Idle Minds, the Devil's Un-American Tea Party

Examine Your Motives!

We've read so much about the Tea Party movement in the past few months and have seen its members across our televisions and filling our newspapers. Sometimes, we even wonder if some of our friends are part of this movement, but we are not sure. People can be very incognito about their side activities. They come to work seemingly normal and balanced, and only later do you discover the shenanigans in their after work life. Thus we find it appropriate to lay down some simple ways to help identify a Tea Party activist. You might even discover that you are one yourself and this new self knowledge will go a long way to helping you fill your spare time with frenzied activity that accomplishes absolutely nothing.

But let's begin.

• First, while there is no prerequisite that you be white to be an authentic Tea Party activist, and while we are sure there are black ones here and there, the general lack of racial representation should be an obvious clue that you are dealing with an authentic Tea Partisan. We cannot fault the movement entirely, since blacks involved in politics rarely like to stray off the Democratic ranch.

• If you the person in question has the unique ability to hold contradictory facts in their head simultaneously, and while not being ethnic, then the authenticity rises even more. For example if you are on Medicare, or receiving Social Security, which represent two of the unfunded legs of rampant government expenditure sending us into debt, and yet you are ranting and complaining about government debt and bankrupting America, you are a Tea Partite. Perhaps you rationalize and say you paid into those two programs. No freeloader are you. But you didn't pay enough and the net result of underpayments is the same debt on the nation's books as every other major undertaking. In one case Obama gives kids healthcare on the government's dime (taxpayer money), in the other case the government gives you healthcare on the government's dime (taxpayer money). 

• A true Teatotaler (teetotaling from the complications of logical thought, drunk on rabid fantasy) can probably be found simultaneously arguing (still), that Obama is an empty suit or lacking in ability, while in the next breath assuring everyone that the same man will be responsible for the complete reworking of society as we know it. Sometimes it is not a real Teabagger, but a Republican in drag, so you can never be sure. They will often come to the same conclusions, most of which result in Obama destroying the known world in an evil for evil's sake kind of conflagration filled with deadly terrorists, Islamic Christmas specials (see ya Frosty!), death panels, Kenyans uncontrolled in Kansas, forced camps, unlimited government spending on crazy shit like healthcare for kids. 

• An authentic Tea Parttite does not see the big picture because the world began the day Obama was elected. The subtle or blatant blaming of has nothing to do with his blackness of course, just so you know. Tea Partites didn't care that the economy was in recession before Obama was in office. They didn't care that the government was creating more debt and doing purchases on credit for things like Medicare Part D, Afghanistan, and Iraq. They didn't care that all branches of government could be faulted for not reigning in the financial sector. They didn't care (and probably participated) when Americans across the land had their mass orgy, copulating the hell out of the home ownership apparatus. Nope. They didn't realize any of this until the precise moment Obama came into office. And upon entry it was his responsibility to 1) fix everything in the first month or three and 2) also ignore doing all that he said he would do when voted into office by a plurality. 

• The Tea Party member is humble. Simple. Of the earth. From the special land just over that rainbow where real Americans come from. California? Mostly un-American. Indiana? American. Iowa? Probably American though they got duped by Barry and probably need their American cards checked. New York City? Uhm, no. Godless. Real America can be defined by location, but it's more than that. Because sometimes you are a real American, but everyone around you is not and you exist as a John the Baptist of patriotic purity crying out in the geographical wilderness of un-Americaness (like in San Francisco). Which of course if you are a Tea Partite in San Fran, check your motives.

• If it's a female, she will probably be a bit frumpy, a bit middle-aged or old and wearing a fanciful hat that belies the actual danger that can be caused by people with time on their hands and non-corollary and causal false truths in their heads. The hats and patriotic plumage and signs can sometimes obscure it all.  

Here is the New York Times, profiling, so that we can get a better glimpse:

She and others who receive government benefits like Medicare and Social Security said they paid into those programs, so they are getting what they deserve.

“All I know is government was put here for certain reasons,” Ms. Reimer said. “They were not put here to run banks, insurance companies, and health care and automobile companies. They were put here to keep us safe.”

She has no patience for the Obama administration’s bailouts and its actions on health care. “I just don’t trust this government,” Ms. Reimer said.

And here is another:

When Tom Grimes lost his job as a financial consultant 15 months ago, he called his congressman, a Democrat, for help getting government health care.

(N.Y. Times)

It's hysterically funny to begin an article with the above sentence, in part because it highlights that special super power of being able to hold contradictory ideas in the head at the same time, each thought unaware of the existence of the nullifying other thought. Tea Partisans have mastered that skill to the point where someone like Tom can turn to the government for personal help, not get it, and then discover the government is bad and thus nobody should have help. Or everyone should have help? Or exactly what? Because it's never clear what the Tea Partites really want.

