She is the country’s first WWE politician — a cartoon combatant who inspires stadiums full of frustrated middle American followers who will cheer for her against whichever villain they trot out, be it Newsweek, Barack Obama, Katie Couric, Steve Schmidt, the Mad Russian, Randy Orton or whoever. Her followers will not know that she is the perfect patsy for our system, designed as it is to channel popular anger in any direction but a useful one, and to keep the public tied up endlessly in pointless media melees over meaningless nonsense (melees of the sort that develop organically around Palin everywhere she goes). Like George W. Bush, even Palin herself doesn’t know this, another reason she’s such a perfect political tool.
I spent majority of my day at Border’s in Noblesville, Indiana waiting to get my book signed. After 8 hours in the cold and rain with my wife and 10 month old baby, I was shocked to watch Sarah get on a bus and leave without signing books for at least 400 people.
…and I think: Dude, you stood in the cold rain for eight hours with a 10-month-old baby?
On a final note, I wanted to point out Goldman is also shorting a Euro index (betting against that currency) as well as two gold mining companies (Barrick and Agnico Eagle Mines). This indicates that Goldie is bearish on both the euro and gold which hints that Wall Street’s finest are likely betting on a US Dollar rally (that would, after all, be the most obvious catalyst for a correction in gold and the euro).
To be blunt, it’s clear that Goldman (like me) believes the financial crisis is nowhere near over: four of its top ten largest shorts are financial companies. It’s also worth noting that Goldman is betting against gold and the euro. Given Goldman’s incredible access to and close relationship with the regulators and federal government, I see this as further proof that we may be seeing another stock crisis triggered by a Dollar rally in the near future.
Dollar up again today. Dollar goes up; gold and stock market goes down.
For Citibank credit card holders, there is one way to escape the bank’s rate hikes currently under way: Meet a monthly spending requirement.
Those who meet the spending minimum — in some cases $750 a month — will be able to get a rebate on their total interest charges for that month. The rebate could cover some or all of the interest rate hike. Customers also need to make payments on time to qualify for the rebate.
So - you spend $750 per month, sure, we’ll drop your rate from 20 percent to 15 percent, or whatever it is.
Of course, 15 percent of the growing credit card bill you can’t pay off will wind up being a lot more than 20 percent of a smaller bill you can pay. Citibank wins! As they were always going to.
It ain’t because she’s a Christian. It ain’t because of the kids.
It ain’t because of her good looks.
It’s because anybody -and I mean anybody - could mouth the exact same boilerplate talking points. Are these the conclusions she’s reached as the result of deep introspection, a study of history, and perhaps personal experience?
Or is this just the ideological shopping list, swallowed whole and regurgitated on cue? Things she just “knows” to be “true” in her “gut?”
Via Atrios, here we see a forecast that mortgage foreclosures will peak - peak! - in 2011. Not end by then; peak, as in, the problem will get worse and worse until then.
Aside from causing a ton of personal misery, this is fertile political ground for Republicans. Too bad they’re averse to a populist economic message. If Sarah Palin ever realized that her biggest fans are likely carrying five-figure Visa bills, and the interest rate they’re being charged is going up, and fewer restrictions on the banks won’t fix that (and could make it worse) - she’d be unstoppable.
The direction the GOP is heading does require a repudiation of Reagan’s legacy.
Reagan raised taxes occasionally in deference to some concern about deficits. The current GOP refuses to even think about thinking about raising any taxes.
Reagan embraced immigrants and indeed granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.
Reagan was prepared to negotiate with the Soviet Union. The current GOP does not believe in meeting or negotiating with any foreign enemies.
Reagan opposed an anti-gay initiative in California. Today’s GOP regards anti-gay initiatives as a key fundraising and base-stoking tool.
Reagan never went in for extensive and open-ended nation-building and pulled out of Lebanon after a bombing that killed many Marines. The current Republican party never retreats on anything.
Reagan took personal responsibility for his violation go the law in Iran-Conrtra. Bush still has not taken responsiibility for the illegal authorization of torture.
Reagan took pride in his reading and his thinking on the philosophical and economic and social arguments that forged modern conservatism and the critique of the welfare state. Today’s leader of the GOP - Sarah Palin - holds up her ignorance as a badge of honor.
Reagan signed the UN Convention on Torture. Today’s GOP takes pride in violating it.
I don’t think you understand. All we need to know is that Reagan was a God. We don’t need to know anything about what he actually did. It only complicates things.
It’s that potent one-two punch that has had Las Vegas and Atlantic City reeling all year long: the bad economy and slashed discretionary spending.
But the desert gambling mecca, with more than 150,000 hotel rooms (easily overshadowing Atlantic City’s 17,107) and heavily dependent on convention business, is having the tougher time.
Fewer people are visiting, let alone spending. Casino floors are half-empty during the day. As Ellis played the slots at the Paris Casino this week, he was surrounded by rows of lonely machines.
