March 11, 2009
WEDNESDAY'S MINI-REPORT.... Today's edition of quick hits:
* President Obama signed the "imperfect" omnibus spending bill into law today, but not before chiding some of the hypocrites who railed against earmarks while adding earmarks to the package.
* At the same time, Obama also issued a call for earmark reform. McCain and Feingold weren't impressed, but Norm Ornstein was.
* Deadly shootings in Alabama and Germany this morning. Tragic.
* Uh oh: "The federal agency that insures bank deposits, which is asking for emergency powers to borrow up to $500 billion to take over failed banks, is facing a potential major shortfall in part because it collected no insurance premiums from most banks from 1996 to 2006."
* As a rule, it's best not to get into a contentious naval dispute with China.
* In the United States, 2009 is off to its driest start since the government began keeping track in 1895.
* Can we not wait another four years on this? "Four million to five million voters did not cast a ballot in the 2008 presidential election because they encountered registration problems or failed to receive absentee ballots, which is roughly the same number of voters who encountered such problems in the 2000 election."
* Someone should let Michele Bachmann know: "The director of the 2010 Census will report to the Commerce secretary, a White House official said Tuesday, offering the clearest statement yet about the chain of command on the census and possibly allaying fears among Republicans that it will fall under the political control of the White House."
* Seattle police chief Gil Kerlikowske was named the nation's new drug czar today. I'm glad to see the office has been dropped from cabinet-level status.
* And speaking of the White House, Obama established a new White House Council on Women and Girls today. It will be run, in part, by Valarie Jarrett.
* MoveOn.org unveiled a solid new ad today on health care.
* The chairmen of the House Committees on Energy & Commerce, Ways & Means, and Education & Labor wrote the White House a letter today, vowing to get health care reform done this year.
* CNBC's Jim Cramer gave an interesting interview in 2006 bragging about manipulating the market and occasionally pushing the legal envelope, which he said was fine because the SEC didn't know what was going on.
* Speaking of Cramer, he really should stop taunting Jon Stewart, who continues to make Cramer look ridiculous.
* Jack Cafferty is unimpressed with the GOP of late: "The Republican Party is becoming a cartoon.... The Republican Party is marching double-time down the road to irrelevance and they don't even know it."
* Good question: "Anyone seen any recent calls for Social Security private accounts?"
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
—Steve Benen 5:30 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (42)
West Texas is as dry as California, though with less national media attention. One lake west of San Angelo is effectively dry.
Posted by: SocraticGadfly on March 11, 2009 at 5:26 PM | PERMALINK
In case anyone missed it, far-right actor and buffoon Chuck Norris had an interesting opinion piece earlier this week.
He not so subtly argues for a "second American revolution," and refers to clusters of like-minded traitors as "cell groups," which I thought was a loaded term reserved for terrorists.
Perhaps he's just committing the age old political mistake of telling the truth.
Posted by: doubtful on March 11, 2009 at 5:26 PM | PERMALINK
psst. . . Steve. . .
16 posts in a day?
c'mon, man, give me a break. you're wearing out my brain. :)
Posted by: zeitgeist on March 11, 2009 at 5:27 PM | PERMALINK
While the MSM and congress focus on one type of domestic terrorism (predictably I suppose):
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/11/terrorism.recruitment/index.html
They're decidedly ignoring another form of domestic terrorism:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/3/11/32434/1638/783/707067
Posted by: JWK on March 11, 2009 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK
With regard to the USA Today article you linked to, which reports that 2009 so far is the driest year ever recorded in the USA: intense, extreme, prolonged drought is not limited to the USA and Australia. Such droughts are becoming more and more widespread all over the world. This is entirely in accord with computer models of anthropogenic global warming.
We are in for some very, very tough times in the not too distant future. By "tough" I mean the worldwide collapse of agriculture, the death of oceanic fisheries, and global famine.
Posted by: SecularAnimist on March 11, 2009 at 5:37 PM | PERMALINK
By "tough" I mean the worldwide collapse of agriculture, the death of oceanic fisheries, and global famine.
Thanks for clearing that up. I thought you were alluding to the fact that I might have to give up premium cable.
/average American
Posted by: lobbygow on March 11, 2009 at 5:40 PM | PERMALINK
I just read that Jim Cramer is going to be on "The Daily Show" Thursday night. That outta be interesting!
