Elections Americaines

I was switching around looking for a bit of late night election news and stumbled on to TV5, the French channel. The French really do things differently, don't they? First I saw a couple of reporters talking about the election from inside an aquarium. I was only guessing, but I presumed it was the Shedd in Chicago. Of course, for all I know it could have been a seafood restaurant in Paris.

Then they went to their panel discussion. On the panel was the coolest looking guy I've ever seen on a political discussion program. Behind the panelists there are women (mostly) walking around drinking wine.

You can watch the coverage here, but unfortunately, they've changed panelists now so the cool guy is gone. Still, it's worth it just for the difference in images, etc.

Ambassador Foley doesn't love me (sniff sniff)

I heard on the radio that there's a big bash at the American Embassy today. I guess Ambassador Foley's the host? (I tuned in too late.) Anyway, he's snubbed me two Thanksgivings in a row and now an Election Day bash. That's IT! I'll, I'll, I'll … I'll think of something.

Hennessy & Staunton

Over the weekend I spent a lot of time catching up on my newspaper reading. A lot of what I read was the Irish Times's coverage of the American election. I can't point to anything definite, but after reading many articles by both Mark Hennessy and Denis Staunton I noticed that there was a difference in the style of the two reporters.

I think the difference is that Hennessy's reports struck me as his attempts to report what he was hearing and seeing as he traveled around with the two campaigns. Staunton's reports have a more editorialized tone. Obviously I can't say for certain, but I wonder if it's down to the difference between being one Irish reporter being temporarily in America to report on an event and the other being the full-time Washington correspondent.

Hennessy normally reports on Irish politics and only turned up in America in September (August?). Staunton, meanwhile, sounds like he's spent too much time having drinks with correspondents from the NY Times and Washington Post (& their wannabes).

Anyway, after an hour or so I stopped reading Staunton's articles and stuck with Hennessy's.

Talk about infomercials

Last night TV3 showed United 93. I hadn't seen it before and I guess I wasn't really expecting the emotional impact that it had. I've watched so many documentaries about September 11 that I thought I was inured to the images of what happened that day. I was wrong because I wasn't ready for United 93. The movie is something else and so much better than Oliver Stone's gobbledygook.

I wonder if that had been on ABC rather than TV3 if it would have had the effect of being an infomercial for McCain. Maybe, maybe not, but it sure gets you angry again.

Fifteen miles on the Erie Canal

This cheered me up this morning. The Erie Canal is getting more business these days thanks to the rise in fuel costs. If it doesn't 'absolutely, positively have to be there overnight' then the canal can, apparently, be pretty cost effective.

I grew up near the canal and even though I knew there'd been some increase in pleasure boats using the canal I didn't realize there was any commercial traffic still using it.

We've hauled some barges in our day,
Filled with lum-ber coal and hay,
And ev'ry inch of the way we know
From Al-ba-ny to Buff-a-lo OH

Common sense from the Guardian

Wow. I can't believe it. Martin Kettle in today's Guardian with a load of common sense about the election.

And yet when, a week from now, we reflect on the immense fact that America has elected a black president, or even if we are reflecting on the scarcely less immense fact that it has not, it will be important to remember what it feels like now - that this campaign has not fundamentally been about race at all.

Don't get this wrong. The Republicans are engaged in an "othering" of Obama into which race is inextricably woven. But the othering of 2008 is not something new and unique but something old and familiar. In 2004 they othered John Kerry as a rich liberal. In 2000 they othered Al Gore as a beltway geek. In the 1990s they othered Bill Clinton as a draft-dodging child of the 60s. Before that they othered Michael Dukakis, Jimmy Carter and George McGovern, each in his turn, right back to the othering of John Kennedy as a Catholic in 1960. Othering, in other words, is what Republicans - and sometimes even Democrats - do.

Okay, I don't agree that the Democrats are any less guilty of this than Republicans, but that's beside the point. The essence of his point, that there's nothing much new here, is true. This election isn't all that different.

That is the reason why, next Tuesday, American voters face a double choice - electing a president of a race they have not previously voted for; and, at least as important on the day, electing a president from a party that, in modern times, they rarely vote in.

Look at it this way. Obama may or may not have a problem getting white Americans to vote for him. But he is doing much better than most of his recent Democratic predecessors ever managed among such voters.

This column should be mandatory reading for everyone in the British & Irish media and anyone who feels the urge to voice an opinion.

Dream On

Sure Obama has Bruce, Billy Joel, Bon Jovi and loads of others, but McCain has Joe Perry. Perry brings with him some campaign songs that could be immediately useful: Walk This Way - obviously; Dream On - always a winner; Dude (Looks Like A Lady) - just to confuse people; And Sweet Emotion - because it's great.

Some sweat hog mama with a face like a gent
Said my get up and go musta got up & went.
You got good news but you're a real good liar
Cause backstage lover set your pants on fire.

I know time's short, but I can't see how this won't tip the scales in McCain's favor.

Obama's infomercial

One of the great joys of traveling from Ireland to America is that before I get used to the time change I always find myself wide awake at 4am or so. When that happens I generally turn on the t.v. and switch around until I find half an hour on the Little Giant or the Vacuseal or some special mop that cleans your floor whether it's tiles, carpet or linoleum. There's great entertainment in these productions.

Unfortunately, I didn't get to see Obama's infomercial last night. I'm sure Obama didn't employ any of the traditional infomercial production values, but I'd like to imagine he did. The gross (& grotesque) overacting that is part and parcel of every infomercial would have suited Obama's purposes perfectly and it would have been more entertaining than what I'm sure was a very sincere and earnest half hour.

Just think of it.

First you'd see a shrunken, flustered McCain with hair all a mess and purple in the face in a dimly lit Oval Office trying to handle some crisis or whatever and then you'd switch to a brightly lit Oval Office where a cool Obama is soothing staff and the nation simultaneously. Next you'd see McCain stepping on the neck of some poor person while patting some Wall St. guy on the back followed by Obama cuffing the Wall St. guy as he hands over the keys to a new house to a 'typical' family.

Ah, if only.

I don't hate the Phillies

One of the strange things about living away is that the teams I hate is frozen in time. In the 1980s. I hated and still hate the St. Louis Cardinals, who were the Mets' main rivals in the 80s and who beat the Mets in 2006. And, of course, I hate the Yankees.

I don't hate the Philadelphia Phillies, although it seems that most of my fellow Met fans loathe the Phillies and their (relatively) nearby fans. Last night the Phillies won the World Series and I was rooting for them. When the series started I was uncommitted, but after the first two games I realized I was actually rooting for Philadelphia. Given the depth of feeling most Met fans seem to feel for the Phillies I feel almost traitorous.

The die is cast. (Or at least my vote is.)

I voted and mailed the ballot paper off yesterday. It's irretrievable. And who did I vote for? Okay, yes, but no extra credit for guessing correctly that I voted for McCain. It has to be said that I voted with little enthusiasm and less hope. (And the fact I vote in NY State means that I already know beyond doubt that my guy's not going to win my state.)

Back in January I said it had to be anyone but Clinton. Now Hillary seems like a distant memory. It looks like Obama will win, but I won't be joining in the celebrating.

Time to clean house in Brussels

First we had Jaime Smyth in a newspaper article and now we have RTE's Sean Whelan testifying before an Oireachtas committee that our representatives in Brussels are suffering from low morale after the Lisbon vote. Time for the government to act. Time for new people representing us in Brussels.

Circumstances have changed and the kowtowing brown noses are now useless and what we need are combative, argumentative diplomatic soldiers for Ireland. We need people who relish being disliked. Annoying, cantankerous so and so's. We need a team of Michael O'Leary types. Have we got any of those available to the Irish government?

Where Parker is wrong

I didn't have a chance earlier to finish my thoughts on Kathleen Parker's column on Sarah Palin. Near the end Parker says:

And though it isn't over yet, it seems clear that McCain made a tragic, if familiar, error under that sycamore tree. Will he join the pantheon of men who, intoxicated by a woman's power, made the wrong call?

Had Antony not fallen for Cleopatra, Octavian might not have captured the Roman Empire. Had Bill resisted Monica, Al Gore may have become president, and Hillary might be today's Democratic nominee.

