Just So You Understand

Robert Reich -- former Secretary of Labor in the Clinton Administration, former Wall Street Executive and not without his detractors for being too cozy with the Masters Of The Universe -- wrote a column recently which noted that the chances we have begun the second fall of a 'Double-Dip' Recession is very likely.

In June the nation added fewer jobs than necessary merely to keep up with population growth (private hiring rose by 83,000 after adding only 33,000 jobs in May). The typical workweek declined. Average earnings dropped. Home sales are down. Retail sales are down. Factory orders in May suffered their biggest tumble since March of last year.

So what are we doing about it? Less than nothing. The states are running an anti-stimulus program (raising taxes, cutting services, laying off teachers, firefighters, police and other employees) that's now bigger than the federal stimulus program. That federal stimulus is 75 percent gone anyway. And the House and Senate refuse to pass another one. (The Senate left Washington for the July 4th weekend without even extending unemployment benefits for millions of jobless Americans now running out.)

Then, Bob added, Wall Street and the other biggest global banks, meanwhile, are making piles of money betting against government debt all over the world. These were the same banks and financiers, remember, that were bailed out by government not long ago. But now they're demanding fiscal austerity, and politicians are once again doing their bidding - cutting deficits in every rich economy that should now be doing the reverse.

What he's saying is, the same financial institutions which nearly created a Second Great Depression are doing the same thing Goldman-Sachs did: Betting government efforts at Recovery will fail, and the Markets will fall. When they do, huge sums of money -- more money; always more and more -- can be made in both short-selling stocks, and the buying them when their prices drop low enough.

Now, the same financial institutions and global banks are demanding that governments follow policies of austerity -- cut spending, cut support to its citizens; reduce budget deficits. But this isn't prudence, which I could agree with -- it's like keeping medicine from the sick; it's stupid, and benefits only a small number of people. Natürlich; doch immer aber natürlich.

Those same financial institutions and global banks, saved from imploding and closing their doors by U.S. and European government intervention (though the configuration in the EU is a bit different) are creating exactly the climate for markets, and stock prices, to fall, so they can reap future profit, unfortunately by limiting government support and stimulus (jn the form of things like extending unemployment benefits) just when people -- human beings -- most need it.

And in an election year, it's advantageous for the Right to make Democrats appear to be even bigger failures than they are -- right or wrong, accepted wisdom is that a failing economy is always blamed on the Party In Power. A hard choice, to force Americans to suffer; but it's all in the cause of bringing the Republicans back into prominence, so I guess that's okay, then.

This wasn't how the Great Depression was managed. In fact, economists and financial analysts like Reich, Ritholtz and even Paul Krugman are beginning to say that, catastrophic as the Great Depression was, the fact that it was so bad guaranteed enacting a set of banking and financial reforms that limited the greed and manipulation of the Banksters and their buddies which had created the Crash.

What they're saying is, maybe it would have been worth it, to have had a second Great Depression -- just to gain control over the Big Boyz again, and achieve a few more generations of peace. I'm not sure -- but I understand the sentiment that made them say it.

The Bailout kept another Depression from occurring -- but it only pushed the debt which created it a bit further into the future. The Banksters learned nothing. And all this ain't over, in case you haven't guessed.

As Barry Ritholtz noted recently, in the Crash of September and October, 2008, "Banks were not allowed to suffer the fate that all insolvent businesses are supposed to. This was a terrible error, the greatest financial tragedy of the 21st century. That they were allowed to survive mostly intact is the result of the excess influence they have on a corruptible congress and a misguided Federal Reserve."

P.S.

Did you know that over half of all the Federal U.S. currency ever printed and placed in circulation was created since Mr. Bernanke became Cairman of the Federal Reserve? I didn't.

---

Youth Conservatives Rage Against The Machine

 

Elena Kagan; First Day Of Confirmation Hearings 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- At the U.S. Capitol yesterday, some fifty self-described D.C. "youth conservatives" protested against the nomination of Elena Kagan to the United States Supreme Court.

