Right from the horse’s ass


Thereisnospoonupmyass:

Krugman is almost always right. I was annoyed with him during the primary because he I thought he was inadvertently helping Clinton, who I *knew* was a neoliberal shill. But he was right about Obama. I hoped otherwise, but I was wrong.


And still Mr. Atkins insists on inflicting his opinions on others. I don’t know about you, but if I was that wrong about a matter of such importance, I would be ashamed to shoot my mouth off in public again.


There oughta be a law!


Via Ace of Spades, Megan McCurdle gives us the Fallacy of Chesterson’s Fence:

In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.”

This paradox rests on the most elementary common sense. The gate or fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street. Some person had some reason for thinking it would be a good thing for somebody. And until we know what the reason was, we really cannot judge whether the reason was reasonable. It is extremely probable that we have overlooked some whole aspect of the question, if something set up by human beings like ourselves seems to be entirely meaningless and mysterious. There are reformers who get over this difficulty by assuming that all their fathers were fools; but if that be so, we can only say that folly appears to be a hereditary disease. But the truth is that nobody has any business to destroy a social institution until he has really seen it as an historical institution. If he knows how it arose, and what purposes it was supposed to serve, he may really be able to say that they were bad purposes, that they have since become bad purposes, or that they are purposes which are no longer served. But if he simply stares at the thing as a senseless monstrosity that has somehow sprung up in his path, it is he and not the traditionalist who is suffering from an illusion.

Ms. McCurdle was thinking about tax loopholes, but the same principle applies to all laws and government regulations.

I realize that being pro-regulation is unpopular in some circles (and heresy in others) but there was a reason those regulations were created in the first place. Once upon a time something bad happened and afterward people made a rule to prevent it from happening again.

That is not to say that all laws and regulations are still necessary or efficient. Even if needed they may be overly complex or misapplied. Well intentioned rules may be overly burdensome as well. As the graphic at the top of this post illustrates, a rule about closing the gate makes no sense if the fence is gone.

But if there is one thing that recent history has taught us it is that we can’t trust banks and industries to go unregulated or to regulate themselves.


Get your memes straight


Alex “Kid” Pareen (formerly of Gawker):

Tea Party people less popular than many other hated minority groups

There is a shadowy group of malcontents in America today, plotting a grand takeover of our political institutions in order to completely remake the country according to their wishes. Despite the fact the members of this group are a small minority of the population, and an unpopular one at that, they seek to infiltrate the courts and the government at every level, in order to replace our long-standing system of law with their own extremist, undemocratic religious code. These true believers are especially dangerous because they think they’re doing God’s work, and you ignore them, or play down the threat they pose to America, at your own risk. This tiny band of fanatics is largely distrusted and despised by regular Americans, but a terrified media coddles them and pretends they’re harmless. I am speaking, of course, of the Tea Parties, a group now officially less popular among Americans than Muslims.


A couple weeks ago the official line was that the Tea Party was responsible for the S&P credit downgrade. They were so powerful they held our whole way of life hostage.

Now they are the most unpopularest group in the whole school? If the Tea Party is so unpopular why are they so powerful? Since when is the Tea Party a religious group? What does smaller government and less taxes have to do with religion?

Why is Alex pissing in his Underoos?

In the immortal words of Vinny Barbarino, “I’m so confused!


The foxes are guarding the henhouse as usual


Sexist pig Matt Taibbi at Rolling Stone:

Is the SEC Covering Up Wall Street Crimes?
A whistleblower claims that over the past two decades, the agency has destroyed records of thousands of investigations, whitewashing the files of some of the nation’s worst financial criminals.

Imagine a world in which a man who is repeatedly investigated for a string of serious crimes, but never prosecuted, has his slate wiped clean every time the cops fail to make a case. No more Lifetime channel specials where the murderer is unveiled after police stumble upon past intrigues in some old file – “Hey, chief, didja know this guy had two wives die falling down the stairs?” No more burglary sprees cracked when some sharp cop sees the same name pop up in one too many witness statements. This is a different world, one far friendlier to lawbreakers, where even the suspicion of wrongdoing gets wiped from the record.