There is absolutely no question but that Monica does not belong there. Bill Clinton was not "intoxicated by" Monica's "power", but rather indifferent to her vulnerability. She was an insecure, plain-looking star-struck young woman (girl, really) who was simply another play thing for Caligula. She was no Celopatra.

Palin

The New York Times has a long-ish profile of Sarah Palin today. I actually didn't find it all that interesting, but this paragraph caught my eye.

Friends say Ms. Palin’s itinerant college journey was nothing unusual, that it was routine for Alaskans without money to tour colleges in the Lower 48, uncertain about their interests and attracted to anywhere that sounded warmer. Many here ticked off their own tallies of colleges attended.

There's been a lot of noise about how Palin attended all these different colleges, but from what the Times says this is just another Alaskan quirk.

The key question about Sarah Palin is not why did she attend all those different colleges, but - "Is she up to being President"? I believe the answer to that question is 'Yes', but I'll admit that the evidence in favor is lacking. I think she's plenty smart enough and I think her judgment is sound.

If she loses next month she'll have 4 years to fine tune her political philosophy and acquire sufficient knowledge to 'appear Presidential' in 2012. She will also gain more executive experience as Governor.

So did McCain make a mistake choosing Palin? Well, maybe, but who would have been a better choice? Romney, maybe, given the economic problems, but he's such a turn-off. Really McCain didn't have a lot of good options.

Kathleen Parker thinks McCain chose Palin for 'other' reasons.

One does not have to be a psychoanalyst to reckon that McCain was smitten.

… As my husband observed early on, McCain the mortal couldn't mind having an attractive woman all but singing arias to his greatness. Cameras frequently capture McCain beaming like a gold-starred schoolboy while Palin tells crowds that he is "exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief." This, notes Draper, "seemed to confer not only valor but virility on a 72-year-old politician who only weeks ago barely registered with the party faithful."

I'd love to dismiss this as nonsense, but I can't. I think most men - especially those who are at least 35 - find Palin attractive. She's pretty, smiley and seems so full of life. It's possible that this did - even if subconsciously - figure in McCain's own thinking, but I'm also sure the more cynical in his campaign would have known that she'd be a hit.

I also think her good looks explain why so many men on the left want to paint her as some airhead Barbie; it's safe enough to be attracted to her so long as she doesn't threaten you. I think even the NY Times's profile provides plenty of evidence that she's far from the ditz that these people say (hope?) she is. If things go against her on November 4, she'll be back and better next time.

Medical card fiasco

To be honest I haven't got a lot to say about the medical card and the government's handling of it since the budget last week. I don't even have a clear idea what a medical card is or what it's used for. I don't have one, which explains a lot, I suppose. I have this vague understanding that a medical card ensures free medical care for poor people, but sometime in the not-too-distant past it was extended to include anyone over 70 years of age.

All of that is a preamble to my view that I just don't know how the government didn't see that taking something away from old people - even if they've only had it a few years - was always going to be a problem. Once people get used to an entitlement, it's very hard to take it away from them. And when you're taking it away from either the very young or the very old it doesn't much matter about the rights and wrongs of it, you're on a political loser.

Defending such a move in print, even indirectly or only partially, is a brave decision. I applaud Sarah Carey for her article this morning pointing out that many of those who are opposed to the government's recent attempts to cut back on the medical card for old people were among those who opposed the granting of it in the first place. She also pointed out that the number of old people getting private insurance had increased since the free medical card was introduced. (I bet her life won't be worth living for a while after this column.)

Carey's column combined with what to me seemed unseemly behavior at the protest yesterday has almost made me sympathetic for the government. Almost.

Angela's Ashes & Hitchens

I recently read Angela's Ashes. I'd read Tis a while back so I knew what to expect as far as style and general themes were concerned.

I enjoyed the book, although I can't say I believed it. Not all of it, anyway.

Now I'm reading Love, Poverty, and War by Christopher Hitchens. The book is essentially a selection of his essays, columns and articles over a period of 15 years or so. I knew very little about Hitchens before I started reading this book other than that he was a writer for The Nation (don't know if he still is) and that he was in favor of the Iraq war.

Well, I tell ya, he can write.

It isn't just his grasp of the subject that strikes you - whether it's Kipling or Trotsky or the Kurds or Route 66 or even Malcom Muggeridge - it's how he makes you want to know even if you never really cared before (which I can say is true of many of his subjects in this book). And when he touches on a subject that's been gnawing at you (like the hipsters' worship of the Dalai Lama) it's like a lightning bolt of clarity has struck you.

I haven't finished the book yet and I know there are essays on some leading figures of the Church that might be uncomfortable. Doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to them, though.

Oh to be hip in London

I found myself in Notting Hill in London over the weekend. I hadn't intended to go there nor had I ever been there before. After 5 minutes walking around I realized that the chicest (is that a word?) fashion accessory was one I didn't have: an Obama badge. I saw three or four being worn by the 'coolest' people around. There weren't just wearing them, they were displaying them.

I wondered to myself how my Bush-Cheney '04 cap would have gone down?

Hockey fan?

I know it's not looking too likely, but what if McCain wins? What about all those Gore/Kerry/Obama voters now? Well, this option's still there.

If Obama wasn't black ...

I heard George Lee on Today with Pat Kenny say that while watching the debate the other night (no, I didn't watch) the thought occurred to him that if Obama weren't black (he actually said "colored", but I can't kill him for that) he'd be well in front by now (or something to that effect). If this was the only time I'd heard this, I'd ignore it, but I hear it all the time - on the radio/t.v. and in conversation. I don't buy it at all.

First of all, if Obama were a white guy he would never have won the nomination. No similarly urbane, cosmopolitan white guy would have won the black vote against Hillary as Obama did. For example, Obama won 80% of the black vote in South Carolina. There's just no way that a 'white Obama' would have had similar success among black voters. Therefore, if Hillary had run against 'white Obama' Hillary would be the nominee right now.

But, what about the general election? Would Obama be further ahead if he were white? Let's face it, the underlying assumption when people like Lee make this point is that there are a large number of racist white Americans who won't vote for Obama because he's black. Is that true? I doubt it.

First, I'm sure there are some white people who are drawn to Obama because he's black. How many? Who knows?

Second, it's obvious that Obama is inspiring greater interest among black people in this election than in any previous presidential election. And he's going to get their votes in greater numbers than a 'white Obama' would. He's currently out-polling McCain among like black voters by 91% to 3%. That's a good deal better than Kerry did against Bush in 2004, when Bush won 11% of the black vote.

And, last, you have to expect that Republicans were always going to vote for the Republican candidate. So the only possible segment of the electorate that Lee and others could be talking about are those Democrats and Independents who are voting for McCain, and McCain has an appeal for independents and some Democrats. He always has. So to pin a 'racist' tag on all non-Republican McCain voters is wrong, ugly and irresponsible.

I'm sure there are some people out there just waiting to go to the polls on Nov. 4 to vote against the black guy, but I honestly doubt they outnumber those who are equally keen to vote for Obama because he's black.

Our cousins

I haven't got a lot to say other than this is a great article from National Geographic on the Neanderthals. Every time I think about Neanderthals I wonder to myself how different the world would be if there were two species of human beings.

Explaining the financial crisis

I like this from Jim Manzi at National Review Online. He uses hunters and gatherers living in caves as the example of how a banking crisis - like the one we have now - might arise. Here's a paragraph on Credit Default Swaps, which are often explained in nearly incomprehensible terms.

While this is happening a couple of sharp operators might sit together in a dark corner of the cave, and make a wager about whether Og will default on his bond. In plain English, we would call this a side bet. Though if you wanted to sell this idea to a fairly gullible person who holds Og’s bond, you might make it sound kind of gee-whiz by calling it a Credit Default Swap. If I hold one of Og’s bonds and I take a bet that pays out if Og defaults, then I’ve just hedged my risk.

Read the whole thing.

For a good article on CDS's this one from Newsweek is pretty good. Provides interesting background too.

The ballot

I got my ballot yesterday. I didn't even know Ralph Nader was in the running this time. He's listed as the candidate of the Populist Party, which I didn't know was still around. Cynthia McKinney is the Green candidate, where Nader had a home the last two elections.

Also on the ballot are Roger Calero (Socialist Workers Party), Gloria La Riva (Party for Socialism and Liberation) & Bob Barr (Libertarian). See? It's not just about the big two. (Yes it is.)

I was disappointed I didn't get one of the Osama ballots.