Taxi drivers up and down the Strip complain that they wait a long time between pickups. The fares they do get negotiate every rate and no longer tip even minimally.
Even fewer flights are landing here - US Airways Group Inc. announced last month that it was cutting arrivals in half - so Vegas hotels are heavily discounting to lure folks back.
At the Imperial Palace, rooms are going for $25, $65 on Saturdays. At the Palms Casino Resort, a standard room costs $59, $99 for a studio suite.
High-end casinos such as Mandalay Bay are offering rooms for $109.99 this week, with a special two-night-minimum promotion that includes a 50 percent discount on a suite upgrade, a two-for-one House of Blues restaurant voucher, $25 resort credits on food, beverage, or merchandise, and 30 percent off tickets for The Lion King.
Not a good omen for other casino towns - or tourist destinations in general.
Right-wingers are buying gold. It’s advertised all over Glenn Beck’s TV program; a wise investment usually, though the price of gold has skyrocketed as the value of the dollar has fallen in recent months; up to $1,150 per ounce this week, a new high. The dollar is generally expected to keep falling, and with recent news that China and some other countries are looking to buy more gold - as a hedge against the dollar - it stands to reason that the value of gold will keep going up.
But what if it doesn’t?
There’s some (still isolated) sentiment out there that gold is in a bubble. If that bubble pops - what happens to all the Glenn Beck fans who bought it at $1,150 an ounce, or thereabouts?
Been following the furor over the new mammogram recommendations, and while conservatives have been quick to jump on it - see, see, this is what happens when government gets involved in health care! - it strikes me that we will never, in this country, be able to do away with unnecessary medical testing. There will always be someone who, for financial or political reasons, insists that there is no such thing as unnecessary testing.
What is the conservative position here - that there should be no independent standard as to what tests are necessary? Perhaps that it should be up to the doctor and his or her patient what’s “necessary,” but isn’t it also up to the insurance company? And while we might quibble over what’s “necessary” and what isn’t, the reality is that the more testing you have done - the more money the medical establishment makes:
Molly Birnbaum was in a car accident that left her with multiple injuries. She fractured her pelvis, and hurt her knee.
“I broke the windshield with the back of my skull,” she said.
She was given a total of nine CT scans during her week-long hospital stay. Doctors wanted even more, but her father, resisted. And he’s a radiologist.
“At that point, I drew a line in the sand and said, absolutely not. There is no reason to do this anymore,” said Dr. Steve Birnbaum. …
<snip>
The problem is a growing number of critics say tests like these are overused.
“We’re definitely doing too many procedures,” said Dr. Howard Forman, Professor of Radiology at Yale School of Medicine. “Every time we work in the ER or in the in-patient setting, after the fact, it becomes very obvious that certain studies either could’ve been avoided, delayed or not done at all.”
Now there’s also widespread concern over skyrocketing costs.
CT scans are big money makers, costing anywhere from $300 to $1,000. MRIs run as high as $1300.
The annual price tag for imaging? $100 billon. And experts estimate 35 percent of these tests aren’t even necessary. That’s potentially $35 billion wasted every year.
And that doesn’t matter?
Conservatives may come back with the charge - absolutely true - that many tests are ordered to stave off potential lawsuits. Until we get litigation reform that won’t change.
But I’m stunned that the accusation being made against this government task force on the mammogram issue is that they’re just trying to reduce the amount of money the government spends on mammograms.
Even if it were true - if we’re at point where conservatives are railing against the government for trying to save money, then we really have gone through the looking glass.
In a new interview with Newsmax, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin hinted that a “dream ticket” of Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck is not out of the question:
“I can envision a couple of different combinations, if ever I were to be in a position to really even seriously consider running for anything in the future, and I’m not there yet,” Palin tells Newsmax. “But Glenn Beck I have great respect for. He’s a hoot. He gets his message across in such a clever way. And he’s so bold – I have to respect that. He calls it like he sees it, and he’s very, very, very effective.”
Buried on page A12 of this morning’s paper is a brief item, but what may be the most intriguging piece of news in the whole paper:
Carrie Prejean herself is coming to Lancaster, to speak at Thursday’s “Celebration of Marriage and Family” banquet, hosted by the Pennsylvania Family Institute.
No link because we don’t actually have it online yet. But do you think they’ll show her sex tapes to warm up the “pro-family” crowd? Isn’t Prejean up to, like, seven or eight sex tapes now?
But pro-family, baby. So long as you’re against gay marriage - doesn’t matter how many underage sex tapes you make. That’s still pro-family!
If you’re a Republican, is it better to be in favor of gay marriage or to make a sex tape? … After watching several of Prejean’s media appearances this week, it was not her incredibly uncomfortable threat to walk out on Larry King that had me most unnerved; it was actually her appearance on Sean Hannity’s show. This was Prejean’s first stop on her book publicity tour, and when the sex tape came up, he proceeded to ask her if she was “in love with her boyfriend at the time that she made [it].” I’m sorry, why would being in love matter when it comes to filming yourself in a sexual context? …
<snip>
The problem I have with my fellow Republicans is why gay marriage is the trump card in any situation. It seems that as long as you are against gay marriage, any scandal in your life can be overlooked or overcome. When you are in favor of it, however—and I have been very vocal about my support—that position defines you.
I don’t think you understand. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!
Noting that the national debt has topped $12 trillion (”and make no mistake, that is a disaster,” he writes), John Cole both predicts that right-wingers will “pretend that Obama spent all 12 trillion in the last nine months propping up ACORN and SEIU union thugs” - and issues a challenge:
I would love to hear how the Republican plan for slashing the deficit and tackling the debt will work. I’m interested in how capital gains tax cuts, making the Bush cuts permanent, ending the “death tax,” continuing the prescription drug plan while ignoring the rising costs of health care, permanent war in the middle east and privatizing social security are going to bring our books back into the black.
And the second commenter wins Teh Internets:
Well, according to the Laffer curve, we could just set the tax rate to zero and then the government would have infinite revenue! Problem solved.
Hm. Media Matters points out that in addition to Sarah Palin’s running shorts, that Newsweek cover features a headline - “How do you solve a problem like Sarah?” - that’s actually pinched from Sound of Music, “in which nuns fret about ‘how’ to ’solve a problem like Maria,’ a ‘girl’ who ‘climbs trees’ and whose ‘dress has a tear.’ “
OK, so maybe there’s something to the right-wing whinging this time around after all.
Of course, given their opposition to women’s reproductive freedom - and their penchant for doing things like this - Republican complaints about sexism tend to ring just a tad hollow. Add to this something Sullivan wrote yesterday, after noting an ABC News/Washington Post poll showing Palin had a higher approval rating among men than women:
Because they are not blinded by starbursts. Women always saw through Palin in ways that men didn’t. That was most evident in the vice-presidential debate. Because many (straight) men found it hard to see past the b**bs. Let’s face it: if Palin looked like Golda Meir, there’s no chance McCain would have picked her. And no one would currently give a damn. She is the Carrie Prejean of politics; and like the Ailes-tested fembots on Fox News. Women are not so dumb as to buy it. Men: well we all know what our weak spot is. We do not always think with our heads.
Emphasis added. But hardly necessary.
Palin’s appeal is both visual and cultural. It isn’t intellectual. It isn’t in her grasp of policy. It isn’t in her vision for the country. She exhibits no real leadership skills. But she likes the celebrity aspect of politics; and, as Christopher Hitchens writes in that dodgy Newsweek, she’s the ultimate empty vessel:
But the problem with populism is not just that it stirs prejudice against the “big cities” where most Americans actually live, or against the academies where many of them would like to send their children. No, the difficulty with populism is that it exploits the very “people” to whose grievances it claims to give vent. …
<snip>
If she were ever to get herself to the nation’s capital, the teabaggers would be just as much on the outside as they are now, and would simply have been the instruments that helped get her elected. In my own not-all-that-humble opinion, duping the hicks is a degree or two worse than condescending to them. It’s also much more dangerous, because it meanwhile involves giving a sort of respectability to ideas that were discredited when William Jennings Bryan was last on the stump. The Weekly Standard (itself not exactly a prairie-based publication) might want to think twice before flirting with popular delusions and resentments that are as impossible to satisfy as the demand for a silver standard or a ban on the teaching of Darwin, and are for that very reason hard to tamp down. Many of Palin’s admirers seem to expect that, on receipt of the Republican Party nomination, she would immediately embark on a crusade against Wall Street and the banks. This notion is stupid to much the same degree that it is irresponsible.
Disagree with the last few sentences - from what I’ve been able to see, Palin’s supporters really don’t care about the banks; in fact, they’d give the banks more power by scrapping government regulation of them. What they want is to stick it to the liberals - in the same sense that the kid in high school who gets picked on wants to stick it to the bullies. It’s this fervent, cherished dream; but what does it mean? How would Sarah Palin “stick it” to the liberals?
And the answer, as Hitchens notes, is - however the Weekly Standard and Wall Street Journal, and Bill Kristol and maybe Karl Rove - want her to.
And guess what: That doesn’t improve her supporters’ lot in life. But at this point, I suspect they’re willing to trade lower incomes and less job security if they’d just get the chance to plant their flag of cultural hegemony.
In a press release touting “unfriend” as the word of the year, the New Oxford American Dictionary may have unwittingly made a more controversial move than the New Oxford American Dictionary pretty much ever does.
No, it wasn’t another cutesy tech neologism: they included “teabagger” as one of their Word of the Year finalists.
According to the release, they define “teabagger” as “a person who protests President Obama’s tax policies and stimulus package, often through local demonstrations known as ‘Tea Party’ protests (in allusion to the Boston Tea Party of 1773).”