Posted by: mrspeel on March 11, 2009 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK
Also, for those who haven't seen it, and the Huff Post link provided didn't link to it, here is Stewart's latest takedown of CNBC and Cramer.
Cramer is also supposed to be the guest tomorrow, so let's see if the pendejo has the cojones to show.
Posted by: doubtful on March 11, 2009 at 5:46 PM | PERMALINK
of course there is flooding beginning in Iowa this week, which some ignorant wingnut will use to "disprove" the idea that the droughts are the impact of climate change (not unlike Steve's pet peeve about isolated cold winter temps not disproving global warming) in 3. . .2. . .1. . .
Posted by: zeitgeist on March 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM | PERMALINK
"The federal agency that insures bank deposits, which is asking for emergency powers to borrow up to $500 billion to take over failed banks, is facing a potential major shortfall in part because it collected no insurance premiums from most banks from 1996 to 2006."
Somehow I doubt this. I have also read thier earlier backstop guarantee was never used, so this one (though bigger) might also never be used.
What's probably true is that the FDIC wants to increase charges to banks for their insurance.
Posted by: MarkH on March 11, 2009 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK
Speaking of Cramer, he really should stop taunting Jon Stewart, who continues to make Cramer look ridiculous.
Minor point of clarification. Stewart does not make Cramer look ridiculous, he merely points out that Cramer IS ridiculous. Cramer does a darn good job of making himself look ridiculous.
Posted by: thorin-1 on March 11, 2009 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK
I thought Cramer was just an idiot when I caught his act on the tube before. Now I see he is a seriously integrity-challenged con artist who will probably be the subject of a serious SEC investigation for fraud and insider trading.
Does he really think he can bully Jon Stewart or bluff his way out of this after that criminally stupid interview video surfaced? I don't think so, Cramer honey. I'd be on a fast jet to Montevideo if I was you....like immediately.
Posted by: Curmudgeon on March 11, 2009 at 6:16 PM | PERMALINK
Most amusing to first watch Cramer go most pleased with himself when he thinks Stewart is apologizing, and then go rigid when the sucker punch is landed.
We should be having a lot of that this week, Cramer is the gift that will keep giving.
Posted by: SteinL on March 11, 2009 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINK
"It’s like washing down a doughnut with a Slim-Fast shake," says Boehner's spokeswoman regarding the omnibus bill.
Having tried that combination, I can heartily endorse it. Mmm, hypocrilicious!
Posted by: Grumpy on March 11, 2009 at 6:44 PM | PERMALINK
Chris Matthews really ripped Ari Fleisher a new asshole. Look for it to be repeated in a few minutes.
A beautiful thing...
Posted by: phoebes in santa fe on March 11, 2009 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK
"Speaking of Cramer, he really should stop taunting Jon Stewart, who continues to make Cramer look ridiculous."
LOOK ridiculous ?
"Jack Cafferty is unimpressed with the GOP of late: ‘The Republican Party is becoming a cartoon....'"
BECOMING a cartoon ?
Posted by: Joe Friday on March 11, 2009 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK
Just sayin' that these are great times for us libruls, with Richard Vitter melting, Jim Cramer called on his shit, and Obama coming out each day to counter the rabid right wing bullshit
Posted by: armchair psychologist on March 11, 2009 at 7:10 PM | PERMALINK
Must. Read. This.
NYTimes: The Looting of America's Coffers
Sixteen years ago, two economists published a research paper with a delightfully simple title: “Looting.”
The economists were George Akerlof, who would later win a Nobel Prize, and Paul Romer, the renowned expert on economic growth. In the paper, they argued that several financial crises in the 1980s, like the Texas real estate bust, had been the result of private investors taking advantage of the government. The investors had borrowed huge amounts of money, made big profits when times were good and then left the government holding the bag for their eventual (and predictable) losses.
In a word, the investors looted. Someone trying to make an honest profit, Professors Akerlof and Romer said, would have operated in a completely different manner. The investors displayed a “total disregard for even the most basic principles of lending,” failing to verify standard information about their borrowers or, in some cases, even to ask for that information.
The investors “acted as if future losses were somebody else’s problem,” the economists wrote. “They were right.”