Harper reelected

Stephen Harper was reelected yesterday, although not with the majority he wanted. Still, he retained his job and that's not to be sneezed at during these tumultuous times.

So, if Obama wins in November, will he be the most left wing leader of any of the G-7 nations? Merkel in Germany, Sarkozy in France, Berlusconi in Italy and Harper in Canada all hail from the right in those nations. I'm not as sure of Aso in Japan, but I think he's considered to be 'right-leaning'. Then there's Gordon Brown. I guess he could be to the left of Obama, but I'm not sure. If David Cameron comes to power that will leave Obama as the only leader coming from the left.

Funny turn of events.

8c extra a liter

The budget hiked the cost of a liter (okay, litre) of gas (okay, petrol) by 8c (that's $0.41 per US gallon). That's a substantial, punishing increase on the already overtaxed motorist. Okay, it's a "tough" budget as everyone's been saying. This is just more pain, right?

Not if you're John Gormley, who's clearly happy about this measure, which only makes me angrier at the government.

Mr Gormley also pointed to what he called "Green Party gains" including: a substantially increased budget for water services; new funding for home energy efficiency and warmer homes scheme; increases in petrol prices; the bicycle initiative; and an increase in motor taxes.

Gormley is Fianna Fail's (that FAIL has rarely seemed so accurate) partner in government. Think about that: FF is sharing power with people who are today reveling in the pain being endured by millions of voters.

Even though I'm not sure if a Fine Gael-Labour government would do much differently, I'd be happy with the change in tone. On the one hand you have Fianna Fail acting as if this budget mess is a mystery to them, like they've only recently come to power. And there holding their hands in government are people who are sneering and laughing at the vast majority of Irish citizens. Time for a change?

"Long haul"? Is this a joke?

I heard the Minister for Finance on the radio last night explaining aspects of the budget. However, when I heard him explain that long haul flights will incur a tax of €10 and short haul flights will have an extra €2 added on I thought to myself, "Well, it could be worse".

It was only later I found out that "long haul" is any flight of 300km (200 miles) or more. Well that leaves a lot options open to people looking for the short haul flight. From Dublin you can go to Liverpool, Manchester, ... Wait surely there must be others? Let's check again. ... Eh, No. That's it. Although maybe they'll throw Glasgow into the mix seeing as that's listed as exactly 300km from Dublin. And, from Shannon? Well, there's always the t.v.

Wikipedia defines 'long haul' as any flight over 500 miles (800km), which would be a lot better for Irish travelers AND those who might want to visit us.

I later heard the Minister explain that he used a Netherlands law as a model. Well, excuse me Minister, but maybe had you checked a map you might have seen that the Netherlands is NOT an island off the northwest coast of Europe. They don't have to include 60+ miles of open water in their distance charts. And, they have other travel options - road, rail, etc. - that we don't have. (And, forget about the ferry. When you have to spend at least 2 hours to travel the first 60 miles that's not an option.)

Blaming the Central Bank

Now, I've already said I'm favorably disposed to laying a lot of blame for the financial crisis at the feet of the Federal Reserve. In America. Here the Central Bank is getting some criticism and, well, I might be willing to cut them more slack.

One of the problems that the Central Bank has is that it has no control over the currency or interest rates. We should have had much higher interest rates for a number of years, but due to the fact we foolishly joined the euro our central bank has been powerless to make the adjustments necessary. That meant we were able to borrow at rates far too low for an economy growing so rapidly.

And, on top of that, the exchange rate with the dollar for so long favored us too. The weak economies at the center of Europe meant we had a weak currency to go along with our low interest rates. Low interest rates a weak currency and a rapidly growing economy were always going to create a bubble. All that extra wealth had to go somewhere and, given Irish people's love of property, that's where the money went. Land speculation, buying houses to rent, investing in overseas property.

Now, back to the Central Bank. Should they have known we were heading towards a disaster? I think so, but I'm not sure. When you read the statement of Governor John Hurley delivered on July 10 it's hard not to conclude that something was wrong with the Central Bank's monitoring.

Accordingly, the banking sector here has not experienced the write-down of assets that has required some of their international peers to raise additional capital, thus Irish banks are well capitalised with good asset quality. In line with the results of previous exercises, the preliminary results of our latest macroeconomic stress tests on the banking sector, which are designed to test the financial position of banks in the face of a serious economic downturn suggest that the banking sector’s shock absorption capacity remains strong. This strength is an essential prerequisite for the more challenging times that have arisen.

"Good asset quality". I'd love to know how they arrived at that conclusion. Maybe they're right, but seeing as the state is now insuring the banks, why not publish the details on that assessment? Let all of us judge whether we agree with the regulators on the "quality" of the banks' assets.

Former Central Bank Chief Economist Michael Casey isn't quite ready to throw is ex-employers under the bus. Yet.

If, however, it turns out that none of the Irish banks needs to be recapitalised, then the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator may, in retrospect, be seen to have done a reasonable job.

In that eventuality it will probably be accepted that the main problem affecting Irish banks was the lack of liquidity and the seizing-up of the global inter-bank market - problems which the present State guarantee are designed to address.

It's a reasonable column. He does a good job of presenting the "what if is a capital and not liquidity problem after all" scenario too. Then he provides us (me at any rate) with this nugget.

Close relationships between regulators and banks - difficult to avoid in a small country - will have to be ended. It is not being suggested here that the Irish system suffers from "regulatory capture", but the long-standing practice of former governors and senior regulators joining the boards of banks on their retirement should be stopped. The ordinary taxpayers of this country have been placed on the hazard for an unprecedented amount of money. They deserve no less than that those already on the boards of institutions which they once regulated, should stand down, if only for symbolic reasons.

I shouldn't be surprised by this. You come across this sort of thing all the time here. It's a small country. Still, I can only say 'Amen' to that last sentiment. It's time all you ex-Central Bank big shots stand down from the banks' boards of directors.

Budget rumors

One of the rumors regarding the budget is that there will be a €10 tax on all flights out of Ireland. That will be the kiss of death for our short trips on Ryanair. It will also be a bitter pill for anyone in the tourism trade, but what's another industry tossed on the fire?

Budget day

Today's budget is going to be the toughest in "living memory", according to the Minister for Finance. Cutbacks and tax hikes. The media's so excited it's like Christmas has come early for them.

He's not as sensible as Kermit

I don't use the expression - it doesn't sound right coming out of my mouth - but I do like it. "Ya muppet" or "He's a muppet" to describe someone who is or, at least, is behaving like an idiot.

Well, yesterday we had further proof that Enda Kenny is "a muppet". Again, I say, it's time for Fine Gael to grow up.

What's happening on Squawk Box?

The past week I can't shake Joey Ramone's song from my head. Every night I tune in for my CNBC fix and there she is, Maria Bartiromo.

What's happening on Wall Street?
What's happening at The Stock Exchange?
I want to know

I watch her at the big board every single day
While she's reporting, you best stay out of her way
I watch her everyday
I watch her every night
She's really outta sight

Don't blame deregulation

I guess because what's been gnawing at me the past few weeks is all this talk about how deregulation was at fault for the financial mess. How many times has it been said? And yet, what laws were changed that led to today's problems? The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 is the only one recently that I know of that may have played some role in the current crisis. (And, I know about the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, but I haven't been able to pin down what, if any, part it may have played.)

Sebastian Mallaby of the Washington Post points the finger elsewhere - to the Federal Reserve.

So the first cause of the crisis lies with the Fed, not with deregulation. If too much money was lent and borrowed, it was because Chinese savings made capital cheap and the Fed was not aggressive enough in hiking interest rates to counteract that.

… Rather, the key financiers were the ones who bought the toxic mortgage products. If they hadn't been willing to buy snake oil, nobody would have been peddling it.

Who were the purchasers? They were by no means unregulated. U.S. investment banks, regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, bought piles of toxic waste. U.S. commercial banks, regulated by several agencies, including the Fed, also devoured large quantities. European banks, which faced a different and supposedly more up-to-date supervisory scheme, turn out to have been just as rash. By contrast, lightly regulated hedge funds resisted buying toxic waste for the most part -- though they are now vulnerable to the broader credit crunch because they operate with borrowed money.

This gets to the crux of what's been bothering me. I kept reading/hearing about the deregulation (usually the word 'Republicans' appears near-by), but if you're going to blame deregulation, what regulations were rescinded that shouldn't have been?

