Did I really hear that?

I did promise somebody that I'd be blogging about non-political issues. And I shall. But I can't help myself on this one, and have to get it out. Non-political thoughts to follow later this week, time permitting, and I'll try to keep this one brief.

I took a little road-trip over the weekend, through largely uninhabited country, and to pass the time, I ended up hitting 'SCAN' an awful lot on the AM band. The end result was that I spent most of the drive alternately listening to conservative pundits bashing liberals without really addressing any issues, and - when that station faded over the horizon - then listening to liberal pundits bashing conservatives without really addressing any issues. It was moderately humorous, actually. But notwithstanding entirely too much time listening to that shit, there's really only three things that stuck.

First, every single one of those people think entirely too highly of themselves. And coming from me, I think that's a pretty bold statement. Especially Mike Savage. I gotta say that he seemed to have both the best spin and the most sweat-of-the-brow invested in his message; if you disagree, call in and prove him wrong, and regardless of whether you agree or not, THINK. I can get behind that. But he still sounds like the most arrogant, ego-centric guy on the face of the planet. Would love to have a beer with that guy sometime.

Second, both the conservatives and liberal pundits have sold their marketing souls to gold brokers. Although diametrically opposed on every other point, pretty much everyone at either extreme of the spectrum has been paid sufficient funds to personally endorse the idea that you and I should buy gold as an investment. Further, we'd be wasting our time buying from anyone except Their Guy. I can see how the conservatives can sell this idea with a straight-face, since an intrinsic part of the far-right platform is that Barack, smiling all the way, is leading us to financial disaster. But I wonder how the liberals can talk about how Barack, smiling all the way, is going to lead us to economic recovery, while still suggesting that gold (whose worth is relatively static in the face of economic prosperity or decline) is a wise investment. Whatever.

The third thing that really stuck was when uber-liberal Randi Rhodes indicated that, in event of global economic meltdown, her plan was to prostitute herself. Up to that point, she was scoring against the idiotic marketing of "survival seeds" or some other such idiocy during Glen Beck's conservative radio show. I'm sure you can imagine the ad spot: "In event of global disaster, non-hybrid viable plants seeds could be more valuable than gold! Buy today, only $150 for enough to plant an acre!" No, this is not an exaggeration of the propagation of paranoia presented in the advertisement. One really would think that Beck should've vetoed that sponsor, or at least required them to pay him enough that he could retire.

But in the course of her criticism, Ms. Rhodes openly stated that in event of global financial meltdown, she already had her own personal "survival garden" between her legs. The implication was that she would simply resort to the Oldest Profession to make ends meet. (Of course, this assumes that she's already exhausted the reserves of gold that she's bought from Her Guy, through some prior exchange of cash, goods, or services.) It struck me that if anyone else on the face of the planet affirmatively suggested that a woman resort to prostitution for survival, Randi would be at the head of the pack of people bearing torches and pitchforks. But - as with racism - sexism is apparently only a sin when somebody else is doing it. I found this to be amusing, in a tragic sort of way.

Having returned to civilization (relatively speaking), I couldn't help myself, and took a look at Randi, just out of curiosity. Having done so, I really hope that in the event of economic catastrophe, Randi has a Plan B, since I think she's probably going to need it.

Currencies and Centralization

Any financier will tell you that diversification of portfolios is important. You don't want to put all your capitol in any one asset (or even in any one market), because you don't want to risk being wiped out by any one plunge. The classic "Wealth without risk" business plans were all similar, and all simple: put away a little money each month, into a portfolio balanced between stocks, bonds, and other assets. Generally speaking, problems in any one market trigger a boom in other markets, so with a diversified conservative portfolio, your total assets would ride out most transitory market volatilities, and generally grow at a modest but appreciable rate.

Economic diversity is HEALTHY. This includes competition not just between businessmen and business entities, but also competition between nations, and competition between currencies. While looking through rose-colored glasses shows us a unified peaceful world with efficient energy and food markets - everyone cooperating and laughing, with enough to eat, running water, and good healthcare - the general reality is that those ideals don't work. In order for markets (including energy and food and healthcare) to be healthy, there needs to be competition. There needs to be strife. There needs to be incentive (read: objectively verifiable profit margins and dividends) for companies, markets and industries to be lean and efficient. Otherwise, they look a lot like governments: lots of talk, publicly funded, without substantial impact.

Historically speaking, Europe has been an ongoing hotbed of political and economic intrigue. Nations not necessarily at war with each other (they've long since reached consensus about where borders should be) but absolutely in competition with each other. England vs. France vs. Germany. Lean, efficient competition across the boards. And since each country had its own currency, they managed to avoid any systemic meltdown, even in the face of any number of shortages, regional crop failures, or even extended military conflict. Rough times in France? Some dry seasons in the agricultural areas? Maybe some poorly run banks, and the Franc running weak? Good news in London and Berlin! English and German firms - that are lean(er) and strong(er) - open branch offices in Paris, and governments buy up Francs on the cheap, to stockpile economic capitol for when the shoe, inevitably, shall be on the other foot. And because of that competition, the Franc regains value, French businesses have to get better or get replaced by English and German companies, and either way, the economy French economy rebounds.

