Over at Seeking Alpha we see a plea for making banking boring again in order to get around the "too big to fail" problem:
The very real fact is that the more you try and impose a complex regulatory framework on a complex financial system, the more likely it becomes that those regulated will find a way around the rules. Complexity tends to breed loopholes and lawyers tend to be quite adept at discovering them and developing means of avoidance. Moreover, time tends to favor the regulated as they know very well how to chip away at the ties that bind them and regulators and politicians quickly lose the missionary zeal that prompted them to rein in their friends.
Given all of this, I find myself more and more drawn to a proposal from John Hempton. It’s simple, has been proven to work in the real world and probably has as good or better a chance of being enacted as anything else floating about.
His idea is to copy the Australian and Canadian banking systems. Make the banks big, profitable and boring. Regulate the hell out of them but leave them fat and rich.
Hey, great minds run in the same channel (or is it, "Fools think alike"?). From the recent archives:
The current Plan A for bank reform seems to be to hire brilliant regulators and write a million new rules to assure that banks don't take excessive risks. Of course, since banks live to hire arbitrageurs who exploit rule quirks, and since regulators tend to become captured, this approach will only make sense to a committed statist (so Obama is on board!).
I offered a twist on the road to dull:
My Plan B is to put laughably low caps on bank compensation, coupled with a vigorous exhortation to bank execs that if they want hedge fund pay they should quit and join a hedge fund. If banking had civil service type pay it would attract civil service type managers, who would focus on avoiding mistakes that could cost them their sinecure rather than doing the Big Deals that could get them a summer home in the Hamptons.
Since one key mission of the Dems in Washington is to create more government jobs for future Dems in Washington, any solution that does not include a complex regulatory scheme is DOA.
Well, an easy way to attract the incompetent to their management is to make them non-profit.
=========================
Posted by: Here, have my pound of flesh. | November 10, 2009 at 11:08 AM
I have a home in the Hamptons. So, if someone wants to buy it before Plan B goes into effect, let me know.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | November 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Porchlight's Insta-Famous!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 10, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Break from "banking" - on to the Koreas...
Look, South Korea has "Democrats", too:
TheKorea Times: Seoul Wary of N. Korean Retaliation.
"Rep. Seo Jong-pyo of the main opposition Democratic Party raised the possibility that the (North Korean patrol) boat may have crossed the sea border without malicious intention.
He said its crew could have been seeking asylum in the South; crossed the NLL to arrest a Chinese fishing boat, which was possibly fishing illegally; or mistakenly took the warning shots as an attack.
The DPRK weighs in,
"It is a ridiculous and rash action for the warmongers at home and abroad to make desperate efforts to dare do harm to the DPRK. This only brings to light who is chiefly to blame for disturbing peace on the Korean Peninsula and pursuing confrontation and war.
The bellicose forces of the U.S. and the south Korean military had better roll back their dangerous "OPLAN 5029" at once, bearing in mind that their hostile policies towards the DPRK will only bring self-destruction."
Now, back to banking...
Posted by: Mike Huggins | November 10, 2009 at 01:27 PM
Hyper-regulation of banks is a losing game for the public. The banks will capture their regulators, work around the regulations, or business will suffer stagnation if they can't work around them. People should not be happy that a vital institution will be more a part of the government.
The banks should be less requlated, more transparent, and without government deposit guarantees. There is no market discipline on banks because people will deposit their money without thought. The banks will continue to take short-term deposits and lend these long-term. This creates a systemic risk, the bank run. Remove the governmnet guarantee and you will find out that most depositors don't want their money lent out to risky ventures at the low interest rates offered to them. These days, maybe not lent at all.
The guarantee of bank deposits and the implicit guarantee to bail out some banks, is a means of enriching the banks. The banks can take on much more risk without anyone caring, until the failures at the end.
The guarantee on deposits is not free, and it is being done with the credit of all productive people, a type of silent and unregulated tax.
