Maine Owl

Tantamount to a call for Obama's assassination at a McCain/Palin rally:

"Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience.

H/T TPM.

Fall is sneaking up


Maple leaf near Veazie Dam

Seems I was just down by the dam a few days ago and everything was still green.

Notes on the bombing of innocents

The "Bill Ayers issue" against Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is now out in full bloom. Here was Republican veep candidate Palin yesterday:

Gov. Palin: There's been a lot of interest in what I read lately. Well, I was reading my copy of today's New York Times, and I was really interested to read about Barack's friends from Chicago. Turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man who, according to the New York Times, was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol.' These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes. ...

[Barack Obama] is not a man who sees America as you and I do -- as the greatest force for good in the world.

So, guilt by association will be the McCain-Palin Hail Mary. Can't say I find that surprising.

But I believe there is a lot more to look at about this than its nature as a political attack. Especially ripe would be an examination of American use of war as an instrument of policy.

An old friend of Maine Owl put it like this:

In a televised interview last spring, Senator John McCain asked, "How can you countenance someone who was engaged in bombings that could have or did kill innocent people?"

What branch of the military did Mr McCain serve in??? WHAT DID THEY DO EVERY DAY DURING THE VIETNAM WAR? "ENGAGE IN BOMBINGS THAT COULD HAVE OR DID KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE." What does our air force currently do,well, we don't really know how often now, do we? Weekly? daily? hourly? "ENGAGE IN BOMBINGS THAT COULD HAVE OR DID KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE."

Whew, had to get that out. At least Bill Ayers has gone on to become an education prof and a powerful advocate in defense of children ...

Military bomber pilots often have caring post-war careers too, like serve in public office and run for president. Well, we respect their service, don't we. So, at some level, there is a moral milieu in which bombing innocent people under justifying euphemisms like "collateral damage" is regarded as a "force for good," the true-blooded American thing to do.

Here's my take. First, a quote:

Here is one of them, LCMDR John Sidney McCain, service number 624787 ... USS Oriskany, speaking of the treatment he has been receiving. (Male voice with American accent) I was a U.S. airman engaged in the crimes against the Vietnamese country and people. I had bombed their cities, towns, and villages and caused more injury even death for the people of Vietnam. After I was captured I was taken from a hospital in (?Da Nang) where I received very good medical treatment. ..."

That's from a Pentagon transcription of broadcast, Radio Hanoi, June 2, 1969.

Did I just hear Rahm Emanuel on CNN tell Wolf Blitzer that all the pork in the bailout bill was the fault of those members of the House of Representatives who voted against the bill?

Mike held fast. Tom Allen again voted--this time along with Susan Collins--to punt the taxpayers. This would have been a great chance for Tom Allen to demand a progressive alternative to the Collins-Bush bailout. Squandered.

Their conduct should be like it was for a funeral


Only Barney Frank has an appropriate scowl.

Not that I think Rush Limbaugh does much besides ramble stupidly, but he had one good observation a little bit ago--the Democratic leadership in Congress was seen celebrating the bailout bill in an unseemly fashion. I concur that such whooping over a taking of taxpayer scalps is completely inappropriate, even if you figure this medicine was for the good of the country.

House Approves Bailout on Second Try
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN - NY Times - October 3, 2008

WASHINGTON — The House of Representatives gave final approval on Friday to the $700 billion bailout for the financial system, reversing course to authorize what may be the most expensive government intervention in history.

At 1:21 p.m., applause and cheers echoed through the House chamber as the number of "aye" votes crossed the threshold needed for passage with just seconds remaining in the official 15-minute voting period. The vote was 263 to 171.

This morning on Democracy Now!, Robert Johnson, former chief economist of the Senate Banking Committee had this to say:

Johnson: I think this bill, five weeks before an election, is illustrating for the American people, when there are two currencies of power—votes and money—that even at this time, when the power of votes is at its cyclical high, meaning just before the election, they are almost laughing at the American people, in the—by the nature and structure of this bill. This is a very sad result.

Later Johnson says he himself would have voted for it if it was the only thing offered to address the grave situation, but that in crafting the bill the way it was crafted--in fact a senate provision will increase for distressed mortgagees the difficulty in getting workouts--incumbents in Congress who voted for this thing are "daring" voters to turn them out of office in five weeks.

Who is Palin? Air headed ditz? or gun-toting hockey mom copyright infringer (on Heart's "Barracuda")? Did she "recapture her image" last night?

Ms. Owl saw this come over A & E at about 3:15 this afternoon:


I would never say anything other than that these guys are 100% on the up-and-up. (Note: The ad. refers to the "Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008" see update below.) Can't quite make out the fine print, but I assume there would be a fee for the job loss and default "protection." Still, surely it is legal to offer over the teevee money loans with whatever terms like these. Yet I do wish our crack-shot journalists would ask crisis doomsayers how all this easy money can be flowing with all the credit seized up, when supposedly no one can buy a car, and the Great Depression is just around the corner.

At any rate, Chris Dodd approves so it must be okay.

But isn't "subprime lending" the supposed trigger problem in the economic "crisis" requiring the political class in Washington to drag the taxpayers kicking and screaming into a $trillion mud hole? What the hell is going on here?

