The great dichotomy

We're beginning the 18th month of the Great Recession and things in some areas of the economy are picking up while others lag far behind, namely the markets (up), and jobs (down).

First, the market does appear to be making a bull run, but it's still far from convincing that this is not a bear-market rally. So companies have cut costs and reduced headcount. But what does that say about growth going forward? Nothing. Not as long as the "headcount" equation remains. Thus the other part of the 'chotomy.

If people keep getting laid off, they will not be the consumers who will fuel the growth. So who will pick up the slack? Um, nobody. The government I guess. Maybe the government employees?

The fact is we've just surpassed the last "longest recession" of 1981-82. That took several years to get over. This recession I think will last at least to the end of the year. That could make it a two-year recession. Which means recovery could be double what it was to get out of 81-82.

So now you have some daylight: the stock market. You have a rally in stocks because cost-cutting has finally kicked in and companies are seeing a bottom, some stabilization. But this is unsustainable precisely because of the cost-cutting done before. Going forward, demand will level because there will be no one to buy product (those laid off) or people will continue to save because they think they will be laid off.

Nor am I optomistic we will even get back to a 10th of where we were in terms of consumer demand. The coming job paradigm -- people changing careers, lower pay for work that paid a lot more previously -- probably won't support it because there is a massive ratcheting down of payrolls. Ergo, the next leg down for stocks comes by next October. And here's a little support for that view: the WSJ reports on a new Hewitt Associates survey of 518 large U.S. companies which found that 54% believe an economic upturn will begin at the end of 2009 or early 2010. "Nonetheless, a large percentage have plans for further layoffs, salary reductions, medical-benefit cuts and changes in 401(k) matches." So the killing off of consumer demand will continue unabated until at least a quarter into the recovery.

I don't have an answer for what to do. I do think the government is getting too involved, but hey, they're the only game in town. Besides, there's the Golden Rule, as in "He who has the gold, makes the rules." Right now the government, as poorly led as it is with Obama and all of congress, has the gold.

A revoltin' development any way you slice.

100 days of doubling down

It's come. The liberals have the conch. It seems that GWB, through abominable luck as well as Democratic effectiveness in hammering away at the guy, has created a vacuum of sorts, and now all Republicanism has been sucked away. The last anyone heard of the good ship Republican was a bunch GOPers arguing over the controls before it descended into the echos. And then....

Silence. But only momentarily. For there arose from wreckage of the Kursk-like battle that was the Bush years, the walking victorious indignant. One by one they arose to salute their new master: The Great and Powerful Obama. "Listen children! Stick with me and whether we get there or not, I will talk soothingly all the way. I will say to you all that you want to hear even though some of it, or most of it, will only fuzzily and tangentially be accomplished; calm thyself, brother, for I am the light that illuminates almost something that is certainly tantalizingly nothing. The Ray of Hope that Brings you Closer to the rocks of Home! There will be those who doubt the redactiveness of my decisiveness. But fear not, I am the one we've been waiting for and they are the ones we've been waiting to exit.

If you subscribe to the notion that GWB was a lousy president, then consider that Obama is now doubling down. His is a leadership through looks and words but not action. I await your regrets.

"I won"

Well Obama certainly is living up to that phrase and seemingly using it as raisons d'etre for his administration so far. It certainly makes his leadership small beer and business as usual. It's been this way since about a day after a hope-filled inauguration.

And now it's gone over the top (or completely crashed and burned) by this whole nonsense of holding Bush Justice lawyers criminally liable for post-9/11 opinions of torture. This goes so far beyond realm of reasonable that it's really disturbing. If his plan is divide and conquer, it's creating the division in the wrong place.

And where is the Republican leadership? They are silent. We only hear former VP Dick Cheney. Leadership on that side of the aisle seems to be lacking, too. C'mon fellows, engage!

There are no leaders in Washington right now. Here it is in a nutshell: "I have to go, there go my followers!"

End of the world (for some)

First it was honey bees, now it's bats. Apparently bats in the Northeast have a fungus that's wiping out populations from New York to Maine. The fungis is part of a disease called White Nose Syndrome.

I hope all those "As goes .... so goes ...." sayings prove false (particularly As goes California, so goes the US!!). But if bats and bees are any indication, the human race is in trouble. A few years ago honey bee poplutions began to fall amid mass die-offs around the world. Now it's bats, which could make for more mozzy-infested summer nights as well as damaged fruits and veggies. Bats eat huge amounts of bugs, in some cases up to 3000 mosquitos a night, so a huge die-off would be devastating what with the crop damage, and the possible spread of disease (West Nile, etc).

