It Was Compulsory

On of my favorite rules of thumb from the world of theoretical physics is, “That which is not expressly forbidden is compulsory.” It’s a simple law of probability which observes that given enough time and degrees of freedom any phenomena that could happen will happen. That axiom also applies to any arena were we humans have constructed our own sets of rules to govern behavior: sports, business, civil society, etc. Be it Barry Bonds taking steroids, the New England Patriots illegally video taping opponents coaching signals, the Chinese fudging the ages of Olympic gymnasts, or financial institutions fudging virtually every number on their ledgers; these things will happen unless the rules are enforced.

In the world of physics, life is easy. The rules are enforced by Mother Nature (or a Spinozean God, if you prefer), and breaking the rules is simply not possible. In human endeavors, however, there must be some fashion of governing body to perform that function. Sports leagues have a commissioner. The Olympics have the IOC. It is the role of government, specifically the Executive Branch, to enforce the laws in the business world and civil society. Unfortunately, as far as the business world is concerned, that enforcement has been nonexistent for about 30 years, and now we are all reaping the harvest associated with such neglect.

Oh yes, we have been lying. We have been lying to ourselves for 30 years. We’ve told ourselves that we could allow business to do whatever it damn well pleases, and it will be just fine if we trust the market to fix everything. We told ourselves that government oversight was the problem, not the solution. We told ourselves that we didn’t have to worry about how much debt we carried; individually or as a nation. They were all lies, and now we are all getting called out on our lies. The only question that remains is whether or not we’ll continue believing our lies long enough to elect as President another liar, John McCain.

Would McCain be that much worse than Obama? You better believe it. McCain’s odds-on choice for Treasury Secretary is Phil Gramm. Gramm and Alan Greenspan have been the two most central players in the deregulation fervor that has landed us in this financial mess. Paul Krugman, a professor of economics at Princeton University who moonlights as an op-ed columnist for the New York Times, told Keith Olbermann on the show Countdown, “…we could manage to have another great depression if we work at it hard enough. I think Phil Gramm might be just the guy to do it.” That’s no lie.

Please explain it to me as if I were a 5th grader.

My favorite election prediction site, FiveThirtyEight.com, is currently projecting that John McCain will win the election for President in November. Of course, it is only early September and there are still three presidential and one vice-presidential debates on the slate that could swing things. However, after watching John Kerry stomp a big mud hole George W. Bush during the 2004 debates and still lose the election, I'm not convinced the debates will do much to change the attitude of voters.

Personally, I just don't get it. Granted, I'm an over-educated, underemployed, left-coast, latte-sippin', long haired, neo-hippie liberal who on a daily basis struggles with the overwhelming desire to burn flags, administer abortions, and enslave everyone to a communist government. I may be a beyond hope.

If there is anyone out there who is among the 52 percent who will vote for John McCain, will you please explain to my WHY!?!

Which Candidate is the Media Darling?

There's no doubt that Barack Obama is getting more media coverage than John McCain. Does that necessarily mean that Obama is getting the better part of the deal? Not in the least.

A recent study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs looked at the stories presented by the nightly news of ABC, NBC, and CBS. It found that 72 % of the stories about Obama were negative, but only 57 % of the stories about McCain were negative.

If you are thinking, "Who the hell is the Center for Media and Public Affairs? A lefty wing-nut group?" Well, not really. A study they released in 2006 found that the Democratic candidates were getting an easier time from the media during the primaries. That study was hailed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh as undeniable proof that liberal media bias.

McCain has been and remains the real media darling. Don't think so? Look at this way. Take the misstatements the McCain has made and pretend that Obama said them. Imagine what the media would be saying: "Obama confuses Sunni and Shia." "Obama flip-flops on veterans benefits, on abortion, on coastal drilling, and on time lines in Iraq." Let us not forget ABC's gambit of simply clipping Senator's McCain's errors from his interview with Katie Couric.

Which candidate would you rather be? The one under the media microscope, or the one who is getting ignored despite a virtually never ending stream of misstatements and outright gaffs?

Moyers & Fraser on the New Gilded Age

Here's a spot-0n discussion about our modern Gilded Age.

For those of you who are still a little foggy on the the first Gilded Age, take a look at the 1873 piece by Mark Twain the coined the phrase.

"Liberal" Media - Chris Matthews

Here's the latest short from Brave New Films. Notice the complete lack of bias.

Let the Rumors Loose!!!

This story should just be a nice little side note. A Hollywood star sends an encouraging e-mail to a Presidential candidate, and the candidate writes back. A correspondence then ensues. No problems, right?

Oh PA-LEESE! How can you be so naive? We now hear that Obama has been corresponding with Scarlett Johansson. You know, THAT Scarlett Johansson: the latest in a long line of Marilyn Monroe look-a likes! The letters JFK have been swirling around Obama's head like a swarm of gnats for months, and now he's got his own Marilyn.

Wait until the tabloids get a hold of this story! Talk about having legs! The story, that is. Scarlett has nice ones too, and there will no doubt be no small amount of ink spilled discussing them. What I'm talking about is a tale of two pictures:



AND



To be completely fair, the correspondence between Obama and Johansson seems utterly platonic and innocent. There's no FACTUAL reason to believe otherwise. Then again, since when has the MSM let facts get in the way of a good story? "Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war."

This story has the potential to be HUGE, and not in a good way for Obama. Nothing gets the squinty-eyed bigots of this country more wound up than the idea of a black man with a white woman... a BLONDE white woman. Oi vey! Hmmm... what demographic group has been voting Republican a lot lately... hmmm... could it be squinty-eyed bigots?!?! Yeah, you betcha. We haven't hear the last of this story.

Another example of the "liberal" MSM

The "liberal" mainstream media would certainly pounce on the Senate Intelligence Committee report that confirms that the White House essentially lied us into an unnecessary war. As Jon Stewart would say, "Not so much."