Cerberus Bombs, Israel Considers Bombing, Consumers Confused...

Cerberus, an up till so five minutes ago major hedge fund group, has investors wanting to yank their money from the firm , and all because of a carefully crafted bet on the auto industry gone wrong. We stand amazed, thinking, "Wow, who could have imagined." You know, because the auto industry in the U.S. has always been a font of easy profits and low overhead, with no unions or regulations or more creative competitors to contend with.

Investors in Cerberus are seeking the return of more than $5.5 billion (£3.3 billion) from the fund, which has made a series of poor investments, including the acquisition of GMAC, General Motors’ finance division, and of Chrysler, the bankrupt carmaker.

(U.K. Times)

We could have told them not to go there, but sometimes when smart, one is too smart for one's own good. Now, it is sad tidings. What does this mean for the average fella, who right now is saying  "What the hell does this have to do with me?" between bits of another delicious Tyson Any'tizer?

Nothing. Other than than just because you are smart does not mean you have all the right answers (a point Republicans were making by putting stupidity in the form of Palin on a pedestal... point kinda backfired), and that you should not automatically assume the private sector is more efficient for every task (a point Democrats are kinda making now with a desire to inject more public into healthcare's private sector).

See, everyone has a bit of truth! A happy thought for the start of the week.

*

Humans are complicated. In July consumer spending rose, while consumer sentiment fell. Apparently what people were thinking ("Oh crap the world is going to pieces") did not interfere with their desire to have more stuff ("Oh snap, I can trade in my clunker for that SUV that gets 2 extra miles per gallon and look good when the world goes to pieces").

*

We know. Too much good tidings right? Football season is starting. The annoying kids are now back in school.  The quality of Hollywood movie releases will improve as the fall moves in. The air starts smelling sweeter in places with seasons. The auto companies are still around, as are major banks, and maybe, just maybe, we won't be denied health insurance (though, according to Republicans, at the expense of, well, freedom, but hey, can't have everything right?).

But, we must bust up this seasonal euphoria with the following:

Iran has until late September to respond to the latest international proposal aimed at stopping the Islamic Republic from developing a nuclear weapon....But if diplomacy fails, the world should be prepared for an Israeli attack on Iran's suspected nuclear weapons facilities. As Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently acknowledged: 

"The window between a strike on Iran and their getting nuclear weapons is a pretty narrow window."

(L.A. Times)

On first glance this looks slightly bad, but keep in mind you just traded in your clunker for that new more fuel efficient car. That's 2 miles farther away from the mega-disaster that will certainly end up raining down on your city when Iran strikes back by any means unnecessary. Also, you won't have to rely on Hollywood to provide you with interesting entertainment this tv season.

Kennedy Dies, Eunuch McCain Denies...

Ted Kennedy is now dead, which if anything, shows the utility of delay tactics employed Republicans to do nothing on healthcare as slowly as they can. We will now be witness to elaborate words and celebrations by a set of politicians who would applaud the man, while fighting against every thing he was for. We have never been fans of Kennedy, but also, we lack that special spirit that will turn many Republican politicians into pontificating hypocrites.

Our local Senator McCain, who was holding forth at Grace Bible Church in Sun City, expounding on healthcare much like a eunuch describing how he would rock your vaginal world, had this to say:

John McCain of Arizona, last year's Republican presidential candidate, this week told ABC that he believed Kennedy's absence was making it more difficult to reach agreement on the health care bill.

(U.S.A. Today)

Everyone is loved a little more, when they are dead. But don't expect the death of Kennedy to inspire McCain to grow one and come up with a robust and fruitful healthcare vision of his own.

Meanwhile the beat--the hate--goes on. And let's be clear, never has one man (Obama)  been on the receiving end of so much outright nonsense by those lacking either intellectual understanding, moral clarity, or honest intent. They will tell you it's about the policies, the increasing national debt, but none of these people who are so critical of Obama now, so concerned about the unborn pieces of sperm in the gonads who will be burdened with future debt, raised a single, shrieking hysterical voice over the issue when Republicans were busy running up the debt, and cutting taxes.

In the age of Eunuch Republicanism, you do nothing. You talk of what you would have done. You talk of what shouldn't be done. You make up stuff. But ultimately, you do nothing. And you never remind people that whether you do something, or nothing, healthcare spending, and spending in general, will rise, and in part because you did nothing when you controlled the entire government.