The European continent, because of the intrinsic diversity of having a dozen countries with different currencies, was chaos. A paperwork and exchange rate nightmare, with rampant speculation and opportunism that made the World Cup tournament look like a game of patty-cake. But the continental economy nonetheless ran well, efficiently, and effectively. The strong were strong, because they had to be, and with weakness and slack being seized or seized upon, shit got done. The competition and strife made it ugly and distasteful, but guaranteed that a problem in any one (or any five) nations wouldn't pull the whole system down. It just meant that nations that handled their economics badly would end up with their economies being run by foreign interests.

But in the interest of working towards that rose-colored world, a lot of the strife and diversification has been intentionally done away with. Enter the Euro, the unified currency of a dozen nations, who have agreed to band together in economic unity. In effect, it was in many ways unionization of the European economy. During periods where that joint economy was strong, it was REALLY strong, since it allowed a unified push by not just individual national economies, but by most of a continent. That's a lot of industry, and when it's all running well and in the same direction, it can match any economic bloc on the planet.

The problem, of course, is that times are not always good, and when times are bad, problems in even one nation become the problem of the Union as a whole. The co-mingling has made partners where there used to exist competitors.

In the past, if things in, say, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (PIIGS) ran into the red, and if those governments started deficit spending like there was no tomorrow, it was not really that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. It just meant that the lire, peseta, etc., lost value and got bought by investors, and that either the local economies got lean and healthy, or else got bought out and replaced by foreign interests. Companies that were competitive in competitive places (England, Germany, etc.) stepped into the game in less competitive (lazier) markets, and immediately became the best player in the local game. And, as a result, the economy improved. Individual countries would periodically stumble, but in the face of the wolves already at their national door, they got lean and pulled through, or they got bought out, and pulled through.

But no more. These days, when Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain run into double-digit national deficits (which they have, even through the EU RULES say that no country shall run higher than 3% in the red), the solution is different. In the past, the wolves would drool. They would look to take over. Far from worrying, Germany and England got EXCITED when the lire or peseta ran weak, since that was an opportunity for Germans or Englishmen to make money by doing a job leaner, better, and more efficiently than the locals seemed able. They certainly didn't feel compelled to prop up and support nations that had their heads up their asses. Let those fuckers over-extend their credit and spend their own currency into worthlessness. It's THEIR currency, after all, and their ongoing inflation and other financial bullshit will just make it easier for us to buy them out and turn them around.

Except now, of course, it's not just THEIR currency. These days, when PIIGS and other nations run massively into debt, and have to conjure up a billion or so euros through drawing on credit, there is no differences between the euros being devalued and suffering from inflation in Greece, and the euros that - but for happenings in Greece - should be strong and robust in Germany or England. In order to protect the underpinning of their own economy (the euro as a currency), economically healthy places, rather than preying on stupidity and weakness - as has clearly arisen in places like Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain - instead need to prop up, assist, and bail out those places from their own errors.

The practical upshot, as evidenced by recent headlines: Germany and England, to avoid threat to their OWN economies, must subsidize social welfare, bureaucrat salaries, and foolish economics in Greece. Rather than a net improvement in efficiency and effectiveness, we see a net decline in efficiency and effectiveness. The strong, rather than compelling the weak to get with the program or get replaced in a preditory stance, instead are compelled to prop up the weak, and subsidize the foolishness rather than driving it out.

Socialized economics in action! Please, lets keep all semblance of this sort of shit on the other side of the pond.

Gonna need an extra thousand to make quota this month.

Our President is here in Nevada today, touting his health-care agenda at a "town-hall" meeting at Green Valley High School. Which means that traffic sucks on the entire east side of town. But otherwise nobody seems to give much of a damn. Besides healthcare, Barack is also pulling for his local boy, Harry Reid (D - Nev.), to get re-elected, but I personally think that's running neck-and-neck with the passage of national healthcare for the top spot on Barack's wish-list of miracles.

Don't think it's going to work. Anyone who knows Nevada politics knows Harry Reid is about as big a douchebag as walks the face of the earth. Which was fine when he was a token douchebag lost among a hundred milling senatorial faces. But he's been embarrassing himself enough on the news this last year that people are about as sick of him as they are of Obama. Nobody likes to back a losing horse. Even in a working class place like NV (or perhaps ESPECIALLY in a working class place like NV), lots of people are getting bored with Barack (and his pundits) telling them what a brilliant success the economic stimulus package has been. Apparently the people haven't heard that his experts are projecting 95,000 new jobs each month this year.

As for that last part, about more jobs and reduction in unemployment, the memo apparently didn't get through to places like Boeing. But don't worry. Just a bump in the road. As soon as Harry is locked in place at the top of the Senate for a few more years, and as soon as we get this healthcare thing done, economic reconstruction will be the next item on the agenda. He and Harry and Nancy are going to turn it all around. And they need your vote to make it happen.

Opportunities. Or Not.