"We're, like, just very upset that this kind of person is, like, going to be on the Supreme Court?" said Britney Hollingsworth, 20, a student at Georgetown University and president of its local chapter of Campus Young Republicans. "I mean, oh-kay; Hell-o?? I mean just, like, you know, look at this person. She's just won't do, at all."

 

Some Of Fifty Young Conservatives, At The Capitol

"Most of these, uh, kind of people, you know?" added Caroline Wilksberry, a 19-year-old Freshman at Brown University, "They just don't represent us, you know, mainstream Americans? I had my driver bring me down here today, you know? Because I saw her [Kagan] on television and just thought, you know, 'Ugh'. I mean, she's so tacky. Plus, she's part of a liberal conspiracy to make us all, just-- " Wilksberry waved one hand in the air -- "like, peasants!"

"Rully, rully true," Hollingsworth said. "I mean, I don't want this Kagan person on my Supreme Court. Let's just, you know, like -- put it right out there, you know? Let's just 'speak truth to power', okay? She's, like, not like Chief Justice Roberts, or Justice Kennedy, or even Justice Scalia or Justice Alito. I mean, they're Catholics and all, but they're on the right side. Kagan's just not, you know, 'batting for the team'."

 

At George Will's House In Georgetown For The Protest After-Party

"Not the actual girls' team, added Wilkesberry. Were the protesters implying that Kagan was gay? "Oh, dear; I wouldn't know about that," Hollingsworth responded. "I think Carrie -- and don't let me, like, put words in your mouth, or anything -- what she means is that Kagan's, like, you know -- like, 'not mainstream'." Then, were they commenting on the fact that Kagan, 50, is Jewish? Both young women responded in the negative.

"That's just so unfair, you know? What an awful question," Hollingsworth said. "We, like, have tons of Jewish friends and stuff. My father's accountant is Jewish; I mean, they're like, fine, okay? I've even been to that thing they have at Easter, which isn't Easter. I was in Tel Aviv -- okay, just to change planes; but, I mean, still." "Me too," added Wilksberry. "I've changed planes there." "Was that when you and Kiki went to Davos?" Hollingsworth asked.

   

Other Youth Conservatives Relax In New York City 

"No, that was that 'Spring Arab Thing'," Wilksberry responded with a giggle. "Anyway -- we just think Kagan is a tacky socalist. They need a lot more spa days -- and Kagan could stand some exercise -- 'Boot camp for you, girl!' And she was the legal-something for Harvard; I know, but it wasn't like she went there, but because they hired her, okay? Hell-o? And she denied the military to do its constitutional duty to serve and protect, you know; or whatever that scandal was that she did. Plus -- oh! oh! Here's something --" 

"I so totally know what you're gonna say!" Hollingsworth added. "Totally," Wilksberry said. "Okay. Okay -- I know, okay; I know a guy at Yale whose family's groundskeeper was, like, some Communist? Or who went to some twelve-step program they have for Communism, or something? And he told this guy I know that he had seen Kagan in, like, Nicaragua or Cuba or someplace, in 1970!!" Wilksberry paused, smiling. "I mean, there you are!" "They should, like, be asking her about that in there," Hollingsworth said, pointing in the general direction of the Capitol.

   

Steven Prescott Kingsford VI, Near The National Mall

When it was pointed out that Kagan would have been nine years old in 1970, the two women, and a number of other Youth Conservatives in earshot, gave hoots of derision. "Hoot! Hoot! That's the liberal media for you," said Steven Prescott Kingsford the Sixth, a Sophomore at Princeton. "If you do an analysis of every legal interpretation Kagan has ever made, you can see she quotes radical extremists and Communists. And if things go much further this way in America, I guess we'll just have to hire a bunch of these fundamentalists to run things for a while and get people like Kagan off our backs."

"Hoot!" added Edward Biddle Barrows, who accompanied Kingsford from Princeton, where both are on the university's Lacrosse team. "The ladies here," Barrows said, gesturing at Hollingsworth and Wilksberry, "Are perhaps too polite to say; but, Kagan just doesn't measure up to service on the high court. Not in any way."