On Tuesday morning in Washington, Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, gave a speech that read like a sad coda to the “Looting” paper. Because the government is unwilling to let big, interconnected financial firms fail — and because people at those firms knew it — they engaged in what Mr. Bernanke called “excessive risk-taking.” To prevent such problems in the future, he called for tougher regulation...
If that article doesn't make your blood boil, you are related to Spock on your father's side. Sure Madoff is going to jail for a lifetime. Good. But why aren't these looters being called to justice?
Posted by: koreyel on March 11, 2009 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK
"The federal agency that insures bank deposits, which is asking for emergency powers to borrow up to $500 billion to take over failed banks, is facing a potential major shortfall in part because it collected no insurance premiums from most banks from 1996 to 2006."
So not only were the banks making bad loans, "buying" phony credit AAA credit ratings for the CDOs, buying unregulated CDS "insurance", now we find out they weren't paying in to the FDIC. I guess I'm not surprised, but when are we going to be told all financial sector growth since Reagen were nothing but a fraud? Next week?
I'm long past being just being mad at both what Wall St did for the last forty years, and what we're having to do to fix it. When are some of these SOBs going to jail?
Posted by: Glen on March 11, 2009 at 7:22 PM | PERMALINK
HOW THE FUCK DO YOU NOT COLLECT FDIC INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR TEN FUCKING YEARS!!!!!!!!
Jesus, was that not the primary lesson of the Great Depression - the one that no partisan disagreed with. You can't have a run on the banks. Period. That's why the FDIC was created to keep the middle and lower classes happy, so they would feel safe with their money in a bank.
MOTHERFUCKER.
Posted by: Chris on March 11, 2009 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK
"The federal agency that insures bank deposits, which is asking for emergency powers to borrow up to $500 billion to take over failed banks, is facing a potential major shortfall in part because it collected no insurance premiums from most banks from 1996 to 2006.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which insures deposits up to $250,000, tried for years to get congressional authority to collect the premiums in case of a looming crisis. But [the Republican-led] Congress believed that the fund was so well-capitalized - and that bank failures were so infrequent - that there was no need to collect the premiums for a decade, according to banking officials and analysts."
This is painful.
Posted by: CJ on March 11, 2009 at 7:54 PM | PERMALINK
As a rule, it's best not to get into a contentious naval dispute with China.
As impolitic as Biden's comment was about America being "tested" early in Obama's presidency, does this actually come as a surprise to anyone?
Posted by: Danp on March 11, 2009 at 8:15 PM | PERMALINK
Cafferty may be on to something. The leaders (living) of the Democratic Party most admired are Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore. On the Republican side- George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and...Joe the Plumber. Which party has the brighter future?
Posted by: AlBundy on March 11, 2009 at 8:34 PM | PERMALINK
ReRushlickins becoming a cartoon - yeah, and they're digging the grave deeper and deeper. Catch this from De Long, at http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2009/03/circular-firing-squad-of-flying-republican-attack-monkeys.html. They're ginning up (heh) to dump Steele! Apologizing to Rush wasn't good enough! And his likely or best contending replacement: Katon Dawson — Steele’s former rival for RNC chair — who, until recently, was a member of a whites-only country club...
Here's something scary about banks:
"Banks counted on looting America's coffers"
By David Leonhardt
Published: March 11, 2009
www dot iht dot com/articles/2009/03/11/business/11leonhardt.php
BTW I know some small banker types and they do a good and honest job AFAIK.
That ship harassed by the Chinese has a personal connection for me. It's the T-AGOS 23 Impeccable (like a name for an 18th c. British man-o'-war, but also makes me think of Yaqui brujo don Juan Matus ...) I worked on the design of this vessel in my small way to make this very creative design. It has an essentially unique twin hull design, look for pics.
Posted by: Neil B on March 11, 2009 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK
PS: The link I provided from IHT seems to be the same or almost the same article at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/business/economy/11leonhardt.html?_r=1 noted well by koreyel. IHT and NYT must have a sharing agreement? Yes indeed, it's a "must read"! And heh, I'm getting tired or something tonight with all that "design" alliteration ...
Posted by: Neil B ☺ on March 11, 2009 at 8:43 PM | PERMALINK
Oh no! Levi and Bristol broke up!
How will the institution of marriage stand in the face of this tragedy! All is lost!
