Interesting tidbits on the sub-prime problem

Despite the right-leaning tendencies of this video it does bring up some interesting info on the Dems and Obama in particular.

What am I missing?

So I'm listening to their president scare the pants off people by saying that if the Wall Street bastards go under, their economy could collapse and people could lose their houses to foreclosure and so on. And I can't help wondering, how stupid are they? Was Lincoln wrong? Can you fool all of the people all of the time?

Forget that the bailout is being proposed by the same ideologues who created the crisis by insisting that government should never intervene in the market, and that regulation is undesirable because it might, um, distort market forces leading to, oh, I don't know, some kind of unspecified crisis. Forget that such a bailout is a betrayal of their most basic beliefs and all the self-righteously motivated suffering they imposed on everyone else all these years in the name of a free market. Forget that such a massive intervention in the economy is the American equivalent of Lenin admitting communism didn't work . The question is, having decided to intervene in the economy at the 11th hour, is this the plan that makes sense?

Sooner or later, somebody should ask, if you're going to hand out 700 billion dollars to avert the crisis, how about you give it to the people endangered by the crisis -- say, by setting up an American equivalent of the CHMC to insure mortgages-- rather than giving it to the very bozos who created the crisis? "Hey, we just lost 900 trillion dollars by being so greedy we put our personal commissions ahead of the well being of 300 million other Americans -- hell, the whole rest of the world -- but not only did we get out with our own personal fortunes thanks to contracts that give us millions of dollars in bonuses, EVEN IF WE SCREW UP so spectacularly that the entire world's economy may collapse, but we'd now like you to trust us with another 700 trillion because we did such a great job with the last batch....

How does Main Street swallow this? How do American leaders say with a straight face, "You have to trust us on this, because this is complex, too complex for you to understand You just have to trust in our leadership (again) and let us fix it by handing all your cash and the cash of the next four generations over to the Wallstreet experts." Why doesn't Main Street rise up and say, lets tax the rich investment bankers and bailout the poor slobs who were tricked into mortgages there was no possibility of their ever paying off."

But of course their is no left wing left in the states to stand up and say stuff like that. Without it's left wing, the American Eagal can only fly in circles....

A New Word is Born

Electile Dysfunction:
The inability to become aroused over any of the choices for PRIME MINISTER put forth by any party in the 2008 election year.

Michael Moore's "Slacker Uprising" released today

http://slackeruprising.com/

Available for free download today only. Also available for purchase on dvd for $10.

The whys and wherefores:
http://slackeruprising.com/about.php

Buffy--The Return?

Bafflegab

Here's brilliant piece of political bafflegab by the Republican VP nominee.

Can anyone understand what she just said? (This blog tries to figure it out.)
And if you can divine a coherent thought in the Palin clip, try your hand at something a little harder: McCain talking about Palin.

Harper Plays the National Unity Card

Conservative leader Stephen Harper, in a brazen example of unexpected hyperbole, has played the National Unity card, claiming that Liberal leader Stephan Dion's carbon tax plan will threaten nation unity. He says that "by undermining the economy and by re-centralizing money and power in Ottawa, it can only undermine the progress we have been making on national unity."
Even if Harper is right, hating Ottawa can only bring the the rest of the country closer together.
But seriously, what Harper never discusses is how much the economy will be undermined if we do nothing about climate change, which seems to be Harper's idea. How much of an economy will we have when there's 1,000,000 refugees from Vancouver because their expensive condos are under a rising sea?
And in an unexpected case of politics making strange bedfellows, NDP leader Jack Layton joined Harper in blasting Dion's plan. This is twice this week that Layton had been on the same side of an issue as Harper, the first being the question of whether the Green Party should take part in the televised debates. Layton sided with Harper to not allow the Greens, until the Canadian public reminded Layton that the "D" in NDP stood for Democratic.
Will Dion's plan cause economic havoc? Not according to Matthew Bramley of the sustainable energy think-tank Pembina Institute, who says, "Mr. Harper and Mr. Layton's opposition to carbon taxes is contradicted by leading economics and business organizations who say taxing pollution is a good way to harness market forces to fight global warming. There is no evidence to support Mr. Harper's claim that a modest carbon tax would cause a recession. In fact, Mr. Dion's proposed tax would need to be further increased to enable Canada to meet science-based targets for greenhouse gas reductions."
CTV.ca reports that both Norway and Sweden have had a carbon tax plan since the early 1990s, and according to an April 29, 2008 Guardian article, Sweden cut its overall carbon emissions by nine per cent between 1990 and 2006. Its economy grew by 44 per cent in that period.
CTV also reports that John Williamson of the Canadian Taxpayer's Federation said on CTV Newsnet Thursday that Dion's plan was not truly "revenue neutral."
"This is a fiscal transfer from taxpayers to low income Canadians. That is not the definition of a tax neutral plan."
Yes, god forbid that low income Canadians should ever benefit from the tax system.

