The mayors race in San Diego in many ways mirrors the problems of the nation. The city is facing bankruptcy, the incumbent is ahead in the polls, but after four years he is part of the problem, not the solution, but people are afraid to throw out a powerful figure, and replace him with someone who is less assertive.

During the debate one candidate suggested he would turn the city completely green, with renewable energy. Such a proposal seems a bit kooky, and there wasn't time enough for details. Suppose the city was able to float bonds to pay for this change? The idea of being energy independent has some appeal, as the energy crisis during the Enron episode still lingers in voters minds. After twenty years of credit excess used for frivilous and speculative reasons, could we use some of this credit largesse to fund necessary things, like energy, healthcare, etc?

San Diego has the lowest city tax rate of any major city in the nation. Certainly there might be some room to raise taxes, put the money into energy bonds, and turn the city green? Would that work in the nation at large?

The problem is will the voters accept the message, or simply vote for a powerful figure who will go to Washington and demand earmarks, and smooze lobbyists who will put pressure on the bond rating agencies. For the nation McCain means more of the Bush caboodle, (incidentally the Republican party has three times more money than McCain, and more than Obama I believe, and most of that is blood money, through kickbacks to defense contractors, circa Cunningham and Abramoff, and offshore banks, and the failure of Democrats to prosecute Bush is a failure to get any of that money back)

So yes suddenly their moral failure, is a real failure, with real consequences, not just a sin of omission. Fortunately San Diego has an independent District Attorney, with a strong sense of the law, fairness, and a nose for corruption. San Diego has a fighting chance, more than the nation I think.

Some cause for concern, a criminal sits in the White House and all you can do is sign his bills?

The Republican greed machine started with the venture capital group, (something the SEC should have stopped a long time ago) which allowed investors to obfuscate the transfer of funds. Venture Capital almost always ends up in on offshore bank, and from there political operatives can pump their coffers full. The common link between Iran Contra and the failed Savings and Loans (McCain last member of the Keating Five) is George Bush Sr, with help from Neil (Silverado) and probably Jeb, and even GWB. When the Democrats failed to make that one stick, the outhouse doors were thrown open.

Operating under the cover of black contracts, money was steered into the Republican campaign coffers. The records are sealed and the chairman of the Armed Services Comm, Duncan Hunter, resigned rather than face scrutiny. Cunningham is hoping for a pardon, war hero and all. (perhaps fellow Navy pilot John McCain will give him one, if he is elected President)

The only thing that bothers me about this ed, is that it is all fluff, and no substance. How about a few specifics? Of course if you make it in the WSJ the fewer the better. We all know that everybody does it.

and he has promised to defend Atlanta, even though top NeoConservatives insist they are not part of the Union, according to pre-Civil War Constitutional doctrine.

Hey as long as its good for the economy.

Maybe Bush can write him a letter.

http://europebusines.blogspot.com/2008/08/massive-us-naval-armada-heads-for-iran.html

To correct one point the war was escalating while the stock market rally ensued (flight to safety? the US buck also benefited)

The timing (was meant to take?) has taken something away from the Olympic games, (for that the Chinese should be grateful)

Anyone familiar with Cheney doctrine in Eastern Europe knows this pot is about ready to explode. Maybe Russia will give aid to Mexico in exchange for nuclear missiles pointed at LA? Neoconservative hegemony is a policy you can measure as a matter of degree. The level of fairness in foreign relations has been weighted 90% in favor of the US in these matters, arguing about the other 10% is what the politicians do.

The US Armada is going to guarantee a policy which asserts the right of free passage to all shipping through the Straights of Hormuz, and that policy could easily include a DMZ (free fire zone) along the shoreline on either side, for x number of miles ( the politicians will argue about the final 10%). Dubai has the Southern shore, and we almost had the troops in there, but the port deal fell through.

McCain has already used his White House connections to sound Presidential about the Georgia situation, and when the Bush team hands him tidbits before they make the press, Obama could cry foul, Democrats do crying really well, or Obamas congressional supporters could try to block any resolution, but a resolution which guarantees freedom of the seas? Hell they can't win the debate on offshore drilling.

Which is a curious analogy isn't it?

Chess is a game for two, sorry Democrats, maybe next time.