If Obama is hamstrung, it comes from two sources: Republican fiscal irresponsibility in the past, and Republican inspired stupidity in the present. Those who disliked the mockery of Bush in the past, now find it a crucial moment to exact verbal, if not intellectual, revenge.

One would hope that they have at least the integrity not to kiss the head of Kennedy while dancing on the grave.

Enterprise Rent-A-Deathtrap Bad for Your Healthcare

In case you were still believing in the inherent superiority of the private sector over government initiatives, and thus ignoring many of the points made in previous writings, we here and now present more evidence for your review.

There is no end to the number of reminders that can be given that show that the private sector is not automatically more virtuous or productive. We can certainly affirm that the private sector is not any more attuned to the welfare of its customers than the public sector is. About face and agree with our wisdom, and toss aside the oft repeated mantra that the entire government can be reduced down to the particular rudeness or inefficiency found in stereotypes of the motor vehicle department and the post office.

We bring forth from our bunny hat, Enterprise Car Rent-a-Car. They can alternatively be called Enterprise Death Rentals if we were to take lessons in ridiculous exaggeration from unemployed people like former governor of Alaska Sarah Palin, who fears no combination of words so long as they are entirely untrue.

Turns out that Enterprise is far more concerned with making an extra few bucks than in maintaining a certain level of safety for people renting and buying their vehicles. The particular form of dollar over customer care involved the lovely (ha ha) Impala.

Enterprise Rent-A-Car, the nation's largest private buyer of new cars and seller of used ones, chose to "delete" a standard safety feature from thousands of Chevrolet Impala fleet vehicles, saving millions of dollars.

(McClatchey)

Which brings us back to healthcare. One wonders what happens when the inclination for greater profits runs up against the necessity of required treatments. Who will win that battle? Accountants or patients?

BB&T, Ayn Rand, Self Interest and Other Inconsistencies

If you are a strong proponent of Ayn Rand's style of independent "be your own person" thinking, one should at least stick to the principles that one is pushing, or it all rather violates an internal logic. There are those in business who hang at the breast of Rand, sucking in every word and theme of hers, and fervently believing in the pursuit of self interest as the answer to every ill, with government as the great beast that stands in the way.

In fact John A Allison, chairman of BB&T is one of those suckers, and was profiled back on August 1 in the New York Times in an article titled, "Give Me Liberty but Not a Bailout".

If Mr. Allison’s speech sounds vaguely familiar, it’s because it’s based on the philosophy ofAyn Rand, who celebrated the virtues of reason, self-interest and laissez-faire capitalism while maintaining that altruism is a destructive force. In Ms. Rand’s world, nothing is more heroic — and sexy — than a hard-working businessman free to pursue his wealth. And nothing is worse than a pesky bureaucrat trying to restrict business and redistribute wealth.

There is more.

But Mr. Allison, who remains BB&T’s chairman after retiring as chief executive in December, has emerged as perhaps the most vocal proponent of Ms. Rand’s ideas and of the dangers of government meddling in the markets. For a dedicated Randian like him, the government’s headlong rush to try to rescue and fix the economy is a horrifying realization of his worst fears.

Fast forward to now, with Colonial BancGroup falling into insolvency, and the FDIC stepping in to unwind that regional bank, and with the assistance of BB&T.

Ah, here is a bold bank, willing to take a chance on picking up some assets, but going forth rationally and independantly, taking no handouts, a firm believer in the independent businessman pursuing his own self interest to the benefit of all.

Yea not quite.

Kelly King, BB&T’s chief executive, called the deal “an exciting growth opportunity” that will allow it to gain market share with minimal risk to the bank because of its loss-sharing agreement with the government.

(N.Y. Times)

It's always good to be careful of those who align themselves to ideologies, and especially those philosophies that are functionally incompatible with human nature. Rand, ever so dismissive of faith and religion, would hardly survive in a world lacking the contributions of those of faith. Remove them, and much of the good drains from the world, leaving not rationality, but man's slavery to his own pursuit of ephemeral happiness.

Government and Private Sector Equally Competent or Incompetent

We are all for big business, and little business, and Wall Street. When you live in a hut on the prairie of some underdeveloped place, you stay that way without strong institutions and markets.