Some will object that this will decrease the supply of credit. Yes, interest rates will have to rise to cover the now hidden risks of lending. The government guarantee fleeces the public, enriches bankers, and encourages risky lending. The bankers win when the risks pay off, and the public loses when the loans go bust.
Bank deposit insurance is a valuale bribe to win congressional votes.
Posted by: Andrew_M_Garland | November 10, 2009 at 01:30 PM
A lot of the problems that led to the financial crisis occurred outside the traditional banking system (even where in some cases that was within "banks" like Citi). It was Lehman commercial paper that helped cause a run on money market funds. No traditional banks in that story. So I'm skeptical that carving out this "safe" niche really accomplishes anything. Kind of like when you spray one apartment to get rid of the cockroaches they all just migrate to the adjacent units.
Better to have simple but strict regulations like capital requirements and leverage limits, as much transparency as possible, and let the chips fall where they may.
Posted by: jimmyk | November 10, 2009 at 02:17 PM
which one Thomas? He featured one a mine on the Berlin Wall. yesterday. Not a bad feeling.
Posted by: matt | November 10, 2009 at 02:23 PM
the real problem, as jimmy points out is the concerntartion of power and inherent conflicts of interest therein.
In their lust for "market share" and the Disney model of squeezing every penny out of the customer base, they have run roughshod over common sense and good banking practices.
Fix the underlying issues. What is proposed is more like treating smallpox with clearasil.
Posted by: matt | November 10, 2009 at 02:26 PM
jimmyk,
I agree 100%. I would only add that we are still near the beginning of Zombietimes and the concept of Too Big Too Fail remains unproven, even though Uncle Ben and Turbo Timmy assure us otherwise. Let's see what sort of pieces fall off of Govmo, GE, Citi and BAC by this time next year. TBTF may prove to be as illusory as the reliability of the risk algorithms underpinning ABS/CBO/CDS.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 10, 2009 at 02:28 PM
That's right, matt, you're Insta-Famous too! Porchlight's was a reference in a cartoon and can be found alongside the title HALF WORKS FOR A LIVING, HALF VOTES FOR A LIVING. Matt's is a link under the title THOUGHTS ON the fall of the Berlin Wall. See LUN.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 10, 2009 at 02:38 PM
See LUN for more evidence that it is very difficult to do a parody of elite media and academia that is more biting than the unintentional self-parody exhibited by such elites (in this case, of elite academia).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 10, 2009 at 02:43 PM
I'm afraid I cannot find the reference but I'm glad that matt's getting the attention--he writes such thoughtful stuff on his blog.
Posted by: clarice | November 10, 2009 at 02:46 PM
ABC News radio just said Obama got a standing ovation. I can't watch where I am. Anyone see it?
Posted by: Sue | November 10, 2009 at 03:03 PM
The comments on the PUK thread have now been closed.
::sigh::
BTW, I am now emailing with G Nash who thinks pursuing getting PUK into the HoF is a "fine idea".
He's going to take a look at the letter and offer his thoughts and input.
Posted by: hit and run | November 10, 2009 at 03:17 PM
Clarice and everyone else looking for Matt's insta launch LUN
Posted by: StrawmanCometh | November 10, 2009 at 03:17 PM
I believe that Elaine (the gal in several shots at the Inn with PUK and others, is Nash' sister,PUK. I am so happy to hear of his support.
Posted by: clarice | November 10, 2009 at 03:22 PM
I heard it, and I'd be surprised if anyone stood. The applause was tepid both before and after. The soloist got greater applause.
Posted by: Jane | November 10, 2009 at 03:22 PM
Strawman, thanks..Matt--another winner!
Posted by: clarice | November 10, 2009 at 03:26 PM
Closer to the topic at hand:
From the WSJ:
I don't have a strong opinion. I'm generally leery of the government criminalizing stuff like this, but I don't know enough of the specifics of this case.
