Sure, it's self-indulgent and reflective...but it's my blog

Actually, I think being an adult is learning not to be
ashamed of what you want. And I think for a lot of us, it's hard to
admit even to ourselves what it is that we want.
Much less to have other people see it.
– Ira Glass

Amen.

I’ve often heard people say about law school or any other defining experience in your life…that you should write a letter to yourself before you begin the experience and keep it so that you can read it when you get out and remember or rediscover the dreams you had.

Well today I was in my gmail account and I saw this label that I didn’t recognize called “Emails to Remember,” so I decided to click on it and see wtf it was, and I found this email exchange I had with one of my development professors at Duke that I had written from India in February of 2005.

Reading it over again, I realize that I was still very young and that I was just treading on the surface of deeper pool of understanding (as I still am)…but I was just so engaged. I was pushing so hard for understanding that really meant something to me. This is all I thought about all the time. I was passionate and so invested about what I was passionate about.

Isn’t that what anyone wants? Is it youth? Or is it just not admitting to myself what it is I want, and that desire no longer being poverty developmental policy? And if so, then what is it that I want? (besides another round of mama wrasslin with…you guessed it.)

Anyhow, me…circa 2005. It's just amazing how far I've drifted in some ways, and coming to a realization about whether or not being back in that space is a dream of mine anymore....I think it is...


Anirudh,

After thinking about it…I'm not entirely clear on what you mean by
"Poverty as an absolute state." I've been thinking about what that
means…but I wonder if that's how I see it…If you could clear that up a
little I might be able to respond better. I'll try as best I can
below, but I might be off the mark.

As for the causal arrows on illness and poverty…I do agree with you
that it goes both ways. The main distinction I was trying to make I
think, was that HIV/AIDS may not be independent as an issue of health
and poverty. Maybe it's just the way we frame the issue as the Battle
against HIV/AIDS, and the War on Poverty and such… One of the papers
that I remembered most clearly from your class…(well not the paper
itself, but the general idea) is the study you did about WHY many
people in India were in "poverty." And an overwhelming reason was
because a single illness would create problems that often drove people
into debt and difficulty. So definitely recognize that factor, but it
still doesn't answer the question of who gets sick…it tends more to
answer the question of "what happens to people when they get sick."

But I think it might also take some defining on what poverty means.
The more I think about it…Poverty to me doesn't seem like a status of
any sort, but the convergence of many factors on a person's life…from
education, to opportunity, to environment, to illness. In that way,
susceptibility to disease and the repercussions of disease are a part
and parcel of "Poverty." In my head, poverty seems to be
like…Murphy's law applied to life. One problem exists, but it
connects to another problem, which connects to another problem…so that
from a single issue like lack of education, an entire web of
compounding problems like debt, malnutrition, disease susceptibility,
lack of birth control, and on and on spread out from there. I think
when I wrote before I referred to poverty in a common understanding
way…of socioeconomic difficulty, of financial instability, and of
living on a razor's edge in terms of basic sustenance…but
realistically I think I tend to have a holistic perspective on it so
that poverty very much includes disease as a major factor. As for
"is everyone who is poor born into poverty and remain poor" I don't
think a statement like that is true…but I do tend to think that the
people who are born into disadvantage (whether it be social, economic,
or opportunity related) have a much higher chance of struggling with
poverty in the future. Am I misunderstanding where you're getting at?

As for my research…I think it's going very well in terms of my
awareness of the limitations of "research" and in putting me in
situations where I can more clearly see issues like health care, child
care, and poverty more clearly. In many ways I'm falling into the
general cliché of "The more you learn, the less you know." I learn a
lot from interviewing people, but I also learn that you can't simply
trust what people are telling you. I'm also seeing a lot more of the
problems like health care costs, nutrition, and lack of education
causing serious problems for families, and learning a lot about what
is causing so much difficulty for so many people…but I'm increasingly
I find that the more people you try to include in any given solution,
the more difficult it is to pull off. Basically, I'm shying more and
more away from macro-level policy and just trying to figure out what
it would take to get one family on its feet. I do now believe that
most change in people's lives has to start in themselves…and that the
most we can do is remove barriers. To give people a shove in a random
direction that we find appealing doesn't make sense unless we really
know what's going on. I also don't think removing barriers is the
hard part, I think the hard part is removing barriers without throwing
in 100 new barriers to someone else, or even to the people we're
trying to help.

With all the work I'm doing with children in these orphanages, I'm
getting a little anxious about what I'm really going to find out at
the end of it all. I guess I always kinda assumed that a solution
would be there SOMEWHERE. That there WOULD be a model, or there
WOULD be some sort of revelation that could make things the way they
should be. Not necessarily that I would be the one to figure it out, but
that it existed somewhere. But the more I study children, it doesn't
seem to be an issue of ideas, or of models, or of institutions…it
comes down to nurturing the child, caring for them, loving them, and
providing them with security and stability. If that's actually true,
all you can do is hope that there are people out there willing to
devote their love to someone else's child. And if children need
individualized, human solutions to their problems…wouldn't that mean
that all people need individualized, human solutions as well?

I may have completely missed the boat on the questions you asked.
I've just been thinking about some of these issues and I think I just
rambled through them for a few paragraphs. I hope it makes some sense
and it gets at some of what you were asking for. Feel free to swipe
at and knock down anything I said…sometimes flowers spring up from the
rubble.

Weird.

I never really paid much attention to this fact, but did you realize Obama's mother's name is Stanley?

It's quite strange. Her name was Stanley Ann Dunham, because her father wanted a boy. There's an amazing profile of Obama's past from an older article that I just came across and it traced the life of his mother...

Stanley Ann was an only child, and in those days she dealt head-on with her uncommon first name. No sense trying to hide it, even though she hated it. "My name is Stanley," she would say. "My father wanted a boy, and that's that." Her mother softened it, calling her Stanny or Stanny Ann, but at school she was Stanley, straight up. "She owned the name," recalled Susan Botkin, one of her first pals on Mercer Island. "Only once or twice was she teased. She had a sharp tongue, a deep wit, and she could kill. We all called her Stanley."

Reading about his past is just so interesting. I mean...look at this picture. Look at that kid. Who would have ever thought...

Bye Bye Bill.

Bill Kristol has been ousted from the Times Editorial Page. Props to the NY Times for finally ousting that stupid tired hack. I declare right now, categorically, if you think Bill Kristol was a good columnist, never speak to me again. Anyone thinking person who has ever read more than one or two of his editorials can reach no other conclusions than 1) Bill Kristol is an Idiot, or 2) Bill Kristol is very very very bad at his job.

