Only Bad lawyers and the Certifiably Insane wind up in Congress

I went to Memorandum today to see what was up with the votes on the DADT repeal, the Tax Giveaways to Billionaires Act, and the START treaty.  It’s one of the first places I go in the day because it usually groups the day’s relevant economic and political topics and it covers blog reactions from all sides of the political spectrum.  I just wanted to know when the votes would be. What I saw was a bunch of headlines that lead to the thought  you see above.  I don’t even know where to start with this conglomeration of links, but they all seem connected to my hypothesis above.

It’s not that all of us outside the Beltway don’t recognize that there’s very few real people with functional brains in Congress.  The proof for that is right there in the middle of the Memorandum page too.

From Gallup Polls:

Congress’ Job Approval Rating Worst in Gallup History :

Thirteen percent approve of the way Congress is handling its job

That headline is coupled with this one from WAPO:  Washington Post-ABC poll: Public is not yet sold on GOP

These poll results are fully explained by evidence through out the page.  Try these on for size.

From The Hill: DeMint will force readings of START Treaty and omnibus bill

For some reason, the 2000 pages of the Tax Bonuses for Billionaires plan isn’t germane to discussions of deficits and national security but the START treaty and the ominibus spending bill are fodder for ideological  temper tantrums.

From TPM: Kyl: Reid Disrespecting Christians By Suggesting Post-Christmas Senate Votes

(Psst Kyl:  the Reason for the Season is Mithros’ the Bull God’s birthday.   Read your Roman History.  The reason for Sunday services is The Sun God.  Read your Roman History. You were had a long time ago by Constantine and the Nicene Council. Read the historical records of the Council set up by Constantine to establish a Roman religion and get off your friggin, butt and do your job!)

Oh, speaking of mythology, try THIS one on for size from the NYTimes:   G.O.P. Panelists Dissent on Cause of Crisis.  I’m going to spend some time on this because it’s just the best example of what is wrong with POLITICIANS.  Congress was completely duplicitous in the crisis and yet, all the want to do is blame Federal Regulators.

Democrats have emphasized factors like fraudulent practices by mortgage lenders and reckless risk-taking by Wall Street banks and other financial institutions, while Republicans have focused on poor oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the entities that supported the secondary market for mortgages, and decades of government efforts to encourage homeownership.

“While the housing bubble, the financial crisis, and the recession are surely interrelated events, we do not believe that the housing bubble was a sufficient condition for the financial crisis,” the document states. “The unprecedented number of subprime and other weak mortgages in this bubble set it and its effect apart from others in the past.”

Unbelievable.  Yes, that happened. Yes, it was a problem.  But what drove the demand for subprime and weak mortgages was the demand for those wacky unregulated credit derivatives. It was all part of the same pattern of negligence and wishful thinking.   You can’t unlink the systemic problems and the symptoms.  Fannie and Freddie got into those things and drowned, but it wasn’t exactly their idea to begin with.  Congress should’ve stopped them from going there.  But the driving factor was still the demand for credit derivatives.  Every institution was churning those things out in this country and in others.  The delusion is worse than I thought.

From Yves at Naked Capitalism:

This whole line of thinking is garbage, the financial policy equivalent of arguing that the sun revolves around the earth. Yes, the US and other countries provide overly generous subsidies to housing, and curtailing them over time would not be a bad idea. But that’s been our policy for decades. Calling that a major, let alone primary, cause of the crisis, is simply a highly coded “blame the poor” strategy, In reality, both the runup to the crisis and its aftermath were on of the greatest wealth transfers from the citizenry at large to a comparatively small group of rentiers in the history of man. (If you want to read the long form debunking of this thesis, go straight to Barry Ritholtz, a Republican who has shredded this brand of class warfare, or as he calls it, “one giant clusterfuck of imbecility,” repeatedly on his blog.)

The intent is pretty transparent: to discredit an effort at fact finding into the roots of the crisis, what was hoped to be a Pecora Commission, by making it appear partisan and launching an alternative narrative to muddy the waters. And the reason is clear. Even though FCIC is certain not to have the same effect that the Pecora Commission did, of discrediting major financial services industry figures and exposing various forms of chicanery, it appears that even lesser forms of criticism of the banksters must be sandbagged (the bizarre part of this drama is that at least some Democrats and very selectively, Republicans in office are willing to call out the predatory, extractive behavior of the large banks. But no one has the guts to buck an industry that is a major paymaster in a very serious way).