We are not for specious arguments, like the one that says that the private sector is more efficient than the government. As a principal, it is better to leave things to the private sector (the people), but it remains to be proven that in aggregate, the government has done worse handling what's on its plate when compared to the entire private sector universe.

Some dispute that point by reminding us that when the private sector goofs up, when someone can't cut it and remain profitable, they fail. And that is true. But in the process of creative destruction that is capitalism, an awful lot goes up in that smoke, including money, jobs, lives. There is a cost from someone's pocket. Closer to the point, you don't factor out the private sector failures and run the successes up against the government's entire record.

Here (via Dealbreaker) we have Exxon in court battling New York State over some waste accusations. We contain not a bit of knowledge on whether the charges are legit, or just New York hitting the biggest, most profitable target. The charge is that Exxon poisoned the groundwater. We will ignore that for a moment and focus on what Exxon had to say in response:

The wells are “located in an industrial cesspool that has nothing to do with MTBE,”Peter Sacripanti, a lawyer for Exxon Mobil at McDermott Will & Emery in New York, told jurors in his opening statement.

The groundwater contains pharmaceutical and human waste, dry-cleaning fluid from a company once located near the site, and 70,000 gallons of diesel fuel spill at a nearby bus depot, he said.

(Bloomberg)

Now let us ask ourselves some questions that have nothing to do with Exxon's guilt or innocence. Who, pray tell, spilled pharmaceutical waste? Who spilled dry cleaning fluid? Who spilled 70,000 gallons of diesel fuel? And finally, who possibly contaminated the groundwater with methyl tertiary butyl ether?

Was it the government, or was it the private sector?

Also, who is making an effort to resolve the issue on behalf of people who want clean water?

Is it the government or the private sector?

Daily Update: U.K. Annoyed Over American Healthcare Hyperbole, and Stuff

The town hall meetings around the country have continued, amounting to not much at all. We can lay the blame at the feet of Republicans: all fire and rain, with little ability to listen, offer alternatives, or voice legitimate concerns in a coherent way. The overriding fear seems to be a megalith government taking control and turning the United States into some form of Russia, albeit the chronic worriers have yet to realize that Russia is not the thoroughly socialist republic of past reputation. (Ever since Putin started posing topless to show off his muscular everyman body, has Russia been reliably anything anymore?). Everyone now is reading parts of the still under adjustment legislation, a document so full of vagueness and legalese as to make all the newfound amateur politicians fear conspiracy, Satan, and worse. Apparently they were hoping for something more precise, and reading in evil where none lies.

"Oh look, on page so and so the government does not explicitly say that illegal aliens would not be covered," says the newly energized legislative Joe. Or, "Hey, can you believe that after a certain period, new policies must conform to the government's guidelines on acceptable care!!!!!!!," and as if there were no current Federal guidelines that existing policies and insurance companies must comply with. "Anger, Fear, and Lunacy," as Reuuters calls it.

Overseas in Britain, it would appear they are growing tired of the hits their system is taking by those who have determined that single payer systems in the United Kingdom and Canada are the be all and end all of misery.

The Associated Press reports:

"People have been saying some untruths in the States," a spokesman for Britain Department of Health said in a telephone interview. "There's been all these ridiculous claims made by the American health lobby about Obama's health care plan ... and they've used the NHS as an example. A lot of it has been untrue."

He spoke anonymously in line with department policy.

A particularly outlandish example of a U.S. editorial, printed in the Investor's Business Daily, claimed that renowned physicist Stephen Hawking, who is disabled, "wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."

Hawking, who was born and lives in Britain, personally debunked the claim. "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS," he told The Guardian newspaper. Investor's Business Daily has since corrected the editorial.

(AP)

*

Let's not let the continued healthcare fracas divert our attention from more important news, like Louisville coach Rick Pitino admitting he had an affair with an apparently crazy lady who may have carried for two seconds his child that he might have helped abort before she went on to marry one of his assistant coaches a few months after the consensual interaction which she now calls a rape but which her ex-husband assistant coach suggests is a bizarre accusation. Whew! The University of Louisville as of the current moment sees no violation of the morals clause in Pitino's contract, so sex in restaurants with women not your wife, condomless, and helping women not your wife get either an abortion or healthcare to fund an abortion is a-ok. Don't hate!

