I may be a little bit upset with the failure of many of the initial policy agendas, and their lack of liberal-ness, but right now, I’m feeling good on Obama, and the future. Why, well, that turns out to be a research question in and of itself. Most of my positive thinking right now is due to a) Millenial Makeover, b) the state of the union address, and c) the question and answer session.

If nothing else, Obama, paradoxically, has reduced Republican participation in governance to idiocy. Republicans look like irrational, incompetent fools, and people are noticing this. Now, this doesn’t mean Republicans won’t get elected in 2010 or maybe even 2012, but Obama should be a landslide winner in 2012. Republicans are being reduced to irrelevance, and in part, they are doing this to themselves.

More than ever, I’m convinced that Barack Obama is the absolute perfect president for this time in America. But it may be the next one that brings the kind of policy sea-change promised in 2008.

I’m procrastinating a bit here, but I need to get my creative juices flowing again, and hey, this website is really nice, so I guess I should try to keep it up. But the main issue here, is that I’m disappointed in Barack Obama. Seriously disappointed. Ridiculously disappointed.

I’m glad I have had a fair amount of schoolwork to do this semester to keep my mind off of the horribleness that is currently the Obama administration. Alright, it’s not all horrible. The country has at least begun the move away from the neoliberal, neoconservative Bush years, but it’s been almost a year now, and it seems like we’ve barely taken one step.

Is the war over in Iraq? No. Are we still in Afghanistan? Yes. How about closing Gitmo? Not happening. Where are the jobs? Why is Wall Street still getting bailed out? What about Don’t Ask Don’t Tell? And how is that whole health care thing working out?

Surely, that’s a lot of stuff to expect a President to accomplish in a year. But it seems that we are moving at a snail’s pace. It really does seem like no qualitative changes are possible anymore. The U.S. state is just too stuck in its ways. It took 30 years of conservative rule to get the state to behave the way it does today, why should it be easy to change it in one year of a new presidency?

It shouldn’t be easy, but it doesn’t even look like Obama’s trying. Remember how excited we were when he got elected. I was like “America is the bomb!” Not anymore. My harshly cynical attitude is back, and I had thought it was merely a symptom of the Bush years. I cannot believe that I can compare my dislike of Obama to my dislike of Bush, but it’s happening. Why?

I really want the wars to end.

Call me a dove, or call me an idiot, I don’t care. I need the wars to end. The biggest load of bullshit in my lifetime was the invasion of Iraq. We’ve killed untold numbers of people there (1,033,000), and for what? So we could spend lots of money to occupy the place? So we could engender the enmity of other nations? Recruit more terrorists so we can kill them, too? We need to leave now. Just get the fuck out of there. It was Bush’s fault, leave it at that. I don’t want my vote for Obama to blood on it.

The war also needs to end because I’ve had way too many friends go to Iraq as part of the U.S. military. It’s frightening. The war is bullshit, and even if they have been indoctrinated to the extent that they actually believe in the mission, they still don’t want to be there. My main complaint it that all we do is pay lipservice to the troops when we say we love them, or give them a 15 second slot during the Thanksgiving NFL game to say hello. It’s so easy to support the troops when you don’t have to see them, or what they are doing. Not only do we keep the war at arm’s length, but we keep the troops at arm’s length. This, quite frankly, is highly disrespectful, and would end as soon as the war ends.

There are plenty of serious commentators out there who will say, well, we can’t leave now, the country will go into chaos, the troops who sacrificed their lives there will have died in vain, or something like, we’re so close to winning that now would be the worst time to leave. That last argument is the most bothersome, because this is the argument that always surfaces– “look at all these good things happening, look at the lower casualty numbers!” Okay, so tell me how it’s getting better, specifically, then tell me how we leave, and when. Those answers are never provided. And the fact is, one person’s experience in Iraq is just that, one person’s experience. The war was unjust to begin with. Let’s just count our losses and get the fuck out of there.

As far as Afghanistan, we need to get the fuck out of there, too. If we can’t invade Pakistan to kill off the rest of the Al Qaeda, then why are we continuing to kill the shit out of Afghanistan? Just for fun? Yeah, the Taliban are a bunch of assholes, but haven’t we/they had enough by now? The only way we can actually come out of Afghanistan with any kind of good looking end result is if we stay there for 25 more years, until we can raise a new generation of Afghanis. The country needs to be resocialized, and maybe that’s the strategy, I don’t know. Either way, we are interfering with their potentiality, and resocializing them is only the highest form of condescension.