Obama's efforts that will result in everyone actually having to pay for some portion of their healthcare, much like everyone has to pay  some portion of their Social Security, but that is too hard a concept for Ms.Reimer to grasp. Ms. Reimer's comments that she just does not trust the government, if you scrape away the illogical frou-nonsense, converts to, "I just don't trust Obama".

It's amusing. The Tea Partyists call for small government because the government did not help them in the fashion they expected, and even while benefiting from the same debt fueled government largess. Idle minds are the devil's workshop, and just the cup of tea for non-productive mayhem.

Palindrome: Tea Partisan Edition: Still Stupid Coming and Going

Sarah Palin, the timid. In coming to the realization that she lacks the knowledge and expertise to actually govern on the scale necessary to be president, and without wanting to fully admit this to the sheep she is herding, Palin has decided to wield her influence from the sidelines as some sort of fairy godmother. She will drop into town, say a few lies, and lines, toss some spice to the bland, and disappear before anything gets too complicated. A sniper shooting not at Obama, but at the minds of equally gullible folks willing to believe a convenient lie over the inconvenient truths about themselves. 

These same people would have railed at civil rights legislation, shouting down its passage and using state's rights as a prop for their own inner biases. 

Sarah, the small. Poofed and pretty. Sarah stood in front of a crowd of Tea Partisans in Nevada today, letting the president know that he is "fired". This from a quitter. And from a presumed Christian and patriot, who feels it quite fine to mock the president while simultaneously bearing false witness. Never have so many people, with so many diverging views and theories, incorrect all, been willing to hammer a man so much, and if they tell you that all this talk of patriots and real Americans is simply about debt or too much government, it's complete nonsense. Because at no moment in the past did any of these people feel the need to express such strong discontent and voice such creative fiction when the president was not the black man who now holds the job. 

One hates to reduce a movement down to racism, but most near or actual racists never reduce their views down to racism either. They rationalize, or cover or fade the issue behind something else. Here it's not because he is black. It's because he is potentially the anti-Christ, or a socialist, or Kenyan, or not a citizen, or out to bring Armageddon to your world. 

For Obama it's a losing defense to point out the race factor, but he knows the deal. He is too smart to get into that debate because it would distract from getting things done. The rationale is that if you stay focused on meaningful issues, eventually you end up with a snowball of accomplishments that will be hard for everyone except actual loons to ignore and appreciate. You don't need everyone, just enough. History will sort it out and the same way we see the old photos and video of people being hateful as schools were integrated, so too we will look back at the treatment against the achievements of Obama and be like "WTF". And too, 20 years from now nobody will admit to being a total twit and on the wrong side of the issue. 

We hear yelping about the nationalization of the student loan business, or the reduction in Medicare advantage  benefits, and certain Republicans are going out of their way to obscure the fact that some of the changes are merely the government refusing to subsidize private industry at higher cost to perform a function at mediocre levels. Can't the private sector find ways to do a job without government help, and shouldn't Republicans be applauding that goal? Yea, no. 

Take a look at the amount of loan money that gets dumped into vocational and tech schools of a dubious nature, who saddle kids with huge debts and with promises of jobs that are non-existent. Unlike your traditional non-profit school, or state school, and marginally arms of government, these for-profit schools reduce the amount of money available to the average student, have huge turnover, overcharge (both students and the government) and usually the product is inferior. Where do you want your child to go to school? Penn State or DeVry, Mr. Conservative Tea Partisan. Never have so many people that opt for local "government" colleges here in Arizona for their kids been so vocal about the evils of government. 

Sarah the Beautiful will become an increasing problem, and we applaud her bigness. The bigger she gets, like a Goliath, the harder she will fall when eventually she tries to run for president and gets drilled in the noggin by someone who actually has truth and education on their side. 

Government To Stop Subsidizing Private Sector Education Loans

Odd, or not so odd. In overhauling the student loan lending apparatus, money gets saved by the government by doing direct loans. Which again proves the point that there is no factual basis by which to conclude that government run initiatives are automatically more costly, or less efficient, than the private sector. Private companies overcharge, go bankrupt, fail, waste money, and ultimately, if unprofitable, disappear from the statistical "failure" record. So we are left with hearing some conservatives constantly comparing the entire government record against only the private sector successes. Nonsense.

Here, some student loan changes:

The student aid initiative, overshadowed by the health-care debate, would overhaul the student loan industry, eliminating a $60 billion program that supports private student loans with federal subsidies and replacing it with direct government lending to students.