   

Barrows, And Friends, In George Will's Basement At The Protest After-Party

"It's like promoting your cook to become your business manager," Hollingsworth said. "Not that such people like that can't, you know -- whip up one hell of a meal on short notice. But to do an investment analysis, or make a decision involving, like, you know -- big stuff? Well, they're just not up to it." Flipping her blonde hair fetchingly, Hollingsworth smiled. "Kagan should just realize her limitations." "When you have to hire persons," Kingsford added, "they have to be adequately trained; have some seasoning. They have to be -- the right sort. Kagan isn't; not trained, not seasoned, and not right."

"That is so right on," Wilkesberry said. "I'm not going to stand by and watch the interests of people who matter in this country be compromised by a woman who dresses like a Sunday school teacher in Bar Harbor."

 

"Decide Between Buying 200,000 Forested Acres In Western Canada,

And Investing In Bonds? Above Her Pay Grade!"

"Sweetie, she couldn't teach Sunday school," Holligsworth responded, and the party of Youth Conservatives laughed before going off, as they noted, "for cocktails". A protest after-party was held at George Will's Georgetown home, where the Youth mingled with the likes of Will, Red State's Erik Erikson, newly-married Megan McArdle (trailed by son, Megalon, and his wranglers), and a special-surprise guest appearance by Charles Krauthammer's hair colorist. 

Kagan completed her questioning by Senators as to her qualifications for a position in helping to shape the legal basis for American society. Red State later claimed Kagan had been seen buying a book on Marxist political theory in the "Gay and Lesbian" interest section of a local McBorders. In fairness, it should be pointed out that Red State also believes Jonah Goldberg's tome, Liberal Fascism, is as important a book as Rand's The Fountainhead, or the two metric tons of Ezra Pound's unpublished anti-Semitic writings.

 

---

Move Along; Nothing To See Here

Cartoon By Mr Fish (Harper's Magazine Online, August 7, 2009)

MSNBC's Economics reporter Dylan Ratigan occasionally posts at The Big Picture, the market / financial blog operated by Barry Ritholtz.

Ratigan effectively stood beside the shiny, new Financial 'Reform' legislation and lifted his hind leg in an Op-Ed piece on Ritholtz' blog, entitled "Wall Street Reform: Politicians Lie, Media Applauds, America Suffers":

It means that the same people who brought you these horrible changes — rising wealth discrepancy, massive unemployment and a crumbling infrastructure – have now further institutionalized the policies that will keep the causes of these problems firmly in place.

Meanwhile, all involved in the facade try to pretend that this should be considered a success because, gosh, real financial reform is just too hard and those crafty banksters will just outsmart us anyhow... Real and lasting financial reform is actually quite easy to implement — and the last time we had a crisis of this magnitude, we kept the banksters in check for 70 years.

And I believe as we head towards election time with leaders whose only plan for creating new jobs is a few more workers manicuring soon-to-be even bigger Bankster bonus-fueled estates coupled with a few more government handouts, this lesson will be learned once again.

At the same time, Economist Paul Krugman writes in the New York Times that the central bankers of today are getting it terribly wrong -- and that the result will be to drag out the legacy of the Go-Go, 'Lil' Boots' Bush years (i.e., the slow destruction of what's left of America's Middle Class) for another decade.

In 2008 and 2009, it seemed as if we might have learned from history. Unlike their predecessors, who raised interest rates in the face of financial crisis, the current leaders of the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank slashed rates and moved to support credit markets. Unlike governments of the past, which tried to balance budgets in the face of a plunging economy, today’s governments allowed deficits to rise. And better policies helped the world avoid complete collapse: the recession brought on by the financial crisis arguably ended last summer.

But future historians will tell us that this wasn’t the end of the third depression, just as the business upturn that began in 1933 wasn’t the end of the Great Depression. After all, unemployment — especially long-term unemployment — remains at levels that would have been considered catastrophic not long ago, and shows no sign of coming down rapidly. And both the United States and Europe are well on their way toward Japan-style deflationary traps.

In the face of this grim picture, you might have expected policy makers to realize that they haven’t yet done enough to promote recovery. But no: over the last few months there has been a stunning resurgence of hard-money and balanced-budget orthodoxy.