That, it now appears, is exactly how the Securities and Exchange Commission has been treating the Wall Street criminals who cratered the global economy a few years back. For the past two decades, according to a whistle-blower at the SEC who recently came forward to Congress, the agency has been systematically destroying records of its preliminary investigations once they are closed. By whitewashing the files of some of the nation’s worst financial criminals, the SEC has kept an entire generation of federal investigators in the dark about past inquiries into insider trading, fraud and market manipulation against companies like Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and AIG. With a few strokes of the keyboard, the evidence gathered during thousands of investigations – “18,000 … including Madoff,” as one high-ranking SEC official put it during a panicked meeting about the destruction – has apparently disappeared forever into the wormhole of history.

Under a deal the SEC worked out with the National Archives and Records Administration, all of the agency’s records – “including case files relating to preliminary investigations” – are supposed to be maintained for at least 25 years. But the SEC, using history-altering practices that for once actually deserve the overused and usually hysterical term “Orwellian,” devised an elaborate and possibly illegal system under which staffers were directed to dispose of the documents from any preliminary inquiry that did not receive approval from senior staff to become a full-blown, formal investigation. Amazingly, the wholesale destruction of the cases – known as MUIs, or “Matters Under Inquiry” – was not something done on the sly, in secret. The enforcement division of the SEC even spelled out the procedure in writing, on the commission’s internal website. “After you have closed a MUI that has not become an investigation,” the site advised staffers, “you should dispose of any documents obtained in connection with the MUI.”

Many of the destroyed files involved companies and individuals who would later play prominent roles in the economic meltdown of 2008. Two MUIs involving con artist Bernie Madoff vanished. So did a 2002 inquiry into financial fraud at Lehman Brothers, as well as a 2005 case of insider trading at the same soon-to-be-bankrupt bank. A 2009 preliminary investigation of insider trading by Goldman Sachs was deleted, along with records for at least three cases involving the infamous hedge fund SAC Capital.

The widespread destruction of records was brought to the attention of Congress in July, when an SEC attorney named Darcy Flynn decided to blow the whistle. According to Flynn, who was responsible for helping to manage the commission’s records, the SEC has been destroying records of preliminary investigations since at least 1993. After he alerted NARA to the problem, Flynn reports, senior staff at the SEC scrambled to hide the commission’s improprieties.

As a federally protected whistle-blower, Flynn is not permitted to speak to the press. But in evidence he presented to the SEC’s inspector general and three congressional committees earlier this summer, the 13-year veteran of the agency paints a startling picture of a federal police force that has effectively been conquered by the financial criminals it is charged with investigating. In at least one case, according to Flynn, investigators at the SEC found their desire to bring a case against an influential bank thwarted by senior officials in the enforcement division – whose director turned around and accepted a lucrative job from the very same bank they had been prevented from investigating. In another case, the agency farmed out its inquiry to a private law firm – one hired by the company under investigation. The outside firm, unsurprisingly, concluded that no further investigation of its client was necessary. To complete the bureaucratic laundering process, Flynn says, the SEC dropped the case and destroyed the files.


Okay, I can understand the need to keep the files in closed investigations confidential lest innocent (cough, cough) bankers,stockbrokers and their Wall Street henchmen get their reputations ruined. But such files should NEVER be destroyed.

Not only do they have investigative value, but they belong in our historical archives (after a suitable wait to make sure the guil . . . er, innocent parties are long dead and their reputations can’t be harmed.)

Heads should roll over this scandal but they probably won’t. That’s because BOTH parties in Washington are in the bag for Wall Street.

Things won’t change until people get mad as hell and decide they aren’t gonna take it anymore. Until then voting for the Wall Street candidate is stupid.