Posted by: jimmyk | November 10, 2009 at 03:54 PM
Way to go, matt!
hit, do you think TM could manually keep the comments open? I know he linked the thread in the LH sidebar, at the top of the Private Collection section.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 10, 2009 at 04:35 PM
I don't know about whether we're over-regulated here contrasted with the States, but no-money-down mortgages aren't allowed (I think even literally illegal) and housing buyers are encouraged to make the 25% downpayment to get a lower interest rate. (It's probably similar in Australia.)
Posted by: andycanuck | November 10, 2009 at 04:44 PM
thank you all. I think it was finding this site and reading your comments that allowed me to find that particular voice and make a decision speak out.
Maybe we'll all make Dear Leader's enemies list yet.
Posted by: matt | November 10, 2009 at 05:05 PM
Porchlight:
hit, do you think TM could manually keep the comments open? I know he linked the thread in the LH sidebar, at the top of the Private Collection section.
Yes.
He's got an email from me with that request.
Posted by: hit and run | November 10, 2009 at 05:18 PM
I emailed him too, Hit.
Congratulations, Matt. That was wonderful to read.
Posted by: Ann | November 10, 2009 at 05:26 PM
That's a marvelous memory, matt, and beautifully told. My memories are the horror of the wall's being built. In 1961, we had just returned to the U.S. to live when construction began. I drove an hour to work daily and listened to the hourly news reports of death and heartbreak. It was an evil act, and it seemed as if it would stand forever. It's just as well that our Pres. Poseur did not attend. He hasn't earned the right to stand at the Brandenburger Tor. Victory is above his pay grade.
Posted by: Frau Gesetz | November 10, 2009 at 05:28 PM
My husband went to East Berlin after he graduated from law school. He'd been touring Europe and wanted to see it. There was some event in the stadium there and people were allowed in through the gate to see it. He's rather dark and can pass for a national of any number of places and when asked where he was from, he'd grin and say "Cubano".
Posted by: clarice | November 10, 2009 at 05:49 PM
I emailed Tom too.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 10, 2009 at 06:31 PM
It would have been nice to have Nancy there.
Posted by: matt | November 10, 2009 at 06:33 PM
Where as I am much lighter, than say Sammy Sosa, (lol)btw what was the concensus of the
speech, it was had less first person
references in it, Gen. Casey ticked me off more
Posted by: narciso | November 10, 2009 at 06:36 PM
"As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty, as well," said Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, because "a diverse army gives us strength."
I've always had a soft spot for that stupid diversity-gives-us-strength line /sarc, but I think it was Jack! who mentioned how the Marines start out in basic training as a diverse group, and end up as a cohisive unit which is anything but diverse.
Casey seems to be the lastest glaring example of a dangerous PC idiot.
Bring on the hearings into the Fort Hood failure to "connect the dots."
Posted by: Extraneus | November 10, 2009 at 06:51 PM
andycanuck I think you are mistaken
(( don't know about whether we're over-regulated here contrasted with the States, but no-money-down mortgages aren't allowed ))
just type ((canada no money down mortgage)) into your favorite search engine. CHMC is Canada's version of Fannie and Freddie and I think has a close association with AIG.
No Money Down Mortgage, 100% Financing
To find out more, and start paying your own mortgage rather than your landlord's mortgage, contact a Discount Mortgage Canada Inc mortgage consultant today ...
No Money Down Mortgage
If you have an excellent credit rating, but do not have money saved for a down payment, look into Ontario Equity's No Money Down Mortgage.
No Money Down Programs · View Our Blog True North Mortgages Services People From All Across Canada
Scotiabank first to offer no-money-down mortgage
etc.
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 07:14 PM
Put dimbulb third string go through the motions but never make a decision in lending positions? There was a time when I would have thought such a thing farcical on its face but after seeing the carnage wrecked on the financial system by very bright rocket scientist types, hey how could it be any worse?