Krugman noted in another column this past Friday that central bankers and conservative politicians (primarily in Britain and Germany), determined to create long-term stability by reducing budget deficits, to cut government spending and to reduce stimulus to their economies; are short-sighted and foolish.

...So saying that we need to focus on the long term, and not worry our little heads about trivial short-term issues like the highest long-term unemployment rate since the Great Depression, may sound like wisdom — but it’s actually folly...

[John Maynard] Keynes had it right:

But this long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that, when the storm is long past, the ocean is flat again.

The future will probably be composed of (1) high unemployment; (2) home prices continuing to decline as their value "resets"; (2) tight credit; (5) wages are flat for those who have jobs -- expect 2-3% increases at best for up to ten years.

And, unless no one notices, in the wake of financial uncertainty, no money to spend on public projects to replace infrastructure, climate-related shortages in power and water, comes political instability -- abroad, certainly, but here in America as well.

And when the gap between those who did so well, and those who continue to suffer is large enough, there's a lot that can happen.

---

Just Change The Channel

2.5 Million Gallons Of Oil Per Day

An undersea robot, operated by British Petroleum and doing Things, "bumped" into the cap which BP had (very expensively) placed over their broken, gushing oil leak a mile below the surface of the Gulf Of Mexico, knocking the cap all higgeldy-piggeldy.

Before the cap was placed, the open pipe was allowing 2.5 million gallons of crude oil (that's 45,456 barrels per day at 55 gallons per barrel -- c'mon, people; do the math) under extreme pressure, its source being more than six miles below the surface of the ocean, to pour into the Gulf.

After the cap had been placed some two weeks ago, the device allowed BP to siphon off some of that 45,000 barrels, but not a great deal -- the flow of oil into the ocean was cut by about a third.

Now, we're back to 2.5 million gallons per day, again. But that's not the horrific part.


Obligatory Leavening Cute Small Animal Photo In Middle Of Oil Rant

The Horror is that in America's last remaining flagship newspaper, the New York Times, this little set of factoids doesn't even rate a headline. It's buried in the back pages of their online edition. In the business section.

Most comments made by media, political or environmental figures about this disaster that I've read or heard tell us that the full costs and effects of this "spill" may not be known for decades. Meanwhile, for teevee and print media, and everyone who doesn't live on The Gulf, it's all part of the daily landscape now, and can be ignored: Yep; oil's still gushin' out down there; oh, well -- hey; looky here -- I can buy a box set of 'MacGuyver' DVDs now...


Nine Out Of Ten Gorts Say, Your Civilization's Priorities Suck --
And The Tenth Gort Wants To Reduce Earth To Radioactive Slag

Just because it isn't a pair of collapsing skyscrapers or an alien spacecraft landing on the Washington Mall doesn't mean it should be buried below the fold with advertisements for hemorrhoid treatment creams.

But, I'm only a Dog, and no one listens to me.

UPDATE: BP now says that the robot "bumped" a vent on the cap, and that the cap itself had to be removed to effect repairs. The cap has now been replaced and is again diverting a few less gallons more oil.

Well, then everything's all right. Whew. I thought for a moment we had a real crisis on our hands.

---

Random Barking

Bark Bark Bark Bark. Bark Bark.

In case it's escaped your notice, the intent of efforts dealing with the worldwide financial crisis have not been to solve the situation, only to shuffle debt, forestall a kind of mathematical inevitability, and slow the fall.

This isn't entirely a criticism. You wouldn't like the kind of sudden, precipitous collapse we think of when when imagining the 1929 Crash of the U.S. stock market; America would look a great deal like rural Bulgaria a few months after that. It's human nature -- no one really wants to live in a Yurt and watch children play with toys made of dried animal dung.

However, if you actually look at what American and European financial mavens are doing, it amounts only to arresting the speed of the drop, because the underlying problem which created all this -- a gigantic bubble of debt, built right here in the USA -- is still there.

And frankly, having a pause, a slower rate of fall, is beneficial to those who have, more than those who do not -- because, bless their big peasant hearts, they don't have the exposure that the wealthy do. There's much less cushion between those who don't, and the hard asphalt of the street. They just don't have the headaches that come with ownership and wealth; they couldn't be expected to understand all of that.

