StudioGlyphic

The Commerce Department announced that GDP had grown by 7.2% in the third quarter. Fueled by consumer spending and business spending, the record growth (unseen in 19 years) is a victory for the Bush administration, whose management of the economy has been under attack by Democrats and questioned by Americans. Bush and his team immediately jumped on the numbers as a sign that the tax cuts were working and the economy was on the rebound.

One of the key issues of next year's election will be the economy, and in light of the recent GDP numbers, Bush's prospects seem good. However, with 2.9 million jobs lost, and recent announcements of more layoffs and significant mergers, all the positive GDP growth numbers won't dispel the unease most Americans feel about the economy without significant improvement in job creation.

Furthermore, the biggest factors contributing to the 7.2% were interest rates and child tax credit refunds. With the record-low interest rates, a flurry of mortgage refinancing allowed homeowners to keep more of their after-tax income. Tax rebates gave them cash on hand. Both were used to purchase durable goods such as cars (helped by low interest rates as well as dealer incentives and rebates) and appliances. In other words, consumers took advantage of present conditions to borrow against the future. It is unclear whether consumers will be able to keep up this pace of spending—how many cars do you need, especially when your job may be at risk?

Not to mention the fact that the bulk of the tax cuts went to trimming marginal rates of the highest earners as well as cutting the capital gains and estate taxes of the wealthy. This creates a structural revenue loss for the federal government. With heavy spending on Iraq occupation and reconstruction contributing to the deficit (and somewhat to economic growth), the federal debt will continue to expand, funded by more and more borrowing.

Why is this bad? Federal borrowing results in the diversion of capital from the private sector to the public. As debts increase to worrisome levels, investor confidence falls, and interest rates rise to offset risks, making it more expensive for individuals and corporations to borrow, thus discouraging spending. Furthermore, taxpayer dollars will have to go toward repayment of this debt in greater and greater amounts, reducing the amount of public investment in the economy on top of private investment. As the job base of the country crosses borders and oceans in search of lower operating costs, the nation will lose its primary source of revenue.

Like all of its policies, the Bush administration's spending and tax policies cynically rely on disaster to be averted until after the next election. This is a dangerous game—both for the country and the administration. The next 12 months will show how well they come through.

Economist.com | America's economy roars ahead

NY Times | White House Takes Credit for Surge in Economy

Washington Post | U.S. Economic Growth Surges

(Mark Boster / LAT)

Washington Post: Drawn to The Flame

Ash is falling like rain. It's 3 p.m. and the sun burns a crimson circle through a gray nimbus. The mountain glows like a volcano about to erupt.

After a quick triage, the firefighters set about cutting down what trees they can. The plan here is to create a buffer around the structures and to use the pool water if necessary. If the fire blows through, they will take refuge in one of the buildings, stay close to the floor and hope it doesn't catch fire.

It's little wonder that some firebugs turn out to be the very people who are supposed to be stopping the fires. Like in a John Woo film, the heroes and villains are just two sides of the same coin.

Wow, some people are are really strange.

poke-a-sheep

The New Republic Online: At His Service

Howard Dean is about to take another huge step toward winning the Democratic nomination. According to union officials and aides to several campaigns, it is nearly certain that the Service Employees International Union (seiu) will endorse Dean next week. This may sound like just another obscure piece of campaign inside baseball, but the endorsement could transform the race.

Good overview of SEIU and what its endorsement of Dean would mean for the Democratic nomination.

PETA Wants to Change CA Town's Name

What a bunch of fruitcakes.

NPR : New Bobbleheads on the Block: Supreme Court

Ha. Cool.

Democrats Shake Their Booty

Sounds a lot like the Dean fundraiser/party in NYC last quarter.

DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe looks out over the club's second floor, so packed it represents the sardines-in-a-can wing of the Democratic Party, and beams. "How great is this!" he yells over the blasting hip-hop, thrilled that 90 percent of those who bought tickets are first-time party donors.

By 10 at night, the place is so crowded that no one can do anything that resembles forward motion. Women in tight skirts on their way to somewhere slither against men in loosened ties and rolled shirt sleeves, who get that dopey, glazed look in their eyes.

Maybe the Democrats are finally learning something.

House committee votes for tax cuts for multinational corporations

The New Stop-Dean Candidate - Howard Dean. By William Saletan

All year, Howard Dean has been gaining ground in the Democratic presidential race. And all year, Democratic centrists have been scrambling for a candidate to stop him. He's too liberal, they said. He's soft on defense, a Vermont lefty, an evangelist for expansive programs. To stop him, they turned to Joe Lieberman, then John Kerry, then Wes Clark. But the more Dean's rivals expose his record, the more I suspect that the centrist who's going to spare Democrats this left-wing nightmare isn't any of these guys. It's Howard Dean.

Sure, sure. We all said Dean was not a liberal back in the summer when we appointed him the best hope for wresting control away from the right-wing. Is Will's piece irrelevant?

No.

First of all, it's funny, so it's worth a read.

It's also a great run-down of the way in which this once "too-liberal" candidate is now being attacked from all sides for not being liberal enough. Note that Lieberman and the DLC no longer talk about the anti-war position as being the path to the wilderness. In fact, Lieberman now says his continuing support for the war is an "act of courage" while Dean's unwavering opposition to the war is "principled"; he accuses Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt, and Clark of flip-flopping. These new "too-conservative" attacks reflect the fact that Dean has energized the Democratic base more than any of his rivals. Will thinks the basis of these attacks are key to a Dean victory next year.

If you were skeptical before, well... here's a reason to have an international space station: awesome photos.

NASA - Station Photographs Hurricane Isabel

NASA - Wildfires Seen From Station

Best of all, they're royalty-free.

Thank God for Google and the Internet.

"This is a SigAlert Message"

Now you can search the text of books on Amazon. It sorta works. I did a search for "deliverator" and Amazon failed to list Snow Crash in the search results. It did, however, find a reference to the book in another book.

As is evident from the last decade or two of American politics, our system of choosing representatives has resulted in partisan warfare and corruption by special interests. Both major parties are guilty, and the solution does not lie in electing one party over another, but rather in changing the framework within which they operate. Three reforms could completely change politics as we have to come to know it.

1. An end to gerrymandering. The tradition of redistricting usually results in enclaves of majority Democratic or Republican support, resulting in an unconstructive polarization of our political bodies, since "moderate" candidates tend to lose to partisans. Unfortunately, I don't have a good solution worked out just yet.

2. Open primaries. Closed primaries don't reflect the choices of the people; instead, they reflect the choices of party loyalists and partisans. Furthermore, they reinforce the two-party system to the detriment of other points of view. An open primary would pit all candidates of all parties against one another. The top two chosen by all the people would then go on to the general election for a face-off.

The California recall election is the closest thing we have had to an open primary. Arnold clearly earned the most votes, but his stated views on gay marriage and abortion rights would have alienated many conservative voters in a closed primary, preventing him from entering a traditional general election at all. The key difference between an open primary system and the recall election would be that voters would be able to first vote their conscience and then vote for the lesser of two evils. Presumably more signatures would also be required to earn a spot on the ballot.

3. Public financing of campaigns. Money buys advertising. Advertising sways voters. Money wins elections. Money also makes politicians accountable to donors. Big tax cuts, deregulation of key markets, slackening environmental controls—perhaps these aren't a direct result of campaign contributions, but shouldn't we ensure that even the appearance of catering to special interests is removed from the system?

It's not enough to restrict campaign contributions; elections should be about issues, not ubiquitous advertising. Spending limits would allow all candidates to compete on equal footing. A ban on advertising coupled with allocations of time on the public airwaves would also level the playing field. Imagine a system in which candidates running for office are given the 7:50 - 7:55 PM time slot on all broadcast stations once every two weeks for free (they'd have to pay for the production and distribution of these segments, but not the broadcast).