Today's column: What the hell is this nonsense? Forget what you believe - This is AWFUL atrocious op-ed material.

Since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, conservatives of various sorts, and conservatisms of various stripes, have generally been in the ascendancy. And a good thing, too! Conservatives have been right more often than not — and more often than liberals — about most of the important issues of the day: about Communism and jihadism, crime and welfare, education and the family. Conservative policies have on the whole worked — insofar as any set of policies can be said to “work” in the real world. Conservatives of the Reagan-Bush-Gingrich-Bush years have a fair amount to be proud of.

And then he follows up with this gibberish...

We don’t really know how Barack Obama will govern. What we have so far, mainly, is an Inaugural Address, and it suggests that he may have learned more from Reagan than he has sometimes let on. Obama’s speech was unabashedly pro-American and implicitly conservative.

Obama appealed to the authority of “our forebears,” “our founding documents,” even — political correctness alert! — “our founding fathers.” He emphasized that “we will not apologize for our way of life nor will we waver in its defense.” He spoke almost not at all about rights (he had one mention of “the rights of man,” paired with “the rule of law” in the context of a discussion of the Constitution). He called for “a new era of responsibility.”

I would attempt to argue with whatever device he's trying to use to call say that Obama is stealing conservative ideas...but it's just so stupid that I think it's more a disservice to him to repeat his own words than to hold them back. Here's an interesting article on why he was canned. Turns out that sucking horribly alone won't do it.

In either case, I am very curious to see who they get to fill his spot. As I have said previously, I have generally liked all of the conservatives who filled the Times pages...William Safire was a very intelligent and sharp thinker, and I think David Brooks might actually be my favorite of the whole bunch these days. I don't really want to get into it because I just got home from work and would rather watch TV, but if you have a spare moment...these two pieces (1 2) are particularly good.

Anyhow, Fuck Bill Kristol.

(This was an exceptionally lazy and thoughtless post. But it's still not as bad as a Kristol.)

I give money, you give me paint, yes?

The paintings I asked Jeff (of antagonizing RS fame) to do, based on Bjork songs, are complete! He called them, quite sensibly, Guðmundsdóttir Series (Bjork's last name). Each piece is oil on canvas 6x6" and I think one inch deep (like all of your ex-GFs must have been into). As you can tell, both from looking at them and because I am so excitedly posting them, they are excellent.

After several hours of carefully mulling, re-arranging, thinking and viewing...I finally managed to come up with the arrangement for the 9 little fuckers, now dubbed (in my head) as the "Guðmundsdóttir Vag" (Just kidding Jeff, just "Vag" will do.) Photos of the arrangement follow the individual shots.

For those of you who like Bjork, if you're still around somewhere on this blog, I have included the track title (and mix where relevant) above each piece.

Joga
Generous Palmstroke
Cocoon
Possibly Maybe (Lucy Mix from Telegram)
Unravel
So Broken ("Spanish" guitar version - Joga single)
Enjoy
Hyperballad (Brodsky Quartet - Telegram)
UnisonThe Vag.
The Vag Equivalent of Side Boob (Side Vag)

Oh Happy Day!

There are two things to celebrate today: the first is that George W. Bush is no longer President of the United States; the second is that Barack Obama is now the President of the United States. Words cannot express. I mean, just look at his NAME! Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, BARACK OBAMA. Dude, that's awesome.

I also want to post this 18 second clip of Sasha after Obama's speech (no sound needed) because if you can see this and not break out in a huge smile...then you are barely human. Thumb. Thumb. Walk off with purpose. So cute.

(If it didn't work for some reason, click here.)

Reflecting upon the Bush legacy, it is repeatedly trumpeted that he prevented another domestic terror attack. That is true, and for that I am grateful. I think it a marvelous feat to have prevented such a network from infiltrating our country and launching another round of carnage. I would only like to note that this was not a costless achievement – namely that the cost of preventing attacks on US soil is the toll of lives lost overseas. We've prevented violence here by baiting the hook and then feeding the demons in Iraq. Lives have not been saved – but multiplied and redistributed.

Now back to better thoughts: I thought the speech was a good one, not because it delivered any high flying eternal rhetoric (the absence of which, I thought was appropriate), but because it said the things I want my President to say. It recognized that the power of the market economy is beyond question, but that the economy and growth have a purpose in a just society – providing survival and dignity to its citizens. It explicitly reached out to the Muslim world and stood firmly against evil and destruction. It expressed the freedom of opportunity to pursue happiness as the defining goal of our politics, and the necessity of personal responsibility to achieve it. It made it abundantly and explicitly clear that Obama will be the President of all Americans, even non-believers. He mentioned science. SCIENCE! And most importantly, he sought to destroy the old paradigm of politics forged in the Cold War and social upheavals of the 1960's, which have dominated discourse for the last 50 years (and even appear in the comments on this blog), which I fervently hope have been destroyed for good. If you're wondering, by chance, where I got each of these conclusions from…most of them should be contained in my favorite excerpts from his speech below.

Another point I would like to make again is my irritation at all of the people lamenting Obama's "drift" from the left (e.g., the outrage from the GLBT movement at inviting Rick Warren's to give the convocation. etc.) Just to be clear, when someone declares that Washington must be changed, what do people think that means? A radical lefty revolution? What does a new less divisive bi-partisanship mean to you? Attempting to push the country to the 1960's left? Please. Go fuck yourself. Change is the attempt to kill the old political lines. Change and improvement is leaving aside ideology and governing with the best tools humanity has to offer. Humanity, evidence, science, rationality, autonomy, thought, hope, hard work, responsibility, empathy, accountability, new ideas, and humanity. What a sublime change it will be to again apply these values to governing humanity. Leave your petty squabbles at the door.

Now here are some of my favorite passages from today:

Opportunity and Accountability - Not the Ends, but the Means.
The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

So Radical!!!!!
We will restore science to its rightful place...

The End of Ideology: Reaganist Hostility to Government and the Markets
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

Much Better than Declaring "Evil" Countries
We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

The President of All Americans
We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers.

A Direct Engagement with the Muslim World
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

HOLY SHIT!

I know I've been lazy and posting things I've seen on YouTube or TV and stuff...but shit man, have you all seen the Corn Syrup commercials by the Corn Refiner's Association? damn. That's some funny stuff. Corn forever!