By ending the subsidies and effectively eliminating the middleman, the bill would generate $61 billion in savings over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

(Washington Post)

Republicans are seeing this as a government takeover of education lending, although one should really question the abilities of the private sector if they are subsidized and given risk free business at greater overall cost. And one could hardly imagine that the private sector is in any condition to take on more loans given the shakiness in the securitization industry. Their slice of education loan pie will be entirely sufficient.

Machiavelli, Clinton, Obama and the Resistance

Clinton quoted Machiavelli at the Gridiron club's annual dinner, filling in for Obama who was otherwise occupied with the healthcare reform effort . The words of Machiavelli are quite appropriate at this moment, in this day and age.

"We must bear in mind, then, that there is nothing more difficult and dangerous, or more doubtful of success, than an attempt to introduce a new order of things in any state. For the innovator has for enemies all those who derived advantages from the old order of things, whilst those who expect to be benefited by the new institutions will be but lukewarm defenders. This indifference arises in part from fear of their adversaries who were favoured by the existing laws, and partly from the incredulity of men who have no faith in anything new that is not the result of well-established experience. Hence it is that, whenever the opponents of the new order of things have the opportunity to attack it, they will do it with the zeal of partisans, whilst the others defend it but feebly, so that it is dangerous to rely upon the latter.'' 

(Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince)

 Obama has beaten, for now, the Machiavellian mindset.

Goldman Up At Night Wide Eyed and Contemplating Wetting the Bed

Goldman Sachs has come under so much criticism but has largely stuck to its knitting: making money and managing the risk that goes with making huge amounts of money. Article upon article, and politician upon politician has question the efficacy of selling a product to clients, while simultaneously taking a dim view of said product and hedging the risk.

Some politicians have suggested that Goldman's actions were akin to buying insurance on your neighbor's house, then helping to burn it down. It's a colorful analogy, and probably meaningless.

The better comparison would be buying insurance on your neighbor's house because they are smokers, tend to have electrical fires, and like to make love with lighted candles all over the house like people ridiculously do in movies. Oh, and the house is in a bad neighborhood, and the owner has been convicted in the past of arson.

Sometimes you get someone who puts it all in the correct perspective, like Elizabeth McDonald at Fox. A week or so back she made some observations about the whole Goldman selling Trojan Credit Default Swaps to Greece thing, pointing out that the reporting on Goldman has not been too accurate or meaningful.

But such support, or clarification of the obvious, is rare and quiet. And what should really have Goldman up at  night, wide eyed and wetting the bed is the financial legislation that Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd is pushing. According the New York Times, it would include some pretty harsh restrictions.

In addition, investment banks like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, which converted to bank holding companies in 2008 to take advantage of the Fed’s liquidity programs, would not be able to go back to their earlier status to avoid Fed oversight.

(N.Y. Times)

In times of dryness, lack of liquidity, you park your caravan next to the big pond, which is exactly what Goldman did. We've been waiting for them to flip back the other way. The clock is ticking. We don't know if this legislation could be retroactive to now, but if I were Goldman I wouldn't wait to see what happens. I would convert back to my old status, or go private, and then fight any legislation that seeks to impose conditions on money I received in 2008 that I didn't necessarily need, and was going to be compelled to accept if I refused.

Other News:

No Child Getting Left Behind, Obama hopes.
A child left behind, or led wrong and turned into zombie when mom goes on loony terrorist adventure vacay in Europe.
Wife of conservative Justice Thomas gets thirsty, drinks tea. We can't help but think this is going to cause one of our favorite justices some grief down the road.
Naked 15 year old traps former businessman and now politician in hot tub against his will. He fights back with money!

Teachers Fired, Billionaires Robbed, Education Upended

First a school board in Rhode Island decided to fire the entire Central Falls High School staff, calling the bluff of unions in a bid for Federal funds to improve schools. Last we looked they were seeking some last minute compromise.

Now we have the same in Kansas City, but for reasons unique to that city, including declining enrollments.

The Kansas City Board of Education voted Wednesday night to close almost half of the city’s public schools, accepting a sweeping and contentious plan to shrink the system in the face of dwindling enrollment, budget cuts and a $50 million deficit.

In a 5-to-4 vote, the members endorsed the Right-Size plan, proposed by the schools superintendent, John Covington, to close 28 of the city’s 61 schools and cut 700 of 3,000 jobs, including those of 285 teachers. The closings are expected to save $50 million, erasing the deficit from the $300 million budget.

(N.Y. Times)

Poor performance or financial strains should cause actions like this to continue across the country, eroding a stable employment base in most cities. It still amazes that Republicans and other can be dismissive of stimulus efforts that at least stalled some layoffs in the education field.