---

If this is what is needed to change the tone of politics, to whom should we look to initiate these changes? Possibly outspoken critics of the process such as Senators McCain and Feingold or outsiders such as Nader. But these men will not be able to do anything until the public speaks in favor of reform. Write to your representative. Write to your Senator. Write to your Assembly Member. Write to your State Senator. Talk to your friends and neighbors about politics. Drum up support for change. Blog it.

Chicago Tribune | Rep. Jackson plans to back Dean

It's a start.

USA Today: Health insurers' deals get mixed reactions Competition could increase, but small insurers could fold

Benefit consultants and others had mixed views on what the mergers may mean for consumers. Savings from merging back-office efforts and eliminating some jobs could slow increases in premiums, which are currently rising at their fastest clip in a decade. The Anthem-WellPoint deal particularly may increase competition among large insurers eager to attract the business of large, multistate employers.

If the merger of two large health care providers could save increases in premiums by merging some operations and laying off staff, then it follows that a single health care provider could also save money. Strip out the advertising budget and the savings will increase.

Combine this with policies that restrict drug company advertising, expedite the process of bringing generic versions of off-patent drugs to market, negotiate drug-price controls in other countries, and control the costs of catastrophic medical care, and we might be able to afford health care for everyone while reining in overall costs to an acceptable percentage of GDP.

Well, hell. I was going to blog about Dean's support from two big unions, the California Teachers Association and The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, with links going to different newspaper articles, but Hugo Martin at the LA Times decided to save me a lot of trouble by writing a single article to discuss them both: "Dean Wins Support of Two Key Unions".

Now, Gephardt's gotten the support of 20 unions so far, but my understanding is that they're relatively small unions. The unions that have come out for Dean are of decent size: IUPAT has 140,000 members, CTA has 333,000 members and is part of the 2.7 million member National Education Association. Getting the support of the national body would be a coup. So would getting the Service Employees International Union on board. They've got 1.3 million members and represent a lot of health care workers and janitors. Since Dean has vowed to "clean house" in Washington while holding a big broom, SEIU support is virtually in the bag. That's a joke, son.

Update

The Des Moines Register's Jonathan Roos reports that Gephardt's 20 union endorsements add up to 54,000 members and explains why union endorsements are important:

Democratic candidates covet union endorsements because organized labor is a major Democratic constituency with a lot of money and muscle to help campaigns.

ABCNews Dean campaign reporter Marc Ambinder contributes this to the Note:

"With 3,000 active Iowa members and 1,000 retirees, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades may not be a match for the potent union coalition that Dick Gephardt is building in Iowa. But IUPAT, will try to match Gephardt's numerical strength by setting an ambitious shoe-leather goal."

"When the secretary-treasurers teleconferenced and laid out their arguments in mid-October, Dean was the clear favorite, union officials said."

At first glance it almost seems like an ash-covered survivor is surveying the ruins of her home. Then you realize it's a silly statue put up by some bourgeois dumbass who decided to buy an expensive house in an area where forest fires are common. Still, it's an interesting photo. The top half is very picturesque, with light streaming among the barren trunks of trees. It could almost be a winterscape. The bottom half of the photo shows a lot of crap the humans brought up.

---

By the way, if you don't know much about the fires beyond the fact that they've been out there, you might want to check in on the LA Times. They'll tell you everything you want to know about where and how they started, where they're burning now, and how the prospects for control look. They've also got some amazing photos, satellite shots, videos, and all sorts of other things, including a link to Sigalert.com. So far this looks like a nicer traffic map than TANN's.

Economist.com | Mahathir Mohamad

From the country that brought you "only fellow Muslim nations should have troops in Iraq" comes some inflammatory anti-Semiticism:

THERE is much to be admired in politicians who are brave, or foolish, enough to say things that are true, even when they are unpopular. That is the sort of image that Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia's prime minister for the past 22 years, has sought to cultivate—as a man not afraid to speak his mind, to call a spade a spade, to stand up against foreign pomposity and bullying. Although he does not allow free speech within Malaysia, his right to say what he thinks should nevertheless be defended outside it. But what if he says things that are untrue, but popular? That is what he did on October 16th, at the summit of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, when he said that "The Europeans killed 6m Jews out of 12m, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them."

Implicit condoning of Holocaust coupled with the "Jews rule the world" propaganda. It doesn't get much worse than that.

The response was predictable: outrage from governments and Jewish groups around the world, but a standing ovation at the conference. Both Dr Mahathir and his government officials were quick to defend his speech against its critics by saying that his point about Jewish control had been taken out of context. He was urging his fellow Muslims to eschew violence, and to emulate Jews by using their brains, not brawn. So it was a compliment, you see. It was just like the old Jewish joke about an Israeli who is puzzled when he sees his friend reading an anti-Semitic newspaper. "Our papers are full of bad news," comes the reply. "But this one has good news; it says we control the whole world."

"No, no, I was saying that we should learn from the Jews who rule the world!"

Reuters | Bush Tells Mahathir His Jew Remarks Are 'Wrong'

Mahathir himself was unapologetic when asked last week about the furor his comments had caused, and some Arab leaders said he was simply telling it like it is.

"The fact is that they are biased, most of them are biased. They think while it is proper to criticize Muslims and Arabs, it is not proper to criticize Europeans and Jews," he told reporters after closing the Islamic summit hosted by Malaysia.

Economist.com | Finally, a new UN resolution

Many American politicians are calling for an expansion of an international presence in Iraq; the UN resolution seems to be a first step toward implementing that strategy.

One firm offer of troops came last week from Turkey. The Turkish government has offered as many as 10,000 troops. But many Iraqis are appalled at the idea: for centuries, Iraq was part of the Turkish-run Ottoman empire and the idea of being reoccupied, even temporarily, by the former colonial ruler has not gone down well. In a possible expression of this disquiet, a suicide bomber blew himself up, injuring ten people, outside the Turkish embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday. That was a day after Iraq's Governing Council reaffirmed its opposition to admitting troops from Turkey: foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari said at a summit of Islamic countries that the council was opposed to the presence of forces from any of Iraq's neighbouring countries.

Malaysia, which is hosting the summit of the 57-nation Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and will chair the organisation for the next three years, argued that only fellow Muslim nations should have troops in Iraq and that they should operate under the United Nations' control. However, Mr Zebari said that, from his initial contacts with the Muslim countries, he detected no desire by any of them to contribute troops. Pakistan and Bangladesh—two Muslim states on whom America had pinned some hopes—have indicated that they might send troops, but only if they had either a UN mandate or a formal request from Iraq. Pakistan's foreign minister, Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri, criticised Malaysia's call, in effect, for American troops to withdraw, calling it "unrealistic".

Howard Dean has also called for an infusion of Muslim and Arab forces to dispel the notion of a Western occupation of Iraq. But what happens when the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council takes a position of opposition to troops from its neighbors, and its neighbors are unwilling to commit the troops? When talks of expanding a nation's role results in an attack on that nation's presence in Iraq?

Iraq has proved to be swiftly degenerating into a "wicked" problem—one that cannot be solved by armchair strategists, and one that may very well echo what followed the American installation of Iran's Shah decades ago. In the meantime, 150,000 American targets are sitting in the desert, waiting to come home, with no sign of hope at the bottom of this Pandora's box.

CBS News | The Man Who Knew | October 17, 2003 12:03:46

60 Minutes II interview with Greg Thielmann, a former expert on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, career foreign service officer, former director of the State Department's Office of Strategic Proliferation and Military Affairs.