I have to caution though that some of the dimmest wattage around roam the halls of Congress, and as long as they have the power of the Federal budget, and can effectively deficit spend just like a lender on crack, it may be win battle lose war situation even if it works.
Posted by: gmax | November 10, 2009 at 07:17 PM
after seeing the carnage wrecked on the financial system by very bright rocket scientist types, hey how could it be any worse?
Believe me, it could be. Remember that those rocket science types were aided and abetted by a corrupt Congress. I don't think they could have pulled this off without help. So the first priority is to get the politicians the h*** out of there.
Posted by: jimmyk | November 10, 2009 at 07:21 PM
andy canuck
check this out
CHMC CANADA'S BREAKING POINT
http://americacanada.blogspot.com/2009/07/cmhc-and-our-government.html
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 07:21 PM
Matt
Great article, congrats
hit
That's great news! Just a thought, maybe his should be the first letter the Foundation reads?
Posted by: Rocco | November 10, 2009 at 07:26 PM
I'd like an easy way to scroll to the end of the thread, too. Perhaps a link in the original post to the end.
======================================
Posted by: Peter thanks you, too. | November 10, 2009 at 07:31 PM
jimmyk
((Remember that those rocket science types were aided and abetted by a corrupt Congress))
Something that is as clear as day but that I just recently noticed is that the situation of government and business being so cozy together is seen by the left and right in exact opposite ways. The right blames government for unduly influencing business and wants to brake government. The left blames business for undue influence on government and wants to put the brakes on business. Two totally different ways of viewing the exact same problem of the fascist marriage between gov and biz.
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 07:32 PM
Nice, PL; now which viewpoint leads to successful solutions?
==================================
Posted by: And which to slavery? | November 10, 2009 at 07:37 PM
Inspirational post from Geraghty. LUN
Posted by: PaulL | November 10, 2009 at 07:49 PM
Thanks, Parking Lot, I'll take a look at those when I return in a few hours, but I've never seen any advertising for them.
Posted by: andycanuck | November 10, 2009 at 07:54 PM
a diverse army gives us strength.
What's the name for the costume the army guys wear?
What's an antonym for diverse?
Posted by: bgates | November 10, 2009 at 07:57 PM
So is "V" worth watching?
Posted by: Jane | November 10, 2009 at 08:01 PM
the situation of government and business being so cozy together is seen by the left and right in exact opposite ways
That's a good observation. My view is that government has to be the responsible party because businesses' only business is to make money. If the government creates exploitable opportunities, we can't expect businesses to pass them up, since they will just be put at a disadvantage relative to others that jump in. But instead of responsible grownups, we have a government that actively plays this game of influence peddling.
Posted by: jimmyk | November 10, 2009 at 08:04 PM
Well, PaulL, Geraghty's wrong. Tucson Native remembered that Laos beat Castro, the last time that a Republican beat a sitting Democrat.
========================================
Posted by: Marais des Cygnes Noires. | November 10, 2009 at 08:10 PM
OT: Another "teachable moment"? Another beer summit?
But the good stuff is in the LUN:
I presume if the racial identities had been reversed, this would have been all over the news, and Obama would have had the opportunity to make a fool of himself again. But because this was a liberal black academic physically assaulting a white woman, there's "nothing to see here, move right along."
Posted by: jimmyk | November 10, 2009 at 08:12 PM
bgates, do you mean the uninformed?
========================
Posted by: Don't dare tell me. | November 10, 2009 at 08:12 PM
It's interesting I just went through the slide presentation that Hasan put together, and it's a much more honest document then the pap that Casey and others put forth. Logically, however, it would proclude Moslems from serving, by the doctrinal conflicts therein. I guess Aulaqi's
assistance was invaluable, after all, (sarc)
Posted by: narciso | November 10, 2009 at 08:13 PM
A good one, again, bgates. I think I can finally retire.