My main argument is that war is more than just numbers and wins and losses. It’s about the very real effects it has on our soldiers and the peoples whose lives we interrupted. It’s about people. But war doesn’t give a shit about people.

Wall Street Must Be Punished!

Why did we have the Great Recession? Because of some asshole Wall Streeters who decided that all that matters was that they make tons of money, everyone else be damned. I do have a problem with capitalism in general, because it is founded on this premise, that individuals, when acting in their own self-interest, will actually end up cooperating. But capitalism is greed. Plain and simple. We should be prosecuting Wall Street for damages to the pysche of the American people. Their stupid risks and gambles left us all out to dry, and for the most part, they are still making boatloads of money, mostly at our expense. Wall Street should be reduced to dust. But no, Obama just loves Wall Street. There is nothing I hate more than corporate Democrats. They are all scum. And Obama’s turning into one.

Now, if we can’t punish Wall Street, because we all love each other and we don’t want to dwell on the past (even though Wall Street could give a shit about us), the least we can do is prop up normal Americans, too. That’s what the stimulus money was for, but it wasn’t enough, and now we won’t get any more $$ because suddenly Obama is worried about deficits (which are a problem, but not yet). The only visible effects of the Stimulus Bill has been the major highway construction projects that I have to drive through on Interstate eighty-fucking-one.

We need jobs, not just hope of jobs, and in this department, Obama has seriously let me down. Fail.

My Friends and I–We Need Health Care!

This is perhaps the most troubling failure yet. I can’t believe how shitty this health bill is going to be, as it stands right now. I thought the public option was shitty, as I wrote before about how even it is not enough. What we need is single payer, what we need is to close the market for our health. Some things just shouldn’t be commodified, and my health is one of those things.

If we don’t get a public option, but young people like me are forced to buy shitty private insurance plans, how is this anything other than a huge new tax that disproportionately affects the poor and the health that goes straight into the pockets of health insurance companies that have fucked up the system in the first place? We need health reform, and I’m not sure this plan makes it worse, but it is a disastrous example of how government can solve problems, because this bill won’t solve many, and creates a few on its own. I guess I’ll save my final verdict for when we actually see what Reid writes up.

Well, that was a pretty bad post. Once again, I had such high hopes for it, but it failed. Catch me over Winter Break. I’ll be reading some books, and it will probably get me into the writing mood again.

When drama strikes, I always pull out my cellphone. See some people arguing, shit’s about to go down, look over at me and my fingers are deep in the on-screen qwerty keyboard, frantically typing something–anything–to keep the drama at as far a distance as possible.

I’m not exactly sure how this phenomenon began, but I only recently discovered it after taking note of incidence after incidence where the day following a long bar crawl, someone tells me a story like this:

Someone: Dude, you believe that shit happened last night?
Me: What shit? What are you talking about?
Someone: Dude, how drunk were you? Shit! My mans got into a fight with some out-of-townies! How can you not remember that?
Me: Maybe I was really drunk. I can’t remember anything about that, but I do remember the drive home, vividly, thankfully. (checks phone) Oh shit, yeah man, I took a bunch of pictures during that same time frame you are referring to, but none of the actual drama.
Someone: Dude, you missed it. Damn, how do you always miss these things??!?!?!

Clearly, I have a subconscious instinct to avoid drama at all costs. I love knowing about drama, but actually participating in it and witnessing it? Yeah, not so much. Not at all. Especially when I’ve downed a beer or five.

It’s not always pictures. I asked my girlfriend to go back to some of her archived text message conversations between us, and sure enough, every now and then, she gets a slew of messages from me. Other nights, nothing. I’m pretty sure the nights with no texts were largely female-free on my end. That or my man SCS is not there, because for some reason, everyone wants to start shit around him. Not necessarily with him, but without him there, there would be no conflict, no drama. (buries head in phone, let’s see, what’s on Twitter??)

That’s it, that’s all, just had a few extra moments to bang out a post. Have a good one.

