Well, you just might be after you read THIS.
BE SURE TO READ THOSE PARTS IN BOLD, then call your doctor for a prescription of Valium (or Prozac, whichever you prefer), or just go slug a bottle of Tequila, have a second one for me cuz I can't, I'm nursing the third child of mine who will inherit a bankrupt country and a world of pain.
Oh, and then you go have yerself a nice day, y'hear?
Election Winner May Welcome Early Exit in 2013: Caroline BaumCommentary by Caroline Baum
Oct. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The 2008 presidential campaign has been notable for many things: its interminable length, its lack of substance and its sheer nastiness, to name just three.
What has been notably absent is a serious discussion of the challenges facing the country -- those that pre-date the credit crisis and will be with us long after it abates -- and the candidates' ideas for addressing them.
Did you hear anything pithy about the future of Social Security and Medicare? Neither did I. The moderators of the three presidential debates clearly didn't think the U.S.'s entitlement programs, which are on automatic pilot and have the potential to bankrupt the country in the 21st century, were worthy of discussion.
The candidates touted green fuels -- wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, cellulosic ethanol -- until they were blue in the face. They talked about better, more affordable health care that achieves cost savings and belongs to the fuzzy-math school of budgeting. (In the candidates' defense, my guess is that every health-care initiative has exceeded cost estimates by a long shot.) And they enumerated plans for lots of job-creating new spending while glossing over the issue of how to pay for it.
In short, the 2008 presidential campaign has been short on substance and long on slogans. Call it, Change meets the Mavericks.
Democratic candidate Barack Obama and Republican candidate John McCain have made noises about fiscal responsibility that don't pass the most basic smell test.
Wrong Rock
Obama has pledged to go through the federal budget ``line by line, page by page,'' cutting programs that don't work and making necessary ones work better.
John McCain has promised to balance the budget by the end of his first term and is targeting earmarks, or pork-barrel spending, toward that end.
Both candidates are looking under the wrong rocks. Excluding defense, discretionary spending (those expenditures that go through an annual appropriation process) amounted to 17.5 percent of all federal spending in fiscal 2008, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Even if Obama used a thick, charcoal pencil, it would be hard to find enough savings in non-defense discretionary spending to change the long-term outlook.
As for John McCain's jihad on earmarks, ``Congress stuffed 11,610 projects into the 12 appropriations bills worth $17.2 billion'' in 2008, according to Citizens Against Government Waste, a Washington non-profit organization committed to eliminating inefficiency in federal government. That represents a 337 percent increase from fiscal 2007. It also represents about 0.6 percent of the 2008 budget.
Going Broke
The ticking time bomb for the federal government is entitlement spending: Medicare and Social Security. Social Security's costs will exceed tax income in 2017, according to the 2008 annual report from the Trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. By 2041, the ``trust funds'' -- there are no assets compounding in the trust fund -- will be exhausted and unable to pay full benefits.Medicare's financial status is even worse, according to the Trustees. The Hospital Insurance Fund is already paying out more than it's taking in on an annual basis. The HI fund will be kaput in 2019.
The 2008 Medicare Report triggered a ``funding warning'' for the second consecutive year as required by law when Medicare outlays are projected to be 45 percent greater than revenue from payroll taxes and premiums.
Congrats and Regrets
Outside of entitlements, budget trends are nothing to write home about. The federal budget deficit hit a record $455 billion, or 3.2 percent of gross domestic product, in fiscal year 2008. The $250 billion the Treasury will use to buy preferred stock in U.S. banks will be scored as an expenditure in the 2009 budget, according to the White House budget office.
Now that cyclical forces (a recession) are compounding deteriorating secular trends -- fewer workers to support a greater number of retirees -- one wonders how either candidate is going to be able to do anything more than keep spending, which rose 9.1 percent this year, to single-digit gains.
I feel sorry for whoever wins the presidential election on Nov. 4. He faces a colossal mess. The housing bubble is still deflating, with no end in sight. The unemployment rate is rising, making consumer loans of all descriptions -- mortgage, auto, credit card -- vulnerable to rising delinquencies.
U.S. banks have already reported writedowns and credit losses of $411 billion ($662 billion worldwide), a financial hole that is certain to grow as more loan categories are affected by recession.
Playing Defense
Neither candidate has offered much of a vision for addressing the credit crunch sinking an economy that was already taking on water.
McCain wants the government to buy $300 billion of home mortgages to help homeowners facing foreclosure, which sounds like an incentive for homeowners who are current on their mortgage payments to find a way to qualify for relief.
Obama wants to give a tax cut to some people who don't pay any taxes, which sounds like government spending by any other name.
For the next 11 days, the two candidates will regale us with their vision for the future. They will promise, if elected, to work hard each and every day for the American people. They will inspire us with their rhetoric and scare us with distortions about the other guy.
