Facebook Politics

Facebook shows you more than the trivia of your friends' lives. It also shows you their politics, and how they think about the world. This can be fascinating and unsettling.

For example, some people I like recently joined Petition To Remove Group "Soldiers Are Not Heroes", a group that's a petition to remove the Soldiers Are Not Heroes group.

Leaving aside which group I agree with, the 'Petition To Remove' group scares the fuck out of me: their goal is to silence people who disagree with them. If you want to engage the "Soldiers Are Not Heroes" group in vigorous debate, argue with them, call them names, start a group called 'Members Of The "Soldiers Are Not Heroes" Group Are Clueless Ingrates' - fine. That's freedom in action. Let both sides make their cases.

But remove them from Facebook because you don't like what they're saying? Shut them down to shut them up? What could be less free, less noble, less American, than that? That's not what our troops are fighting for. That's the kind of death-to-unbelievers intolerance they're fighting against.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

Colonel Barfoot Should Take His Flagpole Down

First, this isn't about the American flag. The Sussex Square Homeowners Association (SSHA) has no objection to American flags. It's about whether the colonel or anyone else in the community can fly any flag on a 21-foot front-yard flagpole. The SSHA says no.

Second, the colonel's military service and heroism are wonderful, but irrelevant. Would you say yes to a flagpole for the colonel, but no to a flagpole for draft dodgers like Bill Clinton or Dick Cheney? What if the stoner down the street wants a 50-foot flagpole for his Steal Your Face flag? Does he get it if he's a veteran, otherwise no?

Finally, this is about honoring a contract. When you buy a house that's managed by a homeowners association, you agree in writing to follow their rules. If you don't want to abide by their decisions, don't buy the house. But you shouldn't expect to have it both ways.

(If you need background, here's the Richmond Times-Dispatch article, and here's the misleadingly-titled Facebook page.)

Cash For Chuckleheads

I really don't like the "Cash For Clunkers" program.

First, the supposed environmental benefits are "middling" at best. There are far more effective ways to use tax dollars to save the planet.

Then there's the moral hazard. The most common trade-ins include Ford Explorers and Chevy Blazers. Why should we reward people who made lousy mileage decisions? We should be letting the free market punish those decisions. I'd much rather reward the guy whose '95 Civic is still going strong.

Finally, the economic stimulus. Short-term stimulus for car makers and dealers, yes. Woohoo! But what happens six months from now? Remember employee pricing, the superstar of 2005? Remember what happened a year later, when there was no more demand in the pipeline? Remember the bankruptcies of 2008? A taxpayer-funded price cut isn't a rescue plan, it's a leaky life preserver in the middle of a big ocean.

So this is one of those odd moments where I find myself in agreement with immoderate Republicans like Jim DeMint. "Cash For Clunkers" gives Joe Taxpayer a piece of bail-out pie, so it's enormously popular. But that doesn't make it good policy. It's as misguided as the huge Wall Street bail-outs.

Another One Bites The Dust

Just for the record, I predicted Palin's resignation months ago. Sure hope I'm right about the scandal part, too. That would explain her odd decision to announce her abdication on July 3rd.

At Least We Knew Where Clinton Was

Turns out South Carolina mystery man Mark Sanford was out getting his package stimulated. First Ensign, now this.

Feel free to insert your own remark about astonishing Republican hypocrisy here. I'm worn out.

The Company We Keep

According to this Amnesty International study, the U.S. had the fourth-highest number of executions in the world in 2008. First, second, and third were China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Fifth was Pakistan.

Granted, absolute numbers that don't adjust for population are skewed. And, granted, the U.S. number is going down. Still - Iran? Saudi Arabia? Pakistan? Do we want our country on this list?

And anyone who abhors the idea of spending tax dollars to keep killers alive should read this Economist article. Life imprisonment is cheaper than execution.

Actual Numbers Trump Vague Threats

Daniel Gross has a very nice analysis of Republican tax increase FUD. If you're making $300K, you'll pay an extra two grand in taxes. Is that really going to drive a lot of successful entrepreneurs onto the welfare rolls?

Republican Lies!

I know, "Republican Lies!" is like "Rain In Seattle!" But this one is so flagrant.

Those high-earner tax increases that the Republicans keep whining about? They don't take effect till 2011. That's twenty months from now.

We can debate the dubious assertion that a modest tax increase turns entrepreneurs into slackers. We shouldn't have to debate how a calendar works.

I Accept Full Responsibility For This Post

Timothy Geithner is the latest government official to take (or "accept") full responsibility for a mess. So much courage in the public sector! But there's always an unspoken asterisk - full responsibility, as long as there are no consequences. As long as I don't lose my job. As long as it doesn't cost me anything.

In Geithner's case, the statement is especially absurd. Of course he's fully responsible - he did his own tax returns. Does he imagine that he's taking the heat off Intuit? Were fingers pointing their way because they left the "Do you work at the IMF?" question out of Turbotax's canned Q&A?

But even when the responsibility-taker sits atop an org chart and really is talking about the mistakes of people down below, the statement is meaningless. It's easy to take full responsibility when there are no consequences. How about "I accept full responsibility for my team's mistakes, and therefore I'm resigning"? That would mean something.

See Ya, Dubyuh

Well, it's almost over. We're getting our country back. We rented it out to some lousy tenants, and they did a lot of damage to the place, but the eviction notice stuck this time. Soon we can start to repair things. (Except for the Supreme Court appointments. They'll be around for a long time, occasionally causing pain and embarrassment. Like herpes.)