The heart of American industry has always been small businesses. Until recently, most Americans took their diplomas and/or degrees, settled down somewhere, and spent most of their lives working at some small establishment or storefront, doing some form of skilled or semi-skilled activity. These days, of course, most Americans are or will be working for the Federal government. Our politicians naturally want to be the boss. Of everything. It's just a defect of that personality type, and always has been. In its original incarnation, our government was structured specifically to keep government from taking over our lives and economy, but what can you do? Socialistic creep, and all that. We'll build stricter controls into our next government. Which is probably not going to come until a century or so after effective space travel is discovered, but again, what can you do?

In the meantime, it is fun to keep track of ongoing jokes, and to have the occasional pipe dream. In terms of comic relief, the Obama administration has declared today that the economy is going to grow by 95,000 jobs per monthfor at least the balance of this year. This is good news, in light of double-digit unemployment from the 8.4 million jobs that have been lost since late 2007. I think this is funny since a lot of these projected jobs are not economically created, but government created. Our beloved president, beset by difficult times, he has unveiled his proposed budget, in which Barack seeks to spend $3.8 trillion. That's $3,800,000,000,000. Thirty-eight, followed by ELEVEN zeros. I sincerely hope that a lot of this money is somehow going to find its way back into the pockets of taxpayers, through some form of employment. The only other way it will get back to grass-roots taxpayers is through hand-outs, so hopefully we can do this right. Not gonna hold my breath, but here's to hoping.

Now, aside from the fact that government jobs don't really qualify as economic growth, there is a problem with this plan and this budget. Most notable is that Barack doesn't actually have that much money to spend. In fact, what he's spent exceeds what he's got by $1,560,000,000,000. For those of you following along at home, this means that for ever dollar he spends, he also has to borrow 42 cents. I understand that accounting and cash flow problems can be difficult to manage, and he certainly did inherit a lot of the problems he's facing. Still. I don't think the solution to inadequate revenues and hugely overinflated spending is a year where you PLAN to spend almost 50% more than you actually have. The per capita burden comes to about $5,000. Doesn't seem like much, but what it means is that - in addition to all of the taxes we are already paying - Barack needs us all to kick in an extra $5,000. Per person. In the entire country. To get to even. For the year. (We can deal with the outstanding national debt another time. Besides, that's nice to keep around as a reminder to the people of the wasteful spending and bad fiscal practices of prior Republican administrations.)

For comparison purposes, news stories were written in early 2008 about how the Federal deficit was projected to run to $410 billion that year. That was a big number, since the 2007 deficit had been only $162 billion. The projected 2008 numbers would threaten the then-standing all-time deficit record, set in 2004. Of $413 billion. Our politician's spending habits have resulted in deficit spending increasing by over 300%. In two years.

But the 2009 proposed budget contains good news. If we approve the President's budget, and assume another billion and a half in debt, things will get better. If we do it this way, Barack's experts say, next year's deficit will only be $1.3 trillion. See! Things are getting better! And we'll have 95,000 fewer unemployed every month, safely tucked into government jobs, where they have guaranteed healthcare, cannot be fired, and get a month's paid vacation every year! How about that, we can have national health-care after all, we just need to get everyone working for the government!

But this does not bode well for small business. Again, small business has historically been the engine that drives the economy. These days, it is pretty much impossible to set up and run a small business. Beside the uncertainty of things like the availability of credit, the tax burdens of each employee, and the looming unknown of how much more Barack is going to require such businesses to pay for health care - not only for people who work for them, but also for most of the nation's unemployed - the administrative hurdles are overwhelming.

In terms of pipe-dreams, I have thought about opening a small business. And not just a tax write-off, but an actual business that makes things. Specifically, double-stack .45-caliber 1911 pistol frames. As I might have mentioned, the notable problem with the classically American 1911 pistol is that it only holds 8 rounds. If you could preserve the history and platform while bumping the capacity even a little, people will buy it. Ideally, come up with a design that uses most or all of the same 1911 parts (trigger assembly, slide, springs, etc.), but on a frame (the part with the handgrip) that will accept the cheap, reliable, common-place 13-round magazines already being mass-produced for the Glock 21.

In today's market, even in recession, a double-stack 1911 costs, on a good day, about $1,500. That's over three times the cost of a bare-bones GI model 1911. And almost all of the double-stack models require their manufacturer's proprietary magazines, meaning that each mag costs about $80. (A standard Glock 21 mag will run you about $25, for comparison.)

Taurus firearms has already demonstrated that it's possible to make a good 1911 pistol, complete with extra (usually very expensive) features and details, for sale in the $500-600 range. (Their PT1911 line. I own one. I like it better than I like the Kimber 1911 I paid three times as much for.) I wonder, why is nobody selling a bare-bones "entry-level" double-stack in the $600 range?