However, it isn't a conspiracy. Businesses and financial institutions want to put off the day of reckoning as long as possible, as they frantically search for someplace to dump the debt, or slowly transfer it from corporations and banks to governments without anyone noticing.

And, naturally, those with money and property will take advantage of the pause to arrange their portfolios in anticipation of... whatever comes next.

No one knows precisely how much debt is hiding out there; some estimates are $50 to 60 Trillion Dollars. But, it's all bad paper owned by financial institutions, pension funds and banks -- investments with a claimed valuation hundreds of per cent more than they're worth. The banks can't admit how worthless they are, or allow them to be properly valued, because -- here, and in Europe -- those banks would fail almost instantaneously. Bang.

In America, $1.53 Trillion of that debt bubble has been transferred to the government, meaning the People. Some of the liability of the Banksters was transferred, deferred, and made to disappear. If you watch enough commercial teevee, the advertisements for cars and clothes and travel and The Good Life Waiting For Us All are supposed to soothe and convince most people that "everything's the same as it always was". Only, it isn't.

European banks, who were just as greedy and short-sighted as their American counterparts, can't do what they did. The debt bubble is still sitting on their books; it can't be transferred to the governments of a half-dozen countries as it was in the U.S. Those same half-dozen countries also spent themselves silly during the Go-Go, Lil' Boots Bush years, too -- Greece, Spain and Ireland are good examples.

The plan of the European banks and governments is to transfer the pain to their citizens: Austerity, slashing budgets; everyone will have to get along with less -- fewer police, fewer teachers; lower pay for public-sector jobs; more "Privatization" and more Opportunities For Speculators and Foreigners Business. No more month-long vacations and good retirement income, fewer health benefits and public welfare.

And, the Europeans blame us... and they have a point.

At some point, Fate will bring us The Check -- probably in the form of a threat from the Chinese, or a financial crisis in some country like Bulgaria or Monaco which threatens to unravel the entire global banking system. A little like waiting for Franz Ferdinand's assassination to trigger a general European war: Some Damn Thing In The Balkans.

I recommend buying your wheelbarrows now, to transport bales of currency in, because the Hyperinflation accompanying a value collapse (this whole crisis is about value, you see) will make Germany in the Winter of 1922 look like a Debutante's Ball.

Think of Our Current Life as a bit like the Cold War -- Americans and Russians, aiming hundreds of missiles with nuclear warheads at each other, and the rest of the world. A brushfire war in one spot could end up triggering a Global Thermonuclear Exchange, and then we all end up living in radioactive Yurts watching mutant children play with toys made from old currency.

I'm starting to sound like a Leftist Glenn Beck, so I'll stop here before I begin barking wildly about giving money to a gold brokerage company.

---

Alan Furst: A Kind Redux

Author Alan Furst is about to release his newest novel of espionage on the cusp of the Second World War, The Spies Of The Balkans. He will be appearing at The Bookstore, a block or so from the West Portal Muni station in San Francisco, at 7:00PM on Tuesday, June 22nd.

I'll be there, to listen to the man read an excerpt, buy the book and have it autographed. I hope they allow reading Dogs.

I'm doing something now that I don't like to do, which is repost an earlier piece from January about Furst and his writing. But I've put in two twelve-hour days, back-to-back, and don't have the energy to do a completely new take on this good writer -- even though I can't think about him without The Story that's included.

---

Something about the times we're living through made me remember a scene from one of my favorite Alan Furst novels, The World At Night: In June of 1940, Parisian film producer Jean Casson finds himself remobilized into the army, part of a cinematography unit documenting what ends up as a massive defeat, and on the road walking back to Paris, in that order.

As Casson watched, the country died. He saw a granary looted, a farmhouse burned by men in a truck, a crowd of prisoners in gray behind barbed wire.

One night, he bumps into an old man, drinking something yellow out of a bottle, which he shares around a campfire with Casson. They talk, obliquely, about the coming occupation.

“We’ll all live deep down, now,” the sculptor said, throwing a stick of wood on the fire. “Twenty ways to prepare a crayfish. Or, you know, chess. Sanskrit poetry. It will hurt like hell, sonny, you’ll see.”