Posted by: clarice | November 10, 2009 at 08:15 PM
and which way ...
((Nice, PL; now which viewpoint leads to successful solutions?))
I think that there are degrees of merit in both viewpoints, and that there are certain segments of the left and right who want exactly the same end but are currently talking past each other. There are so many people on the left who are totally bummed out about 0 ... they see some prominent business leaders as fraudulent, unethical, dishonest and power hungry as we view some politicos, and can we blame them?
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 08:21 PM
that there are certain segments of the left and right who want exactly the same end
Most of the right would agree with the statement, "The American people should not live with a highly intrusive government which controls ever-increasing aspects of their lives and steals from anyone who is productive but politically unconnected to enrich the state".
The left would agree with the first six words.
Posted by: bgates | November 10, 2009 at 08:27 PM
"... and can we blame them?"
Blame them? How could we not volunteer for jury duty in cases involving clear breeches of fiduciary duty and law? The problem is that "clear" bit and the addition of further regulations isn't going to be particularly helpful in that regard. That's why the insider trading cases are where the action is for US Attorneys looking for scalps.
They may be able to follow the more complex cases but they are really rolling the dice in coming up with a jury capable of doing so.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 10, 2009 at 08:37 PM
bgates
((The left would agree with the first six words))
Maybe the elites, but not all the sheeple. A big problem with left-leaning sheeple is that they mistakenly think of the political left-right continuum as going from communism on the far left to nazism/fascism on the far right, therefore their wrong idea of the political 'right' gives them nightmares. The idea of the continuum ranging from total government (communism, nazism) on the left to libertarianism on the right is a perplexing idea for them to absorb, but not impossible. If they could just grasp it, many would flee the left, imv.
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 09:46 PM
I just posted a reply to bgates and it is not appearing??? RATS!!!!!
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 09:50 PM
ok there it is
Posted by: Parking Lot | November 10, 2009 at 09:55 PM
PL,
Typepad checks your webcam for compromising photos everytime you press . Ironically the other PL got caught out that way yesterday.
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | November 10, 2009 at 10:04 PM
press F5
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | November 10, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Fannie Mae: Please fire the Inspector General in charge of keeping an eye on Fannie Mae.
Ø Justice Dept: OK
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | November 10, 2009 at 10:19 PM
You wouldn't believe this could actually be happening before your eyes, would you Dave?
=============================
Posted by: Snap your fingers. Pinch yourself. Do something! | November 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM
Hi, Parking Lot. I'm baaack.
This is what I was thinking about re. mortgages in Canada and no money down being banned (last year):
http://tinyurl.com/yakwvpt
(It looks like ScotiaBank is the only one that calls it 'no money down'.)
And this is the sort of thing I was also thinking about re. consumer (and bank) conservatism here:
http://tinyurl.com/ybgouv3
And as with the anecdote given at the start of this article, I was under the impression you needed a minimum 15% down payment here but that appears to have been in practice and not in law.
Thanks for your comment. I'll have to look into it more. (Not that I'm a financial geek.)
Posted by: andycanuck | November 10, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Rocco:
That's great news! Just a thought, maybe his should be the first letter the Foundation reads?
I hope you got my email. I am working on finessing it with him.
(remember, The Hollies are also up for nomination this year,so he has his own name to go to bat for as well. And yes,go Hollies!)
Posted by: hit and run | November 10, 2009 at 11:03 PM
O/T: This morning I was reading the hard copy of LUN and was vexed; I was agreeing with Lanny Davis for, I believe, the first time in my life. Ordinarily when I see him on the Sunday blahblah shows, I turn the channel before I feel the need to scrub myself with a wire brush and lysol to remove the noxious experience of viewing that hubris-drenched popinjay. So it bothered me all day that he and I were agreeing on Honduras until I saw at the bottom that he represents the Honduran Latin American Business Council.