We've had discussions with people who have said, "Yes, but it's just a band aid and what happens a year or two from now?" Frankly it's not really the Federal government's task to make long term employment opportunities; its job is to stimulate during a recession and get out of the way.

*

In related news, Federal and state officials are thinking it might be a good idea to create uniform education standards, and we agree. When money is tight and education achievement is lacking (compared to other nations), having a single standard is cost efficient and helps to pinpoint geographical structural weakness. It prevents kid's lack of achievement from being hidden within a school's, district's or state's teaching rubric (had to use that word).

Problems arose in the past under the No Child Left Behind regime when schools modified achievement downward or otherwise manipulated the intent in order to preserve standing.

In recent years, many states moved in the opposite direction, lowering standards to make it easier for students to pass tests and for schools to avoid penalties under the 2002 federal No Child Left Behind law.

After educators, business executives and others criticized the corrosive impact of a race to the bottom, the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers set the common-standards initiative in motion last year. They convened panels of English and math experts from the College Board and A.C.T., and from Achieve Inc., a group with years of experience working to upgrade graduation standards.

(N.Y. Times)

The usual voices will probably voice opposition to these plans. Teachers and unions will lament the lack of "creativity" and suggest that the often loathed "teaching to the test," will continue. Some conservatives will rage at the nationalization of standards and lack of local control (see Texas).

We don't believe that teaching to a standard (or test) is bad, so long as the testing includes what people should know, and demonstrates their ability to know it. Nor do we think alternative evaluation schemes (portfolios) and random school grading methods serve long term achievement. The easiest path toward educational mediocrity is to make comparison incomparable. Food marketers try to do that. Schools should not. You can hide a lot of garbage inside the methodology of your district, with method masking or distorting achievement. The minute you go for across the board harmonization of standards, clarity is enhanced and some people's heads will roll.

The new standards are likely to touch off a vast effort to rewrite textbooks, train teachers and produce appropriate tests, if a critical mass of states adopts them in coming months, as seems likely. But there could be opposition in some states, like Massachusetts, which already has high standards that advocates may want to keep.

(N.Y. Times)

Whether this effort actually succeeds is another story. While holding our breath, we divert you to the lovely eating habits of French school children, as profiled in Time Magazine. It's so amusing and there must be some merit to this extravagance, the least of which being that French children probably grow up able to distinguish good food from utter garbage.

I finally saw the system in action earlier this month. Caught short by a sick nanny, my son, who was accustomed to eating leftovers from the refrigerator, sat in silence with his 25 classmates at tables in the nursery-school cafeteria, while city workers served a leisurely, five-course meal. One day, when I arrived to collect him, a server whispered for me to wait until the dessert course was over. Out in the hall, one of the staff shouted for "total quiet" to a crowd of 4-year-olds awaiting the next lunch seating. "I will now read you today's menu," he told them. "First, you will begin with a salad."

(Time)

Other News:

• Here Ann Althouse passes along comments about Gabourney Sidibe, the overweight young actress who was up for an Oscar for her depressing role in Precious. She received praise from Oprah that seemed to suggest a long Hollywood career. Some feel that such flattery is misplaced, and that short of losing half herself or more in weight, she is doomed to be a one hit wonder. We are of the doom and gloom crowd, knowing how Hollywood, human nature, and our eyeballs tend to function.

• Bill Gates got robbed of his top spot on Forbe's Billionaire List. The Mexican Carlos Slim grabs the lead. Two Indian billionaires take slots 4 and 5. The mayor of New York, Michael, was at $18 billion, and not nearly enough to plug theoretical budget holes in New York.

Rain Coming To Phoenix

Walking near light rail, the sky grew dark, and the trees began to shiver while the men worked on taking down the tents from the Native American festival at the museum.

Lampost

The Eurythmics (edited lyrics)

Here comes the rain again

Falling on my head like a memory

Falling on my head like a new

emotion

 

Here comes the rain again

Raining in my head like a tragedy

Tearing me apart like a new

emotion

 

Here comes the rain again

Falling on my head like a memory

Falling on my head like a new

emotion

Iraqis and Hollywood Go to the Polls

I am not in the habit of watching the Academy Awards, but deviated from normal habit since nothing else was on the television in my cableless secret lair. I've been on a bit of a movie run lately--The White Ribbon, Sherlock Holmes, An Education, Avatar, Shutter Island, Book of Eli, The Damned United, Edge of Darkness--and it always helps to be familiar with the films being judged. I'd also seen Coraline and Up on dvd.