From HuffPo:

Experts agree that while Fannie and Freddie and the federal government’s push to encourage homeownership played a significant role in causing the crisis, actions by Wall Street magnified the fallout and caused a crisis that led to the Great Recession. Economists from the Federal Reserve, as well as bank regulators first appointed by Republicans, agree that the Community Reinvestment Act played virtually no role in causing the financial crisis.

But the Republicans’ report will largely focus on the role played by the federal government. It will note that a crisis was averted after the government bailed out Bear Stearns and facilitated its absorption by JPMorgan Chase, according to people familiar with the matter. The crisis roared back after the government allowed Lehman Brothers to fail, scaring nervous investors. A bigger and more protracted downturn was avoided when policy makers essentially bailed out the entire financial system.

Exactly. It’s never EVER been the Community Reinvestment Act and to even insert it into the report is odious and false.  I never got how the CRA got connected to the Fannie/Freddie mess from the outset other than through political memes.   I remember getting blog wacked by some from the left because I said Fannie and Freddie were part of the problem.  I never ONCE mentioned the CRA; only that Frannie and Freddie did what all the financial instituions did except on a much larger scale.  They packaged and sold poorly underwritten mortgages that were eventually going to make some one homeless sooner or later.  Fannie and Freddie’s roll was complicit and huge only because of their size and importance in the mortgage market.  They’d have never dreamed of doing what they did if it wasn’t for the fact they could package and sell the things–just like Countrywide and a bunch of other now defunct private entities–to stupid investors who were mislead by high ratings and the belief that due diligence was done on mortgage underwriting. The deal is that Congress could’ve stopped all of that–especially Fannie and Freddie–but they did nothing.  They could’ve prevented the underwriting of many of those predator loans.

Couple that with this travesty via the Birmingham News and AL.com.

Bachus, in an interview Wednesday night, said he brings a “main street” perspective to the committee, as opposed to Wall Street.

“In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated, and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks,” he said.

In his quiet campaign for the chairmanship, Bachus promoted an agenda to end taxpayer subsidies for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, repeal those parts of the Wall Street reforms that he thinks still leave the door open for taxpayer bailouts of financial institutions or their creditors, and increase oversight of President Barack Obama’s administration.

Then, we have Congressman Out-of-touch-with-reality Ron Paul who will be in charge of the subcommittee in Congress that deals with the FED. This is another example of putting some one in charge of oversight that want’s to just plain abolish the reality.  He’ll be so stuck in ideologue land that oversight will just go by the way side.  It’s like putting a Flat Earther in charge of NASA.

In a move that may seem to some like putting the fox in charge of the hen house, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has been named to head the House subcommittee that oversees the Federal Reserve.

Paul, 75, is a longtime critic of the central bank and, as Bloomberg pointed out, has even written a book called “End the Fed.” He will lead the domestic monetary policy subcommittee of the House Financial Services panel.

In announcing Paul’s appointment Thursday, chairman-elect Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) said the Texan would add to the team that “crafted the first comprehensive financial reform bill to put an end to the bailouts, wind down the taxpayer funding of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and enforce a strong audit of the Federal Reserve.”

Paul told Bloomberg last week he plans to call for hearings on U.S. monetary policy and will continue to press for a full accounting of the Fed’s functions. In the past, Paul has introduced legislation to abolish the central bank.

There are a lot of people realizing that Congress is not acting in the interest of the American people.   The American Interest journal has a series of articles–including an important one on Income Inequality by Tyler Cowen–on inequality and democracy.  The front page of the Magazine–featured and linked to on the right–asks the most relevant question I can think of today. “Are Plutocrats Drowning our Republic?” A subsidiary question could well be “Why is every one in Congress intent on helping them do it?”

Congress did not get the message from this election.  Here’s a clue from another link at that AI site. They just seem intent and recreating the same scenarios and the same problems over and over and over again.

Many Americans are still furious that their government helped the rich and politically connected few while leaving the rest hung out to dry. The government bailed out Wall Street financiers who live in the top tenth of the top hundredth of the income distribution. Meanwhile, almost one quarter of families with mortgages remains stuck with negative equity in their homes.