Casson has spent his life in the milieu of exclusive, wealthy Parisian society -- not quite Ancien Regime, old-monied nobility, but right next door. He found a niche in film production, made some money at it; but, assigning motive and direction to characters in a script was much simpler than determining where ethical, even moral, boundaries are in his own life.

Casson's story is where he draws those lines, and to what or whom he owes his allegiances. Furst is very good at presenting his character's search, warts and all.


Alan Furst

I admire Furst's writing, and enjoyed World At Night -- and a sequel, Red Gold -- among his ten novels of living in a Europe during the mid-thirties, and espionage, on into the Second World War. I recommend his work without reservation; it's good (You can see an interview with Furst here, talking about his 2008 release, The Spies Of Warsaw).

And, I only have one Alan Furst story: In 2006, with the release of his then-newest novel, The Foreign Correspondent, Furst was scheduled to do make a brief appearance at Stacey's Bookstore, an institution on Market Street since the 1930's; it closed in 2008, a victim of The Crash.

He appeared on the second floor at the back, with windows overlooking the street and a perspective that reminded me of a narrow Gustave Callibote painting of a Paris street seen from a second-floor balcony (the trunk of a tree; a circular iron grate around its base; a glimpse of a pedestrian).

There were thirty or so people there, at one o'clock in the afternoon on a workday in midweek. Furst seemed slightly preoccupied, but read the opening segment of his book easily in a warm contralto. When it was over Furst answered questions, then signed copies of the book.

Stepping up, I mentioned to Furst that I'd particularly enjoyed The World At Night, and the sequel, and particularly liked the Jean Casson character; would he make any other appearances in another book?

Furst took my copy of Foreign Correspondent and looked at me as if stung. "No!" he said, with emphasis. "I had a bad relationship with my publisher at the time, and was locked into a contract. They 'suggested' to me that I write a sequel with Casson in it, and that's why I wrote Red Gold, under protest. It wasn't a happy experience for me."

I was surprised at his response, but added quickly that even so, it was a good read; I'd enjoyed it. Furst, who had bent down over a table to sign my copy of his newest, remained in that position and turned his head to look up at me.

"Thank you; that's very kind," he said quietly, then turned his head back to my copy of the book, and signed it.

Ever since then, when I've wanted to say Hey, pal; know what? You're an idiot to someone without being so blunt, I use that line -- a soft emphasis on the word 'kind', which indicates the comment is anything but sincere, and an assumption that the listener is too ignorant to comprehend the subtlety of the insult -- or, not; in which case the point is made, anyway.

But, fortunately or unfortunately, I don't have to spend time with Furst; I just buy and read his books. He's a good, even gifted, writer; his evocation of Europe on the edge of the abyss of nazi domination and occupation, and of people who resisted it, is brilliant.

Here's a tip: You can find good, used copies in hardback or paperback of any of Furst's work, some even signed if that's your thing, by ordering them through Alibris.com, or ABEbooks.

These bookselling services list inventory held by secondhand booksellers, who were having a hard time competing with McBorders or Burned & Ignoble even before the economy tanked. Want to buy books? Use either or both of these services. You'll wait a few days -- it won't be instant gratification -- but it's worth it.

Of course, Alan won't receive a dime from these sales -- but the secondhand booksellers of America will; I'm really fine with that. And, isn't that gesture, well... kind?

---

Not Good Enough

I don't particularly agree with many things our current President™ is doing -- some of which are Lil'-Boots-Bush Lite, and others just seem like Chicago machine politics. A bit like the Clinton years -- but, national politics is local politics writ large.

Even so -- and let there be no doubt that he applied the pressure of his office to obtain it -- Obama announced today that British Petroleum will finance a $20 Billion fund for claims resulting from the continuing Gulf Oil spill, and I was happy to hear it.

At the same time, I thought The Right will immediately criticize him. It won't be enough; it'll be part of some socialist agenda; why wasn't it more; he still was too slow; it's a gross interference with free enterprise and on, and on, and on. Not a word of thanks, not an acknowledgment of the assistance twenty billion dollars represents to real people in a real world of hurt.