Let's speculate. The lenders have learned something very important--The president and Congress will back up any lending practice with a taxpayer bailout, taking "toxic" paper off the books as deemed fit by officials owned by the industry. It's a nice arrangement that the political class is loathe to change in order to provide support for distressed people. This leads to the belief of many tuned to the teevee during the daytime that the types of loans you see here are their best option to keep their little middle class existences alive for one more day. Hence, these strange fee-eating "privatized" loan companies spring up to direct this business to the money flows insured against loss by taxpayer-sponsored bailout.

I haven't bitten on one of these loans yet, but I oughtta know because I resemble that remark. Is there a real day of reckoning on the horizon? I'd have to think so. But for now the political class prefers just to punt us into an increasingly uncertain future.

Update: HERE is a summary of the legislation referred to in the ad. The concept of the Bill claims as one of its principles, "No investor or lender bailout." Also, the borrower must pay back part of any benefit of the workout. Mmmmm. How would the current bailout interact with this program? Maybe someone could help explain. It seems to me the "privatized" aspect of promulgating this program, as seen in the ad., should raise some questions about just how the taxpayer is supporting it.

Update 2: Upon reflection, I suppose conceptually this somehow could fulfill what is discussed HERE: mortgagee bailout, not fat cat bailout, or what Dennis Kucinich discussed HERE. If so, why doesn't anyone mention this FHA legislation already passed? And why the need for the teevee loan hawking? Am I right about the fees involved?

Needless to say, the Sanders Amendment did not become part of the bailout package that passed the Senate last night. Nevertheless, I am posting its text below. If there was a single iota of thought (beyond Bernie & ilk) within our political class that this would be the just, right, and moral thing to do, I'd be much more likely to believe any of 'em have the public interest in mind.

Text of the Sanders Amendment follows:

From headlines on Democracy Now! today:

Senate Approves US-India Nuke Deal

Back in Washington, the Senate has approved a measure to lift a three-decade ban on nuclear trade with India. The deal will allow India to expand its nuclear power industry without requiring it to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty as other nations must. Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota said the agreement would encourage nuclear production worldwide, because it effectively rewards India for developing nukes outside the treaty.

Sen. Byron Dorgan: "The bill before us will almost certainly expand the production of nuclear weapons by India. And here is what is says to India: even as we take apart the basic architecture of nonproliferation efforts, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which India is one of three countries that has never signed—even as we take that nonproliferation architecture apart with this bill, we have said to India with this agreement, 'You can misuse American nuclear technology and secretly develop nuclear weapons.' That’s what they did."

The House passed its version of the measure earlier this week. The vote marks a victory for the Bush administration, which has lobbied heavily for the deal.

I've been concerned about the contradictions this represents for a long time. Commercial nuclear interests trump high-minded concerns about nuclear war.

Even after reading THIS sober explanation and somewhat more spirited exchange of what might be going on underneath the "zero reserve requirement" provision in the bailout bill, I'm not convinced there are no dangers of abuse. I still think Pam Martens was onto something when she characterized this bit of de-regulation as a "Trojan Horse embedded by Wall Street lawyers."

That, my friends, is the change we need: McCain, "aye"; Obama, "aye"; Collins, "aye"; Snowe, "aye".

The proper term is "sweeteners." Gerald has some righteous indignation going HERE.

FOR GOD SAKES, CALL MIKE MICHAUD AND TELL HIM TO VOTE "NO"!!

On Saturday, I looked at a nice pellet stove at the Broadway Hardware store in Bangor, 50,000 btu/hr, $1700. Can I have that delivered with 3 tons of pellets? No, the guy has no pellets.

Here's a story from the Bangor Daily News today:

Wood pellet supply fails to meet demand
Sellers tell consumers: No reason to panic
By Eric Russell - BDN Staff

Wood pellet manufacturers and suppliers in Maine are urging consumers to be patient and let supply catch up to demand as the winter heating season approaches.

In the last several weeks, a number of pellet fuel distributors in Greater Bangor have been running out of pellets within a day or two of shipments. Many have been simply catching up on pre-sale orders that were made earlier this summer from customers looking to buy in bulk.

This stockpiling of pellets — heating fuel made from wood waste and sawdust that is pressurized into compact pieces — has created a unique bubble in the market, pellet experts said.

"The analogy I've been using is that if everybody who uses oil had [an empty 275-gallon oil tank] and wanted to take their entire full supply in July, there wouldn't be any oil left either," said George Soffron, CEO of Corinth Wood Pellets LLC, the state’s largest pellet manufacturer. "People need to hang on."

No evidence is offered in the article about total seasonal supply-demand balance so that we could evaluate if there really will be enough pellets this season. However, I am confident there will be plenty of $4 oil.

Ask them to support the Sanders amendment.

Snowe: 202.224.5344
Collins: 202.224.2523

Kucinich: "It kinda raises the question of what a Democrat is."



This is Bailout 101. I'll update this with the transcript link when it becomes available. (Update: Transcript HERE, now correct.) I want to thank MSNBC for putting up the best mainstream cable news show--ever.