Sometimes his special comments bother me, but this time, he kills it. I thought it deserved it’s own post. Enjoy!

It might seem like a fantasy, and I’m wondering if it is. But if the Democractic Federal Government fails to pass and fully-implement & fund comprehensive health care reform, maybe the only hope leftists like me have a chance to show the country that single-payer works in the United States is to make it work at the state level. Health insurance coverage is important, but it is only one part of our broken health system.

As congress has decided to go on recess before finishing the health care reform bills, it has significantly increased the likelihood that all parties will come back after August, and completely water down the bills that right now seem pretty solid aka they would actually have a chance to make a significant positive impact on the general public, especially those who need help the most when it comes to health care.

But one thing they did stick into the house version of the bill by Todd Platts (R-PA) of all people was an amendment that guarantees the right of states to enact more comprehensive reform, including single-payer programs. This is pretty cool, especially for Pennsylvanians who have Ed Rendell on the record saying that if a workable single-payer bill came across his desk, he would sign it.

The group behind this initiative in pa is HealthCare4All. The bill has 36 co-sponsors, and it definitely workable. The group has also been doing a good job convincing the health care providers that it would put them in a much better situation than they are currently in, and a much better position than the federal health reform bill will put them in. It really is a good bill, check it out.

Maybe it’s not that I should be worried about misplacing my hope on single-payer in PA, but that I’ve been misplacing my hope in the Federal government, only to be consistently disappointed. I keep hoping that Democrats will grow a backbone and actually meet the demands of the constituents who elect them, not with petty soundbites, but with effective policies that address real needs, treating us like adults.

P.S. I started this post a week ago when I was much more depressed about the plight of the health care reform bills. It seems we may get a good bill, at least out of the house. However, you wouldn’t know that by watching CNN, where the number one headline is something along the lines of “Health Care Bill / Obama’s Presidency in Peril”, or in the Daily Item, where Chris Carney blathers on about not rushing health care bill. Also, this was going to be way more reflectionate, but I just needed to get this out of my drafts pile.

What you should be listening to

It’s an oldy but a goody. Too bad Gabriel & Dresden broke up…

Way Out West – Mindcircus (Gabriel & Dresden Remix)

First, I’ve got a wild video via Matt Taibbi’s blog on True/Slant (click the link and it will open in shadowbox). I mean, he flips out, wants Goldman to be dragged to the Hague. I agree. He gets me really fired up.

Max Keiser takes offense to Goldman, Sachs story by Matt Taibbi

Then, we have a Jon Stewart induced demolition of the those assholes who think Obama is not an American citizen because he’s not a Republican birthers:

I think the birthers simply boil down to people who are so ashamed of being openly racist and blackophobic that they have repressed their feelings of inadequacy so far down inside of them that they resort to supposedly reasonable conspiracy theories to make sense of the bizarre world around them in which, gasp, a black man is president of the United States. Holy FUCK!

And here’s the man in question doing his duty, supporting health care reform. I’m gonna flip out on health reform later today or tomorrow, as well as flipping out on Goldman, Sachs further.

…Which is here.

Pay of Top Earners Erodes Social Security (You can get the full version if you search through Google News)
Ellen E. Schultz, The Wall Street Journal

Executives and other highly compensated employees now receive more than one-third of all pay in the U.S., according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of Social Security Administration data — without counting billions of dollars more in pay that remains off federal radar screens that measure wages and salaries.

Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total U.S. pay in 2007, the latest figures available. The compensation numbers don’t include incentive stock options, unexercised stock options, unvested restricted stock units and certain benefits.

Just try to stomach the outrage over the huo-hum fact that executives receive more than 33% of total pay in the US and read down to this:

The growing portion of pay that exceeds the maximum amount subject to payroll taxes has contributed to the weakening of the Social Security trust fund. In May, the government said the Social Security fund would be exhausted in 2037, four years earlier than was predicted in 2008.

The data suggest that the payroll tax ceiling hasn’t kept up with the growth in executive pay. As executive pay has increased, the percentage of wages subject to payroll taxes has shrunk, to 83% from 90% in 1982. Compensation that isn’t subject to the portion of payroll tax that funds old-age benefits now represents foregone revenue of $115 billion a year.

