Wall Street Vs. Detroit

Robert Reich discusses why Citibank got bailed out while the automakers were told to take a hike (TotH: Mr. Furious). It's more stuff to make your stomach churn. Of all the people Obama's bringing back from the past to handle the top jobs, why didn't he pick Reich? He always gave Larry Kudlow a good fight when debating economic policy pre-bubble bursting.

\_/
DED

Change I Can't Believe In

Before I turn sour, let me start by shouting, "Hooray!", as the Alaskan King Crab is finally cooked. Alaskans voted by a slim margin to oust the Pork Magnate and convicted felon from public office.

Now on to the lemons.

I'm a bit surprised by a couple of Obama's candidates for top positions in his Cabinet. Now it makes sense to have a Washington veteran like Rahm Emmanuel in the position of Chief of Staff. Yes, he's got a reputation of being rough, but he's also a no nonsense guy, which he needs to be in that role. However, Obama shouldn't be looking at candidates that are going to be inviting controversy with just their nomination.

For instance, his choice of Eric Holder to be the nation's first black attorney general would seem to be a good idea, except for Holder's role in the pardoning of Marc Rich on the last day of the Clinton administration. Who was Rich's attorney? Scooter Libby.

And speaking of Clinton's, why the hell would Obama even be considering Hillary for the role of Secretary of State (SoS)? Yeah, I get the whole "Team of Rivals" bit, but this goes too far.

First off, as we learned back in '92, Bill and Hillary are inseparable. You can't have one without the other. Obviously, there are some residual legacy issues to deal with (pardons and campaign finance). These days, Bill is busy with the Clinton Global Initiative, which, as its name implies is international in scope. He's still an imposing figure in the world. Since I highly doubt that Bill would just set his work aside, it presents an opportunity for a conflict of interest to arise should Hillary become SoS.

But irregardless of Bill, there's issues with Hillary herself. This is the person who questioned whether Obama had the experience necessary to handle the "3 AM phone call" yet proudly proclaimed that her role as first lady made her qualified. She exaggerated her experience claiming that she landed in Bosnia "under sniper fire" and played a key role in the Irish peace process. Neither of which was true. While she was the most traveled of all First Ladies, tourists don't make policy.

She voted for the Iraq War, Obama was against it from the start. It wasn't until things turned sour that her position began to change. And her resume looks thin for foreign policy experience.

The role of the SoS is to represent the President and his policies abroad. I have had a hard time believing that Hillary Clinton would be willing to toe the line and "follow orders" as it were. She's a strong willed person; which is fine in and of itself, but the President is the boss and sets policy, not the SoS. Obama already has an experienced foreign policy guy who voted for the Iraq War to consult with, his VP, Joe Biden. At least Biden has a vested interest in the war being successfully concluded as his son, Beau, is currently deployed there. With Biden, I sense that he knows who the boss is and doesn't plan on following Cheney's interpretation of the job. I don't get that from Hillary. She's someone who doesn't give up when she feels she's right. Witness her campaign. Despite needing massive numbers of superdelegates to defect and thus overturn the majority of Democratic voters who chose Obama in the primaries, she continued campaigning to the very end (June).

Wouldn't it be better to have less controversial, yet qualified, candidates take the role. Bill Richardson and Chuck Hagel would make for much smarter choices. And, in the case of Hagel, would be a conciliatory nod towards Republicans and might prove useful.

Hillary's place, for right now, is in the Senate. With the departure of other senior members after this election, she automatically moves up the ladder. Maybe she'll even get to chair a committee. If she plays her cards right, maybe she can challenge Harry Reid for Senate Majority Leader. I'd support her in those efforts. At least there she'll get to lead something.

11/24 UPDATE: Mike says that all of this pales in comparison to Geithner's nomination for Secretary of the Treasury. I find it difficult to argue against his point.

\_/
DED

How It All Turned Out

Everyone I voted for won. That's a first.

Amazingly enough, a black man is now President of the USA. While racism is alive and well, its stature has diminished enough that it is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to the highest office in the land. As of 2:45 PM today, 7 million more Americans chose Obama over McCain. If Jesse Jackson's tears of joy last night are any indication, then MLK and Malcolm X would be proud.

Obama's charisma and ability to inspire people reminds me of JFK. Kennedy challenged America to put a man on the Moon and serve their country through the Peace Corps. But while he rose to the challenge put forth by Khrushchev in the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Bay of Pigs, the escalation of our involvement in Vietnam, and the rise of Iraq's Baathist Party all happened on his watch. Hopefully, Obama will leave a better legacy.

Obama would've had a tough enough time as President dealing with the defeated, yet still living, Republican party, but he faces extreme challenges on just about every political front possible. How he faces those challenges will be scrutinized like no president before him.

