Michael Krummel's Blog

Flat out disgust!!!

Mikey — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:06:33 EDT

I really don't feel like I should be giving my vote to anyone at this point. Once again the invisible hand of capitalism has slapped the middle and lower class in the face. Congress has handed $700 billion dollars of our money to an administration that no one trusts, and left town without a single change in regulation. They promised oversight, but they won't be back to Washington until January. This means that Bush has a blank check for the next three months.

Anyone dumb enough to believe this bill will prevent huge job losses and further hardships, is intentionally avoiding education on the subject. The market still dropped today, and there is a good reason. The market is not an institution as it is presented. Instead it is individual investors who will cover their ass at any cost. These are the people congress has left to deal with this mess. These are the people who will determine the fate of our economy for the next three months. These are also the same greedy people who brought this mess about.

I am disgusted by the behavior of both political parties today. It is bad enough that they screwed us, then ran out of town. But before they did, they had to hold press conferences patting themselves on the back. I don't know anymore what I will do in November, but I really don't have any trust left.

What does it matter?

Mikey — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 02:21:20 EDT

When I watch one of these debates, I try to give myself a metaphorical lobotomy. I don't fact check anything, and I suspend any previous knowledge. Perhaps this underestimates the American voter, but I feel this must be the frame of mind an undecided voter is stuck in. So I let it rattle about upstairs, and then flipped between the talking heads telling me what to think. In this Zen like state I came to one conclusion. Who cares? This debate was a push before it ever happened. The sky is still falling in my simple world, and neither of these people have a damn thing to say about it.

Crap Sandwich, and Extra Crap Please!

Mikey — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:25:58 EDT

Before anyone jumps on me, understand that this has nothing to do with presidential politics. This bill is terrible. It started out bad, and they stacked worse on top. Instead of a $700 billion dollar liability, we now have a $850 billion dollar liability. This will not fix anything. It may get us through the next couple months, but the underlying problems in our economy will show up in another form.

I'm not saying that we don't need action, but wasting $850 billion dollars isn't it. We need to stabilize the mortgages in question, but that is not even half of the problem. As long as real estate values continue to drop, Americans are getting robbed by this bill. We will be buying loans at higher prices than they are valued, and we will watch their value continue to drop. Whatever banks remain will still tighten their belts, and will survive at the expense of taxpayers. Because this is the last bill passed this year, no new regulation will be considered till January. By that point the market will have three months to protect itself, while the average American watches their situation get worse.

Congress must stay in session until they can put together a bill which adds liquidity, and reforms regulation to keep us from repeating Wall Street disasters. Passing a bill this week is not as important as passing the right bill sometime this month. I hope that the bill coming out of the Senate is ignored by the House, and they instead begin working on a real solution for the very real problems we face.

Making a Bad Bill Worse!

Mikey — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:01:06 EDT

There are two realities facing our nation that don't add up. The first is that this bail out is a terrible burden on the US taxpayer. The second is that is must be done in a more reasonable form. The Senate is taking up this bill, but they are taking an immature point of view for getting it passed. I will lay out their plan, but in the spirit of fair debate, I'll offer an alternative.

Finite Economics.

Mikey — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 11:47:47 EDT

We are stepping deeper into the philosophy of corporate socialism, and no one seems to perceive any real cost. The same people who opposed watching over the market are now in favor of giving away tax payers' money to failing players in the market. This is said to avoid continuing instability, but it will do no such thing. The instability derives from a reality that we can not responsibly ignore. At the end of the day there is a finite amount of money in any economy, and we are pretending there is more to spend.

The New South singing an Old Tune.

Mikey — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 00:27:15 EDT

Perhaps this has been covered to death, but I missed it today. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia referred to Barack and Michelle Obama as "uppity". When asked to apologize he stood by his statement. He claims that he was using a strict definition of the term, and was unaware of the racial context. Now I'm a yankee from PA, and I was well aware of the racial context. This is a guy born in the south in 1950. He grew up in the hotbed of the civil rights movement. Again I'm a yankee born in 1976, and I know what that word means.

link

Pick Your Heads Up!

