A View of Putin From Moscow

And I would say an objective view.

I'm not sure the author will live much longer if he remains in Moscow, although he is certainly not an agitator.

Link to Column

This is a Bipartisan Mess With Global Responsibility

For years, Presidents of both parties, and leaders of the other countries in the Global Economy have sucked up to the Leaders of Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states.  We supported the Shah and didn't promote Democracy or encourage economic development or fair treatment of women.

Somehow,  all this led to a proxy war between the Sunnis and Shia that turned into the War on Terror, which in turn created conditions that have brought the Middle East to its current condition.

The U.S. is in an impossible condition and I am sure we would be in the same place (or even a worse place) if John McCain or Romney had won their elections.  Because Iraq is a Shia dominant country in an Iraqi National Election and some Iraqi Sunnis resent that to the point of becoming anarchists.  Syria was poised to disintegrate into it's Sunni and Shia areas with Iraq so out of control.

At this point, some Neo-conservatives would say, no I am wrong because if we had left the U.S. Army in Iraq, this wouldn't have happened.  But do you really believe the U.S. Army can fight a war in Iraq against the Sunni's and the Shia for decades.  The Sunni and Shia have been going at it for over a thousand years.  The U.S. Army would have been a magnet for the jihadists to come from all over to join ISIS with the U.S. Army right there for the fight they all want to have.

I have written before about the tangled web of the Middle East.  It is becoming ever more obvious that Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran need to develop some diplomacy with each other if Jihadism is to be stopped.  The money needs to be cut off from the Jihadists and the militias that fight the proxy war.

That is what is going on in Yemen, a god forsaken country that has no economic reason to exist, except that it does for some reason.  Don't forget, almost every Muslim country in the Gulf has a mix of Sunni and Shia.  The opposing sect is discriminated against in many countries feeding the resentment.

So why does Saudi Arabia send its military forces against the Shia in Yemen but not ISIS?  Why do the Shia militias stand down vs ISIS when the U.S. military starts bombing in support of their efforts?    Why can't the Iraqi Army fight?  These are not questions with answers from the U.S. Department of Defense.

The world needs to cut off its use of oil from the Middle East and Russia as fast as possible.  Only by cratering the funds that feed this mess, will we be able to put these autocracies back into a less harmful place.

And while we are doing that, we need to get Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran talking to each other about what their vision of a peaceful coexistence looks like, because right now, that vision does not appear to exist.  And there is no reason for the U.S. military to be in the middle of that.

Why the United States is not a Christian Nation

I know this will be a shock to some on the Religious Right, but there is a reason that Christianity is not enshrined in The Constitution, but rather Freedom of Religion is enshrined.

Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and James Madison, as well as Ethan Allen, were Deists.  Deism is the belief in a deity based on natural religion only, or belief in religious truths discovered by people through a process of reasoning, independent of any revelation through scripture or prophets. 

I am really not sure how Deism differs from being Agnostic or an Atheist, as a life led by reasoning and basic goodwill toward others, would seem common to all three.

And certainly, respect for the right of others to believe in scripture and prophets is part of that as well.

If only, those on the Religious Right, would return the respect for the rights of others to live as they wish without interference from the beliefs of those who follow scriptures and prophets.

I thank Paul Unger for pointing this out to me in a blog on Forbes.com

Even Elite Colleges Fail to Produce Intelligent Graduates, Ted Cruz

As a graduate of the University of Chicago Business School, I have long felt slighted at the aura Harvard graduates have around them in the eyes of recruiters.  I have also noticed that when companies failed they are frequently led by Harvard Business School graduates who were head strong, didn't listen well, and didn't respect their underlings.  This does not mean all Harvard Graduates have those fatal traits, just some of them who have the tendency to master the bureaucratic political process to rise to the top of big corporations.

Now we have example number one that even Princeton and Harvard Law can graduate a dud.  Everything Ted Cruz stands for policy wise is an assault upon my senses.  However, his policies are in the main stream of the Republican Party today.  Watch the 2016 GOP platform and I guarantee it will be indistinguishable from what Ted Cruz represents.

However, the speed with which the GOP venomous wags have come out against Ted Cruz with personal assaults is stunning.  When Donald Trump and Peter King are out for you, you know you have a problem in the base.

Why is that?  Well, you can fault Ted Cruz for a lot of his policy beliefs, but they are GOP mainstream.  I think the issue is the same problem I noticed in some Harvard Business School graduates.  He is headstrong, doesn't respect the opposition or even some of his teammates, and clearly doesn't know how to listen.