Bush has had a chance to watch Obama in action for two months now. I wonder if he sees the difference, if he's picking up even a glimmer of how a real leader does things. Maybe he has a clue now about what went so wrong for the last eight years.

Probably not.

Connect The Dots

• Chrysler Shuts Factories For A Month


• PT Cruiser Does Poorly In Crash Tests - December 2008


• PT Cruiser Does Poorly In Crash Tests - August 2000

How About Al Gore For EPA Administrator?

My wife's idea. Sounds like a winner. Sure hope the transition team reads my blog.

Leaving Office In Disgrace? You Betcha!

A lot of people think Sarah Palin has a political future. I think her past is catching up with her: ethics violations, bridge-to-nowhere flipflops, secret Yahoo email accounts to sidestep Alaska's public records laws.

This is the future of the Republican Party? Sounds more like the greatest hits of Nixon and Bush.

Many Alaskans have strange ideas about morality, but I don't think Governor Palin will make it to the end of her first term. Let the hue and cry begin.

Balanced Journalism, Richmond-Style

As long as the Times-Dispatch reports lynchings-in-effigy for both sides, they're on the high road.

How The Other Half Lives

I was standing outside a bar last night (does a common theme emerge in these posts?), talking politics with some people. We started listing the various canards and pseudo-evidence that might keep a poorly-informed voter from supporting Obama: He's a Muslim, a terrorist, a member of Al Qaeda, his middle name is Hussein...

A woman standing nearby yelled, "That's not true, and I'm voting for him!" Great, right on, we responded. But, "You need to get your facts straight!" she yelled. No, we were joking, we explained. "Doesn't sound like joking to me," she said, and returned to her cellphone.

In short, she was an intrusive pain in the butt, far more interested in excoriating than in educating. She's voting the right way, but I wonder how many votes she's cost Obama with her hectoring.

And I got a sense of how folks on the right must feel when we true believers explain things to them. It's not fun to have a stranger yell at you. It doesn't make you reconsider; if anything, it makes you even more certain that Obama and his supporters are scary.

I understand the frustration - we're fighting racism and a massive campaign of lies. But it doesn't matter how right we are - stay calm, or stay silent.

I'm Calling It Now: Obama Wins Virginia

I was at a blues party this past Sunday. I was wearing my Bush's Last Day t-shirt. The guy sitting in front of me was wearing a B-52 bomber peace sign t-shirt, "Peace The Old-Fashioned Way." White guy, middle-aged.

I told him we probably disagreed on all sorts of things, but I thought his shirt was cool. He told me I was making assumptions that might be wrong. We chatted. He was right.

He's a vet, served in a bomber wing, is proud of it. But he had no problem with my t-shirt. As a conservative Bush voter, he feels "betrayed," and his feelings about the Iraq war match mine: senseless, the wrong war.

He's not thrilled with either presidential choice, and he wouldn't say how he's planning to vote. But he did say that he hopes that "young man" can lead the country. So, again, this is a prototypical McCain voter who's actually somewhere between uncertain and Obama.

Another reminder that, in these polarized times, there are smart people in the middle with nuanced views.

Finally, a caveat, my margin of error: I do most of my political fieldwork with a bellyful of good beer. Unlike the media elite, however, I admit it.

My Money Went To Wall St. And All I Got Was This Lousy Bailout

Good thing Congress acted so quickly to reduce market volatility.

OMG Democracy!

The richest, strongest special interests lost one today. Whatever their reasons, an odd coalition of House Republicans and Democrats said no to business as usual.

Will it last? I'm not optimistic. But, for one day, it's possible to believe that maybe, just maybe, we can wrest control of our government back from the lobbyists.

$700 Billion

The argument goes something like this: we have to do something, or thousands of people in the financial industry will lose their jobs. Banks, leery of taking on more bad debt, will stop lending money, and we'll have a credit crunch. If no one can borrow money, that'll prolong the housing market collapse. Thousands of people in construction will lose their jobs. More people out of work means more people behind on their mortgages, more foreclosures, more bad debt and failing banks. A downward spiral. The bottom? A recession, or maybe this century's Great Depression.

Okay, let's put aside for a moment the very necessary discussion of just how likely this doomsday scenario really is. Let's stipulate that, if we do nothing, disaster will play out just this way. Let's assume that we have to do something radical and expensive to avert calamity.

That still leaves a $700 billion question: is a huge bailout for bad debt the best way to stop the meteor? Right now, it's the only solution the Bush administration is offering: make taxpayers the buyers of last resort for Wall Street's mistakes.

But $700 billion is a lot of money. It can pay for a lot of restructured mortgages to keep people in their houses. It can pay extended unemployment benefits for a lot of laid-off workers. And it can ease a credit crunch by guaranteeing debt - new, solid debt issued by lenders willing to submit to rational regulation in return for a federal guarantee. The kind of debt that gets repaid.

Any Wall Street dealmaker knows that you don't take the other guy's first offer. We taxpayers should keep that in mind as we look at the Administration's bailout plan.

A Perfectly Executed Double Pander

John McCain's bizarre vice-presidential pick is a brazen pander to two key voting blocs: women and the religious right. Plainly, he will do just about anything to win the election, principles and good sense be damned.

Sad, really. Eight years ago, McCain ran on his beliefs, and Karl Rove whupped him good. Lesson learned, integrity jettisoned. What a steep price to pay for a shot at the Oval Office.