If there was one surprising and welcome outcome, it was Avatar director Jim Cameron getting beaten by his ex-wife Kathryn Bigelow and her film, The Hurt Locker. She took home both best director and best film, which in our eyes is a triumph of one type of political correctness (awarding a woman in both categories) over another type of political correctness (the unrelenting banality of Cameron's unoriginal liberal ecology tale). One wonders if the Hollywood establishment is making yet another effort to get people focused on Iraq as grand tragedy, and it was ironic that Bigelow could win twice, with not a word toward the massive show of democracy going on in Iraq today as citizens pushed out through sporadic bombing to vote. You could, if a thinking person, tie some of the danger and disability from the war tasks in "The Hurt Locker" to the display today, where formerly fighting opponents encouraged their people to take to the streets democratically.

Avatar took technical awards and that was fitting. The film is all in the visuals, with plot borrowed from other dubious films. One would have thought that all that money and effort would have been wrapped around an original story, and a story that did not poke you in the head with its point. The lack of a best film award was the perfect justice. Elsewhere newbies enjoyed the spoils.

First-time winners took all four acting prizes: Sandra Bullock as best actress for "The Blind Side"; Jeff Bridges as best actor for "Crazy Heart"; Mo'Nique as supporting actress for "Precious"; and Christoph Waltz as supporting actor for "Inglourious Basterds."

(ABC)

I would have liked to see Meryl Streep win for her wonderful portrayal of Julia Child, but getting past the broad support for The Blind Side was tough. That film had everything necessary to touch the mental lobes of both conservatives and liberals. For the liberal, you had the whole helping helpless black people thing going on, and for conservatives, you had the helpers being conservative Republican NRA supporters. The movie confirmed the less nuanced of  caucasian mental perspectives, leaving blacks to question exactly how they felt about the film: basically wanting to like it, but feeling uncomfortable at yet another film where they need to be saved from their own flaws. But I like Bullock, and you can't underestimate her basic appeal and it was going to be a good choice no matter who won. My second choice was Carey Mulligan from An Education. That film was a small delight- a quality cast that took you to a more original place than Avatar ever could with a bazillion times the budget. Mulligan was a wide eyed glowing presence, but strong minded.

Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin worked well together, and dual hosts should be the norm going forward.

Other News:

• The winners at the 82nd Academy Awards in list form: The Hurt Locker (best picture), Jeff Bridges (best actor),  Sandra Bullock (best actress), Christoph Waltz (best supporting actor, Inglourious Basterds), Mo'Nique (best supporting actress), Kathryn Bigelow (best director, best film), Up (best animated).

• Iraqis ignore violence and head out to vote. This is the result of the war liberals, including Hollywood, frowned upon. 

We congratulate the true winners.

My, My, My, My Sharona!

I've never been a headachy or sickly type, but woke this morning with another headache. Taken to self diagnosing, the threat of apnea looms. The thought of waking up dead is bothersome, but at the same time, delusional romanticisms arise; if I am suddenly dead, the memory of me will arise as an object of deep affection in the mind of some woman. She will weep, and realize she is with the wrong man, that that cowboy, that fireman, that otherwise fine chap, was not in fact her true passion and the toucher and lover of her soul. I am. She will weep into my coffin, start a foundation in my honor, and carry my vision, my words, into the future. "He was the most beautiful person... hard...quiet... searing... the most beautiful man I have ever had the privilege to know and love," she will say to a fluttery eyed Diane Sawyer in some news interview.

In my sudden death I will find love, for the right love will not find me while I yet live and breath.

Doug Fieger of the Kinks got that love, in life and now in death. Sharona, of the song "My Sharona," is right there on NPR giving an interview, telling of how they first met, and how they stayed in touch so many years later, together at his death.

It's sweet, but you have to actually be someone in order for your former lovers or unrequited fans to come out after your death and share lofty thoughts in interviews. Step 1: Decide to be something unique and excel at it. Step 2: Not sure. Step 3: Die successful and have attractive women come out of the woodwork to praise you.

Of course what really caught my attention was the story of how she met Feiger, which supports a general theory that some of us men have. Her quote:

"I was about 16 or 17 at the time," Alperin told host Guy Raz. "He was nine years older than me. And within a month or two later, he told me that, 'I'm in love with you, you're my soulmate, you're my other half, we're going to be together one day.' And I was madly in love with my boyfriend at the time, and so it took a year for me to leave my boyfriend."