Edit: I continued to listen to Radio Lab, and YES YES YES it is SO good.

I love these two guys. Haha, especially the one in the middle. Hahahaha



This is pretty awesome too. HAH.

Big Stupid Grin.

Edit: I'm not actually sure WHAT Radiolab is about. But at least this episode's about science.

I just made another wonderful discovery, this time, another podcast called "Radiolab." This is something I've heard in passing on NPR at extremely random hours, but never really latched onto. This week, This American Life included a snippet from the show, followed by effusive praise from Ira Glass - an individual that I grant unconditional credibility and who now has my absolute fullest attention. So...I decided to add the Radiolab podcast and gave it a listen...and I have to say that I definitely like it.

As a start, it's a podcast about science, but from the perspective of geeks who continue to view the world with wonder and remain continually engaged with the universe and our place in it. It's really hard to explain, but is one of those things where you feel comforted because the speakers and thinkers are people who think and function in the same universe as you. In some sense, it's the comfort you get from Jon Stewart. When Jon Stewart comments on the news and speaks to his guests, I can't help but feel like he lives in the same universe as me. Evil people doing stupid things is evil and stupid. Up is up. Down is Down. The world is as the world appears to me. I also have the same reaction to Ira Glass, who has the keenest ability to be fascinated with people and the minutiae of human behavior. I'm not drawn to them because I agree with them, but because they are mirrors that reflect the world I know. The reverse, of course, are George Bush, cable news anchors, advertising, marketing, religious people, and all such things that act and communicate an idea of the world I don't share.

In any case, this week's Radiolab opens with a story of a kid who feels the visceral creeped out feeling of first entering an awareness of the mathematical/metaphysical nature of the universe while plotting out a parabola...followed by a story of a man's love for the periodic table and the story of Mendeleev, pushing ultimately at the question of whether the elegance and function of the periodic table is a discovery of the nature of the universe, or merely the imposition of some sort of framework on the chaos. This may sound a little boring...but I was definitely not bored. For my sake, if you have an hour...or even 20 minutes...you may just want to give the episode a listen while doing the dishes or something. It may or may not be your thing. You can find it here. (And if you listen to NPR, it's NOTHING like Science Friday or anything like that.)

On a broader note, which I've sounded several times already...I have to say that I think podcasting has enriched my life immensely. As someone who has a huge appetite for knowledge in things that interest me, it allows me to pass the time pleasurably while constantly learning more and more everyday about all the things I want to know. If you have a commute, or you like to take walks, or you like books on tape, or you like NPR, or you simply like a little background noise in your life...take my advice and give this a shot. They are all free, they automatically update, and it only takes the click of a single button to subscribe off iTunes.

Currently, my list of daily/weekly podcasts is:
1) This American Life (weekly) - If you haven't heard this, if I have any credibility with you, give it a shot.
2) Marketplace (daily) - 30 minute NPR show about the economy and financial news
3) Planet Money (daily) - 15 minute podcast that was spun off from those incredible financial crisis This American Life episodes that explores the financial crisis from a layman's perspective and tries to teach about issues as they arise (e.g., wtf is the commercial paper market and who cares? What is money? Who prints money? How much US currency exists today and where is it? (900 billion and probably overseas)
4) The Splendid Table (weekly) - a "show about food for people who love to eat." Totally awesome if you like food.
5) Pardon the Interruption (daily) - the ESPN show, except just the audio.
6) Radiolab (weekly) - see above. I just downloaded 49 back episodes.

Now that I look at the list, this looks like a LOT of time I spend with my iPod and/or computer speakers...but given that my total walk/commute is about 40 to 60 minutes a day, and on average I spend 45 minutes in the gym each day, and the time I spend just taking care of stuff around the house...I actually still run out of stuff to listen to daily.

Good Reads - Sorta: Yet Another Cop Out from Original Thoughts.

I read this article today, which compiles the top 25 ridiculous Bushisms from the past 8 years. It's a little amazing. And I found myself laughing out loud in short bursts in the office (while wearing a douchey tie this time. Oh yeah...) My next post is likely to be an angry rant at yet another emergent moron movement, the anti-vaccinators, so enjoy this while you can.

Cheers to the END! I'll post the whole slate article, because it sums it all up pretty well.

* * *

I started gathering Bush's verbal slip-ups while covering his first presidential campaign. From the first one we published in Slate in October 1999—"The important question is, how many hands have I shaked?"—adding to the collection has been my main pleasure, perhaps my only pleasure, in watching the man.

Since then, I've collected—with help from Slate readers—more than 500 Bushisms. What follows is a list of my 25 favorites. There were many to choose from, but in my opinion, the greatest Bushism of all was delivered on Aug. 5, 2004, when the president declared: "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

People often assume that because I've spent the past nine years collecting Bushisms, I must despise George W. Bush. To the contrary, Bushisms fill me with affection for the man—and not just because of the income stream they've generated. I find the Bush who flails with words, unlike the Bush who flails with policy, to be an endearing character. Instead of a villain, he makes himself into an irresistible buffoon, like Mrs. Malaprop, Archie Bunker, or Homer Simpson. Bush treats words the way he treated recalcitrant European leaders: When they won't do what he wants them to, he tries to bully them into submission. Through his willful, improvisational, and incompetent use of language, he tempers (very slightly) his willful, improvisational, and incompetent use of government. You can't, in the end, despise someone who regrets that, because of the rising cost of malpractice insurance, "[t]oo many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across the country."

It helps his case that Bush, like Yogi Berra, is in on the joke. This was clear from the first White House correspondents' dinner, in March 2001, when the new president read from the first collection of Bushisms, which he described as like Mao's "little red book," only not in Chinese. "Now ladies and gentlemen," he said, "you have to admit that in my sentences I go where no man has gone before." Of course, he bumbled his speech, claiming that he'd invented the term misunderstanding. He meant to say "misunderestimated."

Being able to laugh at yourself is a rare quality in a leader. It's one thing George W. Bush can do that Bill Clinton couldn't. Unfortunately, as we bid farewell to Bushisms, we must conclude that the joke was mainly on us.