There will be some engineering and drafting problems involved in making that product, to keep the handgrip small enough to be usable, even with the fatter mags, but that seems manageable; the Glock 21 does it, after all. It could be a difficult mechanical transition from the wide Glock mag-well to a narrower rail to accept the standard 1911 action, but there are enough double-stacks out there to show that that's doable as well. Once the design is complete, we've got plenty of machine and milling equipment for sale in places like Detroit, complete with highly trained, newly-unemployed machinists to operate them. The substantial manufacturing is milling a billet of steel into the needed shape (with tight-but-not-that-tight tolerances), and then a final hand-fitting with mostly off-the-shelf 1911 parts. With CAD-driven milling machines, does it make a difference if the operator is supervising the milling of a pistol frame, instead of the turbo-charger turbines they used to makefor GM? Take a while to get business up and running, but I think it's doable, and that people will buy the product. Could be a classic American enterprise! Have an idea for a product, make it, sell it, pay your people, and maybe turn a little profit. Holy shit, almost like a real, live, free market!

The problem, of course, is the extrinsic bullshit, nearly all of it government or pseudo-government in nature. Gotta have the right tax forms and business licenses. The paperwork shouldn't take more than 6 months. Go through the permit process. An OSHA probationary period while they audit your premises. Making pistol frames, you also gotta pay the equivalent of a full-time salary so an ATF guy can be there looking over your shoulder. No, of course they can't just presume that you're following the laws you've agreed to follow. Without the inspector there regularly checking up on you, you could make even one unregistered illegal pistol, and thereby forfeit all the work you've done to get licensed, lose your business, and go to a Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison! How are you supposed to resist that temptation without someone policing you? That of course, comes AFTER a detailed testing of your design, to be undertaken at cost to you. Please send in a prototype for approval, a blank check, and don't forget the self-addressed stamped envelope for our reply. Make it a postage-prepaid box if you want the prototype back as well. Don't call us, we'll call you.

You're going to have to provide benefits and healthcare for all your employees, and we're not quite sure how much that is going to cost, but we're working on it, and will get back to you. But be ready for a BOHICA moment when Barack unveils his plan, because he's DEFINITELY not working for your benefit, buddy. You're an evil business owner, making profit off the sweat and industry of the proletariat. He's got his eye on you. But you can fly under the radar - to a degree - if you self-police you business to affirmatively limit any success you have. You'll actually make more profit if you make less than $250,000 profit. You're not allowed to make more than that without falling into a specially-created tax-bracket that is overtly intended to bleed you dry. So if you want to stay successful and profitable, you'll need to self-limit your success and profitability.

Since you're dealing with the machine industry, you'll have to have the right operating permits and approval stamps for your machinery. And while the law does not actually require you to hire union workers, Barack is certainly working on fixing that as well. God forbid you hire your labor as cheaply as you can manage it. Again, Barack has his eye on you, and won't let your sleazy "sense of business" arguments result in giving anyone a job that Barack doesn't approve the terms of.

Et cetera, ad nauseum.

Alas, alack. Add it all up, and you really have only two alternatives these days. Either (1) You open your business in Brazil, China, Mexico, or some other place where you can avoid all that bullshit, or (2) throw up your hands in frustration, and wait from somebody else to go through all that bullshit to get the product on the market. Neither of those options results in America gaining a new small business to fill a niche that's already there.

But Barack has taken the matter under advisement, and is working on a solution that will get the economy moving again. Regulations are going to be passed. Don't worry, things will get better. Again, there's going to be 95,000 new jobs every month this year!

Ramblings on Politics, and Predictions on Media Events

In his presidential campaign, Barack Obama very much rode to victory on a tide of good press and optimistic endorsements, not just from notable political figures like Colin Powell, but from any number of journalists, columnists, and other public figures (hello, Oprah!). The funny part is that those people - lets be honest here - never endorsed the man's actual politics. How could they? Nobody even knew the man's politics. It was less than a five-year span over which Obama went from being a con law professor at University of Chicago to President of the United States; he HAD no real history in making or shaping policy.

He expressed various things over the course of his campaign, like the end of government subsidization of Big Business. The cutting back of involvement in over-seas conflicts. The idea of open government, free of back-room deals. And, of course, CHANGE. But for all that, it never really mattered what his political position was, because he was just so damn charismatic, people WANTED to believe what he said. People WANTED to believe that he was going to usher in a new era. People WANTED change. And they wanted it so bad, and thought Barack was just such a great guy, that nobody - mass media, this means you - ever got around to asking him the usual pointed questions politicians face about the whys and hows and whos-going-to-pay-the-bills. The mass media and pop culture anointed Obama the Golden Boy of a New Era, and to large degree, turned into his minions.

But then he got into office. He jumped right into government subsidization of Big Business, by essentially nationalizing two of the larges business entities on the planet. There was no substantial improvement in the military situations in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Back-room meetings (from which even opposing-party elect were barred) became par for the course. Not only was there no indicia of substantial change, but things appeared even worse than before. Changing locks in the Capital building, to keep Republicans out of meetings where national policy is being made? Staged "town hall meetings" packed with Obama ringers tossing him soft, slow, up the middle questions? Open spats with national media organizations? This did not seem normal like a dignified, above-board, respectable administration trying to make changes from within. More than anything else, it looked like all the stories about the worst points of the Chicago Machine projected onto the national scale, with much the same ill-conceived shady antics.