So because these behemoth assholes are getting paid so outlandishly, Social Security is drying up. What kind of ridiculously regressive tax policy is this, anyway????!?!?!?

The Can’t Do Blue Dogs
Harold Meyerson, Washington Post

Watching the centrist Democrats in Congress create more and more reasons why health care can’t be fixed, I’ve been struck by a disquieting thought: Suppose our collective lack of response to Hurricane Katrina wasn’t exceptional but, rather, the new normal in America. Suppose we can no longer address the major challenges confronting the nation. Suppose America is now the world’s leading can’t-do country.

Every other nation with an advanced economy long ago secured universal health care for its citizens — an achievement that the United States alone finds beyond the capacities of mortal man. It wasn’t ever thus. Time was when Democratic Congresses enacted Social Security and Medicare over the opposition of powerful interests and Republican ideologues. In fact, our government used to actually pave roads, build bridges and allow for secure retirements by levying taxes on those who could afford to pay them.

To today’s centrist Democrats, this has become a distant memory, a history lesson they cannot grasp. The notion that actual individuals might have to pay to secure the national interest appalls them. In the House, the Blue Dogs doggedly oppose proposals to fund universal coverage by taxing the wealthiest 1 percent of the nation’s households. Their deference to wealth — whether the consequence of our system of funding elections or a byproduct of the Internet generation’s experience of free access to information and entertainment — is not to be trifled with.

Also, you def need to see this on the Republican / ignorant White person outrage surrounding the Sotomayor nomination.

This is the first in what will probably be a several part series of rants and internal monologues about how I feel about Goldman, Sachs. Basically, the company can go bite the curb, collectively. If you’ve been paying attention to the recent noise over Goldman, you are definitely familiar with Matt Taibbi and his article, “The Great American Bubble Machine”. If not, you should read it, then come back here for the next installment of me being a complain-face. If you don’t want to read it, keep reading so you can get the jist of what’s going on–you know, the actual facts surrounding Goldman. It will make you angry. As it should.

In fact, if you’re not angry by the time you’re done either a) reading Taibbi’s article, or b) reading and agreeing with my opinions published here, you should probably check yourself into Skynet headquarters, because you’re a mindless robot lacking basic human emotion (you’re probably also lacking the killing machine part, though, that comes with Skynet-conceived robots). At some point, I’m going to go on a rant about how EFCA was watered down…blah blah blah… but I’m a little behind in my constructive postings, so let’s get started.

The Great Bubble Machine

Taibbi presents awfully compelling evidence that Goldman has participated in creating bubbles in order to unfairly profit from them, while the rest of us suffer the consequences of their thirst for riches. He begins with the Great Depression, believe it or not.

Beginning a pattern that would repeat itself over and over again, Goldman got into the investmenttrust game late, then jumped in with both feet and went hogwild.

[...]

The end result (ask yourself if this sounds familiar) was a daisy chain of borrowed money, one exquisitely vulnerable to a decline in performance anywhere along the line. The basic idea isn’t hard to follow. You take a dollar and borrow nine against it; then you take that $10 fund and borrow $90; then you take your $100 fund and, so long as the public is still lending, borrow and invest $900. If the last fund in the line starts to lose value, you no longer have the money to pay back your investors, and everyone gets massacred.

Yes, they really were involved in Great Irresponsibility that created the Great Depression. It surprised me, too. Believe it.

Then we have the great Tech Stock bubble. This one is particularly interesting, if only because it wasn’t so long ago. While many firms participated in inflating the bubble, Goldman decided it would be cool to take it off the charts. We must remember that the Government is completely beholden to the interests of Goldman, not the least reason being that pretty much the entire market policy of the USA has been developed and administered by Goldman people (Rubin, Paulson, Summers, etc).

The basic scam in the Internet Age is pretty easy even for the financially illiterate to grasp. Companies that weren’t much more than potfueled ideas scrawled on napkins by uptoolate bongsmokers were taken public via IPOs, hyped in the media and sold to the public for mega-millions. It was as if banks like Goldman were wrapping ribbons around watermelons, tossing them out 50-story windows and opening the phones for bids. In this game you were a winner only if you took your money out before the melon hit the pavement.

[...]

