As most regular GMDers know I have been (and remain) an ardent supporter of Obama.  However, I am very annoyed with the following:

Yesterday, we received an invitation to the inauguration in the mail.  It was addressed from the Presidential Inaugural Committee and was printed on high quality paper.  It looked very real.  

Only it isn’t a real invitation.  There is a second piece of paper that mentions this is only a commemorative invitation in small print in the second paragraph.  It took us a very careful read and a quick call to Peter Welch’s office to determine that the invitation was not a real invitation.  It is a fundraising letter.

We were crestfallen, but more importantly disappointed. I think this is about the most cynical ploy imaginable.  I expect such deceptive practices from credit card companies, but not from the Presidential Inaugural Committee of Barack Obama.  It preys on the hopes of the very people who contributed time and money to make change a reality.

If the Inaugural Committee wants to ask for donations, fine.  Just ask!  There is no need to engage in deceptive marketing tactics.

(This is a few days old, but it keeps the conversation going and is a bit different than many of the suggestions here, although clearly in the same ballpark with the same governmental priorities. Excellent addition to the discussion. – promoted by odum)

All,

Here is an op-ed I wrote a few  weeks back that is in today’s Free Press:

http://www.burlingtonfreepress…

Best,

Steve

(Here’s an excerpt -odum):

Rather than cut social services and increase taxes, Vermont’s political leadership needs to consider a radical notion: allowing the state government to use the rainy day fund to cover vital social services and issue bonds to finance public works. The state can run a deficit for a couple of years without creating a huge debt burden for future generations. Just as FDR ran deficits to keep people working during the New Deal, the state government can play a smaller similar role. We can keep people working and help soften the worst effects of the economic downturn.

Fiscal prudence does not mean penny-pinching in every circumstance. In fact, tax hikes and spending cuts in vital services at this moment in our economy would be fiscally imprudent during these difficult times.

We need our leaders to demonstrate political courage by maintaining social services and putting Vermonters to work without burdening families and businesses with more taxes.

Yesterday, Obama made it official: he is going to put a massive amount of federal dollars on the table for infrastructure projects.  Conservative estimates put this at $400 billion.

So can Jeb and others please now drop the gas tax proposal for infrastructure?  Uncle Sam is picking up the tab, so there is no need to raise the revenue.  Arguments regarding fuel efficiency are premised on faulty economics – due to the inelasticity of demand a gas tax would need to be magnitudes larger to change purchase or commuting decisions of consumers.   Lastly, for Dems the idea of proposing a tax is yet another opportunity for Douglas to tee off.

The gas tax proposal is unnecessary, regressive and bad politics.  

Given the kerfulffle we've been having re appointments and the lack of netroots certified (nee ordained) nominees, I'd like to point out that Samantha Power looks like she is headed for a major slot at State.  TPM is reporting she is heading transition at State, but I heard scuttlebutt before the holiday that she may head up Policy and Planning at State (this is a hugely important position at State)

Why should liberals care? Samantha is a leading expert on genocide and human rights. Her book: A Problem from Hell: America in the Age of Genocide, won major accolades (and featured the work of Vermonter Peter Galbraith).  Her newest book is about the life of Sergio Vieira de Mello, the spouse of a friend of mine from grad school, chronicles the efforts of the Brazilian diplomat up to his death in the 2003 bombing of the UN in Baghdad.  Samantha is a major policy heavyweight in human rights policy.  If she were to get Policy and Planning, it would ensure that human rights would play a central role in our foreign policy.  

One would hope her role and possible appointment to a HRC State Department would be considered significant by the netroots.  Yet, thus far there is silence.  Crickets are chirping.

My theory is that there are two reasons: 1) netroots is still kinda weak on foreign policy.  Sure Bowers, Sirota, Stoller and Kos will periodically raise foreign policy issues, but it is not really their bailey wick.  Of the major blogs, I think TPM is the only one I've seen that will really probe (mostly in TPM cafe) foreign policy issues in depth. 2) the foreign policy community is still quite elitist and also somewhat insulated from partisan politics because the principle divide in foreign policy is between realism and idealism – neither of which are readily encompassed by the conservative or liberal moniker.   

(Was just talking about this very thing on Mike Abadi’s cable access show yesterday… musta been channeling SPS. Progressive economics is good economics, but I believe many of us have internalized self-doubt about these approaches going all the way back to the Reagan era. When the heat is on is precisely when we should be going with what we know works. Time for some liberal self deprogramming. – promoted by odum)

For a state crammed full of liberals of all stripes, we seem to be positively Hooverian when it comes to running our own ship.  The other day I caught a few minutes of Vermont edition where they were talking about plugging a gap in spending with big cuts in spending.  Now, we have Spaulding proposing a 5 cent gas tax to cover a public works project.

Our politicians are acting as if the problems in the economy are routine.  They are not.  We are headed for a nasty, nasty recession, possibly even a depression (though not on the scale of the Great Depression).  

So why on Earth is Vermont talking about cutting spending?  now is the time for deficit spending – to ensure needed social services are delivered and to keep people working through public infrastructure investment.  This is a classic Keynesian moment.