(NPR)

The theory, or formula N=N+N1+T=N1-N=N1, posits that women in general at any "solitary" moment in time have a man. That would be "N". However, at any given moment they are capable of seeing, meeting, noticing, flirting with, talking to, working with, thinking about, feeling sorry for, despising (but liking) any other man. That would "N1".  Often N and N1 exist on the same side of the equation, and totally unaware of each other.  Time passes. That would be "T". (Yes I know you are not five, but I am still working out the math in my head for myself). After that period of time, and after hanging around, working with, talking to, or thinking about the new guy, she eventually replaces the original with the new one (N1).

We see that with Sharona. She was madly in love with her boyfriend, and it took a whole year to leave him. A whole year! Madly in love! A whole year! Don't underestimate the amount of time during that year that she spent with Fieger on the sly before official termination of anonymous obscure original guy.

To the average male this should be quite encouraging, while also lending torment to your soul on the backside. That woman you are pining after right now... the one dating the cowboy...will not always be so attached. If you prove sufficiently interesting, sufficiently alpha, amusingly elusive, and just on the edge of her grasp, she will gravitate to you and line you up as a potential future relationship partner.

In this way, no unmarried woman is really beyond your grasp if you play it right.

The flip side is that once you know this, you will never feel totally sure that the woman you have is not already sizing things up and looking to swap you out. Perhaps she is talking with you about some guy at work who "totally, totally is such an ass and gets on her nerves" and you are sitting thinking, "Wow, why is she obsessing on this non-entity?"  Because women obsess on men that interest them, and what is coming out of their mouth and what is in there head often go in different directions depending on who they are talking to.

In other words, there is no security in love. Love--or whatever that is we call what we do--in life is haphazard, and love after death is useless.

Other News:

• Banks large and small are still working out their liabilities, and, failing. Four more banks have given up the ghost. Some depositors are losing money, but frankly if you are keeping more than  the insured amount in any bank, that's your fault and you deserve to lose it or take a delay in getting all your money back. That makes 26 banks for the year. The article states there were 3 in 2007, 25 in 2008, 140 in 2009. Given the 26 in two months, we seem to be at the same pace as last year, which is not an entirely bad sign. 

• 320,000 Icelanders say no to paying off national debts created by their 3 major collapsed banks. This is essentially jumping out of a plane at 30,000 feet to escape a killer on board. Without a parachute. Nobody will want to lend to Icelandic men again. (Women tend to always find someone to lend to them or help them if they are attractive enough, so the credit doom scenario is quite variable). 

Republicans Won't Reconcile with Reconciling Evil Democrats

It's probably not surprising that the Republicans are trying to make the legislative reconciliation process sound like Satanic rocket science, but what else can they do? It's not like they can flip flop since they have already committed to demonizing Obama past his due, before his due.

E.J. Dionne Jr. in the N.Y. Times points out the obvious shenaniganism:

In an op-ed in Tuesday's Post, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) offered an excellent example of this hypocrisy. Right off, the piece was wrong on a core fact. Hatch accused the Democrats of trying to, yes, "ram through the Senate a multitrillion-dollar health-care bill."

No. The health-care bill passed the Senate in December with 60 votes under the normal process. The only thing that would pass under a simple majority vote would be a series of amendments that fit comfortably under the "reconciliation" rules established to deal with money issues. Near the end of his column, Hatch conceded that reconciliation would be used for "only parts" of the bill. But why didn't he say that in the first place?

(N.Y. Times)

See it's all supposed to work differently in the Republican mind. You lose the presidency and don't control Congress, and by virtue of this lack of elective support, you then get to force the opposition to do it all your way, as opposed to them doing it their way, with a wee bit of your input as a compromise. But if we wanted a Republican way of not solving healthcare problems they would have been voted right in.

Democrats are not inspiring much confidence either, with some quitting Congress and others whining about what they can or cannot support. You know, because absolutely perfect legislation is something that is the historical norm ever since Washington crossed the Delaware on some calm, sunny day to buy donuts for his troops in Trenton.

*

At work today someone suggested that 911 was an inside operation of some sort, and I was disappointed to see The Crazies drifting from the movie theater into the mouths of my coworkers. I. Hate. Conspiracy. Theorists. And here is another, shooting up the Pentagon for no reason. He doubted the facts of 911. I think you really have to have a college degree, maybe even a master's before you will be permitted to speculate on the complexities of blowing up buildings and terrorist capabilities. Empty minds gravitate toward the ridiculous. He is dead now, unfortunately, but fortunately.

Other News:

• New music from the great Peter Gabriel, although he is far too talented to be reinterpreting other people's work. In the NPR photo he looks like he is channeling either Jesus, Satan, Yoda or Gandalf. 

• Republicans and populists, especially populists, like to quote or hark back to figures from the Revolutionary period, and with guys like Paine and Jefferson the most quoted. But this man is one of our greatest Americans... this lawyer and banker and battlefield fighter. He helped stabilize the country financially, creating a... a... bank!