Mikey — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 20:16:07 EDT

When reading through this and other blogs I sense a timidness setting in. Why are we afraid of republicans? Do you really believe they have done a better job of running the country? Do you really believe Americans are happy with the way things are going?

Of course the republican convention was going to draw attention. I watched it, and most of you probably did too. We are not running against thin air, and it is going to be tough. No great change comes easily, and despair solves nothing. Ask yourself why you are a Democrat. We aren't trying to win on cult of personality, we are trying to make life better for our nation.

What did the republicans say they would do about health care? They said they wouldn't seek to get the government involved. We are the ones who can no longer watch 50 million Americans be denied the same rights the wealthy have. We are the ones who want to make sure that every man, woman, and child will no longer live in fear of the next sickness.

What did the republicans say about economics? They said that they would continue the same philosophy that has dominated the last three decades. We are the ones who want to repair the tax code to favor the middle class. We are the ones who want to revise our trade agreements to keep American workers on a fair playing field.

What did the republicans say about education? They said they want to give up on our public schools. They want to give out school vouchers, and allow failing schools to go under. We are the ones who want to rebuild these schools from the top down. We are the ones who refuse to allow any child to be undercut just because they were born in a bad school district.

What did the republicans say about the Iraq war? They said that we should stay there until we achieve victory. What they didn't say was what that victory looks like. We are the ones who want to bring our troops home and turn over responsibility to the Iraqi government.

What did the republicans say about the environment? They say they want to drill for more oil, and then let the market figure the rest out. We are the ones who want to bring massive change in how we use energy. We are the ones who refuse to let our kids pay dearly for our indulgence now.

Damn it, we are Democrats. We are the ones who give a damn about the future of our country. We are the ones who see the problems clearly and our ready to fix them. Pick your head up, and dig your heals in. Get to work telling others why our ideas are what is in their best interest.

Peek behind the curtain.

Mikey — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:38:23 EDT

In a couple hours Sarah Palin will be addressing the republican convention. Through the magic of trite political ploys, let me tell you what will be highlighted in this speech.

She will attack the liberal media. She will lay the way for the sexism argument in the furtue. This is a play to rally women. I figured this would happen when the McCain campaign did a press release about her daughter. It is a story that is most would agree is irrelevant to this election. But the press is weak when there is blood in the water.

I'm offended at the quality of troll we are getting lately.

Mikey — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:18:06 EDT

Karl Rove would be ashamed of these people. They sign up, and the first post they publish blows their cover. If your going to participate in insurgent behavior, for god's sake be good at it. Don't just copy and paste your source material. Touch it up, make it yours, sell it. Get in character damn it, its all about method acting. So grab a latte and a copy of the New York Times, and eat a salad of baby spinach leaves before you blog.

Do a couple blogs about underage lesbians getting married while having abortions. Make us believe you are one of us. Earn our trust, and then move to subvert our cause. Photoshop a picture of Obama clubbing baby seals. Take this seriously or don't bother coming here at all.

The Republicans are coming to save us from the Republicans.

Mikey — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:41:05 EDT

I don't even think they are trying to get us to vote for them. I think they are trying to get our brains to explode. The message tonight was that John McCain is coming to Washington as a reformer. This even though he has been in Washington since 1982. This even though the republicans controlled both chambers of congress and the white house until January of 2007.

What policies are they bringing to save us from them? John McCain is a war hero. Sarah Palin eats moose.

What will they do about health care? The mainstream liberal media should stop attacking Sarah Palin.

What will they do improve the economy? Barack Obama is the most liberal senator according to a conservative publication.

Seriously, we are getting into the later Clinton strategy, where we never knew what the hell was going to be talked about day to day. Can anyone tell me what the republican platform is? Is McCain a experienced Senator who understands the world we live in, or is he a maverick that goes by his gut? Now apparently he is here to "shake up Washington". In other words he is going to stand up to special interest groups (the guys running his campaign would be a good start). Can anyone tell me one policy McCain advocates? Is offshore drilling the only thing keeping America from being a utopia? Is this an abortion debate now? Why does everyone running against Barack Obama enter this schizophrenic mode?