*

That was not quite important news, but the continued unwinding of the extended measures the government has taken to save the American financial system from collapse is very important news. It's also news that people busy accusing the government of socialism are probably ignoring, and right about the time when unemployment begins to reverse, these people will be deep in their bunkers hiding from the un-American world that ABP (Apostate Black President) has brought down upon them. All sorts of things, like healthcare you can't lose, will be wreaking havoc upon those not safely in the mental bunker.

In any case, the Fed (evil is as evil does) announced it will end its Treasury buying market manipulation that was designed to keep interest rates low for the common man; a sign of a return to normal that will in no way satisfy the conspiracists who will see every action as its own equal and opposite evil action:

The Fed's moves were an acknowledgment that there are signs the economy is stabilizing, but also that risks remain, said Doug Roberts, chief investment strategist for New Jersey-based Channel Capital Research, a research firm. The central bank does not want to withdraw economic support too soon, he said, "they believe the economy is still pretty weak."

Also helping stocks Wednesday afternoon was a better-than-expected earnings report from Toll Brothers. The large home builder said that although revenue continues to fall, for the first time since the end of 2005 it saw an increase in the number of contracts it signed during its fiscal third quarter.

(Washington Post)

This is just the beginning of the Fed unwinding efforts to support the credit markets. More signs of thawing? Toll Brothers reporting better than expected earning, and hedge funder John Paulson buying a bazillion shares of Bank of America. This is as near as one might ever come to Jesus telling you that the bottom is nigh, and to buy banks and be rich later.

*

Today I saw a movie with a friend. I wanted to see Julie and Julia, mostly for the Julia part, and the food part, and remembrances of things past when Julia Child's big head appeared on the black and white tv on PBS when I was growing up. But no. Instead I was lead to see G.I. Joe. I endured my just punishment in order to appear pro-democracy to my lovely female companion (ironic eh? a female fan of G.I. Joe). While greatly admiring the balanced use of ethnic characters, as in, doofy Wayans brother balanced by more serious black guy, the overall depiction of G.I.'s as some quasi international group of superfriends was more annoying. I also question the ability of women to do superhuman stuff in movies that is particularly physical; call me crazy, but , it never works out quite that way in real life, like when stuff has to get moved around (unless the nearest guys are too lazy to lend a hand). I had one of the original G.I. Joe dolls, including one with Kung Fu grip. Plus some gear: shovels, guns, butter. I never imagined G.I. Joe really being so international, or with the General commanding them saying, "Let's call out the Joes!"

It was also kind of funny seeing both the Joes' and Cobra's secret lairs easily penetrated despite ever increasing technological ridiculousness. Somewhere deep in the G.I. Joe organization's human resource department, someone must have said, "Ya know, we can save by buying Walmart radar systems and letting all the guards go to aerobics class on the opposite side of the secret lair at the same time. It's not like Cobra is gonna penetrate our largely unguarded perimeter with huge drill ships."

Bad movie. Bad, bad movie.

*

Is there a reason why Obama will not prove that he is not part of Cobra? It's a question not yet asked, but is probably on someone's agenda of legitimate concern.

Delightful Facebook Chat on Obama, Birth Certificates, the MSM and Truth

And here, a nice little back and forth between me and one of my more reflexively conservative friends, whose name I have changed. It was in response to a McClatchy article titled, "Right-wing conspiracy buffs harass Obama on his birth".

I posted the link to it on my Facebook page, with the comment, "Some edifying reading for a few associates of mine. You know who you are. A little MSM concoction no doubt," and of course, someone just had to respond:

Fred:
I doubt you had me in mind, but since I happened upon your post . . .

Main point, from article: " . . . it's true that the 2007 document issued by the state of Hawaii, called a Certification of Live Birth, isn't a copy of the original 1961 document. Obama could ask for that from Hawaii but hasn't, without explanation. The longer, original form would show more details, including the name of the doctor, according to copies of other 1961 birth certificates.

JUST RELEASE THE FRICKIN" DOCUMENT!
There will always be justifiable questions until this is done. Why not release it?