Later today, GOP Senator Mitch McConnell who (god help him, it's not his fault; well, maybe it is) looks like a goggle-eyed turtle with something lodged in his excretory canal, said Obama would use the Spill as part of "a liberal agenda" to "ram" climate and environmental legislation "down our throats, the same way he did it with health care".

Even as a Dog, man; I hate having as good a nose as I do, for these things. That, or these Assclowns are that predictable.

UPDATE: Josh Marshall noted that a reader at his TPM site offered the observation that "The 20 billion fund should be viewed as a huge accomplishment for Obama. He had no actual power to compel that aside from moral [per]suasion and the threat of having an unhappy president. Legally, BP could have just waited for the lawsuits and drawn the whole thing out for years. As a lawyer, I find it a unique and mind-boggling accomplishment."

---

Love Accountability For Sale

The Corporate Idea Of Partnership With A Sovereign State

As reported by Glenn Greenwald in Salon online magazine, White House adviser David Axelrod appeared on Meet the Press to discuss things, and tried very hard to explain to NBC/MSNBC's David Gregory the concept of holding someone accountable, which Gregory didn't seem to understand. At all.

That might be funny, if Gregory wasn't the chief White House correspondent for that network. Perhaps I'm mistaken in my assumption, but I thought working that kind of beat meant you understood the differences between government, and business, when it comes to a situation like the Gulf Oil Spill.


Dancin' Dave Gregory, NBC's Chief White House Correspondent
And The Host Of Meet The Press On Sundays (Photo: NBC)

So, in discussing The Spill on FTN, Gregory did what nearly all "modern broadcast journalists" do: He focused, not on the continuing despoiling of marine and wetlands ecosystems, and a fishing and tourist industry, but on his assumption that the U.S. government's response is really all about personalities.

It's so much simpler, 'sexier', to talk about whether the President likes British Petroleum CEO, Tony Hayward. As chief White House NBC Guy, you wouldn't want to raise the level of discussion about how the representative government of a sovereign state deals with a corporate entity over issues of liability.

No; leave that to the eggheads on PBS. Aber natürlich, you would want to know the real details -- like, what Michelle Obama was wearing when told Tony Hayward and his BP Crew would be coming to the White House.


MR. GREGORY: Does the president trust this guy [Hayward]?

MR. AXELROD: Well, look, it's not a matter of who -- we, we -- it's not a matter of trust. We have to verify what they're doing, we have to stay on them, and we have from the beginning. That's why we want this escrow account. I'm not here to, to make judgments about any individual's character, but we do know that they have pecuniary interests that may be in conflict with, with the interests of, of our interests, and we...

MR. GREGORY: But, but...

MR. AXELROD: ...need to make sure that the interests of people in the Gulf are protected. That is what our job is.

MR. GREGORY: But this is a straightforward question. If you are in partnership with somebody -- and make no mistake, the government is in partnership with BP to get this problem solved -- does the, does the president of the United States trust the man on the other end who is leading this operation?

MR. AXELROD: Our, our mission here is to hold them accountable in, in every appropriate way... I don't consider them a partner, I don't consider them -- they're not social friends, they're not -- I'm not looking to make judgments about their soul. I just want to make sure that they do what they're required to do.

Let me add an observation from Jay Ackroyd at The Great Curmudgeon:

Deep in what only can be called the ideology of Washington, DC is the idea that the government's role with respect to large corporations is as a partner. Regulatory agencies do not demand compliance with the law. Rather they work with their business partners in some kind of mutual interest.

...much of our difficulties to date stem directly from the idea that the way to fix problems is to partner up with industry -- the NSA with the telcos, HHS with the insurance and drug companies, MMS with the oil companies, Treasury and the banksters -- to deliver "private sector" solutions.

Of course, they say "free market [solutions]," but this kind of thing is pretty much the opposite of a free market, and is... a distance away from [what] anyone would generally mean by "liberal" or "progressive."

Large profit-making entities do not have the public interest at heart; they (at best) care about their shareholders' dividends. The notion that the relationship between them and the government should be accommodating, rather than adversarial is quite a radical shift away from the views of FDR or LBJ.

