were competing for the most important job they would ever have, the most important on Earth, and chat like any other Americans.
We seem to have lost much of that. Sad. Sad for the participants. And sad for us.
The political tension was clear as Senator Barack Obama walked to the Republican side of the aisle to greet Senator John McCain, who offered a chilly look and a brief return handshake.This reminds me of the documentary film version--they didn't have videotape back then--of Teddy White's great The Making of the President 1960. There was one scene when the TV people were doing lighting checks for the first presidential debate (which was, literally, the first). Kennedy and Nixon were together at center stage for a few moments, as the technicians scurried around them. Underneath the noise of the preparations, you can hear the two men chatting--one says, "I hear you had a big crowd in Cleveland" or something like that, and the other responds, "Yes, and I heard that you did well in....."
From everything I've read--I'm no scholar on the era--JFK and Nixon were never close, not even casual friends, and certainly they were not political allies. But for a few seconds they could forget the politics, forget that they were competing for the most important job they would ever have, the most important on Earth, and chat like any other Americans.
We seem to have lost much of that. Sad. Sad for the participants. And sad for us.
Tonight's debate
If Sarah Palin is still upright, and still on the ticket, at the end of tonight's debate, she'll be counted as the winner.
Fortunately, the people for whom the debate matters--those who are still working on who to vote for--will not score the debate like a baseball game. They will watch it to figure out which ticket to support. Which, as we might easily forget, is the purpose of the exercise.
A friend suggests that he'd like the candidates--principally Palin, of course, to be asked, "Apart from the Bible, what books do you find meaningful?" I hope that question is asked.
I'd like Palin to be asked if she's actually seen Russia and, if so, what that has done for her understanding of the world. Biden, who has actually done a lot of travelling, might be asked what the hell good it does to touch down in a country for a day or two, to be feted by its leaders and taken on a guided tour.
I'd like the candidates to be asked this question (again, it focuses more on Palin than Biden, but there is relevance to both): If the person at the head of your ticket were to die or become incapacitated on January 20, 2009, you would immediately become President. Have you given any thought to what you would do in such a situation? In particular, each of you has differed on some issues with the candidate who heads your ticket. Would you continue the policies of the man elected president this year, even though you have disagreed with them in the past, or do you believe that your succession to the office would justify taking up different policies?
Finally, the question that I'd REALLY like to be asked--although more to the presidential than the vice-presidential candidates. It is not of my devising, but comes from Fr. Guido Sarducci, a/k/a Don Novello, who was asked in 1976 0r 1980 by, I think, Tom Brokaw, what he would ask if he were on the debate panel. In his inimitable fashion (which I am about to imitate, without apology), Fr. Sarducci replied, "I'd aska de candidates, 'Iffa you coulda be an animal, whata kinda animal woulda you be?'"
Are you smiling, maybe a little? I suggest that that would actually be a very good question to ask, precisely because it is so outlandish that it would cut through the preparation and the talking points to give us a glimpse, however brief, of the real person behind the candidate.
Our comment line is open for your ideas about questions.
Fortunately, the people for whom the debate matters--those who are still working on who to vote for--will not score the debate like a baseball game. They will watch it to figure out which ticket to support. Which, as we might easily forget, is the purpose of the exercise.
A friend suggests that he'd like the candidates--principally Palin, of course, to be asked, "Apart from the Bible, what books do you find meaningful?" I hope that question is asked.
I'd like Palin to be asked if she's actually seen Russia and, if so, what that has done for her understanding of the world. Biden, who has actually done a lot of travelling, might be asked what the hell good it does to touch down in a country for a day or two, to be feted by its leaders and taken on a guided tour.
I'd like the candidates to be asked this question (again, it focuses more on Palin than Biden, but there is relevance to both): If the person at the head of your ticket were to die or become incapacitated on January 20, 2009, you would immediately become President. Have you given any thought to what you would do in such a situation? In particular, each of you has differed on some issues with the candidate who heads your ticket. Would you continue the policies of the man elected president this year, even though you have disagreed with them in the past, or do you believe that your succession to the office would justify taking up different policies?
Finally, the question that I'd REALLY like to be asked--although more to the presidential than the vice-presidential candidates. It is not of my devising, but comes from Fr. Guido Sarducci, a/k/a Don Novello, who was asked in 1976 0r 1980 by, I think, Tom Brokaw, what he would ask if he were on the debate panel. In his inimitable fashion (which I am about to imitate, without apology), Fr. Sarducci replied, "I'd aska de candidates, 'Iffa you coulda be an animal, whata kinda animal woulda you be?'"
Are you smiling, maybe a little? I suggest that that would actually be a very good question to ask, precisely because it is so outlandish that it would cut through the preparation and the talking points to give us a glimpse, however brief, of the real person behind the candidate.
Our comment line is open for your ideas about questions.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Another view
Comments from JB, a friend, about Sarah Palin:
Yesterday, I was excited to watch the VP debate (in much the same way I would be excited to be in a live studio audience for a sitcom -- pure entertainment value). No more. Last night I watched a clip of Katie Couric's interview with Sarah "Psychobabble" Palin, and am now beyond terrified.
Really? She's read ALL magazines? If by "read" you mean "shared space with them while in the checkout line at the supermarket" and by "all" you mean "Woman's Day, Cosmo, and Cooking Light," then sure, I GUESS that statement could have some truth to it.
I am horrified by her complete and utter ignorance of anything remotely intellectual (or intelligent). I am even more horrified by the fact that she's absolutely clueless as to her own cluelessness. And I am most horrified at the idea that she could actually, one day, be president. But, hey, she can see Russia from her house!
I keep hoping for a Harriet Miers situation, whereby Palin realizes how totally over her head she is that she steps down from her starring role in Legally Brunette: The White House Years. The big difference, though, is that in the end Miers was brought down by her own party, whereas here the Fundies love Palin. LOVE her.
If McCain actually wins this election, Canada will not be able to build a wall fast enough to prevent a mass exodus of disillusioned ex-pats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