But the media persisted. Barack was their boy, and they had his back. They pitched some lines that even Chris Matthews had a hard time delivering with a straight face, said that things really weren't as bad as they seemed, and promised that change was coming. All of this hubbub is just Right-wing/Racist/Republican hate-mongering. Reports from the Southern Poverty Law Center supported this, and were cited to by many news agencies. But those damn reactionaries could not stand in the way of Change! Barack just needs some time to address the matter. After all, people couldn't expect results right away. But the situation is under control. The matter is being assessed, and will be handled. Don't call us, we'll call you.

And most of the media bought it, and tried to sell it to the American people.

More time when by. Wars did not end. The economy did not improve. And the President abandoned pretty much every issue except his dream of national healthcare. Good goal to have, and if he managed it, Barack could tell himself that he would live forever as a Man of Destiny. He had climbed the mountain that had beaten Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and all the other predecessors. He would bring health care to all those inner-city people he worked with back when he was just getting his start in politics. All that was needed was for American to take on $10 trillion or so of healthcare tab. But he was going to have it, and the American people were going to have it. He was President! He had the Mandate of the People! Everyone who read the mass media knew what a great guy he was!

But time passed, and nobody could really explain how this transcendental health plan was going to work. Nobody could really explain how this transcendental plan was going to be paid for. Back-room deals (the kind Barack said would be a thing of the past) were cut with key senators, to get them to support the bill. All of the dirtiest, sleaziest, most corrupt parts of American (Chicago?) politics were front and center. And, for the first time in about 20 years, the American people started paying attention to government, instead of just listening to the media reports on the government. Polls were conducted, studies were commissioned, but in truth, nobody really knew where the People stood, even though the media generally continued to tell them how close we were to a halcyon moment when national healthcare became a reality, and how great it would be for America, whether America like it or not.

And in a sudden, unexpected twist, Ted Kennedy died. Initially, it looked like the Obama administration was drooling over it: he was a lifelong crusader for national healthcare, and even if he did have a few foibles in his youth involving dead secretaries, he WAS a Kennedy. Barack could trumpet the current health care bill as Ted's legacy, even though he wanted everyone to be sure to remember that HE got it done, after Ted couldn't. Media events and spin-doctors got on the job. The Democratic party was poised to ram through national health-care, whether the Republicans (and/or the electorate) wanted it or not. One more once-over from the House, reconciliation and ratification in the Senate, and it was a done-deal.

But there was a problem. Ted, now deceased, was part of the Democrats' 60-man super-majority in the Senate. The healthcare bill they were trying to pass was so amazingly left-wing that not a single member of the Republican party was going to support it. Hell, even some Democrats needed sweat-heart back-room deals to get them on board. Ted's vote had been counted on, and they needed it!

This problem was compounded by the fact that Massachusetts law required a special election to fill the seat. Rather than just appointing a guy they wanted, Barack and his camp would have to WIN that seat back again. But no worries. Massachusetts was so Blue it was black, and this seat had been held by a Kennedy for 50 years. It was theirs. They would get the vote. They, through Barack, had the Mandate of the People! The media suggested how cute it was that Brown was making a good showing in the race, but expressed (historically well-founded) opinions that a blue-to-the-bone Massachusetts election was a Done Deal.

Except it wasn't. Somewhere along the line, people had noticed that the only change the administration had brought was business as usual, except where such business was pushed aside to pursue was appeared an impossible dream: A plan to saddle the American people with a nation's healthcare costs (whether they liked it or not), and don't worry; we'll be able to afford it. Economic recovery will be the next item on our agenda. People seemed to stop buying it. They got over the charisma and charm, and realized that this was fucking stupid. No matter what spin the media put on it, Obama's vision was not Camelot, it was a castle in the sky.

And - in Massachusetts at least - they responded, and voted Republican. Political Armageddon: the Kennedy Seat turned Red. Shock in the media, and rightly so. I guarantee you, NOBODY saw this coming, even two weeks ago, and anyone who says otherwise is lying. People might've anticipated a close race, and were prepared to argue that - in Blue Massachusetts - even a close win boded poorly for the Obama agenda. But an outright Democratic loss? In MA? Inconceivable. Right-wing talking heads hailed the return of reason. Left-wing talking heads scrambled to find a way to fit this development into the liberal world-view media gestalt they had been pitching for years.

But it happened. Spin-doctoring aside, the voters voted how they did, and they didn't toe the line the media never doubted. Wonder of wonders, the people MADE the news, instead of just reading it. With the practical result that EVEN IN MASSACHUSETTS, the Administration's platform was declared too far to the left, and in need of reigning in.

But the funny part of all this is not the results (which warms my heart, since it suggests that the populace is once again taking an interest in their national situation), but the aftermath. Most notably, the Administration's response, which was to blame the loosing candidate (Democrat Martha Coakley) for having run "a poor campaign." Which she undeniably did. But isn't Bacack supposed to be the head man in the party? You know; in a Presidential kind of way? As badly as he needed that 60th vote in the Senate, might he not have taken a greater interest in this election?