Obama Jane Fonda

A great article in the WSJ by Dorothy Rabinowitz, "Obama Blames America." It states basically that "a new American leadership stood ready to atone for the transgressions of the old." Some in the comment section said there is nothing wrong with admitting you're wrong, etc. and that what the president is doing is reaching out in a healing gesture. But what was the wrong? And according to whome? I find it somewhat offensive and generally unseemly.

I don't suppose there's anything wrong with admitting your wrong, however, there is something wrong with a president speaking ill of his own country and apologizing. He wasn't elected to apologize. He was elected to energize, something he's falling woefully short of doing. It's not the time to apologize nor is it the place -- partiucularly a place so morally self-righteous as Europe.

Europe is still rife with antisemitism as well as racism; there is not nearly the same level of opportunity in any of these countries as there is in the US. Say what you will about certain dark episodes in US history, but they are not the things that define us, or me for that matter. I guess for some the Bush years were a "dark episode" but it is still far from clear; and they weren't as far as I'm concerned. And even if history shows they were, they would rank pretty low on a "dark episode" scale. Sure, Obama's my president and for now I have to live with him, but I don't want him out there kowtowing around the world like he's Jane Fonda.

The makings of a backlash

I'm actually loving all the talk and flip-flopping about holding Bush Justice folks accountable and criminally liable for tactics used post-9/11.

This would be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back, or it will finally be issue that lays bare the real Obama. The Obama that people seem to overlook because he's so shiny, becauase they are so distracted by his aura. It would herald "the Backlash."

You see, the real Obama is a political predator, a scorched earth politician who is vindictive and when forced into a corner (which, lets face it, the presidency is) will lash out at and take down opponents if his brand is under attack (though super smoovely and oh so subtly). Childish things? Forget it; perhaps he was coaching himself; maybe he meant it's time for me to give up childish things and move on. Evidently childish things are hard to put down.

So now Obama has left open the possibility that Bush Justice officials could be prosecuted for their opinions re torture. Perfect.

Because this is exactly what we need right now: a protracted legal battle, with enough detailed legal mumbo to fill the grand canyon, between one set of justice officials and another.

This is exactly what we need right now: a partisan witch hunt designed to continue the battle v. Bush by the Democrats.

This is exactly what we need right now: another project for Obama to work on because his plate isn't full enough. He needs more distraction!

Once again, leadership on the rocks. This guy is a disaster. He can't control his own party, who, not satisfied with winning the White House, the Senate and the House, now want to strong-arm, they want to dominate, they seemingly want to be the only political party in the country. He uses populism frequently and pretty soon will bite him the ass.

But as the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for. Getting these particular wheels of justice going will take a lot of political capital. Truth Commissions? Really? Even if you agreed that the peace we've enjoyed since 9/11 was ill-gotten through torture and other aggressive methods, you cannot argue that, well, we were never attacked. You cannot argue that the enemy has no law, no state; that they use methods far more barbaric than we do. You cannot argue that the US legal system is at its foundation, a jumble of words, and words, like statistics, can be manipulated to mean whatever you want. What is "is"? as Clinton once uttered. So you have both sides manipulating the words to fit the argument. There will be no clear winner or loser (except the entity that started the whole mess).

Not to mention it bodes ill for any future justice department lawyer. It opens up the mother of all can of worms. If these views can be viewed criminally, by the opposition, by the way, what views won't be? So now any new administration can come in and review previous behaviors by the previous administration? The criminal possibilities are endless.

We are in for it unless Obama is voted out in four years. He's had bright spots with a few good ideas. But these are ideas for peaceful times; for presidents that have no major challenges. Otherwise, he has proved disastrous.

Walter Lippman: From NY Herald Tribune, 1939, by way of the WSJ

"The reason is that there are in fact two main tendencies inside the New Deal, and . . . the President is never able finally to make his choice for the one or the other. Between the conciliatory and irreconcilable New Dealers the crucial difference is . . . that the one group is interested primarily in social reform and the other is interested primarily in the control of the economic system.

Thus the reformers wish to provide relief, to practice conservation, to establish social security, and by law to impose social standards upon business and finance. But in order to do these things, they know that there must be money available, and so . . . they would like to promote recovery, not only for its own sake, but in order to finance the reforms. When they are convinced that a certain tax is "deterrent" to enterprise and investment, they would like to modify it.