That unfortunately, is a problem some smart people have and why they are failures as leaders.  I am always amazed, have had the importance of teamwork drilled into me growing up, being educated and seeing it at work in successful organization, that some people who go to great schools fail to see that and insist on their way or no way.

I am sorry the 2016 campaign has begun, but hopefully I will be able to stay distracted and maintain my low blood pressure.  I just wish a Democrat other than Hillary would get some momentum, but many of the other candidates either have serious flaws or are little known.

That is really depressing.

Is it Time to use the Neutron Bomb?

I will admit I am out of my league with this question and know that I don't know all the questions that need to be asked before something like this should be done.

But what better way to kill the jihadists in ISIS and ISIL.  Kill them and leave the buildings standing.

Of course, I am assuming you could inhabit the land they are on again.  And I am assuming there are relatively few innocent people in the target area.  And I am assuming that the rest of Islam would not turn on us for being so brutal against their fellow Muslims.

Of course, it is the brutality of those targets toward their fellow Muslims that prompt me to ask this question.  And it is the failure of those fellow Muslims to develop the means of isolating ISIS from money and recruits that prompts me to ask this question.

Just who is buying ISIS's oil and paying them in dollars?  And where does ISIS have a bank account?  And where does ISIS get it's cash to pay its fighter's?  I don't understand why this cannot be shut down.

Do I see duplicity on the part of Sunni Muslim leaders in bordering countries?  Yes, I do, Mr. Erdogwan and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Mr Putin was somehow involved because he is one evil individual.

This is probably one of my most nonsensical posts, but I share the frustration of the GOP, I just don't share their desire to send in the Marines or the 10th Mountain Division.




Post Blog Wikipedia Update:  It turns out the U.S. dismantled all its neutron weapons some time ago as they were difficult to maintain, had limited effectiveness in combat situations and did not leave buildings standing.

Why isn't there a greater focus on family?

I know one area that I have common cause with some conservatives is in the area of family responsibility for child rearing outcomes.  And the debate in D.C. on both sides skirts around this, but gets mired down in base cheering politics.

Michael Gerson's column today outlines a book that focuses on the consequences of inequality on kids that has risen from 3 interrelated trends:  family instability, community disfunction, and the collapse of the blue collar economy.

It is hard to believe in my life time, the chances for a kid today to follow my path, have gone from likely to improbable.   My grandparents didn't go to college, my mother is the only one who preceded me through college and I was raised in a blue collar household in a blue collar town.  But I got a good education, went to a good college, and got into a great business school.

The important thing is my parents stayed married and gave me good examples.  They also had two steady jobs.  That is much harder today and the political debate is not really focused on how to make that simpler.  One of the reasons that ObamaCare is in such trouble is people see it as being focused on the poor only, while those who are just above that level, cannot see the benefits from ObamaCare which will come when they lose their job or suffer a serious illness (or the real safety net, those two coincide).

But I see ObamaCare as helping keep families together and focused on raising productive children.  It also helps control the cost of health care which is one reason in my mind that we have had a collapse of the blue collar economy.  If I were a business manager with a global operation, I have no doubt that I would be motivated to establish the marginal business in a country where there is a single payer health plan or no health plan.  You multiply that decision by 1000 companies and you have sent hundreds of thousands of jobs to other countries.

Anyway, Gerson's column doesn't go there, he simply highlights the issue and I wonder why D.C. politicians can't frame their policy discussions around this critical issue.

But then I know all D.C. politicians care about is their next campaign dollar.

Link to Gerson column

Boris Nemtsov, We Barely Knew You, Cop Killer Bullets, and Congress

I have given up my Economist subscription, but they have yet to stop sending me a copy.  Each week I expect that to happen, but so far it has come.  I know it will not last.

But, it came last week and I got to read the obituary for Boris Nemtsov.  He was a great man for what he did not do.  He did not become an oligarch even though he was a very smart guy.  He was humble and aspired to have good government and a clean market economy.  He was the anti-Putin who worried that Russia is becoming a fascist state where if you don't agree with the government, you are killed.  And he liked to windsurf.

Boris Nemstov died too young, and I have no doubt that Putin is behind it somehow and that it will never be proven.  That is how dictators work.





Meanwhile, the NRA has fought and defeated a proposal to ban cop killer bullets.  You would think people who want the police to be safe (which is almost everyone) would be for this.  But not the NRA and not the GOP politicians that are scared of them.  They will bemoan the death of a policeman from a cop killer bullet (and it could have been the shootings in Ferguson, MO last night), but they will not act.  The way the NRA and the Heritage Foundation act today, it almost seems like they are trying to emulate Putin.




