The Case for Obama/Biden

I got into some back and forth on Facebook this evening over the merits of the presidential candidates. One of my Facebook buddies posted this link to a blog where the conservative authors laid out the case against Barack Obama. She encouraged people thinking about voting Democrat to read the blog and consider their position. I read it. The authors rehashed the same attacks the McCain campaign has been employing for months. Nothing new.

I responded with the following comment: "Read it. Still voting for Obama/Biden. Are there any McCain/Palin supporters willing to state a case for their candidates, or is the tank so dry that attacking the other guy is the only thing left?"

She came right back with: "Ben, it's all about balance within the government. There are other people I might like above McCain but above all I'm a fiscal conservative. As a small business owner I am a capitalist and don't believe in spreading the wealth nor raising taxes on people who suceed in this world. Without any checks and balances we may be bordering on socialism. Keep government out of my pockets and my home. Capatalism works. That's why I'm voting McCain. Why are you voting Obama? Just wondering. I know I live in a state where it doesn't matter anyway:)"

I want to respond, because after taking shots at McCain and Palin in previous blog posts, I haven't explained precisely why I believe Barack Obama is the superior candidate. So here it is:
I am also a fiscal conservative. I believe in institutional deregulation and placing an emphasis on individual education and accountability. I think that irresponsible borrowers should share the blame for the crisis in the credit market with the lenders. And I agree that McCain's fiscal policy reflects those beliefs more closely than Obama's.

But here's the problem. After eight years of mismanagement by the Bush administration, the presidency has been compromised. The American public no longer trusts the Executive to lead effectively on matters of domestic and foreign policy. So regardless of who is elected in November, much of their first term agenda will be dictated by the Congress and the media, as these institutions have replaced the Oval Office as the director of American government. With that in mind, I'm looking to the incumbent to serve as a "rebuilding" President. A man who can restore trust and confidence in the office, so that in another one or two election cycles, we can elect a candidate based more on policy, than personality.

I think Obama is the best equipped candidate to put the Executive back in the driver's seat. He has demonstrated patience, intelligence and diplomacy in his brief senate career. And he has carried himself with poise and dignity throughout a grueling campaign. But most importantly, he has shown a capacity for openness and a willingness to compromise that has been lacking from the current Republican administration and from the McCain ticket. According to Bush and McCain, if you are not with them, you are against them. If you oppose their foreign policy, you are not a patriot. If you believe that we must fund improvements in health care and education with tax dollars, you are a socialist. Not all the policies are bad, but the way the Republican party conducts themselves alienates Americans, instead of building consensus.

Every election cycle we put a President into office who makes a practice of divisive politics, we are another four years removed from electing a President who has a say in setting their own agenda. This is why, in 2008, Barack Obama is the candidate for the job.

Who's Up For a Recession?

I just watched the President's address regarding the "economic crisis." This is the first time since his 2001 inaugural address that I've been able to sit through an entire Bush speech. I read the transcripts of the state of the union each year, but I simply can't watch the man speak in public. It's painful.

But tonight was different. The economic mess we find ourselves in came to fruition under Bush's watch. And if he doesn't find a quick fix, the resulting recession will be his legacy. I'm also fairly certain that Bush realizes the fate of his GOP successor, John McCain, hangs on the current administration's ability to bail out Wall Street. Either way, Bush needed to sell his plan tonight to throw the financial sector a lifeline. So he stuck to the script, didn't entertain any questions (thinking on his feet is not his strong suit) and remarkably, didn't smirk. It was Bush at his most watchable. Only took 7 years.

The key provision of the Bush plan is to take $700 billion of the taxpayers' cash and use it to start buying up bad mortgage assets. The government will sit on these assets until they rebound at some point in the future and then sell them off, mitigating the initial $700 billion investment. But don't worry. None of that money is going to end up in the pockets of Wall Street executives. Because after we cut this enormous check, Congress is going to legislate new methods of oversight. Isn't that backwards? Shouldn't we change the rules of the game, then dump boatloads of money back in the market?

I respect the efforts of those individuals who want to try and prevent the collapse of major financial institutions. For better or worse, there are thousands of jobs, and billions in investor assets at risk. The same sidewalk-loitering, interview fodder on the local evening news who say, "it's their dumb mistakes, why should we pay?" are the same people whose 401k's are going to tank and who won't be able to get approval for a Gap card if this situation continues unchecked.

But there is a select group of people out there who wouldn't mind a helping of recession, and I'm one of them. We're the same folks who have are saving for retirement, protecting our credit, investing prudently and purchasing homes we can afford. And through fiscal common sense, we have managed to insulate ourselves from market corrections. And that's what this situation is. It's not economic catastrophe. It's not a crisis. It's a correction. Maybe you remember 9/11, Enron, etc. back in 2001? Same deal. From time to time, the market must realign itself. And there are always casualties. Last time, the government bailed out airlines. This time, it's brokerage houses who backed the wrong pony.

Now that Bush has publicly made his case, the reactionary masses are going to demand a bail out. There are too many baby boomers nearing retirement who haven't sufficiently reduced the risk in their portfolios. I'm sure that within the next week or two, we'll probably pick up the tab for at least half a trillion dollars worth of bad mortgages. And as result, we'll save a whole lot of retirement funds. But that only prolongs the problem.

Credit needs to be tough to get, or the cycle will repeat itself in short order. Nobody wants to see jobs lost or nest eggs evaporate. But until we force lenders to accept responsibility for the consequences of their determinations of creditworthiness, we ignore the fundamental cause of the current situation. Will we fund a bail out? Yes. Should we? Probably not. That's how capitalism is played.

International Smackdown

Despite their underdog status, the Chinese men's basketball team kept things interesting for the first half of their eventual 101-70 loss to team USA. Watching the Chinese team keep things tight with some ridiculous perimeter shooting in the first half sort of reminded me of every NCAA game I've watched where a ridiculously overmatched 13, 14, 15 or 16 seed goes out and makes a run at a top seed. But inevitably the tide turns, as it did for the US in the 3rd quarter. What they lacked in 3 point shooting, team USA made up for with ridiculous defensive rebounds and powering through the lane like Yao Ming was a JV player. After some embarrassing losses during recent international outings, this morning's blowout was a good indicator. But there are some more serious tests before anyone with a right mind declares these guys a gold medal lock.

Some Olympic observations from the opening days of the Olympic games:
-Way to go Beijing! Disgusting air quality, filtered internet to the Olympic Village and now a tragic murder suicide involving the family of an American coach. 24 hours down and you're doing a bang-up job. And I hear those opening ceremonies were gorgeous.
-Dara Torres: Fastest leg of the women's 4x100 freestyle silver medal effort. Props to Dara for showing up the young'uns. Here's hoping she doesn't pop positive for HGH.
-Micheal Phelps: Thanks for losing the facial hair prior to competing. The gold medals are going to look a lot classier without the porn star 'stache.
-Laura Bush and Henry Kissenger: You're at the US vs China basketball game. You're getting roughly the same amount of camera time as Chris Bosh. Try to stay awake.
-George Bush: Don't restrain yourself. When Kobe drops a tomahawk dunk down on Yao's head, stand up, pop your shirt and ask the Chinese President, "whatchoo gonna say 'bout THAT, shorty?" It's only slightly less classy than how you usually behave on an international stage.