"The main problem was that the senior administration officials have what I call faith-based intelligence. They knew what they wanted the intelligence to show."

The Washington Post reports that Clark, Lieberman, and Edwards have decided not to try to win in Iowa and New Hampshire:

Retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) and Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) have staked their presidential candidacies on an unusual second-chance strategy, betting their futures against the record of history and the dynamics that have governed nomination contests for more than two decades.

The decision by the three Democrats to say they will look for their first victories on Feb. 3 -- two weeks after the Iowa caucuses and a week after the New Hampshire primary -- tests whether anyone can win the nomination without competing to win in Iowa and New Hampshire and also highlights the parallel battles underway in the Democratic race.

Okay, that's probably a really stupid move by all these guys.

Iowa and New Hampshire aren't as important anymore. Time was, winning in Iowa or New Hampshire gave you a big media boost, and you could spend weeks or even months raising funds and traveling to all the other states and building up your campaign. Next year, however, everything will be over in six weeks. Maybe three. So if you don't have the funds and numbers by the time Iowa and New Hampshire roll around, you just aren't likely to get them after an Iowa or New Hampshire win. This happened to McCain in 2000: he won in New Hampshire, but didn't have the time or war chest to fund an adequate campaign in South Carolina, where George Bush creamed him with attack ads and whisper campaigns.

Let me restate: if you don't have the funds by the time Iowa and New Hampshire roll around, you are already screwed. Oh, and if you're the front-runner and you win in Iowa or New Hampshire? You just confirm what everyone already believes.

So unless you're polling really strong in the February 3rd states, what would be the point of conceding defeat in Iowa and New Hampshire and looking forward to February 3?

It suddenly struck me as I sat here tuning out that Sam guy who always goes on and on that he reminds me a hell of a lot of Parsa. Ugh. Die, bitch, die!

Honda's NSX-cellent supercar

Something about it says Corvette to me. Maybe it's because they've flipped the backside upside-down, with the spoiler inches off the ground. They'll have to fix that.

It's not every year a new Ferrari is announced. Here's their replacement for the 456M:

Ferrari's all-aluminium 612 Scaglietti packs 540bhp

Nice.

While the Secretary of State's site still hasn't been updated, the Democratic party issued a press release yesterday welcoming "independents" in their primary.

Independents are those who "decline to state" a political party.

How does this work? "Political parties have until 135 days prior to an election to provide a written notice to the Secretary of State indicating the adoption of a rule allowing decline to state voters to vote the ballot of that individual party." Now that the Democrats have provided written notice, all you "decline to state" voters can join in the Howard Dean nominating fun next Spring! Future primary elections will require another written notice from the Party.

Howard Kurtz does a run down ("A Blogger's Apology") of the controversy surrounding Gregg Easterbrook's blog about Kill Bill. Easterbrook hates the violence in the movie and thinks Tarantino is a hack. Fine. Then he says this:

Set aside what it says about Hollywood that today even Disney thinks what the public needs is ever-more-graphic depictions of killing the innocent as cool amusement. Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence.

Sounds pretty bad, right? It's almost as though he's setting up Jews as being particularly greedy, even more so than their Gentile counterparts.

Was there outrage? Lots of it. And he got fired from his ESPN job (ESPN is owned by Disney).

But finish the paragraph before firing off your angry email:

Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood are now shown all over the world, to audiences that may not understand the dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can't possibly miss the message--now Disney's message--that hearing the screams of the innocent is a really fun way to express yourself.

So what he's saying is that just because the others do it, doesn't make it right for a group, particularly when that group should be particularly sensitive to a particular issue. By the same logic, blacks shouldn't make movies that glorify violence just because white people do, too.

Okay. Let's get back to the issue at hand.

So let's first admit that this anti-"violence in the media" rant is really tired (I mean, that's why we chose not to give Tipper Gore or Joe Lieberman a bigger soapbox for their anti-Hollywood crusade, right?)--not to mention unsupported by research--and Easterbrook's prescription for what cultural/religious/ethnic groups should or should not do is really pretty stupid... but the basic question is, was his statement a sign of antipathy toward Jews?

No.

But if any of my Jewish friends care to comment, you know where to send the email.

Politicians need to stay the fuck out of medicine.

Senate Passes Ban On Abortion Procedure

In a major victory for antiabortion forces after an eight-year struggle, Congress yesterday gave final approval to legislation banning a particularly controversial procedure for ending pregnancies, ensuring a legal showdown that could help define the scope -- and limits -- of abortion rights in the United States.

--

Woman's Feeding Tube Is Ordered Reinstated

MIAMI, Oct. 21 -- Gov. Jeb Bush ordered doctors to resume tube-feeding a severely brain-damaged woman Tuesday after an unprecedented vote of the Florida legislature gave him authority to override the wishes of her husband and the orders of the courts.

ABCNEWS.com : Dean's Playful Prank

Howard Dean Decides to Have Some Fun … But it Backfires

Funny.

THE STOVEPIPE: How conflicts between the Bush Administration and the intelligence community marred the reporting on Iraq’s weapons.

Yikes. I just finished my second of two papers due tomorrow. Now I can go to sleep and still have some time to review them in the morning. I don't remember the last time I worked this hard on schoolwork (of course, I haven't been in school for years, and my memory's just not what it used to be). It's too bad I didn't start on these papers three weeks ago. I'm sure they could be better. Don't get me wrong--they're good, but they could be better.

Right to an Attorney Comes at a Price (washingtonpost.com)

Can I have the right not to have an attorney in my residence? I guess I'll have to consult the attorney.

...a new Minnesota law that requires poor people to pay as much as $200 for this privilege is under attack by public defenders and some judges, who contend that it undermines the 40-year-old legal tenet established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Gideon v. Wainwright.

Minnesota is one of a growing number of states facing enormous budget deficits that are beginning to charge indigents for their constitutional right to legal representation.

And I thought the administration's economic policies and attack of civil liberties were two separate things. Okay, maybe I'm stretching here, but it's still a terrible thing.

Medicare still on table in Dean balanced-budget plan

Gephardt and Kerry are still going on about Dean cutting Medicare.

"When you cut Medicare to balance the budget, you end up hurting the program, hurting beneficiaries, causing their costs to go up." Gephardt said by telephone before a campaign event in Cedar Rapids. "It doesn't work."

I really wish this attack line would die. Gephardt's criticism is far too simplistic. I think there could be a lot of support for means-testing Medicare benefits and also raising payroll taxes beyond its current limits. Seniors who depend on these programs tend to be pretty savvy since it has such a large effect on them.

The politically potent seniors advocacy group AARP, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons, opposed the cuts proposed in 1995, which equaled $270 billion. Clinton vetoed the budget bill, but two years later he signed a budget that included $115 billion in cuts to Medicare.

"When you talk about cuts and slowing the rate of growth, there are a lot of ways you can do that," Naylor said. "In fairness to Dean, leaving Medicare on the table covers an awful lot of options."

Thank you! Finally a voice of reason from a group that actually represents the constituents.

Scientists make electricity from tap water

Cool.

A team of Canadian researchers has found that an electrical current can be produced between the ends of a microscopic channel when a fluid flows through it.

...

A typical setup using a ceramic filter and tap water can produce 10 volts and the current depends on the size of the filter. Since large water pressures are not needed, natural flows of water can be harnessed. These could include tidal water flows, underground aquifers, dammed water, drinking water currently being filtered by utilities companies to improve its clarity, and rain falling from roofs.

Do you want the Artist (formerly known as Prince) or a Jehovah's Witness showing up at your doorstep? How about both?