Let’s return to that bit on the Republicans on the crisis panel.  I’ll borrow some analysis from Paul Krugman in his blog thread:  ‘Invincible Ignorance’.

So Republican members of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission are going to issue their own report, placing primary blame on the government — because it’s always the government’s fault.

And according to reporting at the Huffington Post,

all four Republicans voted in favor of banning the phrases “Wall Street” and “shadow banking” and the words “interconnection” and “deregulation” from the panel’s final report, according to a person familiar with the matter and confirmed by Brooksley E. Born, one of the six commissioners who voted against the proposal.

Yep. It was all Fannie and Freddie, which somehow managed to cause housing bubbles in Ireland, Iceland, Latvia, and Spain as well as the United States; and the repo market had nothing to do with it.

And bear in mind that this wasn’t one Republican; it was all of them.

We consistently get people in congress that appear to live in a reality of their own making.  They ignore science.  They ignore history.  They ignore economics.  They ignore nearly everything to push partisan power, curry favor with the donor and the bonus class, and spin tails to deluded followers that have no basis in fact, evidence, or theory.  They even run campaigns based on denying scientific theories that are well prove–like evolution–and promoting failed hypothesis–like all of Reaganomics–even when the majority of people who would know try to give them the facts.

What is it about our political process that seems to put policy in the hands of complete whack jobs and unemployable lawyers?   My one dash at the Nebraska Unicameral convinced me that only pathological narcissists and liars and ideologues capable of denying reality can get through the process.  Those folks are surrounded and supported by equally pathological narcissists, liars, and ideologues and they’re all bought up by a plutocracy that pays to play.

We are so F’d.  I am so frightened for and disheartened about  the future of this country.  How is it that Congress can get such low approval numbers but go right back to ruining the country in the same manner post-elections?  Both parties have their on unique style that achieves the same end.  What can we do to stop this?  It has to be the gerrymandered districts and the money.   But, how can we change the laws when the foxes are in charge of all the hen houses?

UPDATE: Senate approves tax cut deal; House Dems weigh amending estate tax

The Senate on Wednesday approved a sweeping tax package negotiated by the White House and congressional Republicans, and House leaders – who were looking to amend the measure in a way that would satisfy liberals without unraveling the deal altogether – said a House vote could follow as soon as Thursday.

The Senate passed the package by a vote of 81 to 19.

Before senators began debating the $858 billion package in late morning, President Obama urged lawmakers in both houses to pass it “as swiftly as possible.” He called the plan “an essential ingredient in spurring economic growth over the short run.”

Speaking before a meeting with business leaders, Obama said: “I am absolutely convinced that this tax cut plan, while not perfect, will help grow our economy and create jobs in the private sector.” He acknowledged that lawmakers of both parties object to different aspects of the plan but said, “That’s the nature of compromise.” He added that “we can’t afford to let it fall victim to either delay or defeat.”

In other news:  Obama announces his Faith Based VooDoo economics initiative based on advice from the ghost of Ronald Reagan … We are still so F’d.

that is all.


61 Comments on “Only Bad lawyers and the Certifiably Insane wind up in Congress”

  1. Pat Johnson says:

    Talk about depressing! We are “led” by a handful of fools.

    And I’m still amazed at those Obama loving idiots who see nothing wrong with the path this nation is taking under his leadership as the GOP, the rest of the wingnuts, and the fundies are finding the strength in numbers to shephard us back into the Gilded Age.

    Astounding.

    • dakinikat says:

      Partisan blindness is going to be this country’s downfall.

      • Sima says:

        The thing that gets me is that the net result is the same, no matter which party is in charge. It’s so disheartening and scary. I don’t see an easy, or maybe even possible, way out of it, really.

  2. Minkoff Minx says:

    Wow, thank you for this post, so much to check out!

  3. Pavel says:

    It’s not a giveaway to billionaires. Billionaires rarely pay income taxes because they make their money through investments, so that’s capital gains’ taxes. They use this revenue to invest in more companies, including (possibly) your employer.

    Tax cuts don’t cost anything to the gov’t. It’s OUR money, not theirs.

    As per your criticisms towards Dr. Ron Paul, I laugh at your citation of globalist and federal reserve apologist Krugman. I recommend you go to krugmaniswrong.com to see how this moron gets exposed on a bi-weekly basis.