Practically speaking, this could be the death of the Obama health-care plan. First, from a political perspective, he's lost his unbeatable super-majority in Congress. Should healthcare ever need further Senatorial approval, it will be filibustered into perpetuity, because - as Massachusetts demonstrated - politicians who support the bill will tend to find themselves unemployed. The winner in the MA race actively trumpeted himself as "The 41st vote" that would bring a halt to the Obama agenda. People seem to have bought it. Nobody cares more about job security than politicians, and even in MA, the voters appear to opposed to big spending more than they support straight-ticket loyalties. Besides, nobody likes to back a losing horse: Barack held the House, the Senate, and the Oval Office, and couldn't get it done.

And in the aftermath, Barack himself has killed the party unity he was relying on in pushing health-care through. By throwing Coakley under the bus for the loss, he has indicated to his party that he considers himself as having little or no loyalty to any of the congressmen who might tacitly support him. A far cry from his calls to rally together as a party and stand shoulder to shoulder against the opposition, while throwing to the wolves any erstwhile political ally who can't or won't toe the line.

What's going through the minds of Democrat congressmen today? Massachusetts has indicated that elections can be won on a platform limited to "I will oppose Barack Obama," and they know that their personal constituency is almost certainly more conservative than Massachusetts. The people seem to be expressing their displeasure with forcing healthcare through. The best reason to support the bill - presenting a unified party front to achieve a grand goal - seems dead, since the grand goal has been watered down (to put it politely) in committee, and since Barack himself has indicated that he'll consider a pariah anyone who falls away or can't keep up. Washington is very much a back-scratching kind of town, and throwing that away seems to be the only real change Obama has brought. Why exactly should these congressmen contemplate possible political suicide by continuing to support the party line?

Add it all up. Obama has preserved all the worst tendencies of his undeniably lack-luster predecessors. Overseas conflict, weak economy, massive spending, and shady back-room deals. The change he has brought is setting aside central issues to pursue his Man of Destiny dreams about national healthcare. The promises he made in his campaign were lies, he's had a year and gotten substantially nothing done, and even MASSACHUSETTS has aligned itself against his agenda.

The shine has distinctly worn off with the American people.

The thing to pay attention to now is the media. As outlined above, Barack's greatest strength has always been his charisma and presentability with the media (not to be confused with media-saavy; his management of the Coakley loss suggests that he has none of that). Watch how things change, since it's already started. In his first statement since the Brown victory, Obama has urged Congress not to jam through health-care, but to wait until Brown is seated. But the photo on Yahoo accompanying the article is not one of the usual "man of the people" snaps of Barack in mid-oration, or of him gazing into the distance in a visionary fashion. Rather, the photo shows him with a distinctly sour look on his face. The same AP article on MSNBC's web page shows the President angry and intense, which while probably the reality of his mindset, is hardly a positive image in the wake of recent events. In the aftermath of the MA race, even the Huffington Post has turned apologist, which is - frankly - remarkable.

The main goal of the media is to pander to the reader. Journalistic integrity is a contradiction in terms. The people who buy newspapers and read webpages seem to be souring on this whole Obama Brave New World thing. It will be fun to see what changes might be made in the coming weeks to sell newspapers. In the end, I suspect Obama will have lost mush of the mass media that has been his political lifeblood. I wonder how bad the bleeding will be, and if he has anything else to sustain him. Because I suspect not. He has always been a remarkably poor politician. With ever-decreasing returns on his defining charisma, grand hopes, and promises of change, is he a lame duck one year into office?

On the Road: Retrospective

I've been traveling quite a bit lately, which I guess is also a partial explanation for the obscene amounts of money I've been spending. But alas, alack, life has caught up with me. With the holidays behind us, and with no further adventures on the horizon (save a trial in late March, which should be pretty fun), time has come to pause and look back, and jot some notes down here about places I've been, before such details are lots.

Spent quite a lot of time in New England lately, and I have to say that, but for the winter thing, I like it. Winter is probably a deal breaker against me ever living there, but weather didn't impinge much on me seeing New England as a tourist. Winter might even added to the experience, since it's been I while since I've been in the snow. In any rate, my defining memory of the cold weather there is not focused on shivering my ass off (through the warmest coat I own) while stomping through a snowy movie-theater parking lot (AVATAR is spectacular in 3D IMAX, by the way; spend the extra money). Rather, when I think of New England winter, I tend to recall watching the wind blowing snowdrifts down from the branches of the pine trees outside the windows, as I sat in the hot-tub at the Foxwoods resort spa, between steam baths.

Yeah, that was a rough day. Let the record reflect: anyone using the term "dream home" better be imagining something with a steam bath and a whirlpool. Short of that standard, houses can be way up there, even running past "very nice," and into "spectacular." But if you use the term "dream house," there better be acceptable spa facilities.