Let's end with this insightful piece describing Harper's blatant "Republican"-styled campaigning and dirty tricks. That crap doesn't play well north of the border. If he keeps it up, he may be in for a surprise in 33 days.

It Might Just Be Me....

...but I have a feeling that Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams is no fan of Stephen Harper.
Here's some choice quotes from his speech today to a St John's business group.

"Make no mistake — you won't hear Stephen Harper admit he may win a majority government because he is terrified that people might actually stop and think about the consequences. Well, I beg you all today — stop, think and decide if that is what this country deserves...
"A majority government for Stephen Harper would be one of the most negative political events in Canadian history. Even without a majority, he has cut funding for minorities, cut funding for literacy, cut funding to students, volunteers, museums and arts and culture groups right across the country [and] his government cut funding to women's groups and … actually went so far as to remove the federal mandate to advance equality for women. This all happened under a minority government. What in heaven's name will happen if he gets a majority?"

Don't hold back, Danny. Tell us what you really feel.

Strong Leadership My Ass

Harper, the STRONG leader (at least according his ads), is too scared to debate the Green Party's Elisabeth May.
Click here to tell him how you feel about that.
And tell him whatever else is bugging you, too.

Oliver North Rides Again

An American raid on the Afghan village of Nawabad on August killed only 7 civilians, according to the US Army. However, both Afghan and UN officials say that 92 civilians were killed, including 60 children, making it one the biggest losses of civilian life in the war.
The US military continued to insist until September 7 that only seven civilians had been killed. They reconsidered their count when the video came out.
Why was the US count so low? According to the TimesOnline:

The US military said that its findings were corroborated by an independent journalist embedded with the US force. He was named as the Fox News correspondent Oliver North, who came to prominence in the 1980s Iran-Contra affair, when he was an army colonel.

Yes, Oliver North. Yes, that Oliver North.

The Consortium Rules Agianst the Greens

This is ridiculous.
According to the CBC, "Canada's broadcasters will not allow Green Leader Elizabeth May to participate in the leaders debates during the federal election campaign, the networks announced Monday afternoon. The consortium of networks, which includes the CBC, said three of Canada's parties were opposed to May's inclusion, but did not give more details."
Bouchard represented the BQ in their first debate despite the fact that none of the BQ MPs had been elected as BQ members.
Manning represented Reform in their first debate with they had only one MP, and he did not have seat in the house.
All parties with MPs should be represented. If that means that some of the other parties don't want to participate, that's fine -- just leave an empty chair for them in case they change their mind.
This just shows that the old-line parties have forgotten that they are supposed to be serving the democractic values of our country, not themselves.

All You Need to Know About Stephen Harper

"Fixed election dates stop leaders from trying to manipulate the calendar.
Hopefully in the next election we can run on our record and we won't need the manipulation of the electoral calendar."
-- Stephen Harper, after the 2006 election

Harper wants an election because, he argues, that Parliament cannot function. I don't understand this rationale because it seems to be functioning. The Conservative government is introducing bills and the bills are passing through Parliament. That sounds like it's working to me. The Tories haven't lost a confidence vote yet, and Reform/Alliance/Conservative polices are flourishing. Harper has killed Kyoto, given big tax cuts to corporations and the rich, and begun to introduce long-standing Reform/Alliance policies like the fixed election date.
I'm not in favour of a fixed election date, but I don't get my knickers in a knot about it. It's not part of the British Parliamentary tradition, and the ability to call an election when you want is one of the perks of being Prime Minister. Use it or abuse it at your own risk. And many thought that former Prime Minister Chretien did abuse this privilege during his term as PM, basically calling elections at his whim.
This is why the concept of the fixed election date gained some popularity, particularly with the Reform/Alliance/Conservative opposition. The fixed-term idea was a plank of the Reform Party from the beginning. Harper ran promising a fixed-date election law, which appealed to his core group of supporters.
But now, his own law, the law that his supporters clamoured for, is now in the way of his political ambitions. So this morning he's going to ask the Governor General to break his law and dissolve Parliament so he can have an election.
I doubt that the Governor General will refuse Harper's request to dissolve Parliament, but I hope she rakes him over the coals for the position that he has placed her in: asking the Queen's representative to break the law.
This is all you need to know about the integrity of Stephen Harper. He used his supporters to win the last election, but he's betrayed them by breaking the law his own supporters have been wanting for years.
What a way to treat your followers. If I was I Tory, I would be livid.

McCaim Picks Aardvark as Running Mate

Once again, CNN shows its class with this headline. They trumpeted the news that Presidential candiadte John McCain had chosen Alaska Govermor Sarah Palin as his running mate with the a headline that read, "McCain picks Woman as Running Mate."
If McCain had picked, say, Mitt Romney as his running mate, would the CNN headline have been "McCain picks Man as Running Mate"?
Nice, CNN.