    The federal reserve is evil and must be dealt with accordingly.

    • dakinikat says:

      If you want your money, then I suggest you stop driving on our public roads, don’t call any of our police or firemen, and forget about a military, and on and on. You have to pay taxes to support public goods. The rich use more government services than any one else and should pay in kind. Additionally, small states use more government money than any other states, so places like Nebraska, North and South Dakota, etc. wouldn’t be viable if they didn’t have federal dollars.

      You obviously know nothing of economics and finance.

      I don’t have an ’employer’. I quit working for corporations. They are a bastion of greed and inefficiency. They seek monopoly and control. None of this is valuable to any one which is why they get the government to buy their crap and hoist it on us.

      I used to work for the FED. They are many things but they are certainly not evil.

      I’m an economist. I don’t pay attention to libertarians who spout platitudes like the crazy Marxists either. Ron Paul should’ve stuck to delivering babies because he knows nothing about finance or the economy. Dr. Paul Krugman has published many peer reviewed studies that have merit. I don’t need to visit any wacky web sites because I can read his academic treatises and his academic books and evaluate all his models and data; which is probably more than you’ve done. I do research in international economics so I know his stuff well. When you can come back and reasonably discuss his model on international trade and prove you actually know something, then I’ll see you for more than just another ideological rant machine.

      I doubt you even know what the Federal Reserve does. You seem to grab at ideology for answers rather than reason and data. I suggest you attend a university and learn economics. Then, you can engage in something other than baseless demagoguery.

      • HT says:

        My mom used to lecture me that ignorance was no excuse for stupidity, and the older I get, the more I think my mom was brilliant. Great response to a totally ignorant comment.

  4. fiscalliberal says:

    We should not be surprised on the Republican ideiology. Now we need to wait for the full report which will show all of these things like reduction of Regulation under Chris Cox, Lack of prosecution of lawlessness. There are so manny other things to point out which happened in the time perioud of 6 years of total REPUBLICAN DOMINATION OF THE GOVERNMENTWHEN THEY HAD THE PRESIDENCY, SENATE, HOUSE AND SUPREME COURT. George Bush was the president when the bulk of this happened. That said, some of the seeds of it were planted under Clinton also.

    Yes there were clear corruption problems with Fannie and Freddie under that time period also. It will be interesting to see how the Democrats frame this in their response. The clear lack of spine in terms of the Obama and Reid responding to thisis expected to be defening. I do not mention Peolosi yet, because I think she has the spine to step up, we shall see. They have to get on the media and force this dow their throat. I would expect Dylan Ratigan to be the loan voice on this one.

    All this stuff happens because the Democrats enable it, similar to the battered spouse syndrome. When the report comes out the message has to be simple and focused. It cannot be a academic exercise.

  5. fiscalliberal says:

    I agree the FED has a lot of explaining to do per Ron Paul, But I fail to see how Krugman is the problem here. He is not a major player. That is a argument without substance. Oh by the way, Krugman is not a saint, but the blame of this clearly falls on the Federal Government ( uner George Bush) and Regulators who let the financial insustry.

    To argue otherwise is simply irrelevant and not serious

    • dakinikat says:

      I still don’t get all these attacks on the FED. They report all their data. It’s out there for every one to see. They’re just a central bank. There’s nothing extraordinary about what goes on there at all. The world couldn’t exist without their wire transfer service. All this conspiracy stuff about the FED is like some rampant paranoia from people who know nothing and believe anything.

  6. fiscalliberal says:

    Correction- blame of this clearly falls on the Federal Government ( uner George Bush) and Regulators who let the financial insustry fail within a period of 8 years of deregulation .

    To say they self regulate is simply with out evidence or logic.

    • dakinikat says:

      Definitely. A lot of markets–and the financial ones are the worst–cannot self regulate. There are way too many frictions like information asymmetry, agency problems, product differentiation, etc. for an even playing field to exist. The government has to regulate and force transparency or the weaker side of the Demand/Supply equation will be taken hostage and the market will collapse on itself.

