whether or not there's weather....

[lagilman]

I am blog-boring these days, mainly because all my brain power is being sucked up by various work commitments. Even my drinking buddies have remarked on how boring and studious I am being. *sobs* Also? It's too damn muggy, despite my promised thunderstorm passing in the night. Hopefully there will be content of interest some point soonish.

And tonight, another massive thunderstorm/monsoon/windstorm of OMG Right Over Us! proportions. I was in my wheee!glory but poor Boomerang Did Not Want. [ooo, we're being told to expect another violent band in about an hour or so. Poor Boomer, gonna be a long night]. Not quite Hello, Dolly, but enough for my needs right now....

[and for those who wonder? This stormbunny would bug out the moment a tropical storm went to Level 2. Bye-bye, you bethcha. Stormbunny, not dumb bunny]


(aside: note to Johnn McCain: when being interviewed on tv in a supermarket? Standing in front of a display of Dole juice cartoons maybe not your best PR move. Just sayin'....)

Comments

[autojim.livejournal.com]

Heh. You did get our drive-by thunderstorms. Good.

(aside: note to Barak Obama, dated from a few weeks ago: When making a big speech in Detroit, proclaiming your support for the auto industry, hauling out Al "the automobile is the single largest threat to national security and must be stopped immediately" Gore to endorse you? Not a good idea. Having your staffers prohibit two headscarf-wearing Muslim women from sitting in their assigned seats in the the visible-on-camera-behind-you part of the audience, in the city with the largest Arab population outside of the Middle East? Not a good idea, either. I note these to point out that neither side is immune to PR gaffes.)

[lagilman]

I note these to point out that neither side is immune to PR gaffes.

Oh, absolutely. Although the two you note were more "what WAS your staff thinking?" while the one I mentioned was along the lines of "Oh dear, that was...bad visual placement -- someone wasn't thinking that one through...."

[autojim.livejournal.com]

Gore has to add security when he comes through Detroit for any reason these days. How he was able to persuade enough UAW leadership folks to endorse him in 2000 still boggles me. And even with the largest break-in-the-ranks in a national election that the UAW has ever had (a lot of the rank & file were smart enough to realize he was and is calling for their livelihood to be eliminated from the face of the earth), he got enough labor vote to carry the state.

Out of curiousity, how would you charactarize this week's Obama Pretends He's Already President World Tour 2008?

As you might have figured out from the title I give it, I find it presumptuous to the point of arrogance.

Just once, I'd like an election where there's a clear-cut best person for the job. This one, like the previous 2, is shaping up to a which-is-least-bad decision for me. I'm cool with a lot of Obama's social ideas, but his fiscal (in particular the math on how he's going to pay for a lot of the social programs while still cutting taxes for the majority of US citizens) and military ideas are in need of serious revision, while I'm good with McCain's fiscal and military but wish he'd stuck to his guns instead of caving on several social issues in the face of the religious nutbunnies voting bloc of the GOP.

What's a Shwartzenegger Republican/small-l libertarian to do?

[lagilman]

Out of curiousity, how would you charactarize this week's Obama Pretends He's Already President World Tour 2008?

I wouldn't. Honestly, I haven't given it much thought at all, any more than I did McCain's tramping all over the place a month or so ago. It's what they do, to kill time between now and the elections, trying to establish alliances and support groups that may be needed later. Considering how the rest of the world sees us, having positive feelings toward whoever is president next can only be A Good Thing.

As to my choice.... *shrug* I don't trust Obama, mainly because he's a Politician. But I abhor McCain morally and ethically, trust him not half an inch with my life or my money, and strongly suspect based on his own performance that he's no longer mentally acute. And their various fiscal plans? Ain't nobody's got a clue or a cure, far as I can see. The one thing I do know is that the Republican party's "business can do no wrong" theory is a large part of what ended us in this particular stewpot, thanks so much for the deregulation and lack of oversight, boys.

[autojim.livejournal.com]

Well, the Obama tour vs the McCain tour has pointed out a very interesting difference: when McCain went overseas, the media sent bare-bones crews with him or relied on their local bureau staff in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., while Obama had the 3 "traditional" network anchors along, etc., and Obama's people have been doing things like setting up today's big major speech in Berlin, where McCain met privately with various local leaders (something I find far more appropriate at this stage in the election process).