Company Is Foreign at Tax Time, but Seeks Americans-Only Work

This offshore corporation wants to have its cake and eat it, too. This is precisely the kind of thing we need to shut down.

LA Downtown News Online:

Little Tokyo Lofts
Since opening in July, the $21 million project in a converted warehouse on San Pedro Street between Fourth and Fifth streets is 60% full. Jon Peterson and Michael Tansey, who in 1982 developed the first live-work lofts in Downtown, last year began construction on the high-end Little Tokyo Lofts. The complex contains 161 live-work units, averaging 1,000 square feet and renting for about $1,600 a month. Amenities include hardwood floors, marble and granite countertops, a pool and Jacuzzi. A footbridge will connect the building to a 300-car parking structure.

Castle Green

Unknown to me, anyway.

New York Daily News - Politics - Mama Bush raps the Dems

Former First Lady Barbara Bush calls the Democrats trying to unseat her eldest son "a sorry lot" - and says she thought he would lose in 2000.

Hey, he did.

Barbara Bush said she feared that her son would lose the 2000 election because "my gut feeling is that all the media is against George ... any Republican."

Ha!

"I find myself thinking of Al Gore and what he must be feeling," she noted on the day her son was sworn in as the 43rd President. "I'm sure he thinks he won the race, although I don't. I do feel sorry for him. We've lost [before] and losing is not easy."

Really? You have empathy?

"It seems a bit beneath her," Democratic National Committee spokesman Tony Welch said of Barbara Bush's shot at the Democratic field. "But we understand her nervousness. Her husband was beaten by a Democrat and she must be worried her son will also be beaten by a Democrat."

Heh.

General Casts War in Religious Terms

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has assigned the task of tracking down and eliminating Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and other high-profile targets to an Army general who sees the war on terrorism as a clash between Judeo-Christian values and Satan.

Things are tough enough without having jackasses like Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin framing the "war on terror" as a religious Crusade.

Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."

On at least one occasion, in Sandy, Ore., in June, Boykin said of President Bush: "He's in the White House because God put him there."

Michael Moore got a bit tax cut on all the money he made from Bowling for Columbine and Stupid White Men. Now he wants to know how he should spent it. He wants to give it to a Democratic candidate, but needs a reason to pick one of them.

Someone from the MR2 board said the problem is likely to be the wheel bearing and hub.

So now the car's at Marina Del Rey Toyota being diagnosed. I asked for a preliminary quote for repairs if the problem was indeed the bearing and hub, and they said that it would be around $450. I know I can order parts from Jay Marks Toyota for a lower price than Marina Del Rey, and considering that I'd also like to get the front trunk prop latch, the engine cover prop latch, and possibly some other OEM parts, I can do this all at the same time.

Marina Del Rey also quoted me $385 for installing an ACT clutch; this is around the same price as Marina Pit Stop, so I think I'll let them do it. I'll see if I can get any kind of discount for doing both jobs at the same time.

The clutch is on its way from Florida.

My wheels and tires are in Marina Del Rey at Federal Express. They'll try another delivery tomorrow.

I still have to order brake pads, urethane, speed bleeders, and a muffler. Maybe I'll order a set of motor mounts from Jay Marks so that I can drive the car around while the urethane is solidifying.

ABCNEWS.com : Poll: Bush Slipping on Iraq, Economy

They ought to do a poll where they ask the people who prefer a mystery Democrat over Bush whether they would prefer Bush to (insert name here). Then they should ask whether they would vote for Bush rather than (insert name here).

China Sends Man Into Orbit, Entering U.S.-Russian Club

BEIJING, Wednesday, Oct. 15 — The Chinese spacecraft Shenzhou 5 blasted off from the Gobi Desert on Wednesday carrying a single astronaut. The launching left government leaders jubilant yet also anxiously awaiting his safe return so China can stake its claim as one of the world's elite space-faring nations.

If successful, the mission would make China the third nation to send a man into space, coming more than four decades after the Soviet Union and the United States accomplished the feat at the height of the cold war.

U.S. Diplomatic Convoy in Gaza Is Attacked, Killing at Least 3

BEIT LAHIYA, Gaza Strip, Oct. 15 — A large explosion ripped apart a vehicle in a United States diplomatic convoy in the Gaza Strip this morning, killing three Americans and injuring one in what appeared to be the first direct attack on an American target since the Palestinian uprising started more than three years ago.

The diplomats were in the narrow, coastal Gaza Strip to speak to Palestinian professors about academic scholarships. The vehicles in the convoy were armored and had diplomatic license plates.

As conservatives go, George Will is conservative. But at least he's a real conservative and not a fake conservative. I won't say the part about being an idiot versus an evil idiot. Partially because this isn't the place for such invective, but mostly because I don't think he's a complete idiot.

In "A Conservative Travesty," Will doesn't hesitate to call out his Republican friends in California as "so-called conservatives," "Schwarzenegger conservatives" (an "oxymoron"), and "faux conservatives." After all, Schwarzenegger is not a conservative:

Schwarzenegger's conservative supporters have furled the flag of "family values" while mocking their participation in the anti-Clinton sex posse. They were unoffended by Schwarzenegger's flippant assertions that only the "religiously fanatic" oppose human cloning -- not just stem cell research but cloning. These faux conservatives' new hero said that only "right-wing crazies" supported the proposal on Tuesday's ballot to bar the state from collecting the racial data that fuel the racial spoils system.

He points out potential flaws in the argument that Schwarzenegger could help Bush next year:

During the coming presidential campaign, California's Republican governor will be busy proving the fatuity of his proposal to solve California's budget crisis by cutting waste, fraud and abuse -- things for which there is no constituency. In 2004 President Bush will not campaign in a California seething with resentment of spending cuts and attempted tax increases advocated by a hugely unpopular Democratic governor. Instead, Bush will campaign in a California in which the Republican governor will be illustrating the axiom that today only a Republican governor can substantially raise taxes.

He raises the issue of the two-thirds majority required to raise taxes and the carving up of the general fund via the initiative process. He also points out that if Schwarzenegger does actually succeed in reinstating the Vehicle License Fee refund, he'll be grappling with an even bigger budget deficit.

Will gets props for saying that the Republicans might approve "revenue enhancements." And he gets mad props for saying that our forms of "direct democracy" are "precisely what America's Founders devised institutions to prevent."

Repairing California Government (washingtonpost.com)

Broder discusses two initiatives to be placed on the ballot next year that will fix some of the problems in California: reducing the majority needed on passing a budget (and penalizing lawmakers by withholding pay when the budget is late), and having Louisiana style open primaries. Cool.

This opinion piece by Harold Meyerson reports on some findings from the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks on American misperception of news events and news source. No surprise, but Faux News leads in misleading its viewers.

Fact-Free News (washingtonpost.com)

In a series of polls from May through September, the researchers discovered that large minorities of Americans entertained some highly fanciful beliefs about the facts of the Iraqi war. Fully 48 percent of Americans believed that the United States had uncovered evidence demonstrating a close working relationship between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Another 22 percent thought that we had found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And 25 percent said that most people in other countries had backed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein. Sixty percent of all respondents entertained at least one of these bits of dubious knowledge; 8 percent believed all three.

The researchers then asked where the respondents most commonly went to get their news. The fair and balanced folks at Fox, the survey concludes, were "the news source whose viewers had the most misperceptions." Eighty percent of Fox viewers believed at least one of these un-facts; 45 percent believed all three. Over at CBS, 71 percent of viewers fell for one of these mistakes, but just 15 percent bought into the full trifecta. And in the daintier precincts of PBS viewers and NPR listeners, just 23 percent adhered to one of these misperceptions, while a scant 4 percent entertained all three.

