07.11.08

McCain’s Money Problem

Posted in Economic at 3:18 am by

Someone is pushing what could be a damaging story about John McCain.

A lot of of us have been wondering how McCain was able to float his campaign during his months in the wilderness. We knew he got a bank loan, but what was the collateral?

The Politico reports that McCain used his fundraising list as collateral. That’s problematic for him because, as the Politico notes

The privacy policy on Arizona Republican’s website states: John McCain 2008 will not sell your information to third parties or any commercial entities.

Fundraising lists are valuable political commodities, since they offer the possibility of millions of dollars in contributions. And campaigns routinely rent or trade them.

McCains use of his list as collateral, however, could open the unlikely possibility of donors suing his campaign for breach of contract.

Already I’ve had a couple of people send this to me questioning John McCain’s sincerity. He’s for campaign finance reform, but his conduct in this is questionable.

Naturally, of course, Keating 5 is a buzz word being bandied about today with this story.

I did ask John McCain’s campaign if they had a response to any of this. I was told they would not be commenting. This is a wonky story, so it might not get any traction, but if one of the other camps can get an aggrieved contributor, you never know. With McCain backing some campaigns in a corner, he better watch out.

Read the rest of this entry »

07.10.08

Kentucky Rep. Charlie Hoffman (D-Georgetown) eats boogers

Posted in Economic at 8:39 pm by

From the diaries by Leon…

The headline you just read could get me thrown in jail for up to ninety days if the above-referenced booger-eater from Georgetown has his way.

HB 281 prohibits communication via the internet “which causes annoyance or alarm and serves no purpose of legitimate communication.”

And since I’m clearly unrepentent, my soon-to-follow second offense would land me in jail for up to a year.

In 2008, it should go without saying that we err on the side of liberty and thick skin on the internet.

Given that it costs municipalities in Kentucky up to $88.44 a day to put someone in our already-overcrowded jails, maybe we can call this the Thin Skinned Tax-Raising Ninny Act of 2008.

cross-posted on Bluegrass Policy Blog

Originaly from Source

07.09.08

John McCain: Natural Born Citizen?

Posted in Economic at 9:52 pm by

The Man from Panama

With the political comeback of John McCain in this race, there’s a question I’d like to throw out to the community that I think we need to be able to answer in the event McCain wins the nomination: is John McCain a natural-born citizen?

As you all know, that’s what the Constitution requires to be eligible for the Presidency. And knowing their cutthroat tactics, it’s a question the Clinton campaign would almost certainly raise through someone unaffiliated with their campaign…just as some raised questions about George Romney (born in Mexico), it just never got resolved before he dropped from his presidential race.

McCain has faced questions about this issue before. He was born August 29, 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone, to two U.S. citizens. It’s a common misunderstanding that the zone was a U.S. territory - in fact, the U.S. had lease rights, but not territorial rights. And according to some lawyers who work in this field, past citizens in the Canal Zone - again, born to U.S. citizens - have not been considered “natural born.”

Yet according to the Naturalization Law of 1790 that sought to define the term: “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.”

See also: Weedin v. Chin Bow 274 U.S. 657 (1927): “A child born outside the U.S. cannot claim U.S. citizenship by birth through a U.S. citizen parent who had never lived in the U.S. prior to the child’s birth.” So in other words, had McCain stayed in Panama after being born there to US citizens, he still would have been a citizen but any progeny he may have sired while there (if he didn’t come live in the US before then) would not have been citizens. But since his parents HAD lived here, he’s good to go.

The odd quirk here seems to be that one could argue the child of illegal immigrants, who came to America and then gave birth here, would have a better claim to a legal right to be president than John McCain. I still believe he ought to qualify fully to be president - he was on a U.S. Military Base for crying out loud - but we ought to have our legal ducks in a row on this point should he become the nominee.

Read the rest of this entry »

We still need your help

Posted in Economic at 9:00 pm by

Folks, fundraising has slowed down. I know you’ve done a lot. We certainly appreciate it. We have gotten some pledges in, but they are contingent on us getting $15,000.00 raised. We’ve got about $5,000.00 more to go before the pledges kick in.

We need your help. Obviously, as the week goes on, things slow down. That was expected. There’s been too much going on.

But, we still need help and we’ll get back to it on Monday.

Read the rest of this entry »

Supreme Court To Hear Another McCain-Feingold Case

Posted in Economic at 8:10 pm by

The Supreme Court today decided to hear the case of Davis v Federal Election Commission (No. 07-320 on the Court’s docket). The case focuses on the constitutionality of the so-called “millionaire’s amendment,” one of the more egregious examples of the pro-incumbent tilt in the statute (which makes no similar allowance for challengers to incumbents with huge war chests); the petitioner’s brief frames the issue as follows:

Read On…

Section 319 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 created the so-called “Millionaires Amendment.” The three-judge district court found that Congress enacted section 319 to achieve equity between congressional candidates utilizing personal funds for their campaigns and candidates relying mainly on contributed funds. Under the statute, when candidates for the United States House of Representatives exceed $350,000 in personal campaign expenditures their opponents may be entitled to receive: 1) contributions from donors at triple the statutory limit; 2) contributions from donors who have reached their statutory limit for aggregate campaign donations; and 3) coordinated expenditures from party committees in excess of the statutory limit. To effectuate application of section 319, the statute also imposes significant notification and disclosure obligations upon self-financed candidates. The questions presented are:

1. Whether the three-judge district court erred in finding
that Congresss attempt to equalize a potential imbalance in
resources between congressional candidates violates neither
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution nor the
Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

2. If equalizing a potential imbalance in resources of
congressional candidates is constitutional, whether the federal
statutory provision accomplishes the stated purpose.

SCOTUSBlog gives the background:

The millionaires amendment issue is raised by a self-financed candidate, Jack Davis, a defeated Democratic nominee for Congress from New Yorks 26th District. He contends that the amendment was beyond Congress power. Since campaign finance limits must be based upon an attempt to end corruption in politics, or at least to curb the appearance of corruption, the appeal argues, Congress cannot attempt to equalize political resources among candidates because one who uses his own money to pay for a campaign is not corrupting anyone or anything.

+++

One of the issues that the Supreme Court will confront when it takes up the case at a hearing is whether Davis had a right to sue that is, whether he had standing. The Federal Election Commission, in opposing his appeal, argued that he lacked any proof of injury because the candidate who ran against him in 2006 Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds did not take advantage of the amendment to raise more money or to coordinate his spending with his political party, the Republican Party.

The amendment is triggered when a self-financed candidate intends to spend more than $350,000 in personal funds on a campaign. The opponent then can gather contributions up to three times the usual limit on campaign contributions, may receive donations from individuals who have already reached the usual limit of their annual contributions, and may coordinate with their political party to contribute more than it otherwise could legally.

Given the unpopularity of BCRA with Republicans, this isn’t really the time when John McCain wants this issue back in the news, in particular the collision between his campaign finance bill and the view taken of that bill by conservative judges (then again, the actual decision in the case won’t come until long after the primaries are over). My guess just from a quick perusal is that the Court will probably end up throwing Davis’ challenge out on standing grounds. But the provision does nicely illustrate how malleable are Congress’ concerns about “corruption.”

Originaly from Source

07.08.08

More Democrats Come Out For Obama

Posted in Economic at 10:32 pm by

The latest is Governor Janet Napolitano of Arizona:

Napolitano is the most prominent Democrat in Arizona and her endorsement could be significant in a state now regarded as winnable by a Democratic presidential candidate after decades as a near-lock for Republicans. The state holds its primary on Feb. 5.

Napolitano, 50, was elected governor in 2002 and re-elected in 2006. She previously was U.S. attorney for Arizona during most of the Clinton administration and then served a four-year term as the elected state attorney general.

She is regarded as a possible candidate in 2010 for the U.S. Senate seat now held by Republican John McCain, though she has been mentioned as a possible candidate for vice president or for a Cabinet post in a Democratic administration.

A pretty significant get. Whatever momentum Hillary Clinton might have coming out of New Hampshire, it is clear that she still has a major fight on her hands.

Originaly from Source

07.07.08

Venezuela Is Facing A Mountain Of Problems And Crises . . .

Posted in Economic at 10:15 pm by

And so naturally, the Chavez government decides now is a really good time to go after Jews:

Venezuelan Jews, long uneasy with the Ch

Blogfight at the HuffPo Corral

Posted in Economic at 9:25 pm by

First (courtesy of Captain’s Quarters) we have Lawrence O’Donnell, religious bigot, who reports that if “John Edwards stays in the race, he might, in the end, become nothing other than the Southern white man who stood in the way of the black man.” He then goes on to judge former Senator Edwards not only by the color of his skin, but by the presence of his male genitalia: discussion of the content of his character is notable by its absence.

Then we have Jane Smiley, scaredy-cat , who makes the worst accusation about O’Donnell that she can think of: “I am fairly sure in my own mind that Karl Rove paid him to write that post*.” After babbling this, and gratuitously insulting various Republican candidates for President in what seemed mostly to be pure reflex, she then announced that she wrote a big check to John Edwards.

Then we have the comments, which… tell you the truth, I didn’t bother. It’s HuffPo. I don’t double-check Stormfront forums either to make sure that they’re still vilely insane over there.

(pause)

Anyway, it’s too soon to tell whether the New Hampshire primary results were enough to send either the Obama or the Edwards campaigns off kilter, but I’ll tell you this: it’s certainly done it to their sycophants.

Moe

*Because Karl Rove isn’t really gone, of course, and he always hires people who are best known for screaming at John O’Neill. Yeah. O’Donnell’s so totally a Republican.

Originaly from Source

The Tears Were Fake, But the Rumors Were True

Posted in Economic at 8:35 pm by

Before the New Hampshire primary, when it looked like Hillary!™ Clinton was going down to a second consecutive humiliating defeat at the hands of Barack Obama; the rumors of her campaigns impending doom were thick. I speculated at the time that the rumors were a campaign rouse designed to rally Clintons supporters to save her candidacy.

And then the waterworks came.

I believed upon seeing the video that Clintons tears were crocodilian and I still do. When she won the primary unexpectedly, I, like many others, thought it confirmed that the rumors were just a well-played part of the low expectations game. But on second thought, I have become convinced that Clintons crying game is evidence that her campaign really was in turmoil, and that a big loss that night could have finished her off.

Read on

By pulling out the handkerchief, Clinton had to know that she was reaching for a gun with only one bullet. How could she possibly get that emotional again, even if it was genuine, without it hurting her? Either she would be labeled as unable to handle the pressures of the presidency, or her initial fakery would be seen for what it really was.

Furthermore, although she has had a history in the Democratic primary of accusing the old boys network of ganging up on her, she really must have wanted to save that crying jag for the general election. If its a one shot deal, best to use it when it can do the most good. The fact that the damsel in distress card came out early shows that Clintons campaign thought it was in big trouble. So, she went all in. And the rest is history.

Yes, I believe that we came tantalizingly close to a primary campaign without the Clintons. Some have commented that it would be in the eventual Republican nominees favor for Clinton and Obama to have a long, bloody primary battle. Such a spectacle would result in a weakened opponent for the general election. I am sympathetic to that school thought. But it is based on the belief that Obama, the beneficiary of an early Clinton collapse, is unbeatable by the Republican unless significantly weakened by the Democrat. I disagree.

I dont believe that Republicans should be afraid of running against the big bad Obama. The Senator from H.O.P.E.™ is making his campaign on a promise to deliver a different kind of politics. He is selling himself as an agent of change, unique among all of the politicians in the country. But what are his positions? He wants to raise taxes, talk to Americas enemies, expand the role of the Federal government, nationalize healthcare, and so on. In other words, hes just a liberal. Nothing more. That he is not generally recognized as such is a testimony to how little people actually know about him. But in the course of an election campaign, when he is contrasted against a lone Republican, especially a conservative Republican, they will find out.

Its easy to forget, since the primary campaign has been going on for close to a year, that there are still ten months to go until the presidential election. Obama will have to get through all that time without doing anything typical for a politician, and a Democratic one at that. He will have to make policy proposals that will be debated. He will have to react to events. He will have to vote. Every time he takes a position, issues a reaction, or votes in the Senate in the way a standard-issue liberal would, a little more of the bloom will come off the rose. Obama is a teenager in political terms. He thinks he has a fresh answer for everything. But he will find out right along with America that the new politics is not really new. Its just better packaged.

Clinton is the seven-headed hydra of presidential politics. If she can be slain in the Democratic primary, so be it. Bring on the Obama. Republicans should not be afraid.

Originaly from Source

07.06.08

Tata unveils the world’s cheapest car

Posted in Economic at 10:06 pm by

Tata unveils the world’s cheapest car

By Rina Chandran


NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India’s Tata Motors unveiled the world’s cheapest new car on Thursday, bringing car ownership closer for millions of poorer consumers in emerging markets but raising environmental concerns.

The 4-seater Nano, with an engine around 625cc, will have a dealer price of 100,000 rupees ($2,500), about half the cost of the cheapest car on today’s market, a 25-year old model from Maruti Suzuki, Tata’s great rival.

The Nano will go on sale later this year, the company said.

“Let me assure you and our critics the car we have designed will meet all safety norms and all foreign environmental criteria,” Chairman Ratan Tata said as he proudly unveiled what had been dubbed the “People’s Car” at the Auto Expo in New Delhi.

“In a way it is a high point for me. There is a sense of achievement and vindication,” he told reporters later.

The compact but curvy Nano stands in sharp contrast to the luxury Jaguar and Land Rover brands that Tata is negotiating to acquire from Ford Motor Co.

Hundreds of people crowded into the pavilion to see the long-awaited launch, standing on chairs to get the best view as Tata introduced and then drove the car onto the stage in a media circus more worthy of a pop concert or an Oscar ceremony.

Tata planned the car years ago as a safer and more affordable alternative for the millions who often ferry families of four, plus baggage, on motorbikes and scooters.

“It’s a dream come true,” Ashok Singh, a constable with the Delhi Police, said at the show. “I look forward to buying that car. My wife will be really happy.”

New cars are preferable to buyers in India, where the absence of an organised market for second-hand cars makes buying them a tedious and sometimes risky process.

Environmentalists are not so enthusiastic. They worry millions of the cheap cars will flood on to India’s roads, many of which are already heavily congested, sending emissions levels sky high in Asia’s third-biggest economy.

WAFER-THIN MARGINS

The car arrives at a time when oil has topped $100 a barrel, the move to fuel-efficient “green” cars is gaining momentum, and a wave of nostalgia has spurred sales of brands such as BMW’s Mini and the Fiat 500 Cinquecento.

The car has a rear-mounted gasoline engine and travels 20km per litre, with a basic model and two deluxe variants and plans for diesel versions.

“The proof of the pudding will be in driving it, but visually it looks pretty good,” said London-based auto analyst Ashvin Chotai, who was at Thursday’s unveiling. “The pricing was a bit of a surprise. I thought it would be a bit higher.”

Tata said costs were kept low by cutting the “size of the package”, which brought about a reduction in material. Innovative processes and systems, for which the firm has filed 33 patents, also helped.

Chotai believed deluxe variants, which will include features such as air-conditioning, would account for bulk of the sales. Tata expects the car to sell well in semi-urban and rural areas as well as India’s cities.

“Margins are still going to be very, very thin,” he said.

Shares in Tata Motors, which has a market worth of $7.5 billion, fell 2.8 percent to 749 rupees, after having risen more than 4 percent, in a Mumbai market that ended 1.4 percent lower.

Tata Motors’ stock trades at nearly 17 times forecast earnings, compared to 20.2 times for top utility vehicle maker Mahindra & Mahindra, whose shares fell 0.6 percent to 803.15 rupees on Thursday.

For additional stories, pictures and video from the Auto Expo go to Special | Reuters

Tata has said it will initially produce about 250,000 Nanos and expects eventual annual demand of 1 million units.

Global car makers — initially sceptical that Tata could produce such a low-cost car — are now scurrying to make their own versions to meet the needs of cost-conscious consumers in emerging economies such as China, India and Russia.

Ford this week said it would build a small car in India within two years, and the alliance of Nissan Motor and Renault, which has made a big success of its no-frills Logan sedan, plans a $3,000 car with Bajaj Auto.

Volkswagen, Toyota, Honda Motor and Fiat have also said they are looking at small cars for emerging markets where strong economic growth has made car ownership a reality for millions.

Tata said it would focus on the home market for 2-3 years before considering exporting the Nano to countries in Africa, Latin America and Southeast Asia.

With just 8 people in 1,000 owning a car in India, there is huge potential to upgrade bike and scooter owners, who bought about 7 million two-wheelers in 2006/07.

“Our challenge is just beginning,” Tata said. “We have to deliver now on what we’ve promised today.”

Originaly from Source

« Previous entries