Second point: MSM once again going to bat for Obama & ridiculing dissenters (labeling them "birthers") Where was all of this media "fact-checking" when McCain was falsely accused of adultery, Palin supposedly adopting her own grandchild as her own child, infamous Dan Rather faked memos about Bush & Air National Guard, not mentioning the multitude of inaccuracies & falsehoods with "Global Climate Change"!?
30 July at 18:34 · Delete

Finn: 
Some good points. Let me twist your words a little:

1) Because mainstream media (MSM) can be biased on some issues, and with some people, determining the truth of what they are reporting in a specific instance should be ignored.
2) Because McCain (born in Panama without much interrogation on that matter) was the recipient of lies, Obama is due for like treatment.
3) Despite the claims of the Republican governor, two Honolulu papers at the time of his birth, the Hawaii State Health Department in 1961 supplying the info to the papers, the current director of the Hawaii Dept of Health affirming, plus several Republicans agreeing he is legit... you, RICK, believe otherwise?

Is that what you are saying Rick? That you don't believe that our current president was born in the U.S.? Do you have the courage of your convictions (or imagination) to say that plainly?

Say it. "I do not believe the president is a citizen". Bet ya can't, sans verbal sophistry.

Fred: 
As you said, you twisted my words. I'm simply pointing out the media bias, yet again. Of course I would prefer the consistent media position to be fairness and honesty for all, not falsehoods for all.

Someone who wonders why Mr. Obama will not release his Certification of Live Birth (if others can see it, why not everyone?) is not the same as someone who publicly cries out "He is not a citizen!".

Why won't Obama release it and silence all doubt? Isn't that a legitimate question? Do you have the answer?
30 July at 20:31 · Delete

Finn: 
I think your answer is revealing enough. Unwilling to commit to your own pot stirring. That should be enlightening for those willing to be enlightened.

I hardly expected you to answer my really simple question about what you personally believe on the matter. You dance well... for a teacher.

Fred: 
C'mon, Finn,- who's dancing? You've not even attempted to answer the simple question regarding the live birth certificate.

Surely you can see where not releasing it raises questions & doubts, so once again- what possible, rational reason for NOT releasing it could there be, especially when all doubt would be removed and then the "birthers" could rightly be denounced and discredited?
31 July at 03:57 · Delete

Finn:
Ah, it must be cloudy back East, so I will repeat.

Not releasing raises no questions and doubts unless you don't believe the official copy in use (that the government accepts for every purpose), that you believe Obama is a liar, that you believe the head of Hawaii's Health Dept is a liar, that you believe the Republican governor is a liar, that you believe the newspapers that printed the birth records were highly prescient liars.

In light of all of that evidence, and the American system of innocent until proven guilty, (a guilt that would make the entire government unified in deceit) you have, again, my answer to your question.

So, be bold and just indulge me my curiosity and tell me EXACTLY how you would answer my question. Do you, Rick, feel he is a citizen? Or must we assume your sophistry in not answering is wisdom, not wanting to go on the record either way?

Fred: 
I think he is a citizen, Tim. Happy?

But why not totally discredit the "birthers" by releasing the live birth certificate? Where is the wisdom in not doing so? You still haven't given a rational reason to hide the live birth certificate or only let a select few view it when releasing it would erase any doubts at all. Will you now indulge me and be bold and attempt to explain why not just release the document?

So much for "complete transparency", and I'm surprised that you cannot, objectively, see where continuing to hide the live birth certificate would fuel conspiracy theories.
31 July at 05:40 · Delete

Finn:
It's not a matter of being happy or not. It's about truth, and how much time smart people spend debating obvious truths, or knowingly winking at falsehoods.

So why not discredit the "birthers"? I probably would have said, "Fine, here's the long form" ages ago. I also lack discipline.

Complete transparency, which Obama lacks in a few areas, ought not to be begin with indulging a motley crew of conspiracy theorists, in the same way people don't try to re-prove the Holocaust to debunkers. Why? They will ignore the existing facts because... they dislike you.

And in the topsy method they use, you are forced to waste time disproving their accusation,when in reality the burden of proof should be on them.

I highly doubt Obama would want to be the first and last president to dignify stupidity with 100% attention in the middle of two wars, the greatest financial crisis since the depression, and a healthcare overhaul.

Ahab Fred: 
I think he's already dignified stupidity in more ways than one, but look no further than his "beer summit" held yesterday . . .