It looks a lot like this:

$87,000,000,000.00

This is just 3 large:

Nod to bluefunk.

Check out the blog on the new twenties, particularly the second paragraph. Funny.

That's how much I spent on my old MR2 for the following upgrades and repairs:

ACT performance clutch
Water Pump, Timing Belt, Timing Belt Tensioner and Pulley, Cam Seal, Crank Seal, Oil Pump Seal
Front Motor Mount
Brake pads - Axxis Metal Master performance pads
Brake fluid - Super Blue high temperature brake fluid
Brake bleeders - Russell brake bleeders
Brake hoses - Goodridge stainless steel braided brake lines

A whopping $960.75 of this amount was spent on labor for the clutch, water pump, etc.

A garage with a lift and engine hoist, lots of spare time, and a spare car could save me lots of money.

Hopefully I'll get some of this back from the insurance company.

Supreme Court rejects administration appeal on medical marijuana

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal that jeopardized state medical marijuana laws that allow ill patients to smoke pot if they get a doctor's recommendation.

I know a Cajun doctor in training...

Rising Health-Care Costs at Heart of Labor Strife

When Southland supermarket workers went on strike Saturday, their main beef was an employer proposal to cut back their health plan. Mechanics with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority are upset over the same thing. And health benefits are key to the contract fight that has prompted a sickout by Los Angeles County Sheriff's deputies.

"It's at the core of every major contract struggle," said Kate Bronfenbrenner, director of Labor Education Research at Cornell University. "And it's going to be an issue until we see some national solutions."

USATODAY.com - Newspapers sent same letter signed by different soldiers

Rush, to Judgment

Look, the Clinton liberals and feminazis won't tell you, but here's the problem with this big talk-show host who turns out to be a prescription-drug junkie. You have a guy who finally stops spinning and fesses up for his actions. Fine. He says he won't play the victim. Good. He's off to rehab. God bless. But what he and his apologists want you to forget is that he broke the law—yes, the L-A-W. Some of us around here still have respect for it.

The Daily Princetonian - Expanded Photo View

Rice Fails to Repair Rifts, Officials Say

Last week, the White House announced that national security adviser Condoleezza Rice had been given the new responsibility of managing the struggling effort to rebuild Iraq. In the words of one official, Rice would "crack the whip, frankly."

Many officials with firsthand knowledge of White House decision making contend that Rice is weak at forging those decisions, sometimes attempting to meld incompatible approaches that later fail. She is also perceived as not resolving enough issues before they reach the president and doing a poor job of making sure his wishes are carried out.

The secret source talks to the Post again about the Wilson case. Have you seen All The President's Men yet?

Probe Focuses on Month Before Leak to Reporters

The FBI's investigation is trying to determine how White House officials got the information about Wilson and his connection with Plame in the first place.

More secret source:
An administration source said, "One of the greatest mysteries in all this is what was really the rationale for doing it and doing it this way."

This Op-Ed piece ran in the LA Times on September 21, 2003. Reprinted without permission.

Scorning Public Life Is Shameful

Behind the Sturm und Drang of the recall and the continuing budget crisis is the real story: Californians no longer sufficiently value state government.

If they did, they'd understand that services cost money, and that the state is in a tight spot. The funding level for K-12 is mandated by initiative. Debt service is a nonnegotiable obligation. Yet the Republicans won't approve new taxes, and the state Constitution prohibits California from going into debt to pay continuing expenses. When you add all this up, the result is that the Legislature and the governor will have to close any revenue gap in next year's budget by slashing spending on universities, prisons and other programs, according to a former state economist. Think of it. Up to $40 billion, in a worst-case scenario, or $20 billion, if the economy improves, may be needed to achieve balance if the next budget cycle is anything like the last one.

Proponents of Gov. Gray Davis' recall repeatedly claim that the money can be found by eliminating waste. Put another way, they regard a significant number of state services as unnecessary. Underlying that thinking is the subtle suggestion that state workers are not fully carrying their load -- or worse, are loafers deserving of the sack. These charges represent a dangerous assault on the value of the public sector.

What is motivating this attack on statewide programs and employees? It comes partly from Americans' undying suspicion of government. A pervasive distrust of politicians is another factor. Both attitudes have their healthy aspects. If liberty is to be preserved, those who hold and exercise power must be viewed with continuing skepticism.

But lately in California, these longtime American attitudes have exploded into a supernova of suspicion and distrust. This too has its long-range causes. For two decades, Californians have not been engaged -- psychologically, intellectually, imaginatively -- at the statewide level. In the era of Govs. Earl Warren, Goodwin Knight and Pat Brown, Sacramento was at the center of the California experience. In such public-minded visions as the freeway system, the statewide water plan and the master plan for higher education, Californians expressed their highest creativity.

Then things began to change. State government became the problem, not the solution. With the information revolution -- realized and symbolized by the Internet -- California began to devolve into a federation of local autonomies. State government didn't disappear, but it became increasingly invisible as local identities and values superseded Sacramento's. Part of the reason that state programs got so out of sync with sustainable revenues was this invisibility. Californians were too busy finding California locally to bother with finding it in Sacramento. Term limits finalized this devolution, for they brought state government a steady succession of local and locally oriented elected officials.

One of the benefits of the recall is that Californians are refocusing their attention on the statewide public realm. It also highlights the sea change in Republican attitudes. Two-thirds of the golden age of public achievement, it must be remembered, was presided over by Republican governors. It could even be said that because California has been a predominantly Republican state in its 153-year existence, Republican energies were paramount in creating public California -- freeways, aqueducts and reservoirs, colleges and universities. The California many lament having lost was a California, in significant measure, fostered by the assent of Republicans who, while demanding efficiencies, recognized the value of taxes spent to create public value and services.

When I hear the rubbish about how wasted taxpayers' money amounts to 15% of the state budget, I ask myself: What will Californians be willing to do without, now that they seem bent on making war on the public sector? Will they want their forest fires fought? Their highways maintained? Their wildlife and water preserved? Their coast protected? Their abandoned children brought into foster-care programs? Do they still want to be able to visit public parks?

Who will take drunk drivers off the road? Keep dangerous felons under lock and key? Administer our courts, indeed, sit as jurists on our benches? Who will build libraries, tutor the illiterate, send talking books to the blind? Who will teach in community colleges, state colleges and universities? Who will administer Medi-Cal for the elderly, manage inland waterways, repair bridges, subsidize public art, take care of the feeble-minded, bury the unclaimed dead?

Shame on all Californians who indiscriminately bash the good and devoted men and women who do these things: the librarians, social workers, firefighters, doctors, nurses, fish and game wardens, park rangers, preservationists, transportation engineers, college teachers, road repair crews, parole officers, counselors. Shame on you, Californians, for wanting these services while refusing to pay for them -- and, worse, basing this refusal on a contempt for the public sector that constitutes a form of postmodern barbarism: a repudiation of anything that does not seem immediately relevant or useful to one personally, a reconfiguration of society in narcissistic terms.

And shame on political opportunists for turning a blind eye to the great and abiding truth that the public sector and the private sector need each other. Without a flourishing private sector, there can be no public value or programs; without flourishing and efficient public programs, the private sector languishes, or, worse, becomes, in Shakespeare's metaphor, a universal wolf devouring all.

We once knew these things in California. We created a public sector that many thought the finest in the nation. That public sector, in turn, nurtured and supported a private sector that, among other things, invented the health maintenance organization, revolutionized information storage and communications, developed some of the greatest banks (which the state regulated with finesse), extended banking privileges to a mass clientele, surpassed Switzerland and Connecticut as an epicenter of insurance, housed millions in affordable homes, and internationalized entertainment, becoming all the while a global land of hope and glory for millions.