Whether they know it or not, they won't be fulfilling many of those promises come Jan. 20. The next president of the U.S. will be handcuffed by events and constrained by deficits. He'll be playing defense. And he won't have a deep bench to work with.
The only bright spot is the prospect of escape in four years if things get worse before they get better.
Out of the mouths of babes... (Or would that be "into" in this case?)
Although for all I know she was interpreting the candidates as they whined back and forth like babies about how the other one was more hurtful or insulting with their "negative" campaigning.
Hard to tell. It's a toss-up really.
Is it almost over? Just tell me it's almost over so I can stop feeling compelled to argue with people that no, Obama is not the messiah, that actually his tax plan ought to be in my recipe files under "Main Courses: Pork with Depression Glaze," and that his health care plan is D.O.A.
I want to hurry up and get to the "I told you so" part, can we do that? That would be every so much more fun than sitting watching McCain implode. Although I can't say I'm that surprised. I've never really liked the guy, he's always been something slightly to the right of "Not a Socialist," but really? Is that the best we could have done this year?
If you think about it, it's patently ABSURD! Here we were--"we" being conservatives of all stripes, not just Republicans since I refuse to identify with that ass-backwards party, haven't for YEARS--running against a guy with a resume so thin you pretty much have to say (behind closed doors and far from the liberal race-baiters) that the only reason we even know his name is that he has a "funny name" (his words not mine) but is "articulate" and "clean" (not my words, Biden's) just the same.
What's worse is that this same guy who's damn lucky to be where he is given what he (hasn't) done in his brief career in National politics, with his TOTAL lack of foreign policy experience and snooty holier-than-thou attitude has the unmitigated gall to turn to the American people--the same people who, as a nation, let him get this far on so little--and accuse those of us who are not awed by his greatness of bing "racist" (be sure to say that with a hiss, it's so much more effective that way).
He has the nerve to say he'd be farther ahead were it not for Fox News, a network he obviously never watches, and to suggest that McCain's half-assed effort to remind voters about William Ayers is "stirring up" feelings of racial animosity (as if the behavior of a fringe few accurately reflects all of McCain's supporters).
Waaaah! Poor baby. It's not enough to be the first black President of these United States, he wants to win by a landslide TOO. He wants to win the way he's always won elections: UNOPPOSED. Isn't that the best way really? Who wants to do all the pesky work associated with winning people over? I picture him sitting there saying "Can't we just buy the votes? Oh right, tried that, got caught, sort of, well let's just say it's a good thing we have 90% of the media in our back pocket--enough to cast doubt on the credibility of the 10% who aren't buying our bullshit explanations about not thinking our money would go to ACORN if we gave it to a company that is, well, pretty much a front for ACORN."
"It really is irritating how some people just refuse to get with the program isn't it?"
"Oh well, no matter, we'll just make sure everyone thinks those people are nothing more than racists standing in the way of progress, nothing more really than people who don't deserve to vote. That's what we'll do."
Are you getting the impression I don't like the guy? Good, because I don't. I think he's a tin-plated fraud and a liar. I don't think I'd want to have a cup of coffee with him never mind a beer. And to think I actually liked him at the start of all this! ((((shudder))))
I cringe at the thought.
You know what I'm starting to wonder (Deb's multiple personality number 5 talking, let's call her "Jolene" shall we? )
I'm starting to wonder if Sarah Palin is JUST what we need in D.C.!
After this week? Here we are, myself (well "Deb" anyway ) included, shocked that she can't name a SCOTUS decision she doesn't like (hello, Dredd Scott? She did attend High School and graduate, correct?), and w're all aghast that she doesn't "sound" erudite and articulate, and why is that?????
Is it b/c we are *embarrassed* when our leaders don't sound smarter than we are? Is it really a reflection on us personally? And who's looking and judging anyway? The Europeans? Oh yes, well, it's VITAL that they think we're smart! Of course their unwillingness to help us crack down on Iran has NOTHING to do with the fact that they get all their energy needs met by Iran and Russia, it's all b/c George Bush says "NEW-CUE-LAR." Of course, how silly of me
Isn't that a bit, um, narcissistic??? Just asking...
So here's this woman who has been DOING the job up in Alaska? What do I mean? Well, she got started for REAL at the grassroots. She didn't like how the schools were being run, so she went in and tried to do something--alone--no one put her up to it or backed her. Then she didn't like how the town was being run, she did the same thing, paid for her campaign probably with her credit cards She did a pretty good job there by all accounts, without knowing everything there is to know about a whole lot of things, probably even having to do with her own state. Then she runs for Governor, and if you watch those tapes of her debates, she DOES sound like a breath of fresh air--like the only person at the table willing to call "bullshit" on the other guys sitting there batting talking points back and forth, and she cuts through it all and says "Don't you think Alaskans deserve better than this?"