  7. fiscalliberal says:

    Dak – could I suggest that the FED under Greenspan made some very tragic errors in not recognizing the bubble and enforcing laws on fraud in mortgage origination. That said, my view is that Bernanke was a passive person also and did nothing untill the crisis was on us.Also Tim Geitner was NY Fed and Citi went down under him.

    Possibley we need to do some FED articles using the Washington Baby Sitting Coop model which simplifies how a central bank works so these issues can be discussed in a more clear fashion.

    That said, we have to acknowledge that under Clinton: Greenspan, Summers, Rubin and Levitt smashed Brooksly Born who absolutly had the right idea on Derivatives Regulation.

    The whole thing is so corrupt which allows idiologs to shout, obfuscating the facts.

    • dakinikat says:

      Oh, I don’t disagree that Greenspan made some bad moves. However, I still doubt the Fed’s ability to stop an asset bubble. The rich put their money there regardless of credit conditions and that is about all the Fed controls. Also, the laws on mortgage origination aren’t that well written. The only thing the Fed controls is the Truth-in-lending laws and it just says you have to tell people about things. It doesn’t say you can’t hide it in small legalese at the bottom of a contract or make sure people understand it. The Fed is a very conservative institution. It won’t overstep it’s legal boundaries. If the congress wants the Fed to be a bigger policeman, it has to give the Fed a bigger stick.

      A lot of the problems started in the Derivatives and shadow banking industry. The Fed had no jurisdiction there at all. That’s for the SEC and Congress to regulate and they both did poorly.

  8. dakinikat says:

    I’m going to suggest a paper to read. It’s by Dr. Gary Gorton from Yale and the NBER. It mostly presents stylized facts and not models so any one can read it.

    It’s called “Slapped in the Face by the Invisible Hand: Banking and the Panic of 2007”

    This is the abstract.

    The “shadow banking system,” at the heart of the current credit crisis is, in fact, a real banking system – and is vulnerable to a banking panic. Indeed, the events starting in August 2007 are a banking panic. A banking panic is a systemic event because the banking system cannot honor its obligations and is insolvent. Unlike the historical banking panics of the 19th and early 20th centuries, the current banking panic is a wholesale panic, not a retail panic. In the earlier episodes, depositors ran to their banks and demanded cash in exchange for their checking accounts. Unable to meet those demands, the banking system became insolvent. The current panic involved financial firms “running” on other financial firms by not renewing sale and repurchase agreements (repo) or increasing the repo margin (“haircut”), forcing massive deleveraging, and resulting in the banking system being insolvent. The earlier episodes have many features in common with the current crisis, and examination of history can help understand the current situation and guide thoughts about reform of bank regulation. New regulation can facilitate the functioning of the shadow banking system, making it less vulnerable to panic.

  9. fiscalliberal says:

    Dak – little bit off topic a little. When I want to purchase a Credit Default Swap, I go to a investment bank and they go to some one else. Who is that?

    It originally was AIG and monolines, but then I thought the Banks picked it up which became so intertwined.

    It was pure incest and the whole thing fell apart. I think the FCIC report will shed light on it.

    • dakinikat says:

      It depends on the CDS. If it’s a more vanilla one, they can buy it from another dealer or on an exchange. If it has to be more tailormade, then they will become a market maker, go to the originator of the deals and it will be one specific CDS written by a gang of lawyers and priced by whatever they deem fit. The underwriters are still investment bank lines of business. Some of these are owned by bankholding companies which essentially are big commercial banks that have used this ownership identity to get around regulations.

  10. It’s one big idiocracy.

    • Seriously says:

      I find it hilarious that Kyl thinks the average person is all broken up about not giving our elected representatives a month’s vacation at the holidays, like working on Xmas is some unprescedented thing. Welcome to the real world, buddy.

      • Putting the middle/working class into the grave that Bush-Cheney dug–hard hard work for Congress.

        (sing-songy voice) Oh the electorate outside is angry, but the Congress is neverminding! As long as they loathe their constituents so… Let ’em go, let ’em go, let ’em go! 😉

        (at least they can’t pass any more crap if they’re on holiday)

        • Seriously says:

          Lol It might be more entertaining if they barricaded themselves in the Capitol over the holidays. They can chant, sing hymns, carry candles, light ex votos, drape the statues with religious iconography, carry Mary on the Halfshell aloft, I’d watch that.