Kevin Starr is state librarian of California and university, professor in the department of history at USC. His "Coast of Dreams:, California on the Edge, 1990-2003" is forthcoming from Alfred A., Knopf.

I picked up the car on Friday, and noticed a weird noise coming from behind the passenger compartment. I'd noticed on the previous day when I test drove the car, but only heard the noise when I was on the freeway and not when I was driving on local streets afterwards.

Anyway, I jacked the car up and started jiggling the wheels. I could shake the rear left wheel much more than the right. I also noticed that tranny oil was leaking from the left axle. Ugh.

I'm going to take the car to Toyota this week and see if they can isolate the problem. Hopefully they can fix it. Hopefully it won't be too expensive.

I still would advocate that people buy used cars, but now I'm going to start recommending that people spend the $75 and take it to a mechanic to put the car up and check out everything from underneath.

The good news is that Prop 53 and Prop 54 went down in flames, 63.9 to 36.1 percent. I know, the fact that both percentages came out the same (with different numbers of votes) is a little weird.

The other good news is that nearly 8 million people voted on the recall question. That's still only 20% of the state, but it's more than the number of people who voted in the gubernatorial contest in 2002. The public was also much more tuned in to this campaign than they've been in a long time.

The bad news is that the recall passed, 55.4 to 44.6 percent. As I said before, this is a dangerous precedent; elected representatives will be hesitant to make hard choices if they have the threat of recall hanging over their heads. The mechanism for recall needs to be updated. I would recommend forbidding a recall until mid-term and increasing the signature requirements to 40% of the number of people who voted in the last gubernatorial election. The current rules make it too easy for any partisan to initiate a recall. A 40% bar would represent the kind of citizen anger that merits putting politicians on notice.

That said, the recall has been instructive. It's not really an issue of Democrat vs. Republican. Davis is among the most conservative of Democrats, and Schwarzenegger among the most liberal of Republicans. Between them, the key difference was perception: Davis the limp-wristed compromised bureaucrat and Schwarzenegger the strong celebrity outsider. But more important than these image differences was dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Schwarzenegger won by a 17 point margin. The recall passed by a 10 point margin. Both represent a mixture of Republican, Democratic, and independent support. And the biggest losers in this election were the halting economy and politics as usual. Despite the reassurances of the Bush administration and the Wall Street Journal's editorial page, a jobless recovery doesn't do much for the perception of citizens about their well-being. Furthermore, when jobs, education, and health care are on the line, Sacramento's partisan bickering over the budget and legislation doesn't inspire much confidence in our representatives to get things done. In light of this dissatisfaction, Schwarzenegger's lack of experience or knowledge became an asset instead of a liability. The results of this election call for change, both here in California and in Washington.

Ironically, Schwarzenegger's victory doesn't necessarily portend change. Increasing national deficits, tax cuts that have done nothing about the loss of jobs, and the potential quagmire of our foreign policy have nothing to do with Sacramento but everything to do with the economic and personal security of Americans, now and in the future. In Sacramento, the partisans on the left and right will still have only 30% of the general fund to shift around in creating a budget; Republican legislators will likely still say NO to all taxes, and Democratic legislators will likely still push through their legislation.

There is, however, an opportunity for Schwarzenegger to make a big difference. With the mandate given by the election and the soap box of the office and his celebrity, he has the opportunity to uncover the deep structural problems that have caused the decline of education and services. Will Schwarzenegger listen to advisors such as Warren Buffett, call public attention to the changes required, and then browbeat and cajole our legislators into looking at the big picture and the long-term, or will he get mired in Sacramento politics? Let's hope that a Schwarzenegger administration will deliver on the promise of leadership and the promise of being the people's governor.

Finally, I just want to call for a reality check: this election has involved a lot of smearing of California's reputation. There are problems, and our recognition of those problems right now will allow us to take actions to reverse course. But this is still one of the greatest States in the Union. We are leaders in entertainment, communications, Biotech, automotive design, materials science, agriculture, and textiles. In most of these areas we are the innovators of new ideas and the producers of products. Our people and companies generate jobs and new industries like few other states. 75% of the goods that come to the United States come through our ports. We have some of the top universities in the nation: Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC, CalTech, UCSD, UC Irvine, etc.

While it's true that Arizona, Nevada, and Utah have taken jobs in the past, these have been no-growth jobs; as a result, these same states have suffered worse in this recession and jobless recovery than California. If those other states are where all the jobs have gone, then why did Orange County's population grow by 18% and Los Angeles County's by 7.4% from 1990 to 2000?

We are not at the brink, but we can't rest on our laurels. We need to look into the future and invest in innovation, education, infrastructure, and housing. If we fail to make this investment now, we will not have the cutting-edge, value-producing industries, the highly-skilled, educated workforce, the reliable and efficient infrastructure, and the affordable cost of living that are needed for our future success. These investments will require tax revenue, but we can do so with the fixes to Prop 13 I mentioned in "Why the special election won't solve our problems.", and by raising income taxes by 1-2% on the top 2.4% of incomes, with most of the revenue coming from the top 1%. Reagan and Wilson did it, Schwarzenegger can do it, too. And I'm sorry, but those of you whose joint-filing taxable income (after all your deductions, etc.) exceeds $272,230 really ought to chip in that extra penny on the dollar to raise the billions that will ensure your children and grandchildren have the same opportunities to make lots of money.

Tomorrow I will be picking up this 1991 Toyota MR2:

It has 167,000 miles on it. Aside from the aftermarket stereo, the car is completely stock, and in fairly good condition. In fact, this car has much better paint than my old car. My car had some bad oxidation on the spoiler and front bumper. My front bumper was also screwed up.

It has a leather interior and leather seats, but the leather on the seats is in bad shape, and will probably need to be replaced at some future date. There are other minor issues with it, but all in all, I'm quite pleased.

Modifications to be made:

Air intake
Timing
16" wheels
Brake lines and pads
Motor mounts
Performance clutch
Suspension
Exhaust (high flow muffler and straighter pipe)

Let me know what you think.

Check out Verified Voting - Campaign To Demand Verifiable Election Results. This site has an online petition to call for voting machines that allow for verification. Black box systems like the Siebold touch screen machines apparently don't generate a paper trail. The head of the company is a Republican who has promised to deliver 2004 to Bush. We need to have a paper trail for manual hand counts if there is a dispute over election results. We need systems that will work even when the power goes out. In this scenario, an optical scan system would work just fine. A person could fill out his form and put it in a box for counting when the power comes back.

The governor's race, that is. In Louisiana. Now that the open primary is over, the two top candidates, Bobby Jindal and Kathleen Blanco, move on to the runoff election on November 15.

Race Heats Up

Iraq Shake-up Skipped Rumsfeld (washingtonpost.com)

I think he's pissed off: "I said I don't know. Isn't that clear? You don't understand English? I was not there for the backgrounding."

NOW: Transcript - Bill Moyers Interviews Peter Peterson | PBS

Good points.

PETER PETERSON: Well, I see both a fiscal economic crisis in the making. I also see a moral crisis. And maybe that doesn't come very convincingly from an investment banker. But let me explain that to you. The fiscal crisis is both domestic and foreign. We are now facing a situation during a decade when we should have been saving for the Boomer revolution that's coming and the retirement costs. Instead of saving during that decade we're squandering it. The Concord Coalition, Goldman Sachs, the Committee for Economic Development predict that over the next ten years we're going to be adding $5 trillion of deficits. So we have a domestic fiscal crisis. Much less understood, Bill, is the foreign deficit, what we call the Current Account Deficit, that's caused by the biggest trade deficit we've ever had. Plus--

You realize, Bill, at the present time, the Social Security Administration believes that my children and grandchildren will have to pay between 25 and 35 percent of payroll to fund these programs. So when we say you and I, fat cats that we are, are getting tax cuts, I prefer to think of it as a tax increase on my own kids and grandkids. And I find that a fundamentally unacceptable immoral proposition.