1. "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."—Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

2. "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family."—Greater Nashua, N.H., Chamber of Commerce, Jan. 27, 2000

3. "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"—Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000

4. "Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across the country."—Poplar Bluff, Mo., Sept. 6, 2004

5. "Neither in French nor in English nor in Mexican."—declining to answer reporters' questions at the Summit of the Americas, Quebec City, Canada, April 21, 2001

6. "You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.''—Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001

7. "I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense."—Washington, D.C., April 18, 2006

8. "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."—Greece, N.Y., May 24, 2005

9. "I've heard he's been called Bush's poodle. He's bigger than that."—discussing former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, as quoted by the Sun newspaper, June 27, 2007

10. "And so, General, I want to thank you for your service. And I appreciate the fact that you really snatched defeat out of the jaws of those who are trying to defeat us in Iraq."—meeting with Army Gen. Ray Odierno, Washington, D.C., March 3, 2008

11. "We ought to make the pie higher."—South Carolina Republican debate, Feb. 15, 2000

12. "There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, fool me once, shame on—shame on you. Fool me—you can't get fooled again."—Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

13. "And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I'm sorry it's the case, and I'll work hard to try to elevate it."—speaking on National Public Radio, Jan. 29, 2007

14. "We'll let our friends be the peacekeepers and the great country called America will be the pacemakers."—Houston, Sept. 6, 2000

15. "It's important for us to explain to our nation that life is important. It's not only life of babies, but it's life of children living in, you know, the dark dungeons of the Internet."—Arlington Heights, Ill., Oct. 24, 2000

16. "One of the great things about books is sometimes there are some fantastic pictures."—U.S. News & World Report, Jan. 3, 2000

17. "People say, 'How can I help on this war against terror? How can I fight evil?' You can do so by mentoring a child; by going into a shut-in's house and say I love you."—Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2002

18. "Well, I think if you say you're going to do something and don't do it, that's trustworthiness."—CNN online chat, Aug. 30, 2000

19. "I'm looking forward to a good night's sleep on the soil of a friend."—on the prospect of visiting Denmark, Washington, D.C., June 29, 2005

20. "I think it's really important for this great state of baseball to reach out to people of all walks of life to make sure that the sport is inclusive. The best way to do it is to convince little kids how to—the beauty of playing baseball."—Washington, D.C., Feb. 13, 2006

21. "Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."—LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000

22. "You know, when I campaigned here in 2000, I said, I want to be a war president. No president wants to be a war president, but I am one."—Des Moines, Iowa, Oct. 26, 2006

23. "There's a huge trust. I see it all the time when people come up to me and say, 'I don't want you to let me down again.' "—Boston, Oct. 3, 2000

24. "They misunderestimated me."—Bentonville, Ark., Nov. 6, 2000

25. "I'll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office."—Washington, D.C., May 12, 2008

Jacob Weisberg is chairman and editor-in-chief of the Slate Group and author of The Bush Tragedy.

Top That.

I just felt like posting this today. If you haven't seen it already, there is absolutely, positively, no excuse for not watching it.



Impossible.

AGH!

Let's start here: I now love Elizabeth Banks (of Seth and Miri Make a Porno fame) for openly discussing douchebags on network television and leading me to an awesome webpage called hotchickswithdouchebags.
hehe...I just learned an awesome new adjective and noun: uberscrote.



So I went to this bar last night to see a friend who came in from out of town and put my coat on top of a bench in a pile of coats in the middle of the room. I stepped out for 5 minutes, came back, and discovered that my coat was missing. Inside my (favorite and irreplaceable) coat? My phone and my keys. What THE FUCK. I had to ask my out of town guest to stay with a friend in brooklyn and I had to crash at my friend's house in the Upper West Side for 3 hours before dragging my ass home.

Other than that, my New Year's weekend was pretty frickin' awesome. 7 folks from SC, SF, Chi-town, and NJ traveled up here and we made a run at the city. We had a smashingly good dinner at this tapas joint called Alta and lounged over sangria until we made our way over to this club called Pressure, where we quickly raided the open bar and built ourselves a stash of about 15 extra drinks in the corner. Quickly and ferociously, we derided the legions of Steves (who all dressed as if they were going to the office) and Stephs as we lapped our way through the open bar until the ball dropped. (...uh, then we got kicked out and went home.) Then, inexplicably, we lost one of our own. Whipping out the cell, I sent the text: "Hey, where the hell are you?" "Coyote Ugly."

We then got drunk at Coyote Ugly.

On Thursday, I woke up at 4 pm and feeling like I was going to die...we sat six deep in my living room trying desperately not to die, watching Planet Earth. After we managed to get ourselves right, we wandered uptown towards Rockefeller Center to see the big tree, then over to Times Square to witness the giant clusterfuck that is Times Square, marveled at the insanity of any person who waited outside for 9 hours the night before to watch the ball drop without alcohol, and then wandered over to St. Marks to eat a totally shit-tastic dinner at a shit-tastic place with food and serve that tasted like...poo. Then we drank ourselves to sleep at home at 4am.

Friday, we painfully dragged ourselves up around noon and tried to get over to Ippudo Ramen (best ever ramen best ever ramen best ever ramen), which we found was closed (FUCKERS)...but managed to snag ourselves instant seating, pizza, and beers at Otto, one of Mario Batali's lower-end restaurants. We followed up with a lazy walk around the West Village, stopping off for some beers at the Slaughtered Lamb, and then trekked back across to Soho where Nik managed to recession-rob some stores out of tons of merchandise. Then, we made it back to my place where we sat dazed, exhausted, and completely beat and eating Veniero's Cheesecake...that is...until we decided to put on some good ol' top-40 pop through (my super awesome) loud speakers, and what began with Rihanna's Don't Stop the Music became a shit show of all of the best/worst rap and hip hop ever...after which point we got ourselves all energized-likes and the girls decided that some dancing was in store. So we took a short walk down to Spitzer's Corner on the Lower East Side, managed to grab a perfect table in what was otherwise a total madhouse, and managed to grab yet another great meal, followed by a trip to a random swank lounge/club called Ella...which is velvet rope, dressy, and annoying about guy/girl ratios, but we managed to get into purely on A's sweet talking ability. Then we basically danced and drank for a couple more hours then stumbled home. After getting home, apparently went back to Coyote Ugly while I did my best Samwell impression while blaring What What (In The Butt).

Then we got up, chain smoked, drank coffee, ate croissants, packed, and sent most of 'em packing...after which point I sat on the couch watching The Wire while Mike wandered off to Magnolias. Then, of course, I went out drinking again with some old and new friends in brooklyn until I ended up in Chelsea at the DOUCHEBAG SPOT WHERE MY SHIT GOT STOLEN.

ok...enough mindless narrative for one day. I suppose I just wanted to keep a diary of the weekend, because it was fun.