I wish him the best of luck.

\_/
DED

How I Voted

Nice turn out at the polls. I've never had to wait on a line of any significance before. And during town budget votes I breeze right through. This was a pleasant change.

State Representative:
The choice was between incumbent, Jason Bartlett (D), and Melanie O'Brien (R). Bartlett has been ok, though my concerns about there being too many (veto proof) Democrats in Hartford still holds. O'Brien is a political unknown though she's been town attorney in the past. I was going to give O'Brien my vote until my town's First Selectman went too far.

You see, Bethel's First Selectman, Bob Burke (R), hates Bartlett. The two of them feud constantly. Burke won't even let the guy formally speak at town meetings. He's actually gone through official procedure to prevent him from speaking. While Bartlett is guilty of not informing everyone of his initiatives and being a bit of a showboat and doesn't pass up a photo op, it's hardy worth Burke's wrath. The First Selectman and the town's Republicans willfully broke state campaign law by mailing out material blasting Bartlett for not delivering the money needed for local projects. While a couple of the charges might be true, at least one of them was outside of Bartlett's district (the town is split in its representation) and another one was an outright lie.

So I voted for Bartlett out of spite to Burke for being such a dick. Burke is up for re-election next year. I've voted for him in the past, not anymore.

State Senator:
The choice was between John Hartwell (D) and Boucher (R). Incumbent Judith Freeman (R) is retiring. Boucher has been a state rep for the wealthy W towns (Wilton, Westport, Weston) while Hartwell is new on the scene. His big resume star is working as a VP for Chase Manhattan Bank.

Her attendance record for votes sucks. She missed half of them. She helped to preserve the Danbury train line but Hartwell says she hasn't done enough. The Danbury - Norwalk corridor is finally widening but she worked to prevent the extension of the Super 7 highway past Norwalk, thus keeping traffic running through the retail district of Wilton.

As for solving the state's budget shortfall, Hartwell wants to tap into the Rainy Day fund and increase taxes while Boucher wants to cut spending. In the end, this is what swayed me. This article and the fact that Bethel receives just 42 cents on the dollar from Hartford (Redding gets 3 cents). Connecticut has gone tax crazy. We have a state income tax, sales tax, and property taxes on our homes and cars. I'm going to have to do some research to see where all that money goes. We're a small state, both in terms of size (48th) and population (29th - only 5 representatives). So, I'd like to see spending reigned in a bit especially since we're in a downturn. I held my nose and voted for Boucher, though she'd better work on that attendance record.

Congressman
The choice was between incumbent, Chris Murphy (D), and David Cappiello (R). Murphy is serving his 1st term after knocking off Nancy Johnson (R), a 24-year veteran of the House, despite her very negative campaigning. Cappiello is a state senator representing Danbury and Bethel.

Cappiello is a good guy. He's a fiscal conservative and a man of ethics. When corruption charges were levied against then governor Rowland (R), he was the first to call on him to resign.

Murphy is also a good guy. The guy is constantly roaming around the district listening to what the people want (though maybe not enough). Although he's opposed Republicans on Iraq, he's wrote and got John Duncan, a senior Republican from Tennessee, to sponsor the Government Contractor Accountability Act, a measure drafted to get some transparency into government contractors, Blackwater in particular.

Cappiello has accused Murphy of taking money from special interest groups, but he's done the same. Murphy was initially opposed to offshore drilling but decided to compromise, Cappiello called it flip-flopping. While Cappiello says that he doesn't always agree with the Bush agenda, he certainly didn't mind W attending a fundraiser for him at Kissinger's estate in Kent.

In the interest of time, I'm leaving out a lot. If Cappiello hadn't been so negative he might've had my vote. Murphy voted for the Bank Bailout, something I abhor. He made the excuse that "something needed to be done." Yes, something needed to be done. A long, well thought out debate on the source of the problem and alternative solutions to Paulson's plan was what was needed. Cappiello had an opportunity here to come up with an alternative, to show he was a problem solver, but didn't.

I voted for Murphy. He's done a good job, though not a great one. I can live if Cappiello wins, though I couldn't vote for him because of his negative campaigning, something I never like to reward.

President:
This decision was easy to make as Bob Barr wasn't even on the ballot. I could've written him in if I really wanted to (CT provides that option), but I wasn't gung ho for him. The Libertarian Party is the oldest "3rd Party" out there. They know the game. How they couldn't get their act together and get Barr's name on the ballot is beyond me, and a sign of incompetence.

So I voted for Obama. He has disappointed me with his votes on the re-authorizing of the Patriot Act (though with amendments) and granting immunity to telecoms over federal warrantless wiretaps. Voting for the Bank Bailout goes without saying. And I do have reservations on his lack of experience. However, there's enough "good" in the man that I voted for him without regret.