“Since the Depression, there were strict underwriting guidelines that Wall Street adhered to when taking a company public,” says one prominent hedge-fund manager. “The company had to be in business for a minimum of five years, and it had to show profitability for three consecutive years. But Wall Street took these guidelines and threw them in the trash.” Goldman completed the snow job by pumping up the sham stocks: “Their analysts were out there saying Bullshit.com is worth $100 a share.”

The problem was, nobody told investors that the rules had changed. “Everyone on the inside knew,” the manager says. “Bob Rubin sure as hell knew what the underwriting standards were. They’d been intact since the 1930s.”

The main thing to take away is that Goldman, being a firm that takes companies public, was manipulating the IPO share price by having inside knowledge about what investors are likely to buy. This is technically called “laddering.”

But the real problem wasn’t the money that was lost by shareholders, it was the money gained by investment bankers, who received hefty bonuses for tampering with the market. Instead of teaching Wall Street a lesson that bubbles always deflate, the Internet years demonstrated to bankers that in the age of freely flowing capital and publicly owned financial companies, bubbles are incredibly easy to inflate, and individual bonuses are actually bigger when the mania and the irrationality are greater.

Let’s skip ahead (skipping the housing craze which many of us are now familiar with)  to something even more outrageous, but definitely true–the unexplainable spike in oil prices in the Summer of 2008. After the housing bubble burst, Goldman moved on to the physical-commodities market.

Oil futures in particular skyrocketed, as the price of a single barrel went from around $60 in the middle of 2007 to a high of $147 in the summer of 2008.

That summer, as the presidential campaign heated up, the accepted explanation for why gasoline had hit $4.11 a gallon was that there was a problem with the world oil supply.

[...]

But it was all a lie…Not only was the shortterm supply of oil rising, the demand for it was falling — which, in classic economic terms, should have brought prices at the pump down.

[...]

Goldman did it by persuading pension funds and other large institutional investors to invest in oil futures — agreeing to buy oil at a certain price on a fixed date. The push transformed oil from a physical commodity, rigidly subject to supply and demand, into something to bet on, like a stock. Between 2003 and 2008, the amount of speculative money in commodities grew from $13 billion to $317 billion, an increase of 2,300 percent. By 2008, a barrel of oil was traded 27 times, on average, before it was actually delivered and consumed.

And to do all this legally, a depression-era law had to be changed to allow there to be more speculators than “actual consumers and producers.” Nice. So while we all get screwed with high gas prices, declining access to social services including health care, increasing costs of education, increased pollution, etc, Goldman walks away with massive bonuses, and ready for this, pays only $24 million in annual taxes, an effective 1% rate. So I pay nearly 30 percent of my check to taxes, and I make less than minimum wage.

Too bad I don’t have a government that bends over backwards to subsidize my profits. I might have a nicer website. And more time to rant.

What you should be listening to

Kirsty Hawkshaw Meets Elucidate – Face to Face (Ken Loi Rework)

I would rather be writing a post about Goldman, Sachs or about Noam Chomsky, but, alas, I am feeling a bit stressed about the impending future. So I’m going to go sit on a couch and pout for a bit. Hopefully, I’ll be back sometime this week to offer up some good material.

Until then, take some lingering analyses of Palin:

The Emperor Has No Clothes
The Anonymous Liberal

One of the more fascinating sociological phenomenon is the tendency people have, in certain situations, to ignore what their own senses are telling them and instead buy into an elaborate fiction just because other people appear to be doing the same thing. The classic illustration of this phenomenon is Hans Christian Andersen’s story The Emperor’s New Clothes — where a couple of con men convince the Emperor that they’ve made him a new suit out of the finest cloth there is, but that only smart people can see it. Not wanting to look dumb, the Emperor and his ministers rave about how beautiful the suit is and organize a procession through town. The villagers, not wanting to admit they don’t understand what’s going on, also rave about the Emperor’s beautiful new suit as he marches naked through the town. It’s not until a child points out the obvious — that the Emperor has no clothes — that the entire fiction crumbles.