Now is the time to start dipping in to the Rainy Day fund – it is definitely a stormy economic period.  Moreover, we ought to use Vermont’s very good credit rating to finance public infrastructure investment without increasing taxes.  That credit rating is a fantastic tool, let’s use it to put the state on the road to recovery.  

When the economy recovers, we can restore fiscal balance.  

Following last week’s triumph, there are already rumblings on the left about some of Obama’s initial decisions, such as Rahm Emmanuel to be Chief of Staff.  Certainly, on GMD we have seen some consternation about the possibility of Larry Summers for SecTreas.

I think it is important for all of us to keep some perspective.  If we remember back to the long-gone primary days, Obama was most certainly not the darling of the left.  He, along with HRC, represented the center-left in the primaries with Edwards picking up the left’s support.  Therefore, it is useful to remember that Obama is likely to govern from the center-left and that the left will never be fully satisfied with his decisions.  

That said, it is also useful to remember that we are getting some pretty substantial change right off the bat.  The papers today are full of articles about a series executive orders that the transition team is preparing.  They will among other things:

1) Repeal the global gag order on reproductive health.  Right now, any NGO that even mentions abortion is ineligible for federal funding (even if that funding doesn’t cover that mention).  This repeal will save millions of lives and empower many local NGOs in Africa and Asia to receive USAID and PEPFAR funding.

2) Repeal the ban on stem cell research.

3) Allow CA to classify CO2 as a pollutant. This will allow CA (and by extension the other CA-compliant states) to regulate CO2 emissions from cars.  

These are all things we can be very happy about and the list will grow in the weeks ahead.  It can all be done be executive order.   Not a bad start.

BTW: just for the record: Emmanuel’s selection means that Obama is simply being smart about keeping the House in line with his agenda.  Deft move, IMHO.  On Summers: not thrilled, but kinda wonder if this may be a bone to HRC for her support…  Anyway, the whole Harvard bruh-hah-hah misses the point that Summers did more for girls’ education than anyone in modern times by tying it to economic growth at the WB.  Transformed how most Ministries of Finance look at the issue.  Summers ain’t my first choice, but he ain’t all bad either.  

I expect in the coming year or so, we are going to see a lot of hand-wringing on the left about a lot of Obama decisions.  That said, I hope we will all keep some perspective…

Unbelievable.  A few months ago Lady de Rothschild attacks Obama for being an elitist, possibly one of the most ironic statements in modern political history.  Instead of returning to whatever estate she crawled out of, she comes back for more punishment:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…

I kinda get the sense this diamond-crusted windbag is angling for her own reality show or something….    

( – promoted by odum)

Look for several major hedge funds to implode in the coming days.  They are getting hit with a triple whammy: margin calls, deleveraging and the ban on short-selling.  

Politically, I think it will be very, very tough for the Bush Admin to call for a bail out of a major hedge fund – normal Americans don’t have access to hedge funds and they are not generally understood.  Plus, Congress is out of session for the election period.

Rubin pulled off a private sector-led bail out of LTCM (hedge fund) that imploded in the late 90s, but Paulson is no Rubin….

The bloodshed on Wall street continues….  

Let me preface this by saying that I am not a squeamish parent.  I’ve got a 7 year old boy and I realize that means lots of talk of soldiers, shooting, lightsabers and whatnot.  This in contrast to my 5 year old girl, who has absolutely no interest in any of the above.

So when I got my Essex Reporter yesterday and saw the headline regarding parents being upset about a new line of snowboards, I did not expect to take much interest:

http://www.essexreporter.com/E…

After all, snowboarders still have vestiges of counterculture, so it is only natural that they will want something to provoke.

Well, they’ve succeeded.  It is hard enough raising kids today.  Part of the reason we relocated to Vermont when we came back from overseas, was to get away from precisely this sort of crap.  Like many Vermonters, skiing/boarding is very much a family activity for us.  Having images of self-mutilation is really not what I want my kids seeing as they ride the lifts.    

Not sure why anyone would think m-80s blowing fingers off is cool (let alone the Playboy line), but I guess the marketing gurus at Burton think it will sell more boards.  So now, when I go up to Bolton with my son this winter, I get to deal with his getting all excited about seeing body parts blown off.  

Thanks Jake – I hope you feel proud selling a few more boards this way….

Got to hand it to Paulson: he sure takes the cake for being a royal prick. After spending a week trashing the 'Swedish model' for rescuing the financial system, e.g. taking preferred shares rather than buying up debt, it now looks like the SOB is gonna turn around and do just that: http://time-blog.com/curious_capitalist/2008/10/treasury_prepares_for_a_tarpan.html 10 days ago he was all pissy about Barney Frank's warrant amendment, now the guy is signaling that he is gonna go whole hog and start buying equity. Buying equity protects taxpayers, punishes shareholders and also gives the market time to find a price for the bad mortgage paper – it is definitely the route to go in some cases. Too bad it took another week and another trillion or so of market cap for Paulson to get his head out of his ass…