But this notion runs deep. It is so strong in Dancin' Dave that it is like a fish's awareness of water. He seems to be literally unable to understand what Axelrod means by accountability.

NBC, the broadcast network who employs Dancin' Dave, is just another asset of the Westinghouse Corporation. Once upon a time, the National Broadcasting Corporation understood the difference between its News and Entertainment divisions, and journalists more or less believed in a factually-based world.

That hasn't been the case for some time now. Truth, and accountability, are malleable. Corporations have the same rights as individuals (don't believe me? Go ask 'Tight Tony' Scalia, Oreo Tommy, Joey 'Fingers' Alito and Chief Justice Roberts if it isn't so).

Rather than hold corporations accountable; instead of using even Reagan's laughable "trust, but verify"; we should simply allow businesses to conduct business, and accept their solemn promises that -- like Itchy the Mouse's promise to Scratchy the Cat on The Simpsons -- They Will Never, Ever Hurt Us.

How'd that work out with BP in the Gulf, by the way? The same way it did with Blackwater in Iraq? The same way it did with the BSD's on Wall Street? Yeah...

---

One Person's Joke Is Another Entrepreneur's Acquisition and Profit Vehicle

The original I Can Haz Cheeseburger was created by Eric Nakagawa, a blogger from Hawaii and his girlfriend, Kari Unebasami. The theme was "Hey! Lets do a site about cats doing crazy stuff and post pictures of them!!", together with humorous phrases in Geek-Textingspeak that Nakagawa and Unebasami added -- including LOL, which Nakagawa and Unebasami didn't invent, but used everywhere they could in connection with those crazy cat photos.

It was a hit -- in the millions, to be exact; because at one level the Intertubes are still just a shiny toy, and sites like Cheezburger provide us with Teh Funny. It's that simple: Funny = Big Traffic, and big traffic can mean ad sales, and ad sales = money. It's all about the money, you see.

Not all that long after, Ben Huh, more entrepreneur and businessman than free-thinking artist, took one look at the level of traffic to Cheezeburger and thought he saw Opportunity.

Huh pulled together a group of investors, kicked in $10K of his own money, and in 2007 bought the domain name from Nakagawa and Unebasami for $2 Million. It became the first site for Pet Holdings Corporation Inc., and the beginning of a dandy little Internet empire.


Not Everyone At FAIL Blog Is A Loser. Well, Okay; Everyone.

Using the same concept, also in 2007 PHC launched the FAIL Blog -- just in time for the implosion of the economy.

As a Dog, I have a different viewpoint on most things. For one, I think original ideas which make us laugh shouldn't be turned into vehicles for profit. There's something about that which, as an artist, just makes me want to sit down and howl: Does everything on this godforsaken dirt ball have to end up being about acquisition, ownership, and arbitrary value??

Okay; I know, I know. It just seems that practical, Left-Brain rationalizing frequently grabs our culture's whimsical, Right-Brain creativity and throttles it, or dumbs it down, in service to the profit motive.

Not that the dumbing down of a concept like Cheezeburger was such a huge step, or anything. But you get my drift.

---

Running Dogs

Go, Big Pooch.

A recent shakeup at my Place Of Witless Labor™ has put me in a reporting position that is, as the saying goes, "not a good fit". Consequently, there will be some changes; posting will be minimal while this Dog looks for a new place to put my Rug and Food Bowl. How long that will take is anyone's guess.

Reflecting on the post below, about Little Bernie Madoff -- it is interesting what people tell themselves to justify their behavior.

The Germans have a wonderful word that catches some of the flavor of it: Schlau. Cassell's German-English, English-German dictionary lists the definition as

Schlau [zh-lau], adj., sly, cunning, crafty, wily, artful; (coll.) smart, slick; (coll.) slick operator.

I'm no stranger to realizations that I've been unclear about my own motivation, or about creating excuses for my own actions; pas de tout. But the truth is, bound tightly in self-reinforcing belief as they are, people like that have no real ability to see themselves clearly. They believe, strongly, that they do. And perhaps someday, they will. Perhaps not.

That's not my place to say. But, quoting Morgan Freeman, "to tell you the truth -- I really don't give a shit."

---