Sarah Palin’s manic, rambling, completely incoherent resignation speech the other day was just the latest of her many naked processions through town. Yet for reasons I can’t begin to fathom, a large number of people, in both Republican circles and the mainstream media, continue to insist that she’s wearing a beautiful new suit. For instance, Mark Halperin of TIME insists– despite all evidence and common sense to the contrary — that by quitting her only significant governmental job before serving out her first term, and doing so in a complete train wreck of a speech, Palin actually strengthened her 2012 prospects. And though many on the right are belatedly acknowledging that the Emperor has no clothes, many others continue to insist that Palin is a viable presidential candidate and that her decision to step down may have been a “shrewd” one.

As Josh Marshall so perfectly put it earlier today:

“[A]ny pundit who thinks this is some risky but potentially brilliant strategic move is absolutely smoking crack. Hitting the crack pipe, or, just as likely, being witlessly contrarian to set themselves apart from the common herd of sane people.”

Palin leads the right into a reality TV vortex
Andrew Sullivan

The reality of Sarah Palin is that politics is a means to her higher goal: celebrity. Every action she takes is designed to make sense . . . if you believe that government is really a version of a reality show. The remote, David Lynch-style location, the family often in trouble with the law, the pregnant teenage daughter and her impossibly handsome redneck boyfriend, the boyfriend’s angry sister, an ornery Alaskan trooper, a few moose and mysterious pregnancies . . . and, well, the mini-series never ends. The best guess I’ve heard of the real reason for her abrupt departure is: “I’m a celebrity . . . get me out of here!”

A Farewell to Harms
Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal

She was a gifted retail politician who displayed the disadvantages of being born into a point of view (in her case a form of conservatism; elsewhere and in other circumstances, it could have been a form of liberalism) and swallowing it whole: She never learned how the other sides think, or why.

In television interviews she was out of her depth in a shallow pool. She was limited in her ability to explain and defend her positions, and sometimes in knowing them. She couldn’t say what she read because she didn’t read anything. She was utterly unconcerned by all this and seemed in fact rather proud of it: It was evidence of her authenticity. She experienced criticism as both partisan and cruel because she could see no truth in any of it. She wasn’t thoughtful enough to know she wasn’t thoughtful enough. Her presentation up to the end has been scattered, illogical, manipulative and self-referential to the point of self-reverence. “I’m not wired that way,” “I’m not a quitter,” “I’m standing up for our values.” I’m, I’m, I’m.

In another age it might not have been terrible, but here and now it was actually rather horrifying.

That piece was pretty harsh. You should read the whole thing if you love bashing Palin. Now, onto the Health Care reform party, which is shaping up rather poorly right now, and as usual, I blame the MSM propaganda machine for forcing everyone to freak out about change. There will probably be a rant about this at some point this week, too.

The cost of no public option
Devilstower, Daily Kos

Let’s move to the other end of the spectrum. As of 2009, life expectancy in the United States is 78.11 years. Which sounds pretty good, until you realize it puts us one slot above Albania. For the United Kingdom, this number is 79.01 years. For France it’s 80.98. For Canada, 81.23. for the United States, that means about 270,000,000 years lost compared just to the slightly better numbers of the UK. 936,000,000 years lost compared to Canada. Want to stick a monetary value on it? Say that just a fourth of these Americans in their golden years are pulling down 20 hours a week and getting minimum wage to wave you into the local big box or bag your groceries. That’s $442 billion worth of time lost compared to the UK. About $1.5 trillion lost if those workers had lived as long as Canadians.

There are good things to be said about the American system. When you’re in an American hospital, a very good level of immediate care makes you more likely to survive the immediate aftermath of a health crisis. Just had a heart attack? Hug that cardiac care unit close and you’re 20% more likely to hang around than your neighbor to the north. However, a low quality of long term and follow up care erodes that difference over the course of a year. Sorry.

Have a good day. I’m off to freak out a bit. Goodbye.

Harry Reid, nothing but excuses
kos, Daily Kos

During the Bush years, the Senate needed 50 votes (plus Cheney) to pass legislation. Once Democrats took the Senate, that obviously changed. 60 votes became the new threshold. And no one has been a more avid promoter of that new standard than the Senate Democratic leader himself, Harry Reid.

Now that he has 60 votes, his handy excuse is bunk. So what does Reid do? Make more excuses.

Harry Reid sucks as a majority leader. Period.

New Dem health plan costs less, covers more — and has a public option
Jed Lewison, Daily Kos

The key thing to remember is that last time around, we were looking at a $1 trillion price tag over 10 years — and millions without coverage.