  11. Minkoff Minx says:

    A few things…

    So, the House is discussing DADT right now…let see what happens.

    I found this over at BAR:

    The Left and Obama-Trauma | Black Agenda Report

    With a dusky Reagan Democrat in the White House, progressive Democrats were in deep trouble – made far worse by the fact that they refused to accept that they had deceived themselves so badly. From corporate health care to phony financial reform to off-the-books multi-trillion dollar bank infusions to expanded offshore drilling to widening theaters of war to targeting of American citizens for assassination – each predictable and previously telegraphed rightward lunge by the Obama regime was received as a “betrayal” by people who had demanded little, if anything, from candidate Obama. Finally, after two years of consistently corporate, militarist executive governance, after watching Obama’s deficit reduction commission time bomb threaten to explode in a crowd of entitlements, and after hearing “F-you” from the lips of a president who had just returned from consummating his post-mid-term relationship with the GOP, the Left is pissed off and threatening to bust a move of some kind.

      • paper doll says:

        This so reminds me of cousin Cheney’s CEO White House pow-wow.
        Obama with his peeps

      • Minkoff Minx says:

        One more…

        CNBC: Flaherty Criticizes Obama/CEO Summit | National Legal and Policy Center

        The meeting itself would have more credibility if some CEOs who are Obama critics were invited. It includes a few Republicans but it is mostly friendly executives like Penny Pritzker, the chair of his campaign finance committee, and his golfing buddy Bob Wolf of UBS. They are apparently happy to take part in this photo op.

        I question whether CEOs and the President can have a frank discussion about anything because government now intervenes in so much. CEOs have criticized Obama at their own risk because of the government threat to their own businesses. I hope that CEOs can now be more outspoken.

        A number of the CEOs have companies that are increasingly dependent on its government. There’s John Lechleiter of Eli Lilly, one of the big pharma companies that made a deal with the White House to support ObamaCare. I am not sure he will tell Obama what he needs to hear.

        Also you have Eric Schmidt of Google. The FTC recently dropped an investigation of the WiSpy scandal after Obama attended a fundraiser by another Google executive.

        Now that Obama has spent all of the taxpayers’ money and bankrupted the country, he wants to corporate America to spend all of its money. Hiring should be a business decision, not a political decision. Businesses will start expanding and hiring when there is a reversal in Obama’s policies, not because of them.

        Of course, job creation by SMALL business is even more important. There are no small business people at the meeting today. They are going to have a much harder time than big business in grappling with the requirements and costs of ObamaCare.

    • paper doll says:

      the Left is pissed off and threatening to bust a move of some kind.

      Is the strategy here to have Obama and his beloved GOP laugh themselves to death? The Left looked powerful two years ago fueled up and bought off with George Soros’s money…that has gone and the Left is back on the lonely shores where he found it…having served its purpose. Something will oppose this shit eventually…but I don’t see how it can be what is known as the professional Left…many start out good, then become people who only want a book deal and a cable show ….or so it seems .

      • Spot on, except I’d add that while the left looked powerful puffed up by marketing and Wall Street money, it did not look so to you or me or the other cassandras. This is why the “2% less evil” argument is just crap. There is no comparison between the evil that is the GOP and the evil that is perverting the entire Democratic brand and everything left of center into the opposite of the legacy of FDR/LBJ. How can you compare? The latter is an evil in its *own* league.

  12. Sima says:

    So I got this email today from Patty Murray, I assume it’s in response to the emails I sent her demanding she support Sanders’ filibuster/speech and vote No on the More Free Shit for Billionaires bill. It’s entitled: ‘A massive game of chicken’.

    She starts off saying she is ‘angry and frustrated’ to have Republicans holding the middle class hostage over tax cuts to the Rich. She goes on to say she voted for the bill, but only because she wanted to:

    protect middle-class families from a tax hike while extending unemployment benefits for 13 months, continuing the sales tax deduction, cutting payroll taxes, and doing everything we can to create jobs.

    Then she says that the bill came at ‘tremendous cost’. And now she wants me to sign an online petition (oh my god, I am laughing so hard tears are falling) to tell Boehner (think he gets one over this tax bill?) and Co how mean they are and how we are going to ‘repeal these wasteful tax cuts’ as soon as possible! So there! I’m stamping my feet even, can you see me now? I’m going to ball up my fists and start wahhhhhing! (Ok those last 3 sentences are mine alone).