At any rate, I do appreciate you at least addressing my question. I don't buy your reply, however. Just end the "debate" once & for all and release the form to the public. Simple, easy, can be done by his handlers, not himself.

But you did lead me to think of an even grander, much more plausible conspiracy . . .
31 July at 12:02 · Delete 

Even the left has acknowledged (James Carville amongst many others) that Rahm Emanuel coordinated "mainstream" media & White House attacks on Rush Limbaugh & pressed members of the GOP to denounce him . . . It's very likely that it's a strategy to further split conservatives from the GOP by NOT releasing the easily-released document and thereby fueling more momentum into the "birther" movement. Pressure the GOP to denounce these people at the peril of losing even more votes. That would be a Machiavellian reasoning for keeping the birth certificate "debate" alive . . .

Think about it- you yourself pressured me into making a yes or no statement regarding the issue, even though my own opinion is really as stated- why won't the dude just release his live birth certificate? But if I were a politician there would be a political cost to denouncing a movement that some of my supporters may believe in . . .
31 July at 12:05 · Delete


Too bad conservatives didn't have the balls (or have the "mainstream" media at their disposal to their dirty work for them) to pressure the democrats to denounce their left-wing base back when they were only on the fringe (late 1990's early 2000's) rather than now, when the far-left is now running the country, God help us . . .
31 July at 12:06 · Delete

Finn:
The beer summit was probably the "mission accomplished" of stupidities, but it hurt nobody, and was an attempt to correct a wrong (speaking too quickly without the facts) on the President's part.

But to get back on point without commenting on broader MSM biases (of which they have many, and against conservatives), this issue in particular demands that people be truthful. Not snicker, hide and mock, knowing the truth, while engaging in tit for tat.

The proper Republican response should have been "Forget that nonsense; here is our plan to stabilize the credit markets" or "Here is our plan to fix healthcare". That beats setting straw men on fire.

As for God, he will help those who keep his word, and we would know them by their love. (But let's not go down that road or we would all have a lot of explaining to do in terms of our own attitudes and ways of expression).
31 July at 17:19 · Delete

***

Pretty much every discussion takes this path. One of us points to the specifics of truth, while the other points to the broader issue of media bias. Both are relevant, but you don't solve media bias by engaging in lies either, or ignoring factual points on any given issue.  

Healthcare, Republicans, Obama and Beyond

Sitting here thinking that after all the huffing and rumbling and backtracking and embracing is done, we won't get anything really set in stone next week.

We will wait till everyone in Congress goes home to hang out. We will wait while they test the sentiments in the home district. We will wait while they eat hot dogs on Labor day.

They will come back. There will be a big bruising fight over whether or not the health plan should include funding for abortion. That will all but kill any sort of single payer option (or rekill it), and certainly doom any package that includes a government-run option.

Heads will rub together. Democrats will get scared of failure. Some sort of co-op or pooled buying system will emerge, along with one or two of Obama's healthcare pillars. Most Republicans will denounce it. It will pass.

For the next year Republicans will continue to decry the health plan, even as, under their feet, the economy begins to reemerge from coma.

Repulicans will struggle, and lose influence. Unless they get someone armed with truth and creativity. That person is out there somewhere. (It's not Sarah).

Senator Kay and Governor Rick of Texas Getting Fungy with Money

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas will be running against Governor Perry for his job. She is taking the line that he should have accepted Federal stimulus money to help with unemployment, which is rising. Perry takes the line that he is standing up to the government, always a good thing among a certain sector of the Republican base that lacks discernment about when you should stand up, and when you should be practical, shut up, and sit down.

What is funny, the oddity, is the ridiculousness of both their positions, though Kay comes out a bit more sensible by a centimeter of rationality.

Senator Hutchison initially rejected the stimulus package, and one assumes for reasons that can be reduced down to 1) it won't work and 2) it adds to the deficit and 3) it would likely be filled with a huge amount of wasteful spending.  Those reasons are all somewhat valid, but in the face of the biggest economic setback since the depression, one should come with alternatives if you are taking that line. Republicans, generally, have not been overly articulate in providing those alternatives.The line has often been cut taxes and rough it out.