Clark's Manager Quits, Says Supporters Being Ignored (washingtonpost.com)

Donnie Fowler told associates he was leaving over widespread concerns that supporters who used the Internet to draft Clark into the race are not being taken seriously by top campaign advisers. Fowler also complained that the campaign's message and methods are focused too much on Washington, not key states and the burgeoning power of the Internet, said two associates who spoke on condition of anonymity.

That's not too surprising. The DLC, the people who supported and advised Gore, came out early on against Dean as unelectable. But I think they mostly feared becoming irrelevant.

The DLC has influenced the Democratic Party ever since Clinton's plurality win in '92, but have not had a good strategy for most other contests. Witness the losses in '94 and '02. They advised other candidates for the presidential nomination to support Bush on the Iraq war, and I don't think that was good advice. Dean's outspoken criticism of Bush set the tone of the race, and all the other major candidates followed suit when they saw how well it worked for him. The fact that his campaign has been based on grassroots activism and speaking to the Democratic base scares the hell out of the DLC, who have just as much to lose as the Bush administration if Dean were to win the nomination and presidency. I think their positions have been terrible because they've put themselves above the party, above what was right.

TIME.com: The Great Energy Scam -- Oct. 13, 2003

This should piss you off.

washingtonpost.com: Novak Leak Column Has Familiar Sound

Let's review: Syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak gets a leak of classified information from foreign-policy hardliners. The column he writes causes a huge embarrassment for the Republican White House and moderates throughout the administration. Capitol Hill erupts with protests about the leak.

Sound familiar? Actually, this occurred in December 1975. Novak, with his late partner Rowland Evans, got the classified leak -- that President Gerald R. Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were ready to make concessions to the Soviet Union to save the SALT II treaty. Donald H. Rumsfeld, then, as now, the secretary of defense, intervened to block Kissinger.

Graham Quits Presidential Bid

GOP Pollsters Insist Dean Can Beat Bush (subscription required)

A memo being circulated by a prominent Republican polling firm argues that GOPers run a serious risk of underestimating former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (D) as a general election candidate against President Bush.

Moore and Kaiser also offer an electoral vote scenario under which Dean could defeat Bush in 2004. They give Dean victories in 23 states (270 electoral votes) and point out that Bush lost all but two - Nevada and West Virginia - in the 2000 presidential election.

StudioGlyphic: "It sounds like Cheney's being set up to be the fall guy for the Administration for all this stuff that's going on."

Glasstrack: "A lot of it is on his head."

StudioGlyphic: "But with Cheney out of the way, some people might think that electing Bush is okay."

U.S. News: Dick Cheney is the most powerful vice president in history. Is that good?(10/13/03)

[Dick Cheney's Congressional voting] record is more conservative than most Americans might realize. As U.S. representative from Wyoming from 1979-89, he voted against a seven-day waiting period for handgun purchases, reauthorization of the 1972 Clean Water Act, and a bill to ban the production of binary chemical weapons. In 1986, he voted against imposing economic sanctions on the then racist regime in South Africa. He opposed requiring employers to give workers 60 days' notice of any plant shutdown or significant layoff, and he voted in 1987 to cut discretionary federal spending by 21 percent across the board.

And they let this guy be Vice President?

Bush and Cheney share a corporate approach to leadership. They delegate. They don't agonize over decisions. They value secrecy. And they aren't interested in impossible dreams or lost causes. Says Gribben, who attended high school with Cheney in Casper, Wyo., and served as his adviser both in government and the private sector: "He doesn't waste time on things that can't get done." Bush admires Cheney's no-nonsense ways.

Not interested in impossible dreams or lost causes? Really.

"Bush wasn't sure of himself on foreign affairs. Cheney was," says a Bush family insider. "If Cheney were not vice president, it would've been different. The Iraq war situation would've been handled differently. There was a rush to judgment to go to war, all filtered through Cheney. If Cheney had not been there, there may have been a second chance for the weapons inspectors, we would've been slower to move to war, and, maybe, we would have organized a bigger coalition."

Notwithstanding the need for a Bush loss in November, the Axis of Neo, Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz, need to be removed from office as soon as possible.

White House to Overhaul Iraq and Afghan Missions

WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 — The White House has ordered a major reorganization of American efforts to quell violence in Iraq and Afghanistan and to speed the reconstruction of both countries, according to senior administration officials.

The new effort includes the creation of an "Iraq Stabilization Group," which will be run by the national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice. The decision to create the new group, five months after Mr. Bush declared the end of active combat in Iraq, appears part of an effort to assert more direct White House control over how Washington coordinates its efforts to fight terrorism, develop political structures and encourage economic development in the two countries.

William Steig, 95, Cartoonist and Master of Damsels, Drunks and Satyrs, Dies

Wesley Clark interview at Talking Points Memo

Clark sounds like an intelligent man. Makes him electable to me, but to everyone else? And does he have time?

Taxpayers For Common Sense: Senate Committee Shrinks SUV Tax Break

Washington, D.C. - The Senate Finance Committee voted earlier this week to shrink a tax deduction for large Sport Utility Vehicles from $100,000 to $25,000, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a national budget watchdog organization.

$25,000 is still too much. One could buy a Land Cruiser for $54,765 and write off a little less than half of it on their taxes, resulting in a savings (at an effective tax rate of 30%) $7500. This loophole has to be closed completely.

Good article and overview of SB2, which Davis signed today.

Health insurance bill revives national debate

We need to provide health insurance to all Americans. We need to control the costs of health care. We need to reduce the burden that health insurance poses on business. I don't see a way out of this except to provide government-funded health insurance. By removing marketing/advertising costs and taking advantage of economies of scale, we could easily provide everyone with health care and save money doing it. A healthier population is more productive, and less likely to develop the kinds of catastrophic or chronic illnesses that ratchet up the cost of health care.

No matter where you stand on the recall and the candidates, no matter what the outcome is on Tuesday, this special election will not solve California's problems. Last November, political pundits wagged that there was no good reason any of the candidates would want to be governor. This is still true a year later. The budget is a patchwork waiting to fall apart all over again next year, and the fundamental problems underlying this patchwork are not being addressed by the candidates.

The Economist has a good overview of the election as well as an analysis of the problem:

Proposition 13's legacy

Alas, California is not, or not yet, Switzerland: too often the voters' direct democracy has meant politically impossible fiscal arithmetic for their elected representatives, including the hapless Mr Davis. Consider, in particular, Proposition 13, a citizens' initiative put on the 1978 ballot by Howard Jarvis, an anti-tax crusader in Los Angeles. It aimed to reduce property assessments to the levels of 1975-76; limit the tax rate to 1% of the purchase price; and restrict the increase in valuations to 2% a year until the next sale of the property. At a stroke, every homeowner, from working-class Latinos in Compton to film stars in Bel Air and Beverly Hills, would benefit handsomely. Moreover, to make sure the benefit would last, Mr Jarvis proposed that a two-thirds vote by state and local legislatures would be needed to approve any new taxes. Despite dire warnings from officialdom, both state and local, Proposition 13 passed with 65% of the vote.

Now consider the repercussions. Because local governments can no longer so easily tap property-owners, they are more dependent on the state government--which in bad times, such as the recession of the early 1990s or the downturn of today, has to cut back on its generosity. The results are increasingly obvious: ill-maintained highways and a deteriorating public-school system, in which only 30% of seventh-grade pupils meet the state's levels for mathematics and language proficiency. According to Stephen Levy of the Centre for Continuing Study of the California Economy, in Palo Alto, California now comes 30th among the states in spending on pre-college education, and among the bottom fifth on most measures of infrastructure investment.