I realize that sometimes you have to make temporary alliances with true vermin, such as Stalin in WW2, and I guess money can buy the loyalty of somebody with the moral fiber of Alger Hiss. I guess the right way to view this is better for him to be irritating that fat slob Chavez than me. Now where's that wire brush.....
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 10, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Hit and Clarice:
Thanks so much for finding and publishing Peter's remarks on his beloved mother's passing under the thumb of Government Health Care.
It is a hard story to read for us but I think one that needs a lot of attention today.
Bravo to both of you!
Posted by: Ann | November 10, 2009 at 11:34 PM
I am working on finessing it with him..
Hit, Can I help? :)
Posted by: Ann | November 10, 2009 at 11:38 PM
I’m sorry, Canadian banking system could not serve as an example to restructure banking in US.
First, banking in Canada is dominated by big five domestic banks, which are on average 150 years old and are very conservative and cautious. As such, there is no need in tight government regulation, and Canadian banks are among the least regulated in G20. As an example, there is no limit on investment leverage. And creditors are not allowed to refuse banknotes as payments, which effectively prevents bank runs.
Housing in Canada is not encouraged by tax breaks, and there is no such thing as CRA as in US. Banks refused to relax mortgage lending standards, and subprime mortgages are virtually non-existent (thought near-zero-down mortgages are). Moreover, lenders tend to hold mortgages they originated, and borrowers are financially responsible for all sum of mortgage. As a result, walk-outs are very rear, and as of Aug 2009 only 0.4% of mortgages were in arrears.
Only one bank (CIBC) was stupid enough to play risky CDS market (currently it is again well-capitalised, operates in black, and pays 5.5% dividends).
Try to find such conservative banking culture in US.
BTW, if you need to park funds in US$ for current volatile times, take a look at stock of Canadian banks listed on NYSE: BNS, TD, RY, BMO, CM. They pay 3.5-5.5% dividends, are well positioned to appreciate as Asia and BRIC economies are steaming ahead, and are good hedge against falling US$ (about half of Canadian stock market is commodities, and every fall of US$ leads to wave of investment into commodities, and as a result CAD and TSE appreciate).
Posted by: AL | November 11, 2009 at 01:41 AM
Hey Jane, TC or Dave in Mass,
If any of you guy's bump into Barney Frank at the bathhouse, would you please pull out a reefer and show him what a pot plant looks like. Ciao:)
Posted by: daddy | November 11, 2009 at 05:46 AM
Hi, Daddy. I haven't had time to read JOM in the last 2 days. If you're still awake, can you quickly update me on the major gems?
And I return, I'll regale you with my latest discoveries related to that elixir called beer :)
Posted by: BR | November 11, 2009 at 05:58 AM
My fingers may be tipsy, but I'm not:
And I = And in... :)
Posted by: BR | November 11, 2009 at 05:59 AM
Well BR,
Biggest news is Porchlight got naked with either Anduril or Cartoonist Chris Muir (not sure which yet, and she ain't coughin' it up), but the provocative cartoon is here.">http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/2009/11/09/#005421">here.
Then Tom Friedman fell off his flat earth along with Ari Fleicher, and we all took potshots at the MSM kibbitzing on whether Obama should award the Medal of Honor or the Medal of Freedom to the pole dancers in some Texas strip joint where they lap danced for that devout Islamic murderer. Next the Kendonesians and the SocioLutheran's almost went at it again but some Bioethicist grad student came in and intellectualized us all so now as a general rule we politely ignore modes of alienation.
Then Matt got a well deserved Instalanche, and Hit did an absolutely masterful and wonderful job rounding up 5 terrific links to music segments of P'UK doing jazz and excellent R&R licks, and then Hit topped it off with a collection of P'UK's impassioned comments on the death of his Mom and the evilness of the Brit National Health Care system, and that should be memorialized in marble in Congress. (Thanks Hit---that was invaluable.) And Elliott's off to attend the funeral.