Posted by: doubtful on March 11, 2009 at 9:04 PM | PERMALINK
Michael Steele has just sealed his fate. He's announced he's pro-choice sort-of, and also that once again he doesn't know what he's talking about. No matter how he tries to finesse it, he's either for a woman's right to choose, or he's in favor of the state making that choice. He can't be both, although it seems he doesn't seem to understand the bipolarity of the issue. Reality really is a bitch.
He's toast. Look for a vote of no confidence within a month. But who will take his place? Oh, Lush, where are you? This gets more delicious by the day.
Posted by: rich on March 11, 2009 at 9:29 PM | PERMALINK
The problem for the Republican's is that the main alternative to the embarrasing Michael Steele is the even more embarrassing Kato Dalton.
Posted by: tanstaafl on March 11, 2009 at 9:31 PM | PERMALINK
tanstaafl,(@21:31),
It's Katon Dawson. And I just saw his picture (on TP) -- he's got *brown eyes*. How on earth he managed to get into an all-whites club is a mystery to me...
Posted by: exlibra on March 11, 2009 at 9:50 PM | PERMALINK
doubtful, @21:04,
Your link didn't seem to work. Can you repost, with URL or something? I want to know ALL about this installment in the "All Things Palin" soap opera. Not that their break-up surprises me... I figured it was a given, the moment I saw that the Republican Convention wasn't turning into a bridal/baby shower cum bachelor's night; you either marry before the baby comes or you don't marry at all.
Posted by: exlibra on March 11, 2009 at 9:56 PM | PERMALINK
Steve Benen @5:30: Can we not wait another four years on this?
You might want to rephrase that, since it's a little abiguous. Maybe somethine like "Can we afford to wait another four years on this?"
Posted by: Michael W on March 11, 2009 at 10:05 PM | PERMALINK
Is is just me, or is the whole Michele Bachmann trainwreck starting to look a lot like the Katherine Harris trainwreck?
Posted by: ArtEclectic on March 11, 2009 at 10:17 PM | PERMALINK
Neil B: IHT is basically an internationized NYT; used to be put out in consortium with the WaPost.
Posted by: SocraticGadfly on March 11, 2009 at 11:30 PM | PERMALINK
The Brits are getting disgusted with Obama's perceived economic dithering. Note the predominance of American wingers in comments.
Posted by: Michael7843853 on March 12, 2009 at 12:28 AM | PERMALINK
"The federal agency that insures bank deposits, which is asking for emergency powers to borrow up to $500 billion to take over failed banks, is facing a potential major shortfall in part because it collected no insurance premiums from most banks from 1996 to 2006."
Republicans ran the Senate and the House for that entire time. Happy banks, sad FDIC, f***ed you-and-me. Sounds about right.
The Internet Says It
I Believe It
And That Settles It
Posted by: That Settles It on March 12, 2009 at 12:46 AM | PERMALINK
Oh no! Levi and Bristol broke up!
The only thing I want to know about these two is which one more frequently called the other's mother a whack job.
Posted by: Danp on March 12, 2009 at 6:55 AM | PERMALINK
Privatization of Social Security.
The world knows now what private monies can
do to wreck the economy.
The Bush Tax-cuts boosted the housing scam. The collapsing housing scam (for some) meant scoring big on the oil spike last year. Once the oil spike was over, it was time for bail-outs.
We can't do healthcare but we sure as hell can do Wealthcare (bailouts and weird bank shenanigans).
Posted by: Tom Nicholson on March 12, 2009 at 8:21 AM | PERMALINK
Every developed nation recognizes the basic human right to health care except Turkey, Mexico and the United States. Not health insurance--health CARE. Is the president aware of this? Shouldn't we make him aware of this?
Posted by: impartial on March 12, 2009 at 8:57 AM | PERMALINK
They should be playing "Movin' on up", when Cramer goes from "The Gong Show" to "The Daily Show".
Posted by: berttheclock on March 12, 2009 at 9:03 AM | PERMALINK
As a rule, it's best not to get into a contentious naval dispute with China.
I thought a land war was one of the classic blunders.
Posted by: Gregory on March 12, 2009 at 9:09 AM | PERMALINK
Sorry, exlibra, didn't hit this comment thread again until today. Nothing special in my link, just the Reuters report.
Posted by: doubtful on March 12, 2009 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK