Skip to content

Friday Night Music

This is one of those stream of consciousness sort of things, starting with my ride home from work. My iPod is attached to my car stereo, and lately I’ve been playing things at random by spinning the selector wheel on the stereo and seeing what it lands on. It’s safer that way; less need to take your eyes off the road. Anyway, I stumbled upon Maria Muldaur, and it occurred to me that I’d never used her on one of these videos, or, if I did, I can’t remember doing so, and if I can’t remember, it’s not likely anyone else will.

The pickings on youtube from her early days are somewhat sparse. This one seemed best:

Which led me to this, with Maria (who, begging her pardon, always struck me as a not quite Linda Ronstadt) and Linda herself, along with the McGarrigle sisters:

Which led me here, the McGarrigle’s and a host of friends ((Rufus Wainwright – son of Kate -, Emmylou Harris, Mary Black, Karen Matheson, Rod Paterson) singing one of my favorite songs, and one, unfortunately, still quite topical today.

Funny that Stephen Foster songs we learned as kids are, to some extent, now politically incorrect, but this song, which I never heard until I heard Thomas Hampson, of all people, sing it, seems to have been reborn. The Hampson CD, by the way (American Dreamer) should make anyone appreciate Foster’s music.

And, speak of the devil, I found it, so why not stick it up. The violinist (or should I say fiddler) is a guy named Jay Ungar, who may be playing in the McGarrigle version above, which was performed at the Transatlantic Sessions, which he must have had a hand in organizing. I know this because as a result of all this meandering I went to iTunes and bought the CD.

Am I missing something here?

The rich have justified their lower rates on capital gains for years using some variant of the argument Willard trotted out on 60 minutes:

Answering a direct question on “60 Minutes” last Sunday, Mitt Romney said it was fair for him to pay a lower tax on $20 million in capital gains than a worker pays on $50,000 in wages “because capital has already been taxed once at the corporate level, as high as 35 percent.”

Romney was echoing a claim contained in an Ernst & Young study purporting to calculate “integrated” tax rates on capital gains and dividends by (listen up, now) combining taxes paid at the corporate and individual levels. The study mixes apples, oranges and tomatoes too, in a crazy right-wing stew.

He delivered his answer with a straight face, to a national television audience, as if it were the gosh-honest truth. In the real world it’s gosh-awful garbage.

The same study was used by the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), in his opening statement to a hearing last week on tax reform and the tax treatment of capital gains. Here’s an eye-opening sample:

“As we consider the economic impact of the tax burden associated with capital gains, it is critical that we focus on the total integrated rate, which is nearly 45 percent, not just the statutory rate of 15 percent. The capital gains tax is often, though not always, a double layer of taxation. For example, in the case of shares of stock, a company’s income is first taxed at the corporate rate. Then, when shareholders of the company later decide to sell their stock, they are subject to capital gains tax on the sale. But the value of the stock they sell has already been reduced by the fact that the corporation previously paid out a portions of its earnings as taxes. So, even if we make current low-tax policies permanent, the top integrated rate on capital gains is actually 44.75 percent – a 35 percent first layer of tax and a 15 percent capital gains tax. If we allow current low-tax policies to expire, the top integrated rate on capital gains will exceed 50 percent.”

(via Truthout)

Now, this argument is bullshit for a lot of the reasons set forth in the article from which I took the quote. But I think there’s one more. The argument is that at the time a stock is sold, its price is depressed by the fact that the corporation issuing the stock has been taxed. If the corporation had never been taxed, each of its shares would be worth more. Doesn’t that mean the price was similarly depressed at the time of purchase? All things being equal, wouldn’t the impact of the tax be the same at both points in time and wouldn’t that imply that the effect of the tax is cancelled out, and the gain to the shareholder is more or less the same whether the corporation pays taxes or not?

Something completely different

A local story in Smithsonian Magazine. Vampires in Jewett City. (For those not from the area, Jewett City is part of Griswold, and is not now, nor was it ever, actually a city)

 Hat Tip to Matt Berger

It’s funny because…

It’s funny, because it’s true that it’s implausible but it’s still true.

Where do they find these people?

No comment needed:

Mia Love has made her Haitian immigrant family’s bootstraps story the centerpiece of her campaign to become the first black Republican woman elected to Congress. But on Monday, Mother Jones raised some serious questions about the Utah congressional candidate’s public statements about her family’s immigration story, which she’s used to justify a host of draconian budget proposals that range from eliminating the school lunch program to axing student loans.

In 2011, Love described herself to a Deseret News reporter as what some in her party like to derisively call an “anchor baby”—that is, someone who was born in the United States to immigrants hoping to gain legal citizenship. “My parents have always told me I was a miracle and our family’s ticket to America,” she told the paper.

The story has created a bit of a stir in Utah, where Love is trying to knock off six-term incumbent Rep. Jim Matheson, the state’s only Democratic member of the House. Love has fired back and done a number of interviews criticizing our story. Yet she still has refused to answer the fairly basic questions Mother Jones has been putting to her campaign for more than a month, namely: How did her parents get to the United States, and how did they survive here on only $10 if they didn’t get any government “handouts”?

Instead of offering a straightforward answer, Love has blamed the Matheson campaign for somehow planting the Mother Jones story. She told a local radio station, “It is so sad that Jim Matheson and his friends would go as far as attacking my family, attacking the American Dream.” For the record, the Matheson campaign had nothing to do with the Mother Jones story.

Love has closely aligned herself with members of her party who have pushed to end birthright citizenship (as outlined in the 14th Amendment) for children they believe were born here in an attempt by their parents to win permanent residency. (In reality, having a baby on American soil is not a sure-fire hedge against deportation.) Her campaign is managed by people who used to work for Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), one of the leading proponents of legislation that would deny citizenship to US-born children of non-citizens—people just like Love herself. (The issue was so central to Lee’s own 2010 campaign that HBO’s Newsroom parodied it this summer.)

Despite all of the interviews Love has done in the past 24 hours, she has done little to clear up the inconsistencies in her story. She has claimed amnesia about the 2011 Deseret News interview, saying she just can’t recall saying those things. She continues to claim that her parents came here legally, telling one local TV reporter that her parents had come on a “tourist visa.” When asked by Fox News whether her birth in the United States allowed her parents to become citizens, she replied, “I’m not sure, maybe. What if someone got married? Maybe. Again, what we need to focus on is that legal immigration is a good thing when you’re contributing to society. I’m the product of legal immigration.”

In another interview with the Salt Lake ABC affiliate, a reporter pressed her on her comments to the Deseret News, asking, “Just one last time, for the record…your parents didn’t get to stay in this country because you were born here?” Love responded, “Chris, what if they did? So what? What if they did? I mean they are legal. They are legal US citizens. I was born in this country.”

(via Mother Jones)

Okay, one comment. This sort of reminds me of our own Linda, who has been bragging about her elective bankruptcy for years, then attacks Chris Murphy for falling behind in his bills. Could it be that their contempt for the public is so deep that they feel that there is no need to even pretend to be intellectually honest or consistent?

I should have gotten a copyright

Okay, so I went here today, and find to my surprise, that Jon Stewart has introduced a new segment entitled “Barack Obama is the luckiest dude on the planet” or something to that effect. Here’s the video:

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Democalypse 2012 – Every Which Way But Lucid
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Of course, he’s entirely right, but I must register my objections to this blatant appropriation without accreditation. This is a point that some (meaning me) have made before (like here, here, here, here, and here) and for pretty much the same reasons. Obama is the fortunate beneficiary of an unprecedented plague of stupid. So some of us (meaning me) saw this coming. (Though I was wrong about Sarah)

Meandering

A few observations about the campaign, and it is entirely coincidental that I am linking to a couple of stories from the Globe written by an excellent young reporter who shares my last name and half my genes.

And it really is coincidental, sort of.

First, a lot has been written about Romney’s lack of…how shall I put it? Charisma? Star power? Resemblance to an actual human being?

But it turns out that Romney has just as much charisma, just as much ability to inspire almost cult like devotion as Obama. It just turns out that it is extremely concentrated:

Jim Wilson, who can make a reasonable claim to be Mitt Romney’s most ardent fan, is back.

Three months after a mysterious fire destroyed the truck covered with Romney signs and American flags that Wilson had driven across the nation, the 70-year-old Army veteran pulled into a Paul Ryan rally in northwest Ohio on Monday, showing off the new wheels.

“It’s kind of like steering a sailboat in a gale. It has fins and wings but no rudder,” he said of the vehicle. Counting both trucks, Wilson estimates he has now driven 140,000 miles and been to 42 states to support Romney.

Now, I suppose it’s possible, were you a Republican, to make a case that you should vote for Romney, though the evidence for that proposition is pretty thin on the ground, but until today, I had been unaware that there was anyone who actually wanted to vote for Romney. I’m not too surprised, however. I represent disabled people, and I’ve long since learned that there are all different kinds of mental illness. Wilson’s variety is probably fairly harmless, since it doesn’t appear to be infectious.

Meanwhile, on the campaign trail, the Republicans have taken to bashing China. It’s not something new to politics, but I would hazard a guess that never in American history has a party had to hide its agenda so much that it was forced to lie about its positions on almost every issue. If we were to believe their protestations, where would the Medicare hating, outsource loving, immigrant loathing cretins on the right turn for solace? Of course, they know very well that it’s all for show, so they have no trouble sticking with their guys. In the case of China we’ve got Paul Ryan decrying the loss of manufacturing jobs to China (course he doesn’t mention that his Number 1 man sent a lot of them there all by himself). But the tell comes at the end of the story, when someone in the crowd had the temerity (or, if a true fan, cluelessness) to ask if Ryan would actually do something substantive should he and Willard get in:

When one woman mentioned her employer had closed, and asked if it would be possible to penalize companies that transferred jobs to China, Ryan sidestepped the question.

Finally, I pointed out a while back that the Republicans have long since realized that you don’t need to fool all of the people all of the time, you only have to fool most of the people at election time. But what happens when you can’t even pull that off? Well, apparently the solution is to fool yourselves. Republicans are taking denialism to a new level. They deny science in order to fool most of the people, but apparently you can’t make a habit of denying the facts without needing to believe in a fantasy world yourself:

There are really only three ways to deal with all the evidence that Obama is ahead with time beginning to run out: (1) blame it on a bad Romney campaign; (2) argue some 1980-style “big shift” to Romney is inevitable and perhaps already baked into the cake; or (3) just deny it all on grounds most of the pollsters are wrong, biased or both.

Unsurprisingly, this last approach is wildly popular at the moment (Kirsanow mentions it as a possibility). It even has its own Prophet, a man named Dean Chambers who spends his time recalculating everybody’s horse-race polls and approval/disapproval numbers based on what they’d look like if they used Rasmussen’s Party ID weighting.

In other words: if you don’t like what the current electorate seems poised to do, create yourselves another one more to your suiting that’s older, whiter and more conservative just by putting your thumb on the scale (which is exactly what “Party ID weighting” amounts to, with varying degrees of semi-justification).

I for one, encourage the Republicans to continue to deny this little bit of reality. The more they believe the pollsters are lying, the less chance they’ll do anything to turn those polls around. But I do think they’re making a bit of an error here. There will come a discernible point at which the chickens will have come home to roost on this one. Global warming happens slowly, but elections happen all on one day. Will they be able to convince themselves that Romney actually won after Election Day? Stay tuned. If anyone can do it, the Republicans can. Having done all they could to steal this election by disenfranchising Democrats, they will have no trouble claiming that Obama and his Kenyan (or is it communist) co-conspirators somehow stole the election.

Is that all she’s got?

Linda McMahon says that she is talking about the issues. Make that issue. No need for that troublesome “s”. And what is the issue? The fact that Chris Murphy got a mortgage with which only Linda McMahon has been able to perceive a problem.

This is emblematic of the ideological bankruptcy of the modern Republican Party. If they tell people what they really want to do, nobody will vote for them. So they talk about irrelevancies, and when necessary, they just lie.

Here’s a sign that I saw yesterday on the front of the headquarters of the Democratic Party of Kennebunkport, Maine. We in Groton have a similar sign. Ours is not quite as big, though I think it’s more complete.

Now, ask yourself, if you were a Republican, what would you put on that sign? I mean would “Freed the slaves, but we’re the party of the ’angry white man now’” really be a big vote-getter?

Apple loses its way

Apparently Apple is having some problems with its new mapping software:

…Maps is so bad as to have created an entire tumblr dedicated to its awfulness, and the London Underground is offering assistance to the suddenly lost.

My wife and I had a first hand experience of the awfulness today. We were driving up to Maine and asked for directions to a restaurant in Kittery. We had the exact street address. My wife finally convinced the phone that Kittery, Maine and Belfast, Maine were not the same place, as the phone kept insisting, but the directions we eventually got were still wrong. We ended up at a location about a mile from our destination, on an entirely different street. But hey, at least it was in Kittery.

Friday Night Music-Common People

I'm wandering a bit here from my recent theme, which has been music Republicans have been forbidden to use. I'm stealing his from my son, who posted it on Facebook. It's not completely off theme, as I'm fairly sure The Pulp would not take kindly to Romney using their music, though I'm also pretty sure even Romney would never be stupid enough to do so, at least not this song.