If, however, the Fed is the source of this problem doesn't that make you wonder if Ben Bernanke is the right man to be leading the charge now?

Mallaby continues:

If that doesn't convince you that deregulation is the wrong scapegoat, consider this: The appetite for toxic mortgages was fueled by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the super-regulated housing finance companies. Calomiris calculates that Fannie and Freddie bought more than a third of the $3 trillion in junk mortgages created during the bubble and that they did so because heavy government oversight obliged them to push money toward marginal home purchasers. There's a vigorous argument about whether Calomiris's number is too high. But everyone concedes that Fannie and Freddie poured fuel on the fire to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

There was no lack of regulation, but there may have been a lack of oversight or, worse, the wrong emphasis among the regulators. You've got to identify the problem correctly before you can correct it.

Greens cause cancer?

This is for Bishop, err, Minister Gormley.

Health officials issued a warning over energy-saving lightbulbs yesterday after research showed that some types could potentially harm the skin and even raise the risk of cancer.

A study by the Health Protection Agency found that some unencapsulated fluorescent lightbulbs, which have a coil that is visible, emitted ultraviolet (UV) radiation above the recognised safety limits.

We're less than three months from the ban on selling (possessing? - does anyone know?) incandescent bulbs.

UPDATE: Just found this in today's news from RTE.

Environment Minister, John Gormley's bright idea is to phase out the sale of energy inefficient bulbs in a four stage process; the first to go, from March, will be traditional bulbs with an electrical power consumption rating of 75 Watts or more.

The debates

Okay, okay, I'll admit it. I didn't watch the debates. Any of them. Not in their entirety or even substantially. I did watch about 10-15 minutes of the first one and I watched about 10 mintes of the VP debate, but that's it. I even promised some people that I'd watch them all, but I never did. Why? I don't know. I think it's partly because I couldn't (or wouldn't, I guess) watch them live, partly because I didn't need to watch them and partly because I didn't want to watch them once I'd seen all the press about them. And the debates always make me cringe, what with the phony smiles, platitudes and personal stories. Lecchh.

So, now that I've got that off my chest, is it all over for McCain? Probably. Hard to see how he can overcome the financial disaster. (Is Hank Paulson George W. Bush's last 'get' at John McCain?} The Republicans are taking the brunt of the blame for all this mayhem. The only possible argument that they might try - and I doubt it would work - is that it now seems that Europe is in at least as big a pickle as America and this is the socio-economic model that Obama would like to implement. So, no system, no democratic nation is immune. It's not a strong argument, but I can't think of a better one.

The banks are not chastened

British people are flocking to Irish banks, thanks to the government's commitment the other night.

Tens of thousands of savers are seeking to transfer their cash out of the UK and into Irish banks – including the Post Office accounts run by Bank of Ireland – to gain the unlimited deposit protection recently afforded them by the Irish government. The first three days of this week have seen three times the normal level of new accounts and inquiries about Irish banks, according to price comparison website moneysupermarket.com

This has Gordon Brown pretty miffed, apparently. From what the Financial Times reports this morning, our Irish banks are taking our taxpayer commitment and turning it into an unbeatable marketing ploy.

Ireland’s decision to prop up its six biggest lenders by guaranteeing all their debts and deposits was passed into law on Thursday, in the face of anger across Europe about the impact that it would have on the EU’s single market.

British bankers said there were already signs that some Irish lenders were approaching corporate and private banking customers in the United Kingdom and encouraging them to move their money.

You know, I doubt a single taxpayer, well other than those who run our banks and building socieities, thought we were doing anything other than rescuing those badly run institutions. But, no. We were actually emboldening them.

“We now represent the safest place to deposit money in Europe with a AAA guarantee from a country with the lowest national debt to GDP ratio of any AAA country,” wrote Michael Fingleton, Jr, an Irish Nationwide executive, in an e-mail to employees of a large investment bank.

An Irish Nationwide employee confirmed that it was offering UK customers 6.75 per cent interest for a six-month bond with a minimum investment of £20,000.

Sickening, isn't it?

Making shopping online 'easier'

Today's Irish Times tells us that shopping online will be made easier thanks to "new measures to be announced by the EU Commission next week". Great. I like shopping online. Unfortunately, thanks to the Irish government's WEEE we can't buy a Wii (or anything electrical) online from outside Ireland. Protectionism by any other name would smell … you know where I'm going. Always the good Europeans, except when it doesn't suit us.

{And, don't tell me that non-Irish online retailers could become a registered retailer. Our market is too small for retailers to jump through all those hoops.}

It's time to grow up, Fine Gael

Richard Bruton has been fantastic this past week or so. I can't say I ever paid much attention to him in the past, but right now I'd like to see him ascend to the leadership of the party. I can't take Enda Kenny seriously and have no faith that he'd be any improvement on the "who started this fire" crowd of pyromaniacs currently running this state.

And the first thing Richard Bruton has to do is to put Lucinda Creighton so far down the back benches that she's never heard of again. Uggh. First she blurts out nonsense about American foreign policy during the Lisbon Treaty campaign and now she blurts out a ridiculous Hitler analogy for Brian Lenihan and the bank rescue plan. Sheesh.

Come on Fine Gael. You can do it. If you wanna be the big cheese you gotta act the part.

Re-read McWilliams

It's worth going back to read David McWilliams's column from early July that I mentioned here. Read again why we are in trouble with our huge debts and no control over our currency. In July he was a fear-monger, now he's simply prescient.

Bank on the brink

Today's (London) Times claims that one of Ireland's banks was going to declare bankruptcy on Tuesday morning, which is why the government acted so fast.

The background to what has been described as the biggest blank cheque in the history of the Irish state appears to have been the fear that one of Ireland’s biggest banks would declare itself bankrupt at the opening of business on Tuesday morning.

Very senior Irish business figures said that the bank’s insolvency, in the face of a €1.5 billion (£1.2 billion) debt to a German bank that it was unable to pay, would pull down several large companies and possibly a second bank. It was this and the fear that a domino effect would begin – fuelled by the fact that a number of banks are owed billions of euros by property developers – that forced the Government to take action.

Well, clearly that's a problem if true. I'm a little skeptical because I half suspect that this rumor serves the Irish government's purposes better than that they feared that one of the banks was going to be taken over.

Regardless, it's amazing how opaque the financial standing of our financial institutions really is (this seems to be a global phenomenon, not just Ireland or America). We don't know what state the banks are in.

I'm assuming that the Irish government now has all the figures - actually I don't assume that, but I really want to believe it - and that they will publish full and truthful (I'm chuckling as I type this) numbers on the well-being of any institution asking to get under the state's big umbrella. Each and everyone of us is backing the banks now so we should all get to see the truth with regards to their commitments and capital.

Why not?

Make it the law that no bank can operate here without complete transparency. I'm sure there's a downside to such a law that I haven't considered yet, but I'm a conservative person and if I'm going to be underwriting the banks I want to know that the banks are being run prudently.

No guarantee for our commitment to the EU

THIS WEEK'S events had given a clear indication of the importance of a strong European Union and the need for Ireland to remain centrally involved by ratifying the Lisbon Treaty, Tánaiste Mary Coughlan said yesterday in Dublin.

There's no way that 'our EU partners' believe a word of that. Not now; not after the Irish government stepped in to bailout/rescue/guarantee/give a pat on the back to the Irish banks this week. I don't know if the government's action violates the letter of the (EU) law, but it sure as heck violates the spirit of the EU.

The Irish government guaranteed the Irish banks, including their operations in other EU states, but not the Irish operations of 'foreign' banks. So, you have the strange situation where those Post Office accounts with the British Post Office are guaranteed by the Irish government (those accounts are with Bank of Ireland), but not accounts in the Irish Post Office because that operation is with Fortis, a Benelux bank.

There also may have been an EU bank eying a low price takeover of one of the Irish banks and had their plans thwarted by the government's action (and the market's reaction). Preventing Ireland's banks from falling into 'foreign' hands is hardly an endorsement of the EU.

I'm not overlooking the fact that rescuing the Irish banks was in the 'national' interest, but it has completely distorted the market. The Irish government may be able to make the case that the guarantee is what should be done across the EU, but that's what they should have done - made the case to 'our EU partners'. They didn't.

They didn't because deep down, when times are tough, the Irish government's commitment to the EU is only skin deep. I'm happy to know that, but then I wish they'd stop with the hypocritical support for the deeper EU commitment that the Lisbon Treaty represents. They don't mean it.

Avoiding the last economic disaster

I thought this column from yesterday's Boston Globe kind of interesting.

In 1914, the world went to a war that nobody really wanted in which "miscalculations, hubris, bellicosity, fear of looking weak" led to World War I. What could have better described Bush's war of choice in Iraq? Hubris, bellicosity, and the fear of looking weak, we now know, all played roles in the decision to invade, but miscalculation trumped them all.

On the other extreme, Gates said, was Neville Chamberlains's decision in 1938 to allow Hitler to dismember Czechoslovakia because ethnic Germans predominated in one corner, the Sudetenland.

… Gates was right that those two starkly opposing examples have overshadowed decision-making ever since.

Just as generals are always "fighting the last war" politicians are always avoiding the last wrong decision.

Today I was reading this column from the (London) Times about the banking crisis when I came across this. "Mr Bernanke did his PhD thesis on the 1929-1934 Great Depression".

At first, I thought that was good. Gives him a lot of perspective. Then I started wondering if that also makes him more prone to panic when he sees conditions in the financial world that he believes are similar to those that led to the crash in October 1929.

I started wondering if he's avoiding the last economic calamity and driving us straight into something new and, possibly, worse. For example, will the bailout (or rescue plan) and all it entails absolutely kill the dollar, which might be a lot worse than letting the big banks fail. I don't know.

I then decided to see what Bernanke has written on the depression of the 1930s. I haven't had a chance to read any of this yet, but there are a number of papers here and you can read his book Essays on the Great Depression here. {And, I have no idea how much overlap there is from his academic papers and his book.}

I've said that I'm in favor of the bailout, if it's necessary. I'd love to find the time to read some of what Bernanke has said about the Great Depression and see if I agree that the current conditions are similar. Also, since Monday's vote I've been reading about other possible remedies that might be better. Here's one suggestion from George Soros, who I don't like.

I honestly wish I could come to a definite conclusion as to what is the best thing to do, but right now I'm hedging my bets and hoping Congress will too. Take a few days, a week and get it right rather than rushing into a disaster.

We are the center of the universe or Copernicus overturned

Wow. The things you get in an e-mail. This article was sent to me by my brother. Not only is the world economy falling apart, but now there are those questioning 450-year-old astronomical principles.

I can't say I understood all of it, but this I got.

In it [De revolutionibus orbium coelestium], Copernicus (among other things) put forth the concept that the Earth is not unique and does not occupy any sort of special position within the solar system. A generalization of this principle—the earth does not occupy a favored position within the universe—has, along with Einstein's equations, become the founding assumption of modern cosmology.

In the upcoming PRL paper, the authors postulate that we are indeed in a special location within the universe, specifically, "near the centre of a void where the local matter density is low." This isn't exactly a small void—it would need to be on the order of the size of the visible universe to get the new model to work. Still, the earth would be near its center, which is a vaguely pre-Copernican notion and, as a side effect, the model does away with dark energy.

I think it's time for me to bury my head in the sand and deny any of this is happening.

Going after Ganley

I liked Matt Cooper's column on Declan Ganley and the campaign against him. Cooper sums up why what's being done to Ganley is wrong.

First he nails the nationality slur.

It cannot be denied that Ganley was born of Irish parents, that he was schooled in Galway and that, as an adult, he has lived there for many years. He even entertained many Fianna Fail figures in his home. To attempt to deny his Irish identity is an insult to Irish people who have emigrated, and to the children of those who emigrated, especially when they came back to live in this country.

Then he got to the actual core issue – did Ganley use Yankee dollars to 'buy' the 'No' result in the Lisbon referendum?

It may well be that Ganley is at the forefront of a giant American conspiracy and has taken people for fools. But his detractors seem to have missed the point wilfully. It wasn’t Ganley’s money — or where he got it from — that won the day for the No campaign. It was the failure of the Yes campaign — in other words almost the entire political, business and media establishment — to convince the Irish electorate that the benefits of ratifying the Lisbon treaty outweighed the downsides.

Yup. It wasn't Ganley who 'won the day', but the establishment that lost it. And they lost simply because a majority of the people didn't trust them.

For this reason, the current strategy strikes me as extremely risky for the 'Yes' side. Rather than engage with Ganley as a civilized member 'of the opposition' they're going for him as if he's some form of enemy agent, a duplicitous traitor.

I don't know, maybe this will work, but if all these accusations turn out to be groundless (or never anything more than conspiracy theory) will this help overturn the 'No' vote? No, but it could convince some of those who voted 'Yes' that there is actually something dangerous to this whole process, that the forces of Europa will crush you if you dare oppose them. That's not how to win trust.

HAVE TO WIN

I know that for many people this makes no sense. I know they're right. But, I could really care less what happens between Obama & McCain on November 4 so long as I get the right result in Flushing today.

The Mets HAVE to win. It's on NASN. The last scheduled game at Shea and the Mets have to win. They have to win because after the game there's a big ceremony to mark celebrate the 44 years of baseball in Shea Statdium. They have to win because a loss will probably mean the season is over.

HAVE TO WIN.

UPDATE: It seems FAILURE was an option.

Your license fee at work

I love how RTE takes time to pat itself on the back today: "RTÉ.ie is Ireland's top media website".

You know, I bet I could have the top rated web site if I had access to all that taxpayer-funded (oh, sorry) license-payer-funded content. What I want to know is why my license fee going to build the "top media website"?

Bailout

Now, as to the bailout, well …

Who knows? I've spent hours each evening reading up on this as much as I can and tuning into the Bloomberg channel for the hearings and analysis and I'm none the wiser. Okay, not 'none the wiser', but still unsure. I guess if it's absolutely necessary then it's absolutely necessary.

It seems incredible to me that the simple home mortgage, which I and most people understand full well, was somehow transformed into a complex web of incomprehensible investment and insurance products that somehow failed to include the reality that at the root of these products were loans to individuals that had to be repaid or homes that had to be sold off where there were defaults. A whole load of houses that nobody wants, that's what the government is about to buy. And, well above the market rate for houses nobody wants.

It reminds me of the time (I can hear you - here we go again - the old guy's getting nostalgic) it reminds me of when the Space Shuttle exploded. Next day or a week or a month later (I can't recall now) I, along with my other classmates, was sitting waiting for our Physics class when in burst our teacher in an agitated state. He started ranting about the O-Ring and how "could they be so careless, so stupid". I think he promised to hunt down any of us who was ever involved in an oversight of such basic physics. (Rubber becomes brittle at low temperatures - duh!)

Anyway, that's what I was getting at. The Shuttle was a complex machine with thousands of smart people involved in its construction and maintenance, but still one basic rule of physics was ignored with catastrophic consequences. Same goes for all these mortgage-backed securities et al. Somewhere on Wall Street they forgot that if you lend money to a lot of people who are considered a poor risk you might end up with a lot of bad debts on your hands.

New Visas

It wasn't quite what I expected, but the Irish government will be issuing 5,000 visas to Americans who want to come to Ireland to work. It wasn't what I expected because I thought the working visa deal would be an equal swap, but the American government is making 20,000 visas available to Irish people.

Now before you rush off to apply for your visa you should know that the Irish economy is heading downhill fast, so you might want to defer that decision for a couple of years. Also, if you have at least one Irish grandparent you don't need to apply for one of these visas because you're automatically entitled to live here without restriction.

Not a conservative

I hope this bank bailout plan puts paid to the widespread misrepresentation of President Bush as a conservative. Bush is not a conservative. Not in foreign policy with his radical Wilsonian idealism (see the Bush Doctrine); not in fiscal matters with huge deficits and, now, the $700bn bailout (read nationalization) of the banks' bad debts; not with the prescription drug plan or the expansion of the federal government's role (& budget) in education.

Honestly, I have trouble seeing what - other than the two Supreme Court appointments - President Bush has done that fits the label "conservative".

Tough times in Brussels for the Irish

Life is uncomfortable for Irish diplomats and journalists thanks to our 'No' to Lisbon says Jamie Smyth. Many EU governments and their MEPs are annoyed, diplomats in Brussels are annoyed even apolitical friends are annoyed. Meetings and dinner parties are just not what they used to be.