The radicals, on the other hand, are . . . primarily interested in reducing the power of corporate business men, and the heart of their program is . . . precisely those deterrent taxes and those restrictive regulations which limit private initiative. . . . they would rather not have recovery if the revival of private initiative means a resumption of private control in the management of corporate business.

Among the radical New Dealers the essence of the New Deal is the reduction of private corporate control by collective bargaining and labor legislation, on the one side, and by restrictive, competitive and deterrent government action on the other side. Thus they cling to taxes which do not come anywhere near to yielding enough revenue to balance the budget because those particular taxes paralyze the financial power of the rich and well-to-do. . . .

This is the issue between the reformers and the radicals. Both believe in spending. . . . [But] [t]he reformers regard the spending as an instrument of recovery and a means for improving the condition of the people. The radicals regard the spending as a substitute for recovery and as a means of altering the balance of social policy."

Obama: Russia's my friend; US business, not so much

Obama's speech (or his released remarks, anyway) at Georgetown once again shows and reveals nothing beyond a sketchy plan without detail. We need! We must! We have to get beyond the opaqueness that makes everything opaque!

I don't understand how people can listen to things like, and I'm paraphrasing here, "we need to fix healthcare and the environment, etc or we'll end up back in this same situation." Meaning, healthcare and the environment are the current cause of the economic meltdown? How did healthcare get us here?

Granted, the healthcare needs a fix and the environment is always in important (that is, conservation). But where are the details in how these issues will prevent the US from heading toward deflation?

L'Europe: Fous le camp!

I'm not sure my headline is correct, but I think it says fuck off. I hope it does.

Europe, the West's leading champion of ant-Semitism, socialism and just plain assery, continues to shit themselves silly when it comes to Obama. They love the guy. And for no real reason other than he's black and not Republican.

Here's a quote from some little french asshole: "He's a symbol of freedom and equality between black and white and he's not Republican." This is according to Esther Ancel, 16, of Strasbourg. What on earth can this possibly mean? OK, I understand she's young, her parents probably indoctrinated her with all kinds of liberal claptrap. But still. The US as whole stands for freedom and equality between blacks, whites, browns, yellows, and reds. Granted, there are still lots of problems, but they pale compared to segregated Europe.

It seems like Obama to Europe is some sort of savior, some squishy future that they now aspire to. Fine, good. Do it. But nonetheless, their fawning shows that they are easily amused and easily led. No wonder Hitler had such an easy time of things. Actually, if Hitler were black, the continent would probably be sprechender deutscher today.

I don't like all the cozying to Europe and, ugh, Russia. He's friendlier to Russia than he is to US business. All of which conjures some disturbing thoughts. Is Obama purposely leading us down the primrose socialist path of Europe and it's dark shadow, Russia? So he's chatting up to all these sychophants now in order to meet up later? Laying the groundwork.

The revoltin' developments continue.

Do you have Obama in can?

We'd probably have had more one-term presidents in our history if most of them did the right thing (although it doesn't mean that the one-term presidents we have had did the right thing; they were either awful and ineffective -- Jimmy -- or really unlucky -- Bush 1).

But for most modern presidents, it's never about doing the right thing, it's always about another four years.

And while more recently Clinton and Bush at least had the sense to try to hide it or do it quietly, our new prez, BHO, is so openly consolidating power and campaigning to be loved, liked and voted for that it is shocking. He's in it for the long haul, eight years and beyond if he can finagle it (and if he can't physically be there then damn it he'll do his darndest to leave us a stinking pile of legacy). The behind-the-scenes "keeping score," the grab for the US Census, the statehood of DC, the attacks on the rich, the gutting of Wall St., the outsized budgets and stimulus, the redistribution of wealth or transfer of it, is all a grand plan. If all falls into place for Democrats, there will not ever be another Republican majority or another GOP president for that matter.

This guy is disaster for capitalism and a disaster for the US. He's the Gorbachev of capitalism. He will dismantle capitalism. Unfortunately, he'll dismantle just enough to keep those who are "rich" -- ie, an ever expanding category, if you're not poor you're rich -- to keep working and to pay for his programs. I'm really worried. His leadership is totally lacking.

And most people don't understand it. They just eat it up but have no idea how bad it is for them. Coca Cola takes great, it's sweet and refreshing, and tickles when it goes down. But in the end, it'll rot your teeth. That's Brand Obama. He's in a shiny package but the contents'll kill you.