Having met the man, I'm not really worried about McCain's mental faculties.

Again in the "just once, I'd like to see" category: Just once, I'd like to see a candidate promoting all these great social programs come right out and say "Look, all this is going to cost a lot of money. Your money. This is what's going to happen in order to pay for all of these necessary programs." and then detail where and how the money's coming in. I'm a big fan of simple when it comes to tax code. Give me a tax code that says:

1) Family status: single, married one income, married two income (for puroses of taxation, legally-recognized, and yes, I'd fix that, too, domestic partnership regardless of sex of partners = marriage), married filing as singles

2) Number of people in household living on income being reported

3) Gross pre-tax income

4) Net pre-tax income after tax-deferred investments (401k, 403b, Roth, etc.), Social Security, and Medicare withholding.

5) Divide line 4 by line 2. This is income-per-person in the household.

6) Multiply line 5 by (tax rate -- I'd have to do a lot of study to figure out what the right magic numbers are here). This is the tax owed.

The only drawback I see to this is the benefit of having lots of no-income dependents in the household. Maybe the tax rate would depend on the number of dependents as a way of leveling the playing field there. My goal is to have everyone pay effectively the same percentage-of-income regardless of income. Close loopholes. Set the rate so that renters and homeowners aren't treated separately.

But the main thing is I want a candidate to come right out and say "I want the government to do X for the citizens, and Program X is going to cost each of you Y% in taxes."

It'll never happen, of course. That would require politicians to be honest, and actually exercise logic.

[fakefrenchie.livejournal.com]

"It'll never happen, of course."

Thank God for that!!!!

"That would require politicians to be honest, and actually exercise logic."

It would also require us lefties to keel over and play dead!

rules of the road, going forward....

[lagilman]

1. I'm not getting involved in hot-and-heavy political candidate/philosophy discussion here, because I just don't have the time or energy right now. Although I will note that many of you who think you know my politics might be deeply surprised. Something that quacks like a duck might also be a mockingbird.

2. I am not, however, declaring such political discussions off-limits, 'cause it's coming up on that season, and y'all are adults and can keep personal opinions out of theoretical/practical discussions -- RIGHT?

3. Anyone who can't keep their personal opinions out of discussions, or lets loose with anything I, as hostess, thinks smacks of "I will teach you better so you will think like me" or any close variant of "you're an idiot" will have their thread frozen and be warned once. Second time, you're getting a Time Out.

4. Anyone who flames from any side, or uses rude/insulting language rather than respectfully agreeing to not-agree on a topic, will get an immediate Time Out, and be mocked by Yours Truly for behaving like a spoiled radio shock jock whose ratings were falling.

5. Anyone who doesn't like those rules can take the discussion to their own LJ.

Re: rules of the road, going forward....

[autojim.livejournal.com]

Noted and agreed to. Post below happened before seeing this.

Re: rules of the road, going forward....

[fakefrenchie.livejournal.com]

OK

[autojim.livejournal.com]

"It'll never happen, of course."

Thank God for that!!!!

::glyph of confusion:: What's wrong with closing up tax loopholes and ensuring that everyone pays their fair share of the burden (make more money = pay more taxes)? I thought you "lefties" (your term) were in favor of increasing the tax load on the very rich (which this would do). Besides, I thought you "lefties" wanted God out of government (actually, so do I...).

"That would require politicians to be honest, and actually exercise logic."

It would also require us lefties to keel over and play dead!

Again, ::confused:: You want dishonest politicians? Politicians who promise the moon, the sun, and the stars as far as government social programs go, *AND* a tax cut on top of it? Politicians who cannot do the basic math to see the fundamental flaw in spending more than you take in?

I suspect you're making a fundamental assumption error: that I am a rabid Bush supporter, and thus anything I propose comes from that part of the spectrum. If this is the case, you couldn't be more wrong.

What is your idea? How should it work? Substance, not "anything but what you propose!" Present an alternative.