The Tiers of a Clown

Not myiq2xu

Obviously, the Iowa Straw poll will not be indicative of the Republican nominee. Neither will the Iowa Caucuses or the New Hampshire primary. All those magic entrails have been revealed as unworthy in the last few cycles. What they do is help define the top tier of candidates.

Right now, the tier is Michele Bachmann the winner, Rick Perry the non-participant and Mitt Romney, who chose not to put his name in but came for the fun. Tim Pawlenty quit because for all his efforts, a third place showing with single digits was a bad sign. Ron Paul was second, but his support is as deep as the ocean and wide as a thimble.

Still, this was Bachmann’s opportunity to make it into the top tier. She can rally the base, and the base shows up for primaries. There will be two candidates next year, Romney and not Romney. Bachmann is as much not Romney as anyone else. She has fiscal knowledge and experience in security as a member of the House Intelligence Committee. She’s also been in Congress longer than Obama was.

The Iowa Straw poll may be premature, but it’s nothing compared to the idea that the Republicans are clowns who could not possibly beat Obama. The Republicans have a better record of electable candidates than the Democrats. Over the last 50 years, only 4 Republican nominees never became president. The Democrats had 6. John McCain won 46% of the popular vote compared to Obama’s 53%. If just 1 out of 20 Obama voters loses hope and the Republicans who voted for Bush in 2004 and not McCain in 2008 go for the Republican nominee in 2012, the president will shed a tier.

It worked so well on racism

TOTUS


Seriously:

Obama to give major jobs speech

Seeking a jolt for the economy, President Barack Obama will lay out new ideas for speeding up job growth and helping the struggling poor and middle class in a major speech in early September, a senior administration official told The Associated Press.

The president’s plan is likely to contain tax cuts, jobs-boosting infrastructure ideas and steps that would specifically help the long-term unemployed. The official emphasized that all of Obama’s proposals would be fresh ones, not a rehash of plans he has pitched for many weeks and still supports, including his “infrastructure bank” idea to finance construction jobs.

On a related front, Obama will also present a specific plan to cut the suffocating long-term national debt and to pay for the cost of his new short-term economic ideas.

His debt proposal will be bigger than the $1.5 trillion package that a new “supercommittee” of Congress must come up with by late November.

The president will then spend his fall publicly pressing Congress to take action as the economic debate roars into its next phase. Both the economic ideas and the plan to pay for them will be part of Obama’s speech, although the address will focus mainly on the jobs components.

Since Obama is almost sure to face political opposition from Republicans, particularly in the House, he is already preparing to lobby the American public for support if Congress tosses his ideas aside. That would set up an issue for his re-election campaign next year.

The president’s speech is expected right after the Sept. 5 Labor Day holiday.

Obama must actually believe his own hype. “I know, I’ll give a speech! That will cure unemployment!”

Too bad he didn’t think of this 2 1/2 years ago. Oh wait, he did.


That will be just about when Sarah enters the race

Rick "Deep Throat" Perry


Brent Spudowsky:

Rick Perry will self-destruct within 30 days

Rick Perry talks treason about the Federal Reserve Board. Treason is a capital offense. Is Perry suggesting the death penalty for Federal Reserve Board members?

Rick Perry says Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke will have a tough time if he goes to Texas. Is Perry threatening that violence might happen to Bernanke if he visits Texas?

This is sick stuff. I can think of several nations Rick Perry is fit to lead, but the United States of America is not one of them. With his latest comments, perhaps Rick Perry wants to be the running mate of Vladimir Putin in the coming Russian election.

Perry will self-destruct within 30 days. It has already begun.


Iffen he weren’t gonna stay, why’d he take off his coat? Seriously, I’d wait to see what happens before I start writing Rick’s obit.

Meanwhile, here’s Stanley Spudowski (the smart Spud brother):



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 273 other followers