in a very real, large measure a national exorcism -- of Sarah Palin. This woman, whatever her arguable redeeming attributes and skills, is so clearly unfit to serve as next in line to the presidency, that her totally transparent ambition and arrogant ego became perhaps the tipping point factor in McCain's loss.

Think about it. How much time and energy did he have to waste defending this bizarre choice, to the deafening exclusion of every other argument?

the Lenscrafters gargoyle.

Good riddance.

I love that. Any criticism or fact-checking of Gooper totems and otherwise shallow mouthpieces is a "vicious attack."

Call the fucking Wahhhhhmbulance, crybabies.

is the GOPs' Alex Forrest.

is Alex Forrest.

a crappy bass player, too.

But, then, I run with the very best of them.

http://www.rochonwestmoreland.com

Rochon for Secretary of Funk!

So, the Alex Forrest of the GOP will now have to plot her takeover of the Presidency from outside the perch of a Senate seat.

I may have to re-think my atheism.

Been a good couple of weeks. Obama wins, my wife passes her Cert exam, and Kenny Loggins comes to hang and sit in last night with my friends’ band in Vegas.

http://santafeandthefatcityhorns.blogspot.com

Now this. Life is again good.

in the life of The Screechwoman, Alaska GOP Guv Alex Forrest.

have been maimed or killed directly because of the actions of Graner and those who sanctioned him and his immediate cohort? How much more indelible and recursively actionable the hatred of us? The upshot of his behavior indisputably extends far beyond a simple abstract sullying of our national moral character. It can be enumerated via an elevated trail of permanently broken bodies and corpses. Charles Graner, his colleagues, and their superiors all have the blood of countless Americans and innocent Iraqis on their hands.

Roth writes:

"I often asked Richard, the head of our feeder fund, how Madoff made such consistently good returns. Although Richard tried to explain it to me, it was clear he didn't know, either, because I'd leave our meetings still unable to explain to anyone else how it worked."

She oughta read some Taleb, the "Fooled by Randomness" guy.

Part of the problem I see (in agreement with Taleb) is that nobody really understood much of any of this, but once you get to a certain level of "expertise" in the financial world, you simply cannot admit to being clueless. So, it becomes a mileau of ongoing mutual bullshit (ever read the book "On Bullshit"?), a world of org chart climbing pseudo-erudite, jargon-spewing poseurs. And, maybe nobody understood things because there was nothing much rational to understand. I guess the one encapsulating and overarching operative word (extending far beyond the likes of Madoff) is "fraud."

in the Hague. Bush and Cheney, and all of their war crimes collaborators.

It may well take the paroxysm of a complete economic crash to bring us to our senses.

See my blog for a few of my thoughts. (name link)

I have a few thoughts on the topic. See my blog (name link).

Tactically, not pardoning the big fish like Cheney et al (the whole sordid cabal of Bu'ushist war criminals) permits them to continue to stonewall via the 5th Amendment. It'd be like "yeah, bring it on, just try to prosecute..."

Pardons effectively admits guilt. They're never gonna admit to having done anything criminally wrong.

Tactically, not pardoning the big fish like Cheney et al (the whole sordid cabal of Bu'ushist war criminals) permits them to continue to stonewall via the 5th Amendment. It'd be like "yeah, bring it on, just try to prosecute..."

Pardons effectively admit guilt. They're never gonna admit to having done anything criminally wrong. They merely experienced some "disappointments," and vague "mistakes were made," but by no one identifiably culpable, of course.

Interesting article here.

In my recently completed blog post "Tranche Warfare" (link in my name) I ask the following:

"One question we would do well to clarify in political consensus: What, indeed, is the proper ethical function of a "market"? Simply that of an end to itself, a bare-knuckles arena inexorably favoring the rapaciously fleet of mind in winner-take-all, zero sum game acquisitive fashion? Or, is it properly simply a means to the end of economic and social justice (however imperfectly and transiently defined) for all, to the extent practicable?"

President Obama today observed during his inaugural address:

"Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control -- and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart -- not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good."

But, is that what we want? A broadly practicable "common good"? Or, again, turning to my post: "a might-makes-right / oligarchic / gated community / tribal warlord social structure" that seems to me to be the logical upshot of a totally unregulated "free market"?

I don't pretend to have all the answers, and am always open to intelligent criticism and rebuttal. (But, spare me the banal Perfectionism Fallacy "socialism" pejoratives.)

This is a total non-issue waste of bandwidth.

There is no longer any debate. Cheney openly admitted it (perhaps the only truthful utterance of his entire term). I say investigate, and then indict and prosecute should that be where sufficient evidence leads. Simple adherence to law and our treaty obligations and the equal justice our Constitution demands of those charged with leading under its dictates.

If I committed crimes, my having now stopped in no way would suffice to absolve me.