When all this is over, and they call Barack Obama's campaign one of the greatest in history, don't believe it. He runs tight ship, but his opponents seem to want to self destruct by never having a consistent message of their own. I'm not talking about flip flops, I'm talking about reinventing their vision of their campaign every other day. Barack Obama has presented himself the same way since this all began, and John McCain must be in the 5th or 6th rebirth of his campaign.

Joe Lieberman.

Mikey — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:04:05 EDT

How dare he claim to be a Democrat? He is basically saying it doesn't matter what issues you believe in, vote for the guy against them. Joe doesn't stand for health care, reproductive rights, education, the environment, a progressive tax structure or an end to an illegal war. He has given up those beliefs many years ago.

A Christian World View?

Mikey — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:48:10 EDT

I just watched an interview with Tom Delay in which he described Sarah Palin as having a "Christian World View". I am not personally a Christian, though I have read the Bible. My novice interpretation of the text does not enlighten me on what a world view has to do with Christianity. Like most religious texts, I viewed it as a series of lessons on personal conduct. I am all for anything that causes self reflection of ones own morality.

However language like this scares the hell out of me and many other liberals. When I here the words "world view", I am reminded that I am also on the same planet as these people. So whatever they mean by this, it somehow is designed to effect me as well. I would not describe myself as having a world view. I have opinions on many issues, but by no means do I see those opinions as being required globally. I accept that others view the world differently than I, and have an equal chance of being right or wrong.

When I was a kid, I found myself moving further left than my family. I remember seeing republicans discuss family values, and they were speaking about me in an abstract way. I was the child of a single mother, and my family was not religious. They were telling me that I represented the degradation of their America. The left made no such commentary on me. They told me that all people were equal, and deserved the same respect. Republicans felt sympathy on my behalf, despite the fact I was not ashamed of the world I came from.

I am very uncomfortable with Christianity in America. They have accused me and a lot of good people I am friends with of being everything from immoral to an abomination. I respect their right to practice their own personal faith, but I have serious questions about their willingness to grant me the same respect. They do nothing to qwell this anxiety by making statements that include terms like a "world view". They can lead their lives anyway they chose, but leave the rest of us humans on the planet to our lives.

Veto Power.

Mikey — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 14:00:42 EDT

The greatest protection in our system of government are the checks and balances built in. The House of Representatives is accountable every two years to the people of the nation. The Senate represent the interest of each state of the union. The president is charged with executing the laws the congress passes. The Supreme Court is responsible for ensuring those laws fit into the broader framework of our constitution.

I know, but this one troubles me about Palin.

Mikey — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:54:24 EDT

Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which is based on the concept of bringing a vote for Alaska to secede from the United States. Both her and her husband were members in 1994. For all the patriotism questions that have been asked of Democrats, belonging to a group seeking to no longer be part of the United States seems a question she should answer. However the McCain campaign doesn't plan on allowing here a press conference till sometime after the GOP convention.

link

This is not really about Palin though. While I don't agree with her politics, I don't know enough to judge her. Still it is absurd to think you could run for the second highest office in the land, and not have to vetted by the press. The real story here is McCain's extreme lack of judgment in selecting her without proper vetting. His campaign is now competing with the press to learn about this candidate. He made this decision on a handful of conversations, and never even requested a FBI background check.

The republicans want you to go to Walmart for health care.

Mikey — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:20:31 EDT

On PBS there is a health care debate. The republican argument seems to be making two points. The first is that government health care programs attack your liberty. The second is that the cost of health care has gone up due to regulation.

Roe v Wade

Mikey — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 01:41:58 EDT

I can already sense the coming storm yet again on this issue. This decision by the Supreme Court is one of the most misunderstood decisions in our history. Many view it as the pro-abortion ruling, but this is off the mark completely. The Supreme court was never ruling on the practice of abortion, but rather on the extent of personal liberty.

The McCain argument states that we should give it back to the states to decide, and leave the federal government out of it. This completely misses the point. What the ruling says is that the state does not have the right to make this decision for people. The Supreme Court was not saying that abortion is an acceptable practice, it was simply stating that it was beyond the government's scope to decide that.

I personally do not believe in abortion. I would not personally take part in the practice. However that is a choice I am allowed to make for myself. I would never grant myself the authority to make that choice for anyone else. That is what Roe v Wade represents. It is stating that the government doesn't have the right to answer metaphysical questions on behalf of its citizens.