Deep Inner Turmoil.

It's stories like this that bring up the most fundamental conflicts in my politics.

1) On one hand, I abhor our lax gun control laws and find the path of the NRA and U.S. gun rights movements to be amongst the stupidest campaigns ever waged.

2) On the other hand, I would like to be able to shoot people in the arm if they won't stop talking during a movie. Especially a Brad Pitt film.

BEST DEFECTIVE PRODUCT EVER!!!!!!!!!!!

NEWS from CPSC

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Office of Information and Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20207

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 23, 2008 Release #09-073

Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 425-5627 CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772 CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908

Hallmark Recalls Jumbo Snow Globes Due to Fire Hazard

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

Name of Product: Jumbo Snowman Snow Globes

Units: 7,000

Importer: Hallmark Cards Inc., of Kansas City, Mo.

Hazard: When exposed to sunlight, the snow globes can act as a magnifying glass and ignite nearby combustible materials, posing a fire hazard.

Incidents/Injuries: Hallmark has received two reports of the snow globes igniting nearby materials. No injuries have been reported.

Description: This recall involves a Hallmark Jumbo Snow Globe in the shape of a snowman with model number 1XAG5093 and UPC code 795902066666. The snow globe measures 11 by 12 by 17 inches. The model number and the UPC code can be found on the back of the hangtag.

Sold at: Hallmark Gold Crown stores nationwide from October 2008 through November 2008 for about $100.

Manufactured in: China

Solicitation Again!

Last time I solicited your books...and despite my fierce promise to read them all by the end of the summer, I wasn't able to keep up with my convictions because of the need to study for the bar. (How typical to be derailed from meaning by the Career of Law and then complain about it.) That being said, I still have the list of remaining books:

Down and Out in Paris and London – H.
Chinese Lessons - A.B.
Dhalgren - Jeff?
Some indecent book - mh.

Am I missing any?

In any case, I am coming back for another solicitation....this time for music. Similar rules to prevent overload and to ensure you give thought rather than volume...because it's impossible to deal with 30 new artists that are "sooo good." (M: I still have 94 cds of yours I haven't gotten to yet, though thanks much for the Ingrid!)

The rules:

1) Suggest one artist and/or album.
2) Suggest one.
3) Suggest one. If you suggest more, I'm ignoring you.
4) If you suggest something I already have, you get another go.
5) If you have it on non-DRM mp3, please send it to me.

Oh, and if you're one of the people out there who I am aware may read the blog but has never commented and for some reason thinks they shouldn't comment...just comment dammit. For example, KG or CFM.

Recovered!

I think I've recovered! I'm still a little sore, but I think everything else is in order. Now I'm debating with myself over whether I should crack a beer as I watch a game of football in HD.

...tough. On a side note, I think I've actually lost weight from not drinking any beer in the last 3 days...which, since it is the weekend, could add up to a total of, what, 15 to 20 beers? (That or I lost weight from having only consumed 1000 calories since Thursday). I've basically spent all of today doing exactly what I did the past two sick days...watching TV from the couch. However, I was able to sit up and do some cleaning too rather than getting too cold and woozy to be able to sit up straight.

In other news, I watched Hellboy 2: The Golden Army today. I actually really enjoyed the last Hellboy movie, which I had absolutely zero interest in seeing (but bought because I was living by myself in India and needed something to watch while washing my clothes by hand in my bathroom.) Although the movie is not without random flaws, I thought the movie was pretty amazing. It's sorta like mashing together Pan's Labyrinth, The Matrix, and Men in Black (without the Barry Sonnenfeld) into this gigantic, swirling ball of trippy pandelerium. I mean, for God's Sakes....Hellboy fights a Forest God ("An Elemental") under the Brooklyn Bridge - that's entertainment.

Ok...I'm going to recover with Hookah and Alcohol.

Food Poisoning Upsides.

So food poisoning has its upsides...

Although I should be sitting at my desk doing some reading on a new bank regulatory law involving tax deductions and calculation of goodwill for the purposes of tier 1 capital, the truth is that my head is still very woozy and my lower back hurts like hell for some reason. The back pain began with the food poisoning and seems to be my litmus test for how quickly I'm recovering...I suppose it's just a continuation of my body aches. Long story short, I can't sit at my desk and it doesn't seem right to try and work when I should just be resting up.

Instead, I've been resting in a complete daze of media. I woke up and laid in bed listening to an episode or two of This American Life in bed while trying to assess how good or bad I felt. (I felt good lying in bed. I felt sick getting up.)

I managed to trudge over to the couch and turned on the television. So far I've re-watched Talladega Nights, I've watched Annie Hall, and I've also watched Pan's Labyrinth...these in addition to polishing off the first season of The Wire, getting through the first half of Season 11 of South Park, and watching Persepolis last night. Since it's not worth getting into, I'm just gonna say that every thing I watched was totally awesome, except Pan's Labyrinth, which was totally awesome but far more intense than I was ready for. I have semi avoided that movie because I knew it was the type of movie that had the ability to drain you...and boy...it sure did. Then again, it's not like The Wire and Persepolis were lightweights.

I also started reading "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius" and though I'm only like a quarter of the way through, I still don't really like it. Does anyone have any opinions on this particular book? I know we all have opinions about Eggers and whatnot, but just this book...anyone? I could just as easily put it down and leave it for good, but I'm curious as to why he is as well-received as he is.

That's all...back to food poisoning. Ugh.

AH Goddammit!

Food poisoning fucking blows.

I don't know where it came from, but I think I got food poisoning from my firm's holiday party. If I had to guess, it was that cold meatball I ate right before I left. Miserable. Joint pain, my body aches, my skin hurts, I'm freezing and hot and chilled like a motherfucker, my stomach is queasy, I've been in and out of the bathroom for various reasons at least 40 times (25 of which were between 3:00 and 4:00 am.) And if I'm not mistaken, I must have vomited up so much and dug so deeply that I must have cleared my spleen and liver by the time I finished.

And, as it turns out, throwing up HURTS man! I couldn't even keep water down for more than 10 minutes as I felt my lips and skin drying up from the inside.

URGH.

At least I ordered 7 gallons of gatorade from the local delivery grocery place.

Weekend Wrap-up.