You know, I don't feel bad for Smyth (and, in fairness, I don't think he's looking for our sympathy) or the Irish diplomats & MEPs in Brussels. A comfortable life for Ireland's representatives in Brussels does not figure among my concerns. I understand that there may be a price to pay; the Irish delegation may find it hard to wrangle concessions out of our EU partners thanks to the 'No'. Fair enough, that's life. The sovereign Irish people have voted and as our representatives they should stop badmouthing those who sent them there and fight our corner.

I often get the sense that life in Brussels feeds a groupthink mentality among the MEP's, diplomats and bureaucrats. Nobody questions their basic assumptions - such as 'progress' means further centralization or faster, faster, faster. The 'No' votes from the Dutch & French were answered with a slight of hand effort to override their votes. Our 'No' has been met only by anger. There doesn't seem to be any real attempt to understand what has gone wrong or how their Brussels-centered perspective may be out of kilter with the great unwashed across the EU.

Political institutions aren't that different than stock markets or banks. Trust is a big part of what makes them work. Trust and confidence. Without those the institutions are nothing more than tyrannical bureaucracies waiting to be toppled. Unless the EU finds a way to explain itself better to the people across the EU it runs the risk of being blown away through a new wave of nationalism, particularly if the economy gets very tough. The EU will be a scapegoat and all those people who damned Ireland for having the temerity to vote 'No' will find themselves unloved and unemployed at the center of an empty shell.

This was a real opportunity for Brussels to learn lessons, to scale back ambitions and amp up the efforts to be accountable. I expected we'd be flooded with people from Brussels trying to understand why the Irish voted the way they did. Didn't happen, though. Instead of trying to understand all they've done is try to browbeat us into changing our minds. That is not how to win trust and confidence.

Crisis of confidence

You think investors are jittery? You think there's unease in banking circles? You sense a little political uncertainty about the economy?

Well, those who play the market, extend credit or walk the halls of the Treasury Department are sailing on calm seas compared with Met fans today. (Don't believe me? Go to MetsBlog and read some of the comments).

Just as the Mets had fans dreaming of a redeeming October full of glory after an uplifting 2+ months during which they played great baseball and reclaimed 1st place the bottom has fallen out. The past ten days have been hell. Now they're looking into the abyss - again.

The sudden reversal of fortune combined with last year's late season meltdown has Met fans breakfasting on bowls of Diazepam after sleepless nights spent chomping Rolaids. Lunch and Dinner - if you dare to risk it - are strictly liquid at this stage.

Season ends Sunday.

Not "the house that Ruth built"

This is really annoying me. If you own an old manor house and you tear it down and rebuild it around the same basement and garden is it the same house? Seems pretty obvious that it's not, but that logic hasn't been applied to Yankee Stadium.

The New York press, actually the press across America, keeps referring to the last game ever in "the house that Ruth built". Well, "the house that Ruth built" was essentially demolished after the 1973 season and rebuilt (they like to call it a refurbishment, but there was practically nothing left of the first building). For two years the Yankees played at Shea Stadium and in '75 they went to play in what was then often called "new Yankee Stadium".

It's bad enough the American press is playing along with this Yankee propaganda, but the English press has now joined in. Uggh.

At least I'm not completely alone.

There will be no last-minute federal bailout of Yankee Stadium. The National Register of Historic Places has declined, more than once, to consider the big ballpark in the Bronx for landmark status - an honorific, it turns out, that would not have guaranteed protection from demolition.

And the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, which could have stopped this year's scheduled tear-down of the 85-year-old walls, repeatedly has rejected landmark designation because of the Stadium's 1974-75 "unsympathetic renovation."

… In 1999, South Bronx Congressman Jose Serrano wrote to President Clinton about NHL status for the Stadium, only to be informed by the historic-places director at the time that, "while the contribution of the New York Yankees to baseball and America is of national importance in many respects, the National Park Service is unable to conclude that Yankee Stadium retains the high degree of architectural integrity required . . . "

A 1986 landmark survey, which examined several professional baseball stadiums, already had concluded that the Stadium's mid-1970s remodeling "compromised the integrity of the Stadium."

Here's the quid. Now for the quo?

From the new year 20,000 one-year working visas will be made available to Irish people who want to work in America. This strikes me as being of no help whatsoever to those who are already working illegally, but it's a start.

What I want to know is where are the visas for Americans who want to work in Ireland? I thought this immigration deal was going to be one of those quid pro quo deals where there would be an equal number of opportunities for Americans who would like to work in Ireland. This sounds strangely like the old Ireland, not the new Ireland. Has the economic downturn caused a complete reversion in thinking and shredded all confidence in the future?

The Bogeyman

I admire Declan Ganley, but it's clear that large sections of the Irish media don't like or trust him. He's a devout Catholic teetotaler - Strike One. He's a successful businessman with some strong political views on the EU - Strike Two. And, he's the CEO of a company that sells telecom equipment to US Northern Command and the National Guard Bureau - STRIKE THREE.

I mean, good Lord, could he be any more perfect as the ultimate bogeyman for the left-leaning Irish media and the pro-Lisbon Dail parties? Oh yeah, he's married to an American - Strike Four - if a fourth strike is needed.

The government is going to change the law to help silence Ganley and yesterday European Affairs Minister Dick Roche - he's sounding more bitter each day, isn't he? - said that Declan Ganley is "class A+ hypocrite".

“Declan Ganley is calling for more openness and transparency in Europe yet the contract which was awarded to him by the US Department of Defence in September 2004 did not entail public procurement procedure whatsoever,” Mr Roche said.

“The emerging details of Declan Ganley’s business links with the US military raises the question once again as to what his motive was in opposing the Lisbon treaty with such a well-financed campaign. The Irish people have a right to know who is pulling his strings.”

Is Dick Roche always so concerned with transparency in the American public procurement procedure? Really, what issue is it for Dick Roche how the American government awards contracts?

More importantly, there's more than a hint of anti-American hysteria in Roche's comments. I fully expect to see Brian Cowen slap him down or I'm going to write to my Congressional representatives to ask them to raise the issue with the Irish government. It's bad enough that the lunatic left talks about the American government this way without the Irish government joining in. I'm sick of it, actually.

Anyway, I checked FedSpending.org and I don't see any contracts coming anywhere near the €200m that the Irish Examiner claims that Rivada Networks has secured with the "US Military". In fact, for the years 2004-2008 the total for all Federal contracts with companies called Rivada is around $40m or about €28m.

If Rivada has contracts totaling €200m most of them must be with state governments, which should ease the concerns of all those who see the "neocons" behind everything. Maybe a little light (that is, a bit of googling) can help the media and the government to see that the bogeyman's not so scary after all.

Newstalkin'

I forgot to mention that I was on the Wide Angle on Newstalk on Sunday. It was a pretty quick segment - about 8 minutes or so - so I don't have a lot to say. The other guest was Rebecca Wolfe, formerly of Democrats Abroad, was very nice and good at answering questions too. Karen Coleman was courteous and professional. She didn't really rush either of us even though she was stuck for time.

I don't know if I'll do it again. It's just too far to drive into Dublin and park on a Sunday morning/afternoon.

Change the name on the shirt

Now that the AIG has a majority shareholder maybe the new owners will insist on a change in the initials on Manchester United's shirts. No more AIG, but from now on USA.

"Too big to fail"

I wish I had a dollar for each time I heard the phrase that phrase recently. Well, if a bank (or now an insurance company) is "too big to fail" then it was too big. As one who hates the idea of the government getting involved in the economy I'm forced to admit that if the government is going to underwrite these big companies then it would probably be a better idea if they were forced to remain small by law.

I'm way short of an expert on banking law, but it's clear as day that legislation is a better than simply using $85bn of taxpayers' money to bail out these financial behemoths. So, I don't know how they're going to do it, but Congress has to find a way to insure that in future no company is "too big to fail". And/or at the very least the management team of a company that's "too big to fail" should be criminally negligent if they allow their company to get into such a situation.

It's "unfair"

Fr. Sean Healy, Director of the Conference of Religious in Ireland, says that it's

profoundly unfair that a person on a lower income has to pay substantially more for a treatment compared with a person on twice that income.

Dental treatment worth €1,000 costs a person on a lower income €800 after tax relief, he said, while a person on a higher income pays €590 net. Other schemes involving tax relief such as pensions and medical expenses also benefited the better paid.