    Muhahahahahahahahahaha. Ok, I’m not really laughing, I’m actually crying. I had to vote for this stupid woman. I had to go ahead and think, ‘well, she’s done more good than bad and she does stand up for women at times…’. Never the hell again. Never.

    Her letter to me is so frapping insulting it’s unbelievable. It takes my breath away. I have no idea how I’m going to write a response that doesn’t include swear words and vitriol.

    • Outis says:

      I’m speechless! Truly, when I didn’t think I could be shocked any more. We are getting these apology letters from our D senators, saying, “I don’t like the bill… but I voted for it anyway.” And in fact, spouting the same shite the Rs spout: that tax cuts create jobs; cutting payroll taxes (for SS) is worth the cost; and bending over is the new black. What new form of passive aggressive spew is this act? And then, the helpless, blameless Senator wants you to sign a petition. A PETITION? Because she is so powerless that she can no longer control her vocal cords enough to say Nay?

      Just the thought took my breath away again. Like the President of the United States walking out of a press conference (because his monster of a wife will tear him a new one–gotta love that oft-repeated excuse), I honestly believe the laws of the universe have been repeatedly broken by this bunch.

      • Is it weird that I am completely unsurprised by all of this? I feel so bad, because everyone I know is shocked and pissed and I’m so numb to it all. I keep thinking… you guys… just wait… the other shoe hasn’t even dropped yet. Not even close.

        • paper doll says:

          This happens to me and over and over….since Bush stole 2000. My friends laugh( with shock) at what I say will come down the pike…and then later say ” hey you were right… ” about something I said 6 months ago,( at which they laughed )….but the worst part is when I have to remind them I said awhile back what just dawned on them… But I don’t see how one can see how Obama’s South Side constitutes froze as he partied with their slumlord or see what was done to Hillary and the Dem party and then be shocked when it happens to oneself…
          I mean, buy a clue…

        • Minkoff Minx says:

          Yup, that Cassandra in me thinks the same thing…waiting for the other shoe to drop…

      • dakinikat says:

        Ask they if they’d suggest we negotiate with Osama Bin Laden, Ahmadinejad, or Kim Jong-Il next time. Maybe we should give in to their demands since it costs less than maintaining a huge military infrastructure.

      • NW Luna says:

        If they don’t like those bills, why the F do they vote for them? Get together with all those other Senators writing excuses and change the bloody bills.

    • joanelle says:

      Ah, she and Al Franken are on the same page

    • Fannie says:

      I know how you feel, they make you feel so fugging stupid, and then slam, why in the hell did I vote for them? They don’t even believe in themselves anymore, cause they are proving it by telling you they voted out of anger.

      Jump on it, and give her what she deserves.

  13. fiscalliberal says:

    Dylin Ratigan is realy dumping on the administration and the banks now on msnbc

    May not agree with all but the issues are discussed

  14. fiscalliberal says:

    Siima – would you agree with the following

    If I have a farm for my life time and I sell it before I die, I am taxed on Capital Garins just like any other business. Then I give it to the kids

    If I die and give the farm to the kids they are not taxed on the capital gains.

    Kids have left the farms since the 50’s – I was one of them. However from a consistent tax policy, capital gains should be taxed irrespective.

    • Sima says:

      I really don’t know, because I’m not a tax expert at all.

      From what I understand, if the kid inherits it, no, he or she is not hit with capital gains tax, until they sell it. Then they are hit, and sometimes hit big. So you can inherit land and not sell it and not pay capital gains.

      Transferring land in any way is weird complicated tax stuff. I’d go to the lawyer and accountant for it. I should note that I didn’t inherit a farm, nor did I buy a farm. I bought land that was once pasture (from someone who inherited it and then paid capital gains on it when they sold it) and started a farm from scratch, so to speak. I should note that the people who inherited sold the land because they couldn’t pay the inheritance tax on it.

      This was in the early 90’s, I should note.

  15. dakinikat says:

    CNN Breaking news: The House votes to overturn “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which bans gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

    • The arc of the moral universe just bent a little further toward justice. Will Heckuva-job-Harry-and-Barack bend toward it? Are they listening to the grassroots that have sent them the warning signal (i.e. the signal that the Politics of No Place Else to Go has itself reached the end of the line)? Or are their soundproof earmuffs (now in holiday colors!) still impenetrable?