Haiti or Bliss, Or Hearing Voices in the Dark

We are in fearful, lying times. With the earthquake in Chile following so quickly after Haiti's, and with talk of U.S debt, and $60 billion deficits (in N.Y. state), and storm deaths in Europe, and wars raging across Africa and Afghanistan, and hit squads thirty strong assassinating enemies (and using stolen identities), and politicians accusing others of socialism and evil... it is hard to think straight. Gold prices are up, and crazy talk is rampant.

One would expect investment professionals to avoid succumbing to alarmism, but if Palin can get an audience in front of an eager crowd of investment professionals, it shouldn't be a surprise to see a similar crowd eating whatever "market pundit" Marc Faber is feeding them.

Dr Faber, who advised his audience to pull out of American stocks one week before the 1987 crash and was among a handful who predicted the more recent financial crisis, vies with the Nouriel Roubini, the economist, as a rival claimant for the nickname Dr Doom.

Speaking today, Dr Faber said that investors, who control billions of dollars of assets, should start considering the effects of more disruptive events than mere market volatility.

“The next war will be a dirty war,” he told fund managers: "What are you going to do when your mobile phone gets shut down or the internet stops working or the city water supplies get poisoned?”

(Times, U.K.)

He is urging gold and rural farmland on those with ears to hear his wisdom, but one should take his admonitions with the seriousness of a mother's advice, who forever gives you the same advice no matter your age or situation.

(You: "Mom I got fired" Mom: "Go to church. You need more Jesus". You: Mom, there is this weird spot on my scrotum. Mom: "Which is why you should go to church and get more Jesus" You: "Hey, did you know Fry's supermarket is way cheaper than Albertson's? Mom: "In church, you get Jesus for free". Eventually one day will come when all hell breaks lose, and you will actually need more Jesus, and she will be vindicated momentarily, until the moment passes, and you decide that now that you are out of the troubles, you maybe don't need so much Jesus after all)

Eventually by mere coincidence she will be right. Most doom sayers have moments of right, or almost right, because if you stick to the theory of something going wrong all the time, invariably real life will harmonize for a moment with your long running delusion. Then reality will decouple from your fixation and you will be the forever loon, crying in the wilderness and waiting for your moment to come round again, years passing, opportunities missed.

Not saying Faber is wrong, per se. But if things go the route of people needing rural land, or gold, it's not really the type of thing you need to plan for. In fact, if things get really bad, your gold will do nothing for you, and unless you are armed to the teeth and have a mini army, your rural compound, properly stocked with preserved yummies (mmmm, strawberries) will quickly be overrun by the fleeing and roaming hoards. The highways and byways will be filled with a 200 million somewhat dubiously immoral Mad Maxes (your former neighbors, and scarier types, like those black people you saw once on the subway), all panicked, frenzied. Your rural hideaway and pile of gold will do you no good. They will beat you with your gold brick and eat your brain.

I contrast this with a profile of Michael Burry in Vanity Fair.  As a money manager, he saw the housing collapse as early as 2005. People, even his own investors, were not thrilled with his flier on buying credit default swaps on tranches of mortgage backed debt. He saw the signs of trouble and loaded up, with firms like Morgan and Goldman selling him insurance for products he did not own. We can ask ourselves whether the regulatory disconnect between buying insurance and owning the underlying asset is a good thing, but it was the ability to find a way to bet on the downside of mortgage backed assets that made certain individuals and firms a ton of money. This also exacerbated systemic risks.

Burry made the people who invested in his words and wisdom a ton of money. We are not so sure of the historical profitability of listening to Faber, but in parlous times, who we listen to can make all the difference. Faber's seems the all or nothing path, where it takes the collapse of the world system in order for you to possibly remain whole (and we doubt the efficacy of most "survive the end of the world as we know it" strategies). The wiser path is to see the patterns in the world that are more likely to play out. Burry did not need a housing market collapse to make money. He needed movement of just 7% in underlying assets to see massive gains through his CDS positions.  He didn't need, or see, total collapse or seek solace in extremes.

The key is to ignore the near impossible, the least likely extremes, and the loudest voices, and chart your own invisible path. The world has many countries, and billions of people, and cannot be reduced down to Haiti or bliss.


Other News:

• Postal troubles continue, to the tune of $7 billion in possible losses, and the desire to dump off Saturday delivery due to declining first class mail. Also, unlike private and public companies everywhere, they are required to pre-fund retirement costs, instead of paying as employees "goeth" into retirement.