Lastly Jane told us she's been doing 145 push-up's a day so she can punch out Dick in an upcoming episode. This got us all into an exercise tizzy, so Captain Hate's been jogging and Maybee's hoisting brownies and Frau's playing Handball with Dick Nixon, and Dr J's been benchpressing Linux's, and Clarice's been doing the swim-laps plus Pilates, and Porch is obviously taking showers so she must be doing some kinda' exercising and somehow nobody hates Anduril anymore, and all we're lacking is for Bad to make some racy comment and I think we'll almost be back on track. Other than that it's pretty much samo, samo, and if I didn't offend Kim or Sara or Ignatz or anybody else I apologize.
Moose's Tooth ESB (Extra Strong Bitter) myself.---You were saying?
Posted by: daddy | November 11, 2009 at 07:04 AM
Daddy, you are too funny. Could you be kind enough to provide a daily recap-- it would save a lot of time.
Posted by: peter | November 11, 2009 at 07:26 AM
Remembering John Allen Muhammed's victims, and the fact that Muhammed was an Moslem terrorist. Gates of Vienna at LUN>
Posted by: peter | November 11, 2009 at 07:31 AM
OMG, daddy! What's with the assignment to find the bathhouse frequented by Barney Frank? Why couldn't you assign me to a dressing room frequented by Joanna Krupa? :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 11, 2009 at 07:34 AM
Hope this is still on the same page - I took a quick peek here and am looking forward to reading yours above, Daddy. (Gotta make a deadline in the next hour.)
Anyway, here's my tanks -- I mean my thanks, in advance:
Further to my Ode to Beer:
I'm sure men already know this for centuries, but I discovered there's a genie in the bottle! When I open it and pour a little into a glass, and then put the bottle cap back on, lo and behold, it flies off! Then I put it back on, holding it down with my thumb and even my little fist, and watch for the genie to jump out again!
Posted by: BR | November 11, 2009 at 07:46 AM
uuhhmm........good luck with that deadline BR.
Posted by: tea anyone | November 11, 2009 at 08:00 AM
Oh my goodness, thank you, Daddy!! My eyes are wet with laughter, which is very good medicine, since the smoke got into my eyes. Now I can see clearly again :)
Posted by: BR | November 11, 2009 at 08:02 AM
Thanks daddy - I too have been away for a day or two (sick with some kind of bug or other). You just saved me from reading all the old threads!
Posted by: centralcal | November 11, 2009 at 08:08 AM
Ditto Thanks to Daddy.
Back home and bummed today.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 11, 2009 at 08:54 AM
I'm in on the daily recap - how perfect, and time saving, and succinct and funny and all those other great things.
Go DAddy!
Posted by: Jane | November 11, 2009 at 09:15 AM
That was a wrap up worthy of a Pythonsketch,
daddy, summarizing Proust is not my strong suit.
Posted by: narciso | November 11, 2009 at 09:27 AM
Go daddy!
Thanks, Ann--it was Hit's sleuthing that preserved that gem.
(145 push-ups --I am going to be very careful about crossing Jane.)
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2009 at 09:46 AM
Daddy, I'm afraid I won't be bumping into Barney at any bathhouse. Even if I were of the bathhouse-frequenting sort, his district is gerrymandered to loop around my town, so I won't be seeing him and I can't vote against him. One possible effect of MA's shedding of population would be a redistricting brought about by the loss of a Rep. or two, and maybe my town would get stuck in his district. Did you know that his district was gerrymandered to pull in part of Gerry Studds' (another Mass. disgrace) old district, and that Studds was a descendant of the guy for whom gerrymandering was named?
And what's more, Frank's district and Elbridge Gerry's district from 200 years ago have pretty much the exact same shape, even though they're different places?
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | November 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM
The linux was a jab at anduril who keeps posting long stuff about it. I'm lucky to be able to find the power button.