When I saw Obama give his speech during the 2004 Democratic National Convention, I was moved. I admit it. He possessed an eloquence that, IMO, no one else there had. I thought for sure that he would run for president one day, maybe as early as 2012. He just needed some "seasoning." Little did I know it would happen as soon as it did.

This is the first time I've voted for a major party presidential candidate. Past votes went to: Paul (LP), Perot, Perot, Nader, and Badnarik (LP).

Ultimately, I really want McCain and SheBush to take a pounding for the divisive campaign they ran, the ugly monstrosities that crawled out from the darkest depths of this country to root them on, the lies, and their twisted vision of America and its role in this world. I'm hoping for a landslide that buries not only them but the Republican party, for it must not be allowed to continue in its current incarnation. Only through a total rejection of the authoritarian abuses of the Constitution it has conducted over the last 8 years can we ever hope to see a return to civility in Washington. While I like progressives, I don't always agree with them. I like alternatives. With the failure of the Libertarian Party to amount to anything and the Republican Party reduced to a gibbering mass of hate and corporate welfare, there really isn't any other choice.

\_/
DED

Bob Barr's Baggage

I intended to write this post a month or so ago, but my free time has been limited and other topics were more compelling. I realize that it's a bit late in the election campaign, but better late than never.

When I heard that Bob Barr was nominated to be the Libertarian Party's candidate for president, I was shocked. Here was a man who was so opposed to personal freedom that the mere suggestion he'd gone "libertarian" seemed like a joke. Oh sure, he espoused economic freedom, but that's not a stretch for Republicans. It was his social conservatism that I found to be anathema to libertarian principles of personal freedom.

Social conservatives believe in using legislation to impose their value system upon everyone else. While we can all agree that acts of violence upon others should be against the law, the further we go from the basics, the further we get from a free and civilized society and closer we get to totalitarianism. Without going through this subject's lengthy history, let's take marijuana as an example. How is some terminally ill guy, in his home all by himself, smoking pot to take the edge off the pain, a threat to anyone? The libertarian belief in personal freedom doesn't see a problem. But social conservatives see marijuana as a gateway to more serious, and actually dangerous, drugs.

Being a social conservative, Bob Barr saw marijuana as a problem too. During his Congressional career, he was at the forefront on the War on Drugs. Even as recent as 2002, he despised the Medical Marijuana movement.

"There is no legitimate use whatsoever for marijuana. This is not medicine. This is bogus witchcraft. It has no place in medicine, no place in pain relief."

He's probably best known for initiating the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, though it was in regards to fundraising from China and several months before the Lewinsky affair broke. Though when that did surface, he was the first to call for Clinton's resignation.

And as we all know, while Republicans obsessed over a blow job, Osama bin Laden was busy planting bombs and planning 9/11.

Barr voted for the authoritarian Patriot Act and the Iraq War. He was anti-choice and sponsored the Defense of Marriage Act. But somewhere along the way, things changed. As part of his conversion to the Libertarian Party, he's changed his positions. On Iraq, he's says we need to get out of there now. He even went on Glenn Beck's CNN show and said so. He regrets voting for the Patriot Act. In his nomination speech, he apologized for the Defense of Marriage Act. And he's not a global warming denier anymore either.

He's even reversed course on the War on Drugs.

"Regarding the drug war, I've been there, done that, and know firsthand our current strategy is not working," said Mr. Barr. "Continuing to have the federal government run roughshod over the states, even if the citizens of a state decide they wish to legalize medicinal marijuana, for example, is wrong," he said. "As president, I would completely reorient federal law enforcement priorities, that currently are skewed far too much against marijuana possession, and would consider all - and I do mean all - options."

But Barr's new found libertarianism hasn't done much for his ability to get along with others. When Libertarian Party refugee and Republican Party rebel, Ron Paul, had a big press conference urging voters to vote for any third party candidate, rather than endorsing any one, Bob Barr backed out of the press conference. Further pressing of Paul on the issue resulted in the latter's endorsement of Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate, which could be the new home of Sarah Palin if it tweaked its platform to offer sanctuary to neocons.

Ultimately, libertarian voters have to decide by tomorrow if Bob Barr is sincere about his change. That's assuming they even find him on the ballot in their state. I'm still torn on that issue. If the presidential race were close in Connecticut, I wouldn't hesitate to vote for the Obama-Biden ticket as a McCain-Palin administration scares the crap out of me. As Connecticut has been staunchly blue since '92, I still have the opportunity to continue voting 3rd party (as I have in every presidential election). I'll let you know.

\_/
DED