We are left with Kay now criticizing the current governor for money she voted against. In effect, had she gotten her way on the stimulus package, she would have no ammunition to drop on Perry's head. Her rationale is that since the unnecessary evil (stimulus) was done, Texas might as well not be overly dignified in losing its share.

Texas thus becomes the guy at the office party who thinks office birthday parties are stupid and a waste of time and money, and who has contributed nothing, but makes sure he gets a slice of the cake. You know, so it won't go to waste; one has to be sociable and all:

Hutchison said she voted against "every dollar" of stimulus spending but contends that, once the recovery expenditure was approved by Congress, Texas was entitled to get "its share of those dollars." She said she avoided raising the issue while the Legislature was meeting this year to avoid injecting politics into the session.

The surge in unemployment claims over the past year has drained the state’s unemployment trust fund, forcing the Texas Workforce Commission to seek a federal loan of at least $643 million to continue paying benefits. Texas employers also face an increase in the taxes they pay to support the fund, beginning in January.

(Star Telegram)

Meanwhile Perry's position lacks a certain sense as well. Or shall we call it, a highly nuanced way of approaching a problem. He rejected the money for unemployment because it had strings attached that, in theory, might force Texas to be more generous with their unemployment funds in the future. Instead, and with Texas short of funds, they will seek a loan for the money to cover unemployment benefits.

Perry goes on to say that that's what the Feds are there for, and it worked for them in 2003. Thus, he would rather take on a loan, debt, to provide seven weeks or so of benefits, instead of taking the Federal free money, simply because he does not want to have to expand the benefits of a program down the road that is, as of today, not quite funded.

The stimulus money, he said, would have provided less than seven weeks of benefits and would have slapped Texas employers with long-term taxes by requiring the state to expand its benefits program. But Hutchison said she obtained a Labor Department ruling saying Texas could have reversed the added unemployment benefits without penalty.

Everyone wants the money. Everyone needs the money. But everyone wants to pretend, ideologically, that they don't. Fungibility games.

Mind you, it's not like the strings attached to the package are exceptionally evil or onerous. They ought to be part of the general unemployment package to begin with. The requirements, for Texas, include providing unemployment benefits to part-time workers and calculating benefits based on the four most recent quarters instead of the past 18 months.

One suspects that both politicians should be praying that the economy does not improve, or that if it does, people's memories are incredibly short.

It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time

I am reading New York Observer restaurant critic Moira Hodgon's memoir It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time. When homebound on vacation, lacking money, there is little you can do but eat, read, watch television, or spend your hours from link to link on the internet. I could exercise, like I did yesterday for 20 minutes in the Phoenix heat, but that's almost like spending the vacation pulling my own teeth . Or cleaning.

The story she has to tell is slight; an attractive woman bouncing from locale to locale, and the food along the way. Everything is a bit carefree and unencumbered by anything heavy going on in the world.

Today there was a bump in her road. Midway through the book, she ends up having to lose an eye, and what caught my attention was not so much her plight, but how England's health system served her.

"I went to one doctor after another, first on the National Health and then, at great expense, on Harley Street, where the names of thedoctors were written in Arabic and the waiting roomswere filled with women shrouded in black, accompanied by their male minders. Dr. Casey was stumped. He sent me to Dr. Green, a few expensive doors down."

(p.217)

We eventually discover she has a tumor, and must get the eye removed. Then, on page 226:

"At last it was time to get a false eye to replace the clear plastic retainer I wore in my eye socket. This service, like everything else to do with my illness, was provided for free by the National Health."

That was then, another time and place and country. But it is a glimpse, probably, of what Obama and those hoping for healthcare reform wish to see here. In other words, more options, but with a base level of service that is affordable, if not "free." Most of us are not naive enough to believe anything is free; the money always comes from somewhere.

However, when it comes to healthcare delivery, it does make sense to get everyone involved, and everyone paying something, or taking some responsibility, in order to approximate a version of "free" that serves the largest number of people, while still allowing the individual to spend extra or in a fashion they see fit on additional services.

As to the book itself, it's interesting, with no overwhelming strengths, other than being a page turner filled with tidbits of this and that (recipes, locales, the ease of life for an attractive woman with well connected parents). I have the looming suspision there will no moral truth or moment of ephiphany or purpose by book's end, leaving me with that cotton candy feeling in my brain.