• We watch the home builders, by way of trying to understand where the economy is at. We don't expect them to get back to some lofty sales level from the past, but we take note when they can pull profits out of a hat, or see slowly improving metrics. In the case of Hovnanian, revenue has fallen from the year ago 1st quarter, but profits have risen. Yay moment. Then again, profits have risen due to a tax benefit. No yay moment. But cancellations are dropping. Yay moment again.

• Republican Senator Jim Bunning has finally touched earth, though it took a while for him to climb down from that really high horse. He will personally be showing up at your door to give you that extended unemployment check he was busy holding up. Funds are now free to flow to other projects that were stalled out due to Bunning's sudden commitment to financial probity.

• Don't bluff. The teacher's union representing high school teachers in Central Falls, Rhode Island had their bluff called. The district was seeking Federal education funds, but it required reforming a low performing school. They had options, including converting the school in question to a charter school, firing half the teachers, or closing the school. The fourth and least restrictive option included adding 30 minutes to the school day and a 90 minute weekly meeting. The union said, "No way!" The district fired them... all of them. Again, don't bluff unless you can handle being called.

• I am disappointed I didn't get to see A Serious Man at the theater, and now it is already moving to dvd. This review asks questions about the questions the film raises.

HSBC Having Jolly Good Time in Asia, Give or Take an Impairment or Two.

Let us make some observations from some recent HSBC earnings news. This long running British bank has always had a major presence in Asia, and more recently tried to take a flier on mortgages here in the United States and got burned during "the troubles". They have since pulled back, not needing to stick finger in the figgy pudding twice to know it's a bad dish.

Their operating income is down, but net profits are up 1.9% over the previous year. The stock moved lower on the earnings release, perhaps focusing on the fact that HSBC has set aside more money to cover loan loses.

All of this, as reported in the N.Y. Times (among other places), leads us to several points.

First, we make note of HSBC's expanded focus on Asia, going as far as to move its chief executive there to better focus on the fast growing region. This is a sign, and an obvious one. We can repeat it and see it, but often not internalize it. Growth is afoot in the world, as is change, and one has to see the region for what it is and not sit around ranting about communism or Asian's poisoning our children with lead. (And we know people whose fundamental view of the region is negative bias). It's the big picture, and one's money should invariably feel the gravitational pull.

In his first official press conference since moving to Hong Kong in January, HBSC’s chief executive, Michael Geoghegan, reaffirmed the bank’s belief that Asian growth would outpace that in the rest of the world.

(N.Y. Times)

Second, we see HSBC setting aside an additional $26.5 billion aside for bad loans and credit risks. If the "American people" (a term much loved by Republican politicians, who seem to channel the supposed will of the people at every opportunity), and especially the conspiratorially minded American people, look closely, they might realize that banks are refraining from making new loans not merely to maximize profits, but also, to cover for current and future theoretical fast looming risks, like the commercial real estate market, which is forever on the verge of doing something horrid, or so analysts suggest. If I am a true capitalist, I will use my return to profitability to A) avoid further losses on bad credit risks, B) hold cash in reserve to cover existing and potential credit risks and C) reward myself the same old high salary that I've always had during flush times. Be clear that "C" will tend to be the fixed variable no matter the economic climate, human nature being what it is.

It's kind of like when someone asks you for money, or to do something, and you say, "I don't have money for that, I am stretched tight" or "I don't have the time to do that, it's at a premium, I am busy and stretched tight". But unbeknownst to the other party, you have slotted out $12 for Chinese food, or set aside 2 hours to decompress or hit the gym. Your priorities are entirely centered around the "C" variable, which translates to self.

Finally we read that HSBC's impairment charges are expected to fall going forward, and in unison with the trend at some other banks. The Times reports this positive expectation, which gives us another piece of color to see a slowly correcting economic picture. We can see this despite the jobs news which tends to dominate the minds of people and news organizations fixated on the last archaic and least important fact.


Other News:

• In a prime example of the benefits of not selling into panicked markets, the struggling A.I.G. managed to offload a fast growing Asian unit at twice the price it might have gotten at the height of "the troubles" in 2008. But in selling the unit that's doing business in the fastest growing area of the world, they are basically cutting off their head to blow their nose.

• Was that you? Personally spending in January? Because the numbers have improved and the economy thanks you. Spending rose .5 percent, which means it was probably not enough to do anything, given other contrasting factors, like consumer confidence being down, and wages flat. You have to take this news in a basket with other news and form your own conclusions.

• Democrats are getting their health care process in order, which will likely lead to the House accepting the Senates version of things, then amending through the reconciliation process. Accept that Slate tells us that it's not a done deal to even get enough of a vote in favor in the House. Oy vey.