      (crossposted at Taylor Marsh)

    • Sima says:

      Good, and it’s about time. They are getting scant praise from me because it should have been done years ago, when the current idiot occupied the Presidency.

  16. Minkoff Minx says:

    WikiLeaks cables: BP suffered blowout on Azerbaijan gas platform | World news | The Guardian

    Dakinikat….wow you should take a look at these new leaked cables….the similarity between Azerbaijan and Gulf are something…

    • Sima says:

      The scope of the leaked cables is amazing. There’s implications for food too. I hope to have more on this soon, I’m just learning about it myself.

    • dakinikat says:

      Not yet. I’ve been busy for gana puja tonight. It’s guru rinpoche day and Lama’s coming over to do practice for what remains of our Sangha down here. I hit the Ghetto Winn Dixie for sales today.

  17. fiscalliberal says:

    Sima -I wrote and self published a book on country schools, country teachers and farming in the 40’s and 50′ before I left and went to school. My mother was a country school teacher and one of her students (my co author) was my 8th grade teacher. We sold 400 copies and had a wonderfull time

    That said, it was a cold shower in terms of how that life was non existant today and it is big business for everyone involved. So I guess I have little sympathy for those complaining about estate taxes because it really is about paying capital gains taxes on a business.

    So the current US House is talking about re-instating the captal gains tax with major deductions for small farms. It realy comes down to tax policy and if we tax capital gains it should be uniform across the board.

    • Sima says:

      Hey, hey. I’m not complaining about estate taxes. My entire retirement and health future depends on inheritance from my parents, but you won’t hear me complaining about estate taxes.

      I don’t know about taxing uniformly across the board. If society wants all farmland turned into either a big monocropping Con-Agra type business, or a shopping mall/surburban house development, then go for it. If we want to save farmlands, woodlands, streams, fields and so on, then maybe not so much.

      The tax policy is always rigged to favor the businesses du jour, whether they be big or small. It’s a major way government can influence the direction and development of business. If they want to encourage small farms, I’d first want to know how they define them. Then I’d want to evaluate how that encouragement might work. I haven’t had a chance to do any of that over what the House is talking about doing.

      • dakinikat says:

        Is your outfit that big to even worry? You know your parents can gift you 10k a piece a year tax free.

        • Sima says:

          No, my farm is so small I don’t even pay income or B&O taxes right now, I’m under the limit. So the estate tax or capital gains aren’t really on my radar that way. My parents’ yearly gift is what makes it possible for me to continue farming. It’s the equivalent of a small business loan for me.

          On the AL site was an interview with a small dairy farmer. On the side bar it noted that most small dairies net between 20-60k a year. I’d say most CSAs net that a year too. I’m below that, but only because I’ve only been doing it for 2 years ‘professionally’ and I’m still building up my customer base.

          If we want people to farm, to come in to farming (another article on the Al site notes that younger farmers and brand new farmers are increasing in Al for the first time in years. This is true in WA too) then we are going to have to make farming land worth the equivalent it could get if sold as housing, or strip mall or whatever land. One way is to give loans and tax breaks and such to those trying to do that kind of farming.

          I just don’t know the ins and outs of capital gains enough to know how it might affect this. Frankly, I only ever paid capital gains back in the 90’s when my investments actually made money. I’ve no experience in it with farming. I don’t expect to ever net over about 40-60k on the farm (any more than that and I’ll have to hire employees and make a leap to about 150k, so I can pay those employees), so I’m not sure I’ll ever experience it in respect to farming.

        • NW Luna says:

          That might be up to 12K/yr now.

          • NW Luna says:

            Timber land is taxed and valued at a far lower rate than residential land now. The taxation policy works well for sustainable forestry, because it takes so long to grow trees. But speculators will log the land, and then get it reclassified as residential just before selling it at a profit. Zoning in some rural areas has restricted the slash-and-sell tactics.

          • Sima says:

            I think they should keep the taxes low, BUT, put in a condition that says you can’t sell the land within 20 years of logging it, or something without paying retroactive taxes for a number of years. That should keep the real forest lands forest.

            Could do the same with farm lands.