Such citizens' initiatives make it difficult to plan properly for the overall economy. Proposition 98, passed in 1988, requires that a minimum of 40% of the general fund (which represents four-fifths of the total state budget) be spent on primary and secondary schooling; Proposition 42, passed last year, dedicates the sales tax on petrol to transport projects. Add such initiatives together, and around 70% of the general fund is off-limits to the politicians.
(emphases added)

We need to build more schools to keep up with demand. We need to hire and pay for the best teachers. Why is it that the people to whom we entrust our children's education get paid less than some executive's assistant? than a car salesman? As a society, we need to figure out what we value and pony up the cash to pay for it. And I don't buy the BS about waste. We spend less per capita on education now than we did in the "Golden State" years. The problem is revenue.

We have two tasks ahead of us:

Fix the revenue problem (Proposition 13)

Commercial property owners need to pay their fair share of taxes. As California's economy and population have grown, commercial property values have skyrocketed, yet taxes only increase at a modest 2%, and assessments are only made when ownership has changed. What that means is that a property owner can get 2003 sale prices, 2003 rent prices, but only pay for 1978 property taxes. Any person or entity that owns property for the purpose of making money should pay the appropriate taxes.

Proposition 13 also creates an anti-competitive marketplace. Long-term commercial property owners have an inherent advantage over new commercial property owners. New owners pay higher property taxes, and therefore must receive higher sale prices or charge more in rent in order to make money. The long-term owner can undercut him because his taxes are far lower.

Fix, but don't repeal: retirees, working families, middle class families--they need to be spared from property tax increases that outpace their ability to pay.

Fix the budget problem (many propositions)

It is ironic that the voters of 1, 15, and 25 years ago have contributed to the problems we face with our state budget today. We and our parents decided that uninformed voters had a better idea of how to spend the state's money than the elected representatives; and now the elected representatives are blamed for being unable to make a budget out of the 30% of the general fund they have been left. Yet they're still responsible to make sure a number of programs get adequate funding or they will incur the wrath of the voters come November. Some may even get voted out early if you have a (choose your own analogy: perfect storm, trifecta) of budget crisis, energy market manipulation, national recession/jobless recovery.

It's time to take responsibility for our actions. We put a stranglehold on the budget; the lack of flexibility allows the minority to create impasses and decreases the state's ability to manage its economy. If we want to blame our representatives for mismanagement, we need to let them manage first. We need to roll back all propositions that have called for mandatory spending allocations and targets. We can leave in place those propositions that tie spending to a source of new funding (e.g., library renovation bond fund).

Bomb Kills At Least 19 In Israel

Israel Strikes Syria After Suicide Bombing

(requires Shockwave)

Washington Post: Leak of Agent's Name Causes Exposure of CIA Front Firm

The inadvertent disclosure of the name of a business affiliated with the CIA underscores the potential damage to the agency and its operatives caused by the leak of Plame's identity. Intelligence officials have said that once Plame's job as an undercover operative was revealed, other agency secrets could be unraveled and her sources might be compromised or endangered.

Officials at the Pentagon and State Department also have been asked to retain records related to the case.

Tiger Attacks Las Vegas Illusionist

Salon.com News | Suspicion centers on Lewis Libby

Interesting case for identifying Libby as the leak.

More vicious than Tricky Dick

John Dean says the Bush team's leaks are even viler than his former boss's -- and that Plame and Wilson should file a civil suit.

John W. Dean served as counsel to President Nixon from 1970 to 1973.

The Post reports:

We never claimed that Saddam Hussein should be trusted. Given his record and the lack of imminent threat, we advocated that the US support a UN-sanctioned weapons inspection regime backed by the threat of force. At the time, partisan Republicans called it "appeasement," but in reality it was "containment." Was the threat of force credible? Yes. Until the re-entry of the inspectors, the US and Britain had been engaged in a decade-long aerial bombing campaign.

Furthermore, we predicted that attacking Iraq would fray ties with our allies and further antagonize the Muslim world, increasing the threat of terror acts against Americans.

We've seen the initial consequences of American actions. It is crucial that the US now use all available tools to restore order to Iraq and get the hell out before we witness any more. It is time for the administration to stop talking about the responsibility of the UN's member states and start accepting culpability for American mistakes. Only by clearing the air between the US and its allies and conceding to reasonable demands can we expect to acheive any measure of success in Iraq.

That is the work the US will have to do, but we Americans must now ask, "How did we get in this mess? Why did the administration push for war? Was it personal? Was it political? Was it ideological? Was it strategic?"

ABCNEWS.com : The Note:

The Note hears quite a bit these days from Americans who used to work in the White House for the last Arkansan to run for president with Bruce Lindsey's help.

"How long before this appears on 'West Wing' or 'K Street'?"

The LA Times broke a story this morning about Schwarzenegger's history of sexual harassment. Within hours, Schwarzenegger apologized, saying:

White House Looks to Manage Fallout Over C.I.A. Leak Inquiry

Still, one Republican with close ties to the administration said the White House was monitoring five Republicans in Congress, all of whom have an independent streak on foreign policy and intelligence matters: Senators John McCain of Arizona, Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and John W. Warner of Virginia, and Representative Porter J. Goss of Florida.

They could break ranks and tip the scale in favor of an independent investigation.

Democrats in Denial (washingtonpost.com)

The Washington Post criticizes the Democrats for refusing to touch Social Security and Medicare with the reform stick. That's probably fair. The population is aging, and people are living longer. That's a reality that needs to be dealt with.

But they also dismiss the notion of raising the amount of income that is taxed, calling it "a minor bit of tinkering that wouldn't come close to fixing the problems with the system." I disagree.

Currently only the first $85,000 or so is taxed at 7.65%. A sizeable segment of the population makes more than $85,000; some of them well over $85,000. Removing the income cap on these payroll taxes would bring in the revenue needed to shore up Social Security and Medicare. My napkin-as-notepad calculations show that doing this would bring in so much revenue, that a tax holiday (as proposed by John Kerry in a policy speech several months ago) could be placed on the first $15,000 of income. The combination of raising the income cap and creating a tax holiday would do many things:

1) Give individuals who make $85,000 a year or less an extra $48 with every paycheck.

2) Spur demand for goods and services as the majority of working Americans pump an extra $96 a month into their local economy.

3) Create jobs to meet this increase in demand.

4) Make it easier for businesses to hire employees who make under $85,000 a year, since their overhead will be lower than usual.

5) Make payroll taxes more fair, even if they're still regressive.

Going back to the editorial, I also dislike the fact that the Post has decided to outline the fundamental financial problems of the Social Security and Medicare systems as they relate to the Baby Boomer retirement, but fail to address the fact that the cost of health care and prescription drugs has skyrocketed out of control. Many of the Democrats have addressed this issue, and for the Post to ignore the fact that the cost of health care and the doom forecast for Social Security and Medicare are correlated is lazy and simplistic.

When conservative columnist George Will calls on the Bush Administration to admit they were wrong about pre-war intelligence ("Can't They Just Admit It?"), and the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee characterizes this intelligence as "circumstantial" and "fragmentary" ("House Probers Conclude Iraq War Data Was Weak"), one has to hope things are changing within the Republican Party.

CNN.com - Judge: Student may wear Bush 'terrorist' T-shirt - Oct. 1, 2003

DETROIT, Michigan (AP) -- A high school student has the right to wear a T-shirt to school with the face of