Well, is it "fair" that a person earning €1,000 and paying tax at the higher rate pays €410 whereas the person on the lower rate pays only €200? The higher earner pays more for the education his children receive, the health care his family requires, the protection of the police, etc. Is that "fair"? It isn't, but it's the system we have.

Given the unfairness of the tax system it is right (forget "fair") that tax relief on medical bills be at the rate the each taxpayer pays his taxes.

€1bn for meters

Is this really good value for money? The government is going to install new electricity meters in every household in the country. This whole process is going to take "four years at a cost of almost €1 billion".

On the one hand this is all too appropriate because if there's one symbol that I think best sums up the Green Party it's the meter. They're the metermaids of Irish politics. They want to measure every aspect of Irish living so that they can chide us and tax us for not being adherents to their doctrine.

On the other hand, this is a further sign that Fianna Fail is losing control. The economy is heading for tough times. Serious cutbacks will be required and at a cost of €1bn they're allowing the Green Party to enable themselves to preen in front of their Green colleagues across Europe because '"Ireland is leading the world" with the introduction of smart meters'.

What the Green Party doesn't seem to understand is that all these new meters are a significant cost on the Irish economy. The Green Party never worries about spending other people's money and they're none too keen on economic growth, which means the €1bn is actually a lot more expensive than it would be if we could count on a period of strong growth over the next four years. However, growth is going to be difficult to come by and the junior partners in government are not all that unhappy about that.

So, we're leading the world in stupid economics. Who wants to lead that race? Not me.

Dirty politics

There's no doubt that Presidential elections are dirty and that dirty politics can pay dividends. So far the McCain campaign is outplaying Obama's by 4 touchdowns. Obama's been knocked off balance by McCain's VP nominee - when truly he'd have been better off ignoring her as much as possible - and throughout this week Obama has looked unsteady and tetchy coming under assault from the McCain team. None of the shots has been outrageously cheap or ugly, but they're just enough to be getting under Obama's skin.

Obama's being lured into a trap. The strategy, clearly, is to wipe the 'cool' off Obama's image with the voters. They're begging the Obama team to respond in kind. First Obama fumbled with his "lipstick on a pig comment" and now they've rolled out a new attack ad.

The advertisements — among the most pointed attacks to be put out by Mr. Obama — depicted Mr. McCain as he looked when he was first elected to Congress in 1982 and mocked his declaration that he does not use a computer or send his own e-mail messages, attempting to undermine the new argument from Mr. McCain that he is the candidate of change.

Might have been a good idea for Obama's campaign team to find out why McCain doesn't use a computer. This is from Forbes from 2000 (via Instapundit).

In certain ways, McCain was a natural Web candidate. Chairman of the Senate Telecommunications Subcommittee and regarded as the U.S. Senate's savviest technologist, McCain is an inveterate devotee of email. His nightly ritual is to read his email together with his wife, Cindy. The injuries he incurred as a Vietnam POW make it painful for McCain to type. Instead, he dictates responses that his wife types on a laptop. "She's a whiz on the keyboard, and I'm so laborious," McCain admits.

Now Obama's mocking McCain for his war injuries. That might not be a winner.

So now McCain just has to wait a day or two to let that ad settle into the voters' minds and then he can roll out his own ad with this same story about how he can't use a keyboard due to the injuries he suffered in Vietnam, which again hammers home the message about his character that dominated the convention.

Galveston, oh Galveston, I still hear your sea waves crashing

It seems like we'll all hear Galveston's sea waves crashing this weekend. Brendan Loy says that Galveston could be in for a very rough ride starting tonight and that the wind is not the big issue.

High winds are not going to be the primary issue. But, as I wrote below, the storm surge will still be enormous. Coastal residents, do not treat this storm like a typical Category 2! The Gulf of Mexico is about to temporarily reclaim a large chunk of prime Texas real estate.

Palin on ABC

I watched as much of ABC's interview with Sarah Palin as I could find. From the clips I saw I'm not overly impressed nor overly worried. Now, to me, the job of President is mostly about security and foreign policy.

She was definitely shaky at times, not seeming to know what the "Bush Doctrine" is or to have understood why the interviewer was asking about carrying out attacks inside Pakistan. Okay, there are holes in her knowledge right now. I doubt anyone would be too surprised by that. With a little prodding she was able to provide her views on preemption and I was left with the feeling that she's competent and will learn what she needs to learn if she finds herself in the top job.

I wasn't too pleased with view that Georgia & Ukraine should be admitted to NATO. This is right out of the McCain playbook, I know, but really she should ponder this one a bit. I said before that I didn't think the United States should be so keen to poke Putin in the eye. And, he's since proven he's serious about South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Palin does love talking about energy and she was right to press her point that energy is a big part of national security. I think I was going to agree with her, but ABC cut her off too quickly. {I would like to have heard her views on Russian oil exploration at the North Pole. I would bet she knows her stuff on that topic.}

Overall my impression is that ABC edited the interview so badly that it was hard to come to any firm conclusion on Sarah Palin.

Lies. It's all lies, I tell you.

Didn't we go to war over less than this? Today's Daily Telegraph claims that baseball was invented in Surrey, England and not in America.

A diary has been found which describes the game being played by a teenager in Guildford in 1755.

Previously it had been thought that the game developed in America in the 1790s.

But this new proof indicates that the British can claim to have invented yet another of the world's great games, formerly considered as American as apple pie.

The handwritten entry was discovered in the diary of lawyer William Bray. It documents a game with friends on Easter Monday 1755, when he was still a teenager.

Well, it's obviously a forgery. Who could believe such a tale? Where's Paul Revere when you need him?

Today is September 11 and ...

It's an important day. A day Americans remember thanks to the horrific events 7 years ago today. They're unveiling a monument at the Pentagon dedicated to those who died there on September 11. So, how can it be that there's so much discussion about lipstick, pigs, etc.?

It's great that Obama and McCain are jointly marking the anniversary in New York today. I guess it's great. I actually think it would be better if they had spent an hour (or better yet, two hours) discussing/debating September 11: what caused it, in hindsight what was the right response, and what should America be doing to avoid a repeat. A grown-up discussion between the two men who want to lead America hosted by Brian Lambe.

Allianz Stadium

The NY Daily News says that Allianz is the leading contender to win the naming rights of the new football stadium for the NY Giants & NY Jets. This has upset Holocaust survivors, Jewish groups and fans of the two teams.

Frankly, I don't know what to make of this. I don't know enough of the history to assess whether Allianz's role in the Third Reich was greater than other big German companies or would all such German companies - Volkswagen, Siemens, Deutsche Bank, etd. - be equally opposed. I'm also not going to tell people what they can or cannot be offended by.

However, I would like to know if a company can ever overcome being associated with such evil. The News says that Allianz insured Auschwitz and "refused to pay off life insurance stipends to Jews and sent their policies' proceeds to the Nazis instead". The News also says that Allianz "has acknowledged its shameful past and has shelled out millions in restitution".

I know that in law a company is a legal person, but I guess to my mind it's the people who run and work for the company who are really responsible for what the company does. Without people a company is an empty shell, just a name.

Rabbi Jay Rosenbaum, secretary general of the North American Board of Rabbis, agreed that although survivors' sensibilities are understandable, a naming deal is legit.

"I have found Allianz to be receptive, to be sensitive and a friend of the Jewish people today," he said.

"We need not live in the past."

The words of Rabbi Rosenbaum leads me to believe that, yes, a company can live down its past, but for those who survived the Holocaust the name Allianz - regardless of what the company is today - may simply be too stark a reminder.

Fearful

That's Jonathan Freedland's message today. He's afraid that, "The Democrats are about to lose an election they should win". He fears for "blue-state America", for young Americans, and for African-Americans. But, should the Democrats lose the reaction he fears most is the reaction among non-Americans.

If Americans choose McCain, they will be turning their back on the rest of the world, choosing to show us four more years of the Bush-Cheney finger. And I predict a deeply unpleasant shift.

Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change. Suddenly Europeans and others will conclude that their dispute is with not only one ruling clique, but Americans themselves. For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start - a fresh start the world is yearning for.

… Of course I know that even to mention Obama's support around the world is to hurt him. Incredibly, that large Berlin crowd damaged Obama at home, branding him the "candidate of Europe" and making him seem less of a patriotic American. But what does that say about today's America, that the world's esteem is now unwanted? If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us - and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.