What is the metaphysical question regarding abortion? This is not a comfortable subject, but it is one the Supreme Court had to evaluate.

When does life begin?

This question is impossible to answer in a rational framework. The essence of this question passes into a philosophical or spiritual realm almost immediately. The very next question in the process is a matter of personal opinion. What is life? To answer that question you must resort to a metaphysical source. If you believe in the divine soul, then you have to ask when it is injected into the host. This issue is never clearly addressed in any religious text. If you state possibility defines life, then you are now resorting to a philosophical view.

Where the Supreme Court settled was the best possible scientific answer. Life legally begins when it is self sustaining. That is why states have the right to outlaw late term abortions. Before that point women have the right to make up their own minds on this question.

Often people on the left make this an issue of the government having ownership over the bodies of women. That is true, but I think it misses the far more sinister question being raised. This is a question of whether the government has ownership of our minds. It threatens to take away our right to answer philosophical and spiritual questions for ourselves. That is a precedent I never want to see set. If they can answer the question of what the nature of life is for us, what else can they decide for us. Who gives them the authority to make these decisions?

Okay, Palin makes sense to me.

Mikey — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:26:48 EDT

I have spent a lot of time trying to figure this pick out, and I get it now. She is a farther to the right than McCain on most issues. For hardcore social conservatives she checks every box. She may not have the national experience anyone was expecting, but that isn't what the pick is about.

While there may be some who will put her gender first, I don't believe they will ever vote for someone they fundamentally disagree with. My advice to everyone is to ignore her, and get back to the issues. The press will give her plenty of scrutiny, and that doesn't really change anything from our point of view. It makes no difference whether it is a right wing male or a right wing female. We believe in the values that brought us to the Democratic Party, and should have no fear of this pick.

Can we say Harriet Miers?

Mikey — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 04:07:42 EDT

I wish I could play the role of attack dog like so many here, but I am honestly still in a state of shock. If someone had told me McCain would pick a woman, I would have said that might be true. If someone told me he would seek to sure up his conservative base, I would agree that was one way to go. But Sarah Palin, really?

Okay, really? I mean really?

Mikey — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:25:37 EDT

It is a quarter past 3 in the morning here, and I am still puzzled. I was up all of last night after Obama's speech, and stayed up to hear the VP pick. My reaction was one of absolute confusion. I finished my work for the day, and went to bed. After sleeping, I awoke to the exact same reaction. Sarah Palin?

I believed McCain might pick a women, and knew that there were some tough experienced women out there to choose from. I knew he would have to pick someone fuzzy on the pro-life question, if he were to go for a woman. Little did I know that any woman would do. I have nothing against her personally, though I disagree with every issue she stands for. She still says that humans don't effect global warming. She also wants to take polar bears off the endangered species list. All I keep thinking of is Harriet Miers being nominated for supreme court justice.

Is there anyone here who can explain to me why this lady is qualified to be vice president? More to the point, is there anyone here that can explain why she is qualified to be the vice president of a 72 year old cancer survivor? I am stunned.

Honestly, Huh?

Mikey — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:29:56 EDT

Some people are already bringing up sexism, because we are questioning John McCain's choice. I am not sexist, and have the right to form my opinion on any human being I choose to. I would have voted for Hillary, if she had been the nominee. Hillary had to endure the same scrutiny that Obama, Biden and McCain had to go through. That scrutiny is a fundamental part of politics in our nation. Now two months before the election we are given a complete unknown to evaluate. There are many powerful women in the republican party, and I have respect for many of them. While I disagree with their views, I have watched them endure the humbling stress of national politics.

I summarily reject the notion that anyone here doesn't have a right to question Sarah Palin. Before politics she had a job as a sports reporter. Then she became a mayor of a town of 8 thousand people. For 18 months she has been governor of a state that has under 700 thousand people. That is less than most major urban cities in the lower 48 states. Woman or not, she has a responsibility to fill in these gaps. She is the running mate of the oldest person ever to run for president. In the United States the average male life expectancy is 75 years old. John McCain is 72 years old today. It is a very real concern that we know what this person is about.