Winter aside, New England summers are pleasantly cool and green, and the fall really does bring all those colors out on the trees. For west-coasters: you know how people from the east never seem to believe that the paintings and photos of desert sunsets really do reflect the range of colors in the reality? Same way: the trees and plants in New England really do show all those colors you see in pics and paintings.

As for specific locales, I've decided that I love Boston, and have even considered LLM programs there. The winter thing is potentially problematic, but I think spending winters in city-life is easier than any suburb-based existence. Moreso in Boston, since if I lived there, I probably wouldn't have a car.

Great town, with character all it's own, and character based not just on the truly astounding numbers of both churches and dive bars. San Francisco has vibe that you can't explain, but that everyone feels. New York is the same, but instead of a vibe, has almost electric energy. Boston has HISTORY you can feel. Between the architecture, the cemetaries, and the living tradition, Boston's accumulated centuries are tangible as you walk from the Common to Faneuil Hall, and it's not a looming uncomfortable feeling. The substantial completion of the Big Dig means there's no longer a freeway running along the waterfront, but instead a series of parks, so Boston is a GREAT town for a walking tour, and the smells of the place are spectacular. Wet stone. Unhealthy cooking. Overtones of pipe tobacco. Add in the fact that you literally cannot walk a block without passing a Dunkin Donuts or a Bank of America, and I can see that it's an easy city to live in, so long as you didn't have to drive, since that city was CLEARLY never intended to deal with vehicular traffic.

I would honestly consider living in Boston, if it could bring itself to raze the City Hall and government center, which is by far the UGLIEST expanse of architecture I have ever seen. Old City Hall, a few blocks away - which is now a Ruth's Chris steakhouse - is gorgeous. Likewise the State House (the golden dome on the hill at the corner of the Common). South Station. Feneuil Hall. Anything along Newbury Street. SO much beauty in that city. So it's amazing that the City managed to saddle itself with perhaps the ugliest municipal center known to man. I understand that this is something that Bostonians are generally embarassed about. Honestly speaking, they should be, especially if they lived there in the late 60's, and might have done something about it.

But all in all, I like Boston, and will go there again. I have no doubt that Boston will continue to be a healthy bustling city into perpetuity.

Hartford, on the other hand, is pretty clearly a city that's dying. With the insurance industry scattering its workforce out to whatever cheap office space can be found fronting on the information superhighway, the city that was the industry's physical epicenter seems to have a lot of empty buildings and broken windows. Despite being almost 400 years old, Hartford put all its eggs in one basket, and most of those eggs have been lost or gone rotten. All in all, Hartford seems to be deluding itself about how things are going to go from here, since the city focus is on more housing, instead of on more middle-class jobs.

With the top of the economic food chain drying up, there's not a whole lot of trickle down, which seems to be causing some pretty impressive gentrification. The Old Money still distinctly has their enclaves (NOBODY carries their nose higher in the air than a CT Blueblood), but there is not much in the way of a middle class. Even the insurance carriers and businesses that still maintain offices in the city have realized that it's cheaper to use generic commercial space in the suburbs and do business electronically, and I gotta believe that the number of empty offices in the downtown buildings is growing steadily. With the middle-class workforce (and related businesses and industries) fleeing for greener pastures, the city as a whole is in danger of turning into Detroit and forming burbclaves: small armed camps of the wealthy "elite," separated only by a fence from miles and miles of housing projects and neighborhoods where you can't walk the streets at night. Barring some major renaissance, I think the only real hope for Hartford is New York growing big enough and close enough to shine some light on it.

Which is a shame, since as an old city, Hartford is beautiful. I couldn't help but look at some of the (empty, falling down) red brick buildings and think that if that building was ANYWHERE in, e.g., San Diego, the building itself would be reason enough for an artists' community and a farmers market to spring up around it. What is a broken-down wreck in a Hartford suburb would be a landmark in any San Diego suburb. But San Diego is healthy and diversified, with 3 major universities, a dozen major industries, and only a minimum of cultural pretense or snobbery to weigh it down. At this point Hartford has healthy and diversified pretension and snobbery, but only a minimum of institutions and industries. I hope I'm wrong about this, but I don't think I am, and wonder what's going to happen to the city should Pratt have any sort of necking-down.

In terms of other Connecticut locations, Foxwoods is nice, especially in winter. But it's got nothing on Vegas, which is also a hell of a lot easier to get into and out of. Seriously; even if you're coming from New York, it's not all that much extra travel effort to get to Vegas.

All in all, I've decided that I really like New England as a tourist, regardless of the season. But barring a few years study at some Boston university, I will almost certainly never live there.

Turning to other locales, my other notable trip in recent months was to Nassau. Specifically, to Paradise Island. Which these days is just another way of saying "The Atlantis Resort and Casino," which takes up about 90% of the island, with notable exceptions being Nicholas Cage's house, a yoga retreat, and the hole-in-the-wall hotel I stayed at. (Club Land'Or. Was funny: for a lost kingdom, Atlantis was pretty distinct, but everybody - especially at Atlantis - seemed to be telling themselves that Club Land'Or didn't really exist at all.) You can count on your fingers the number of properties on Paradise Island that are NOT part of Atlantis.