Isn't that the point? I want people to install something that just works so that:
1. you won't have to find the power button except for the first time, and
2. you won't bore me by filling up threads with OT whining and complaining about your "computer" (really windoze) problems.
:-)
Posted by: anduril | November 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Hey anduril, sorry that my little situation bothered you so much, as the Russian/
Georgian conflict, or the inherent perfidy
of Islam, actually Major Hassan agrees with you on that point, 'from his own point of view' but I had a problem and I decided to share.
Posted by: narciso | November 11, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Happy Veterans' Day JOM! A thousand thanks to all veterans and active duty personnel for their service and sacrifice. Bless you all.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 11, 2009 at 10:33 AM
and somehow nobody hates Anduril anymore
A rewrite might be needed.
Posted by: Sue | November 11, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Ed Koch:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/11/common_sense_says_major_hasan_was_a_terrorist_99110.html>Common sense says Hasan's a terrorist
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2009 at 10:40 AM
For the 3rd year in a row, Google has acknowledged Veteran's Day with a special logo.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | November 11, 2009 at 10:42 AM
--Other than that it's pretty much samo, samo, and if I didn't offend Kim or Sara or Ignatz or anybody else I apologize.--
Can't speak for the others, but you in no way offended me daddy, so I'm waiting impatiently for my personalized apology.
Will check back this evening; if it's not forthcoming then I may very well be offended in which case of course an apology will no longer be necessary.
Posted by: Ignatz | November 11, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Google has been honoring Sesame Street at least since the weekend so I'm glad they can give some props to the Vets.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 11, 2009 at 10:45 AM
no, no, no, narciso. your situation didn't bother me, precisely because you were willing to reach out and listen.
as for russia/georgia, i haven't changed my mind. it's got nothing to do with loving the bear--far from it--and everything to do with running a smart foreign policy. along those lines, here's what i consider an insightful piece re russia: Twenty Years After the Fall.
Posted by: anduril | November 11, 2009 at 10:48 AM
"and somehow nobody hates Anduril anymore"
that kind of stuff could give me an identity crisis.
Posted by: anduril | November 11, 2009 at 10:52 AM
O/T but this deserves its own thread imo: LUN for "Whatever Became of Kelo". Ah the joys of bureaucratic wisdom over the invisible hand. Too bad they never took that eyesore shack that Souter lives in.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 11, 2009 at 10:54 AM
It's been a stalemate, as I was explaining to a class on World History. The Russians held Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but unlike
1799 and 1921, they did not depose the regime in Tblisi, yet. And the attempted coup against Saakashvilli, didn't work either. Putin is a czar, and not one of the good ones. without a crown. He is but one face of the siloviki though
Posted by: narciso | November 11, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Capt I blogged that yesterday
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/kelo_karma.html
I am so glad that the city of New London was stuck with this pig.
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Sorry I missed that yesterday, Clarice; very well done with spot on comments to boot.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 11, 2009 at 11:17 AM
(145 push-ups --I am going to be very careful about crossing Jane.)
I clearly have given the wrong impression, as those who have met me know. I'll pay you to keep quiet.
Posted by: Jane | November 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Kelo was one of the scariest and worst opinions I can remember..
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2009 at 11:34 AM
"Kelo was one of the scariest and worst opinions I can remember."
If there was one particular event, that single decision was actually the trigger responsible for flipping me from a glass half full kind of guy to the reverse. Not much since then has helped reverse the sense of foreboding that accumulates with each such attack on the society created by the founders, and with each burden placed on our kids and theirs.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 11, 2009 at 11:43 AM
At the AT site someone posted the names and email addies of the New London corruptocrats who are responsible in the first instance for this outrage.
Posted by: clarice | November 11, 2009 at 11:47 AM
I always liked Capn's idea of taking Souter's shack...
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 11, 2009 at 12:02 PM
The Visible Hand.
===========
Posted by: Of Dorian Grey. | November 11, 2009 at 02:30 PM