There's nothing all that interesting here...just a few notes:

First, I had the pleasure of seeing Frost/Nixon. It was excellent. And jesus christ, that Frank Langella is one hell of an actor. I suggest you take the time to see it, not because it carries any deep lessons, but just because I think it's a good movie worth seeing. But probably not on the big screen...instead, you should go see

THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL! NUMBER ONE IN THE BOX OFFICE BITCHES!!! For the record, in case you've forgotten or in case you are new, I will consistently and earnestly defend Keanu Reeves' honor with ferocity and admantine resolve. I am keenly aware of his shortcomings and I make no claim on his talents. But damn, I support Keanu Reeves. Reviews for this movie have made me laugh out loud everytime I see them. ALL of the reviews are all similar (and funny). Here are some examples of the idea conveyed in every review you will read:

• The best part of this movie is Keanu Reeves. He plays an alien who doesn’t talk much and shows no emotion. I really think he has found his perfect role.
• I even liked Keanu Reeves, who has often been unfairly accused of robotic acting. Intentionally or not, his performance here subtly tweaks those accusations.
• On the plus side, Reeves is relatively well cast as an affectless alien. One can only hope that in the future he will devote himself to playing androids, less-self-aware species of undead, stylish pieces of contemporary furniture, and other roles that do not require the exhibition of any recognizably human traits.

Heh.

In other news, I am very impressed with GWB's ability to dodge thrown shoes by Iraqis. I have to admit that I probably would have gotten a very fearful awkward face (like the one I get when pigeon dodging) and had a momentary panic the instant someone stood up in Iraq and started yelling and making sudden movements. I would have embarrassed the shit out of myself. Instead, Bush quite gracefully dodged the first shoe and wasn't all that bothered by the second. Furthermore, as soon as security came over, he brushed them off to the side. Now I hate that fucking man and everything he stands for and has done to this world...but I'm a little impressed. (Note: He completely undid the cool factor by his verbal response to the incident afterwards.)

Sampler Platter.

Once again, I am here with a healthy mix of chinese victuals...a little kung pao, a little general tso's, some financial crisis reading, some buddha's delight, some explanation of securitization, and maybe a quick concert review....followed by yet another great way to pass 15 minutes at work....followed by a pictorial explanation of why racism is proper.

1) The Kung Pao.

...Fuck Kung Pao chicken. It has peanuts and I can't eat peanuts. Fuck Kung Pao.

2) General Tso's.

...This makes up for my inability to eat Kung Pao. If General Tso met Kung Pao (445-398 B.C.E.), General Tso would whip his ass.

3) I read another great article on the financial crisis today, this time from the perspective of Chairman Bernanke. If you're unfamiliar with the players, Ben Bernanke is a smallish little jewish professor who was a lauded academic and economist who became the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. He was installed during one of the most exuberant economic times in history with the irrelevant background in studying the Great Depression, and is now at the helm of potentially one of the most destructive financial crises in the history of mankind. This one is in the recent issue of the New Yorker if you, for some reason, need credentials on whether it's good.

4) Buddha's Delight.

...who the fuck are you kidding? Vegetarian chinese food? Leave. And eat some leaves. (Maybe thick succulent ones if you're lucky."

5) Securitization.

I watched this little video during work today because I had nothing to do. If you have a fairly good grasp over the process of securitization, you won't need to see it. If you 1) don't know what securitization is, 2) don't care what securitization is, and/or 3) don't immediately understand how our financial system managed to vaporize itself...I suggest you take the 7 minutes to watch. It's definitely not academic. It's entirely made for lay peeplez and is interesting.

How credit cards become asset-backed bonds from Marketplace on Vimeo.

6) Bon Iver.

I went to the Bon Iver show tonight at Town Hall. Fantastic. Chills and warmth. 'Twas good. Likey.

7) Fascinating Fascinating: The story of Clive Wearing.

Sarah sent along this wonderful wonderful article about this dude named Clive Wearing. He contracted this cold sore virus that somehow decimated the part of his brain that allows people to remember, and thus has spent the last like...30 years without being able to remember anything for more than 18 seconds. When he wrote in a journal, his entry looked like this:

8:31 AM: Now I am really, completely awake.
9:06 AM: Now I am perfectly, overwhelmingly awake.
9:34 AM: Now I am superlatively, actually awake.

As existential and chilling a piece as you will read. But then again, it's just very interesting because it's just so...inconceivable. (Incidentally, he still plays music beautifully.)

...yeah yeah...it's the New Yorker.

8) [Shakes head]...Chinese People and their products.


IVIKE HAHAHA

Harry Potter and the GIANT FUNNEL. No shit.

Violence and the Media.

WARNING: This post contains several very violent images. I guarantee my thoughts aren't worth reading if you don't want to see the photos.

I don't know if it's just Indian media or all media except our own, but despite our overexposure and over coverage by the media, and all the proclamations about "violence in the media"...our outlets remain extraordinarily sensitive to depictions of violence. This is something I understand, since no one wants their deepest grief and loss displayed for the entire world to see and sensationalize. I remember seeing the Fallujah attacks on the American contractors (i.e., Blackwater) and wondering what it must feel like for the wives and children to see the photos of these men...the people they love the most (I tried to link them to avoid posting them, but it wasn't working, so I'm just posting them.)
(I still can't get over the smiling kid on the left side of that photo.)

I was living in Bangalore when the tsunami rolled through Sri Lanka and southeast India on December 26, 2004. I remember sitting at my computer continuously refreshing the NY Times and watching the death toll climb from 1,000 to 10,000 to 50,000 to 80,000 to 100,000 to 150,000 to 200,000...completely unable to comprehend what was happening less than 200 miles away. What made the experience so different was going into work each day and reading the Indian newspapers and seeing the photos they printed on the front page. I remember seeing the front page of The Hindu which had a half page picture of an enormous pit, maybe 20 or 30 feet deep with a mass of dozens and dozens limp, bloated bodies rising from the bottom to the top, and on top of the pile were 3 or 4 naked and dead babies. I just stared at it. I had never seen anything like it. Mass death. It wasn't a movie. Real people. People who had never imagined their lives would end and would someday look like this. Everytime you see a dead body, it makes a little bit of sense because...they must have somehow put themselves in these situations to die like this...right? nope.

I always wondered how our foreign policy would have to be conducted if the real photos from the front line came back to us. If we were forced to look at the dead face and mangled body of a 21-year old American boy, I think the wars would end pretty quickly (...although I also think we would also lose any wars we did fight.) We've had over 4,000 dead American soldiers since 2003 and probably close to six figures in dead Iraqis. How many of their dead faces would we have to see before we just had to stop? And how many more before the zealots are satisfied?