This is neither a good thing nor a bad thing, although I gotta believe that on the whole, Atlantis has done vast damage to the economy of Nassau. Aside from Paradise/Atlantis and a surprisingly small downtown area catering to the cruise-ship port, Nassau is pretty clearly a third-world country. Most of the small shops, bars, and so forth outside those areas have closed, which is a bad sign for an island nation who's primary industry is tourism. The fact is that Atlantis has pushed out everything else. This is a problem since Atlantis is really not an every-mans' travel destination. Too expensive. Rooms are hundreds of dollars a night. A cocktail costs $12. Don't ask about food prices. Nearly the entire tourism market is under Atlantis' thumb, and they've set prices high.

Which is not such a good thing in these economic times. The marina is packed with million-dollar mega-yachts, and the Elton John and Michael Jackson suites (each $25,000 a night) are booked for the next five years. But there are lots of empty rooms in the hotel towers, and not a lot of people wandering the shops and restaurants. With Atlantis clearly catering to people with fuck-you money, and with Atlantis pushing out everything that's NOT Atlantis, I expect more and more middle-money people who might be going to Nassau will be headed instead to Freeport, Kingston, or the BVIs. This will not be a good thing for the Bahamas as a whole. If nothing else there's not a whole lot of local color left to enjoy; it's been commercialized and centralized, at Atlantis. Most or all of Nassau's restaurants, clubs, bars, taco stands, or what have you are closed down, boarded up, and places you'd worry about walking through the neighborhood after dark. We didn't make it to Cable Beach, so there might be signs of life there, but otherwise, luxury facilities at luxury prices was pretty much the name of the game.

All that having been said, Paradise Island was a GREAT place to spend a week hanging around and celebrating birthdays with friends. Beach weather was acceptable-to-good in the middle of January. Food was expensive, but had large portions. Drinks were expensive, but high in alcohol content. If what you're looking for is casual, low-speed relaxation, and can bring yourself to not fret about costs, Atlantis and its environs are the place to be.

And if you feel the need for an adventure, you can find that in Nassau as well: just take a ride with Bahama John (Cell: 242-477-2716) (Yes, I got his card; only one I kept from the trip). He was our cab driver from the hotel back to the airport, which means he essentially drove us the length of the island. HO-LEE SHIT what a ride. First of all, the Bahamas is one of those places where "lane lines" are really just "guidelines." Since it's a two-lane road for most of the way from Paradise to the airport, and since it's fairly common to get stuck behind, e.g., a backhoe or other piece of heavy machinery, it's completely routine for cabdrivers to swerve suddenly in front of other drivers, pass on the wrong side, pass on the right side in the face of oncoming traffic, and so forth.

Now. Imagine if Mad Max had a psychotic, rum-soaked, Caribbean cab-driver uncle. That's Bahamma John. To his credit, we made if from Land'Or Resort to the International Terminal in absolutely astounding time, notwithstanding fairly heavy traffic, and without a single instance of physical contact with another vehicle or stationary object. You could at least slide a piece of paper between John's minivan and our closest passage to whatever the other object might be. There were a few times where there might not have been enough room for TWO sheets of paper, but we did emerge from the ride unscathed, as our driver's skill somehow balanced out his driving style, at least for the limited duration of that trip. Severe damage to parts of the vehicle suggested that this was not always the case, but while he was under our employ, the guy was a true road warrior. And I say that even though my usual mind-set is that cab-drivers are nominally tied with mimes and performance artists for the title of "lowest form of life on earth."

Still. Imagine being confronted with the World's Greatest Taxidermist. You find him a bit odd, or even disturbing personally. His profession seems unquestionably distasteful. But you can't help but appreciate his ability as a master within his field. Notwithstanding any terror inspired by the ride, and notwithstanding cold sweats at even the idea of sharing the road with the bastard, I have total respect for Bahama John as a cab driver, and he definitely provided a lively ride, well worth the ticket price.

Highlights of our trip included at at least 17 major cuttings-off of other drivers (memorably including swerving from a turn-lane into the #1 position at a stop-light, pulling ahead of and bypassing seven cars already waiting in the que at that light), nearly getting run off the road by a semi-truck while passing on the wrong side, John pointing out where his brother had been killed in (surprise!) a car accident, several instances of passing by "making space" in the middle of a two-lane road, with traffic coming at 55 mph in the other direction, and any number of slamming on the brakes to avoid any number of eminent collisions with other vehicles. And never once did any of this interrupt his ongoing narration of notable points of Nassau's history and geography, save only for sparking supplemental commentary about how other people on the roads were all assholes and shitty drivers.

It was AWESOME, in a choose-now-whether-to-laugh-or-cry, fingernails-dug-into-the-dashboard kind of way, where terror somehow turns into hilarity, based on nothing more than the driver's "business as usual" demeanor.

So all in all, it's been an interesting few months, and I'm looking forward to where the next few months might take me. Might even find a little more time to write between now and then. Which is always helped by people prodding and poking me to get off my ass and produce something, by the way. Hint hint.