This time we’re looking at $600 billion over 10 years and 97% coverage.

What changed?

Two things. First, now the plan includes a public option, which is a far more cost effective way of expanding coverage than only subsidizing private insurance. Second, it contains a funding mechanism requiring employers who do not provide health insurance to pay an annual fee for each uncovered employee. Small businesses would be exempt from this fee.

Thank God we have this bill to offer, but it’s still not certain we are going to pass real reform. More discussion below.

Advocacy Groups? Shut Up. Lobbyists? Have A Seat
BarbinMD, Daily Kos

So, do you want to get involved in politics and help advance meaningful health care legislation? Maybe raise a little money to run ads that target specific lawmakers, organize petitions, or send out emails to like-minded people, urging them to contact their representative? Well, sit down and shut up:

“President Obama, strategizing yesterday with congressional leaders about health-care reform, complained that liberal advocacy groups ought to drop their attacks on Democratic lawmakers and devote their energy to promoting passage of comprehensive legislation.”

But if you have more than a million dollars a day to spend, have a vested interest in stopping real health care reform, and better yet, if you have a past, personal relationship with key lawmakers, pull up a chair

And they say we are lockstep Obama supporters that will follow him into Nazi America. Right. The next piece is less depressing, but same theme.

HELP Is on the Way
Paul Krugman, New York Times

So fundamental health reform — reform that would eliminate the insecurity about health coverage that looms so large for many Americans — is now within reach. The “centrist” senators, most of them Democrats, who have been holding up reform can no longer claim either that universal coverage is unaffordable or that it won’t work.

The only question now is whether a combination of persuasion from President Obama, pressure from health reform activists and, one hopes, senators’ own consciences will get the centrists on board — or at least get them to vote for cloture, so that diehard opponents of reform can’t block it with a filibuster.

This is a historic opportunity — arguably the best opportunity since 1947, when the A.M.A. killed Harry Truman’s health-care dreams. We’re right on the cusp. All it takes is a few more senators, and HELP will be on the way.

If Krugman thinks it’s a good bill, so do I. I’ll follow lockstep with him. For a perspective on the Sarah Palin debacle:

Sarah’s Straight Talk
Gail Collins, New York Times

“And a problem in our country today is apathy,” she said on Friday as she announced that she would resign as governor of Alaska at the end of the month. “It would be apathetic to just hunker down and ‘go with the flow.’ Nah, only dead fish ‘go with the flow.’ No. Productive, fulfilled people determine where to put their efforts, choosing to wisely utilize precious time … to BUILD UP.”

Basically, the point was that Palin is quitting as governor because she’s not a quitter. Or a deceased salmon.

RFK Jr – President Obama should go to Appalachia
Devilstower, Daily Kos

Yes, there are many problems facing President Obama, and many issues confronting the Congress. But the issue of mountaintop removal may be unique in that it doesn’t require any extraordinary action. It won’t cost billions of dollars. It doesn’t need any kind of false “bipartisanship.” It only requires that President Obama instruct the EPA and other agencies to enforce the existing law. If he does not do this, there is no doubt where the fault for the resulting ruin will lie.

I agree with Devilstower, and RFK. It is a tragedy that can be stopped easily. I have one more holdover from July 2:

That ’30s Show
Paul Krugman, New York Times

And as an economist, I’d add that many members of my profession are playing a distinctly unhelpful role.

It has been a rude shock to see so many economists with good reputations recycling old fallacies — like the claim that any rise in government spending automatically displaces an equal amount of private spending, even when there is mass unemployment — and lending their names to grossly exaggerated claims about the evils of short-run budget deficits. (Right now the risks associated with additional debt are much less than the risks associated with failing to give the economy adequate support.)

Also, as in the 1930s, the opponents of action are peddling scare stories about inflation even as deflation looms.

So getting another round of stimulus will be difficult. But it’s essential.

We didn’t do enough stimulus the first time around. Krugman was right, and they still won’t listen to him, even though he was on the cover of Newsweek many month ago.

Okay, whew, I feel a lot better. But now I am going to read Taibbi’s controversial but true articles about Goldman, then report back to you tomorrow. G’night!