What a load of nonsense. Freedland believes that American voters should choose the candidate most desired by non-Americans otherwise America will be spurning "the world's esteem". So the voters should choose to vote not in their best interests, but in the interests of those in Germany or Peru or China?

Olympic coverage

{I know this is dated, but I only found where I'd stashed this one a few weeks ago.}

The Buffalo News's Alan Pergament says that the BBC is worse than American t.v. when it comes to playing the role of cheerleader for their nation's athletes. I know it can be jarring to find yourself watching the Olympics in another country, but sheesh, Alan, I'm not sure I can buy this: "It seems Americans are the only one concerned about objective coverage".

As it happens, all of the Olympics I saw were on NBC and their partner stations. Let me say that being worse than NBC would take some doing. Anyone who watched any of the gymnastics on NBC would have wondered if any other nations other than China & America were taking part. The swimming coverage was only marginally better.

I'll say this: the coverage on the USA Network, MSNBC & CNBC was pretty good. But the prime time coverage on NBC - the primary channel for the Olympics - was horrendous. And, yeah, the BBC annoys me too. Same goes for RTE.

No Tallaght II

Fine Gael has said 'No' to a rerun of the Tallaght Strategy. Well good for them, but this was hardly a tough decision. Back in the 80s there was some justification for adopting their 'no opposition' policy because (a) the straits were more dire and (b) they had played an active role in creating the dire straits.

Fine Gael's been in government for, what, 2½ years out of the past 20? Why should they now roll over "in the national interest" because Fianna Fail has mismanaged us into this mess. I know FF's in a heap of trouble because Joan Burton's starting to sound like a safer pair of hands.

The Last Sister

My aunt has returned to Ireland after 49 years in Prince George, British Columbia. There was a nice write up about her in the Prince George Citizen before she left. She was the last of the Sisters of Mercy in the diocese.

Too often over the past 10 years or so we in Ireland only heard about priests and nuns who left here years ago when some form of scandal erupted. Yet my aunt and the vast majority of the thousands of others who went on the missions from here served the Church wholeheartedly, with passion and grace. At the same time they constituted a tremendous army of ambassadors for Ireland throughout the four corners of the globe. That my aunt and thousands like her are not being replaced by younger Irish missionaries is a loss both for the Church and for Ireland.

Smooth & gaffe prone

Funny how smooth Obama looks when he's delivering one of those big set piece speeches. And, during the primaries I read many times how he set the room alight with one of his speeches. What I don't get is how he's also a verbal klutz who can't seem to get out of his own way (verbally). Now, I know that anyone can make these slip-ups when in the constant glare of the media, but it's my impression that Obama does it more than most. In fact, if he were the Republican nominee there would be (unfavorable) comparisons with President Bush.

This weekend we had "my Muslim faith" - not a biggie, but he also referred to the Penn State football team as the Nittaly Lions, and not the Nittany Lions as they've been known until now. That's the kind of misstep that can cost you - BIG time. If he messes up at Notre Dame he can kiss the election good-bye.

Bad poll for Obama

Newstalk reports today that McCain now leads Obama by 4 percent. Not the end of the world for Obama with 57 days left until election day. However, McCain has a 10 point lead among likely voters. That's gotta be a source of some concern.

{I'm skeptical of telephone polls because those who have only a cell phone are probably younger & more likely to vote Obama. Gallup says that they're polling people who have only a cell phone, but I still doubt that the sample is representative of the nation.}

Carrie follows through

Regular commenter Carrie "threatened" to set up her own blog in a comment below. Well, she's gone and done it. You can find Carrie here, at Coyote Blue-Jay.

I didn't see her speech yet

Last night I was all set to watch Governor Palin's speech from Wednesday night, but my broadband was acting up and I couldn't download it. I have it downloaded now and will watch it later. Might watch McCain's too.

How many goals did the father score?

And as unwed mothers are all the rage in the news, today we learn that France's Justice Minister, Rachida Dati, is both unwed and expecting. The Daily Telegraph says there's a lot of speculation as to who the father might be, but really the more pertinent question is: Has the father achieved anything in sports to rival the accomplishments of Bristol Palin's fiancee? Get the NY Post on the case.

McCain knew

Will she remain on the ticket? I have no idea (and I didn't see her speech last night). Anyway, of all the questions that have arisen about Sarah Palin since last Friday the most important is: Did John McCain vet Palin properly before choosing her as his running mate?

The jury is still out on that one, but one thing that's clear is that McCain certainly knew Bristol Palin was pregnant before he introduced her mother as his running mate. I've read quite a few comments in the press and on blogs that suggested that McCain didn't know. However, pictures of McCain and Palin from last Friday were posted on Meghan McCain's blog and there's one picture that makes it obvious that Bristol is pregnant. There's simply no way that Meghan or Cindy McCain could have missed this. Even 'Nana' McCain could have clued her son in if he was in any doubt.

Well, at least this wasn't kept from McCain. I'm assuming that McCain just figured that nobody would want to have a go at a 17-year-old girl or even her mother for what is, unfortunately, a fairly common family experience. Which only begs the question: Is he really that naive?

So, who's Sarah Palin?

We're all learning quickly who we think this woman is.

For me the best of what I could find included this article from Time's web site on Palin and Wasilla, AK and the first chapter from her biography that I mentioned in the comments below. My own take is that Sarah Palin is not really a modern woman. She's more like one of those tough frontier women who could do whatever it took to survive in a harsh environment. That includes killing animals.

It also includes accepting that life's tough and you just have to do your best. There are no guarantees. That means working hard. That means being adaptable. It also seems to mean that if your daughter is unmarried and pregnant at 17 then she's going to have be tough herself because she's 'not going to be mollycoddled by me'. Will she be a vote winner or loser? I think a winner, but we'll see.

{By the way, the NY Post is clearly the winner with the best angle on the Palin teen pregnancy story. The Post decided to give us a load of details on the baby's father, who played on the Wasilla High School hockey team. "Despite suffering a cracked bone in his shin last season, Johnston scored 24 goals in 24 games". How any of that could be at all relevant, I don't know, but it made laugh.}

Gustav - good fortune for McCain?

So long as Gustav does NOT create a Katrina-like path of destruction today it may turn out to be a great bit of good fortune for John McCain. So long as Gustav keeps President Bush away from the convention that cannot be a bad thing for McCain.

Katrina, RTE & the Irish Times

Not everything breathlessly reported in 2005 in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina was accurate. RTE & the Irish Times might want to do a little background reading before regurgitating long-discredited nonsense like the violence in the Superdome, as I heard on the Ryan Tubridy Show this morning or that "law and order collapsed" as the Irish Times web site claims today.

The government response to Katrina was obviously lacking in many ways, but

by focusing on the part of the glass that was half-empty, the national media imposed a near total blackout on the nerve center of what may have been the largest, most successful aerial search and rescue operation in history.

"The Coast Guard, the National Guard, the military in general performed heroically," said Sen. Robert Barham, R-Oak Ridge, who monitored the Superdome operation from Baton Rouge as head of the Louisiana State Senate's Homeland Security Committee. His opposite number in the Louisiana House, Rep. Francis Thompson, D-Delhi, said, "They (the Guard) did a yeoman's job." Both said they were getting very different pictures from TV than they got from the Guardsmen at the Dome, and the state fish and wildlife department, another key player in the rescue operation.

… Also hard to ignore at the Dome was another big operation: support for local first responders. This effort included many of the black local heroes among the police and firefighting squads, despite misleading media reports leaving the impression they had either fled the city or walked off the job. The majority of local police and firefighters were available, though their communications system had been wiped out. They quickly hooked up with pre-positioned Guard units, as well as an army of volunteers in everything from flatboats to airboats. "We were just handing out radios to anyone who wanted one," Dressler said.

The governments - at all levels - carried out post mortems on what went wrong and what needed to be fixed/changed for the future. It wouldn't do any harm for RTE and the Irish Times to find out where they and their colleagues went wrong in 2005.

For your hurricane updates

I find nothing is better than reading Brendan Loy's updates. I went to bed last night feeling confident that Gustav was not going to be the "storm of the century". If only the headline writers in Britain and Ireland had read Loy's posts they might have saved the apocalyptic headlines for another day.