And here's the kicker I can't get out of my head.....She just spent her brief time as Governor doing what no prior governor has been able to do despite years of trying, largely b/c of fears of "upsetting" the political establishment...She negotiated a pipeline and is getting it built, FINALLY. Alaska will deliver Natural gas to the "lower 48" in huge quantities b/c of HER, no question about it. No one else made that happen, and she did it BECAUSE she's naive, BECAUSE she didn't walk in there even half as cynical as I am! She thought it could be done, when people told her no, she probably pushed them aside and said "Oh, let me just see what I can do about this! I betcha we can do it!"
And she made a LOT of enemies doing it too! But it got done! And it's huge, don't discount that, it's a massive accomplishment that helps the whole country, not just her state.
Now let's take a look at the illustrious careers of Messers Obama and Biden shall we? Oh yeah, they sound so pretty when they talk don't they? OH yes, they can turn a phrase, I bet they are even "gifted" intellectually...But tell me, what have they DONE? What have they ACCOMPLISHED that actually benefits the nation as a whole? How did they get where they are? All by themselves, or did they have backers--big powerful important backers? Did they ever really buck their own party and call bullshit? Really? Did they ever take massive risks to make something happen that their supposed "betters" couldn't do (and said couldn't be done)? Name one thing. I've searched high and low, and while I can find co-sponsorships and arguments for this or that funding, I don't see any major accomplishments. I don't see any JOBS held in the private sector for any length of time, I don't see any bosses who needed them to help turn a profit or help make a payroll. I see gov't salaries or gov't grants and funding paying their bills. ALL OF THEIR LIVES. Oh sure, Biden worked for a law firm for a few MONTHS, but he falsified part of his Law School record, doesn't anyone care?
So I wonder....Sure, it would be nice if she had this wealth of "background knowledge" upon which to draw when answering questions, and it would satisfy the narcissism in us that says "Oh, I really want people to look at my leader and think well of ME PERSONALLY, even if they live in a totally FUBAR country that doesn't think well enough of itself to stand up for its own culture and history, at least they'll like ME!" but would it really get things DONE?
I think it's a false dichotomy to say "Oh, she sounds dumb and Bush sounded dumb, so she's just like Bush. I say hogwash. Look at the records. She--a lower middle class housewife, blue-collar husband who's worked her whole life, didn't have the benefit of fancy private schools and colleges, had to get scholarships and bounced through a few schools just b/c she couldn't afford to visit them first to see what was a good fit. Bush? Trust fund baby, had things handed to him his whole damn life. She? Had to start in politics on her own, work her way up, impress people with her own plans. Bush? Rode Daddy's coattails and used Daddy's friends and even hired them eventually to run his administration.
I just think we are soooooooooooo scarred from Bush that we hear another person sound "folksy" and we assume she's incapable of thinking on her feet or doing what needs to be done. Sure, she needs to be a quick learner, but she's running for VP! She's not running for President TODAY. Might she have been thrust into the limelight too hard and too fast, and then yanked back the same way, prevented from being her in-your-face, here's what I really think self?
Yeah, sure. But I don't know that this means we should be fearful of her abilities if (God forbid) McCain DIES.
So what I hope she does tonight is go out there and do (what I know she won't) the only thing she's really good at which is being REAL. I wish she'd just go out there and say "Yeah, you're right, I don't know all the details about the Pakistani regime that you know Senator, but I know what questions to ask, I know this country has to have allies somewhere, and it just makes no good common sense to go threatening people who ought to be our friends."
Or similar.
She should just let her values be on parade. Her love of this country, even her disagreement with McCain if there is some (which I believe there is). When she's asked about the bill, I WISH she could avoid being a hypocrite and say what I'm sure she really thinks and that is "This is the most bloated fatty piece of pork sausage I've ever seen, and it's a disgrace that the US Congress used this crisis to stick their piggy hands in the piggy bank!"
I would stand up and CHEER!
But she can't do that b/c for the first time in her political life, she's not just on the national stage, she's on SOMEONE ELSE'S AGENDA. Someone else is putting her out there, she's not doing it herself. Here's a woman who has never been bought and paid for, EVER, she is what McCain USED TO BE!! But now she's caught in that limbo of being who she was that got her picked in the first place, and being who most of us say she needs to be to satisfy us if we're going to let her get where she's trying to go.
We're hypocrites. We want the fresh and the new and the unspoiled, the unsophisticated everyman or woman who'll stand there and say "You know Katie, I don't know the damn answer, but really, is it gonna matter worth a shit whether I do when someone puts a bloated budget in front of me and I have to figure out where to fucking cut? Seriously? Will it matter whether I read US News or Newsweek? If I see fat, I'm gonna cut, b/c that's what I do. If you and your cocktail swillin' friends don't like it, well moose poop on you!"
We say we want that, and then we don't.
And if we don't, you know what? We get what we deserve.