In any case, I'm still disgusted to my core over the Bombay attacks, which is what this is about. At the center of it all is the fact that I really really fucking hate stupid people. I don't mean unintelligent people or people who lack the capacity - I just mean STUPID fucking assholes. Racists. Bigots. Ideologues. Zealots. I hate stupid people to begin with, and I hate it even more when they have power and they exercise it by destroying life. And die believing that their version of stupidity was right. Stupid hicks who think they understand who their enemies are. 20 year olds. Kids. These are the deluded school shooters. These are the Cho-Seung Huis who are so lost and so fucking stupid that they think they understand something. Ugh. Someone give me a cogent argument for the use of brutal violence against the violent so that I can go face-punching and nut stomping in Waziristan.

If you're wondering what any of this has to do with anything and are curious at how or why I just rambled on about nothing for the past page, the answer is that I went to a few Indian media outlets (Times of India, NDTV) and picked up some pics from the sites. I wanted to post them both because I always find my perspective on these events sharpened and intensified by seeing pieces of what actually transpired and because I'm so fucking sick of these people that I would like to foster tiny little well-spring of hatred against radical religion, and radical islamism in particular.

So here are some pictures of the victims and the scenes of the attacks.

This is Moron #1. (terrorist/scumbag)

This is Moron #2. I hope it hurt and that they dragged you naked through the streets after this.

Morons #3-9.

I don't think I'll ever understand people...

So whenever I read the NY Times, I invariably wander over to the right lower side of the webpage and look at the "most-emailed" articles. I usually am able to find 2 or 3 interesting pieces to read in there and the bigger more meaningful pieces often end up there pretty quickly. I also get to find some articles that seem totally stupid and boring to me, but click on them to figure out why they are number on the list. (irrelevant, but I love stories like this about how all these haughty taughty luxury stores are *gasp* discounting luxury goods. *Jerk off gesture.*) (Here's another article, but it's more along the line about how millionaires are still buying $191,000 dollar purses because they're still millionaires.)

What I never look at though, are the other two tabs in that section: Most Blogged and Most Searched. I mean, I've clicked on them, but I've never really paid any attention because they don't really seem to offer much. But today, because work was a little slow today (I can't tell if that's terrifying or ok…) I looked at it for a little longer, and then furrowed my brow. Here's the list for the last 24 hours, and a few choice selections.

1. obama

2. november 5, 2008

3. mumbai

4. china

5. cancer

6. education

7. india

8. december 2, 2008

9. bush

10. health

11. modern love

13. canada

23. women

35. sex

36. recession

45. economic crisis

50. pakistan

Now I'm not going to go through these one by one, but I think that taking a few minutes to just think about parts of this list will leave you slightly baffled. Of course the high ranking of Mumbai makes sense, because a very specific event just took place. But searching for "Obama" doesn't make sense, mostly because every other article involves Obama. What is going through your head when you type Obama into the NYTimes search? What story are you looking for?

#5 cancer is sad. Because if I or someone I knew got cancer, it's likely I would type it into a NYTimes search just to see what I could find either to boost my spirits or find hope.

#6 education is a little baffling to me. Education is important. So is oxygen. Why is it #6 on the search frequency? I think Obama's choice for education secretary is going to be an interesting and highly covered issue, but if that's the case, where the hell is "commerce" or "state" or "homeland security"?

#13 Canada. Heh.

#23. Women. #35. Sex. #Wtf. This is the NYTimes, what are you doing?

And which random topics do NYTimes readers search for less, but with at least SOME interest?
Numbers 36, 45, and 50. Recession, Economic Crisis, Pakistan.

Glass.

There is broken glass all over my apartment. Two glasses were broken. One of them was thrown at full force at my wall. The other fell off my desk while I told her "Get the fuck out of my apartment and don't ever come back." There is a hole in my wall.

From one end of my apartment, which is at least 35-50 feet long, I hurled a glass in an uncontrollable rage at the wall. The glass shattered so completely, so fully that every inch of my apartment is covered in glass. I found glass in my bathroom, in my bedroom, on my pillow and in the farthest untouched corner of my bedroom. Every place I thought the glass could not have made it to holds pieces of glass. There is glass on top of my refrigerator, on top of the door frame, in my bathtub, in the space between my fridge and the counter, in pots and pans hanging over my stove, on the toilet, and even inside of clothes hanging in my closet. The glass is in shards and in chunks and in the finest powder that cannot be carried by a broom. I will be breathing, eating, and drinking broken glass. I will be discovering new pieces of the broken glass for the rest of the days I will live in this apartment. It is 1:45 a.m. on Thursday evening and I am done.

Clarification and Good Read.

Just to be clear, since two people have already expressed reservations about my last post: I think Saxby Chambliss is a piece of shit. I wish that some other, almost any other, Republican had kept their seat...maybe even Ted Stevens instead of Chambliss because he represents almost everything that is wrong about American politics. Hence, the "Fuck that Guy."

Nevertheless, the reason I was "ok" with his victory is because I believe a filibuster-proof locked down Legislative, Executive, and possibly Judiciary is a bad thing for the party. We're in for a world of disasters and chaos far beyond the control of any government, and I don't believe the electorate is discerning and educated enough to realize what disasters are government created and what disasters are continuing fallout from the last 8 to 10 years. All indications suggest that Obama is doing almost everything right, and I don't think good governance and good policy should be punished by circumstance...and I think a filibuster-proof Democratic majority can only hurt the long-term prospects for America.

There.

Moving on...

Today's "American Banker" contained a very interesting piece about the Community Reinvestment Act and its role in the current crisis. To provide a little background, it has become Republican stuff of legend that the Community Reinvestment Act is the source of the current crisis. To put a finer point on it, Republicans blame Jimmy Carter for what's happening (yeah, of course they are...jesus). The gist of the argument is that the CRA was intended to provide government support and funding for those who couldn't really afford houses. Thus, the story says too many people bought houses they couldn't afford, a housing bubble was created, and boom - 2008 Financial Crisis.

Personally, I believe that the view is bullshit. Yes, there is some truth to an inflated housing market. No, the CRA is not irrelevant to the housing market. But NO, the CRA explanation for the current crisis is BULLSHIT. The article below explains how all of the front-line regulators, republicans and democrats, agree that it is bullshit. And it is a good article.

In Election's Aftermath, CRA Stays a Flash Point

American Banker | Thursday, December 4, 2008

WASHINGTON — The debate on whether the Community Reinvestment Act caused the subprime crisis has outlasted election season and could affect future regulatory restructuring.

Though there is scant evidence and growing dissent from regulators, Republican lawmakers appear poised to make CRA a fall guy for the financial meltdown, arguing that it spurred banks to make poor loans that eventually led to delinquencies and foreclosures. Some said they plan to tackle the issue next year as Congress works to revamp the broader regulatory structure.

"The overwhelming support" in the Republican party "is for changing the CRA," Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview. "It's high on the agenda as far as trying to fix the entire collection of regulations that exacerbated the housing bubble."

Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Tex., also argues that the financial services panel should "explore the role the CRA played in exacerbating the subprime meltdown and figure out how much bad lending was done in order to fulfill CRA goals," a spokesman said.

Regulators, even Republican ones, are beginning to push back.

Both Federal Reserve Board Governor Randall Kroszner and Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan have recently expressed strong support for the CRA.

In an interview Wednesday, Mr. Dugan said he felt obliged to speak up against criticism of CRA. Data does not support the idea that bankers made poor loans as a result of such requirements, he said.

"There has been criticism recently suggesting that the CRA caused the subprime crisis, and we just felt it was important to set the record straight because that's not what we saw," he said.

After a speech on the subject last month, Mr. Dugan was hailed by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank in a speech on the House floor. "This firm statement by President Bush's appointee with prime responsibility for the safety and soundness of the banking system should help us end the inaccurate, politically motivated misrepresentation of the role that CRA has played," he said.

Critics of the CRA have argued that the law, passed in 1977 to combat discrimination by banks against poor and minority communities, forces banks to lend to borrowers who are poor credit risks. They say CRA regulations have caused lenders to lower their underwriting standards.

"It caused standards for mortgages to deteriorate very substantially because it forced banks to find new ways to offer mortgages to people who couldn't meet the normal standards," said Peter Wallison, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a member of the Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee. "Then those lower standards spread to the rest of the mortgage markets, so people who could have qualified for prime loans were able to get interest-only or negative amortization loans, and all of those things became more or less the standard for mortgage loans."

Mr. Wallison argued that the CRA should be scrapped.

But others said the focus on CRA is a red herring. They said it is a talking point for Republicans who want to distract attention from a growing consensus that more regulation is needed.

"I think that the deregulatory conservatives have a political motivation in trying to deflect attention from the underlying causes of the subprime and financial crisis to anything they can find, including the CRA," said Michael Barr, a law professor at the University of Michigan who has testified to Congress on the CRA's reputed role in the subprime crisis. "The facts just don't support the claim. The overwhelming bulk of subprime lending was made by institutions not covered in the CRA."

Mr. Kroszner on Wednesday told an audience attending a Fed conference on poverty policy that the CRA had not caused lenders to make a significant number of bad loans. He reviewed studies by the Fed showing that CRA lending was "nearly as profitable and performed similarly to other types of lending done by CRA-covered institutions." The Fed's most recent mortgage study showed that 60% of high-priced loans went to middle- or upper-income borrowers, those outside the CRA's target population, and that 20% of high-priced loans to low-income borrowers were not made by banks, he said. Instead, they were made by nonbank lenders not bound by the CRA.

"Contrary to the assertions of critics, the evidence does not support the view that the CRA contributed in any substantial way to the crisis in the subprime mortgage market," Mr. Kroszner said.

Some bankers clearly agree.

During a panel discussion Wednesday at the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce, Ken Lewis, Bank of America Corp.'s chief executive officer, said CRA has become a "scapegoat" for the current mortgage crisis.

"The great majority of loans that caused this problem were outside of CRA," he said.

Given Democrats' control of Congress and the White House, Republicans have little chance of prevailing on CRA in the near term. But some observers said the focus on CRA is meant to lay the groundwork for change later.

"Changes in regulatory laws happen through people stating their case as to why things work or don't work," said Douglas Landy, a partner at Allen & Overy LLP.

"Those arguments are batted back and forth for years — or even decades. So people put in their place holders. You're not sure exactly when an idea is going to come back."

That has in turn spurred regulators to respond, Mr. Landy said.

"I think the Fed, as one of the regulators that enforces the CRA and perhaps as the primary regulator that enforces consumer finance rules, wants to set the record straight," he said.

Mr. Barr, the Michigan law professor, said the attempt to divert the attention of participants in the regulatory reform debate appeared to be failing, despite the recent attention from regulators.

"I think that it has failed so far because it's implausible on its face, the facts don't support it, and the country as a whole recognizes the origins of our crisis were in a failure of government to act and not in the CRA," Mr. Barr said.

So much better.

Obama during the Richardson announcement:

"I'm going to answer this question about the beard," said Obama, when Richardson was asked where the facial hair went. "I think it was a mistake for him to get rid of it. I thought that whole Western, rugged look was really working for him.

"For some reason, maybe because it was scratchy when he kissed his wife, he was forced to get rid of it.," Obama continued as his nominee for commerce secretary smiled broadly. "But we're deeply disappointed with the loss of the beard."

Heh. This is totally something we would want to say about each other if one of us were President.

Ack!

No, this does not qualify as a legitimate post either...but I won't post from work and I didn't get home until 2 am last night.

So I pass on a healthy shudder of revulsion and fear.


AAAGGGGHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Credit to M. for sending me this link, which knocked me out of a corporate law daze and into a visceral fear.)

Oh, and Saxby Chambliss won the Georgia runoff, so thankfully the Democrats won't hit the magic number in the Senate (I'm not going to explain why I think it would be a bad idea for the Dems to get 60, but I do despite my utter repudiation of the mold of the current Republican party). Just three (eight?) words after being otherwise ok the Republican victory...

Fuck that guy. (with a big rubber dick)

World AIDS Day.

Today is World AIDS Day. I think I posted some reflections on the day over the past few years...on the state of AIDS policy, or how I feel about the direction the epidemic is moving etc...but the honest truth is that I haven't been keeping up with it as closely as I used to...and all I would be doing is rehashing the things I've been thinking and carrying with me for the last 4 years rather than adding anything thoughtful or new.

In this situation all I'll say is this:

Please don't get the hiv. The epidemic is definitely not going anywhere, and the greatest conduit of transmission is believing that you're safe. I've seen enough to know that no one is safe - no one.