The Senate cannot pass a bill showing support for our efforts against ISIS because the Democrats think the authorization allows too much and the Republicans think it does not go far enough (and they don't want to be seen as supporting a policy that might fail because we are showing restraint).  I have two thoughts about this:  (i) Is it any wonder that Presidents don't want to go to Congress for authorization on International stuff?  Congress cannot do it's basic job and hold votes and they don't do anything quickly.  And they don't seem to care that they don't do anything.  Congress is disgusting;  (ii) What do you think Iran thinks about this?  Chaos in policy making, threats of policy retreat and disavowal, who would want to cut a deal with the U.S.

All I know is Iran is next door to Iraq.  Syria is next door to Iraq.  We took out Saddam Hussein who stood up to both of them and now the GOP is complaining that Iran is getting involved with the Shia led Iraqi anti-ISIS forces.  Only Muslims can defeat ISIS.  Widespread involvement of the U.S. will lead to jihadists pouring into Syria to kill Americans.  Civil Wars need to be settled by the locals and their neighbors.  There is only so much people with stretched supply lines can do.

Why can't the Senate agree on a bill that supports a prudent middle ground approach to fighting ISIS?   Are they responsible leaders or just leaders when it fulfills a need?  I suspect it is the latter.

The GOP/Netanyahu Coalition Source is Found, Follow the $$$$

And not surprisingly, Citizens United after effects come right to the forefront.

Thomas Friedman has the details to identify Sheldon Adelson's vision behind all this.  His influence is deep and pervasive and legal.  But it is the influence of one man (and his wife).

Link to Thomas Friedman's column

The Adelson's oppose a Two State Solution and support Settlements.  They are convinced that Iran must not get a nuclear weapon even if it takes military action to prevent it and deeply distrust the global coalition that has imposed sanctions on Iran and gotten them to the negotiating table.

They fail to see how their policies create both the motivation for the very despair that feeds the terrorism they fear and the potential for Israel to become an apartheid state.

My friend RedStateVT put forth a comment that Israel needs the Settlements to buffer against terrorist attacks.  My feeling is if you can defend the Settlements in the West Bank,  you can defend the natural borders of Israel.  After all, it was the inability to defend the Settlements in the Gaza Strip that led Israel to force the Settlers to return to Israel proper and abandon those Settlements.  Israel still defends its border with Gaza and when Hamas fails to act as a responsible government, military action is the justified hammer.  A similar situation on the West Bank with the PLO seemingly naturally in charge could be a shining example for whatever emerges from the chaos in Syria and Western Iraq.  With a 2 State Solution, a natural bulwark against such chaos would exist with Israel Palestine and Jordan.  I have no doubt that Israel may well have to protect itself against rouge elements originating in a PLO controlled West Bank, but they have to protect themselves against the same rogue elements in any case.

Anyway, I was wrong yesterday when I thought the military industrial complex was behind all this.  It is just Sheldon Adelson and he is a gambling magnate.

The GOP Senate Wants to Boost Spending on the Military Industrial Complex

That can be the only concrete reason for their wanting to start a War with Iran.  However before they can get their way, they will have to convince our EU Allies that is the correct path as Iran is not simply negotiating with the U.S.; the negotiations are under the auspices of the U.N. and the Security Council plus Germany.  So any agreement with Iran will include Britain, France, Russia, China, the U.S. and Germany.

So if an agreement is reached with Iran, it will be with those parties, of which the U.S. is only one.  And if the U.S. reneges on any agreement under a future GOP President, he will be upsetting not only Iran, Russia and China, but also Britain, France and Germany.  And if the U.S. really wants to invade Iran alone without any support from the rest of the world, well I can only imagine the turmoil the resulting high level of casualties will cause in the U.S.  We might well see turmoil in the streets not seen since the Vietnam War.

I just wish I saw one iota of insightful thinking on the part of the U.S. Senate on either side of the aisle.  It has been years since there has been thoughtful debate and consideration on the legislative side of our democracy.  It's just SPIN, SPIN, SPIN in support of the permanent campaign for funding to run in the next election.

Thank you Supreme Court for Citizens United.  I know that wasn't the cause of all this, but it certainly supports the perpetuation of it.

Will the GOP EVER Acknowledge Reality?

The Florida coast line is pretty much ground zero for exposure to higher sea levels generated by global warming.  Sea Levels have risen @30 centimeters since 1950.  That is close to one foot and since sea level has been rising ever since the last Ice Age, you would think politicians in a state that is certain to be effected by the rising sea level would want to discuss the issue.  But not the Florida GOP.  They have banned any use of the words global warming or any issues surrounding global warming.  Even if you want to deny that human activity is causing global warming (although science has proven unequivocally that CO2 emissions cause atmospheric warming), why would you want to deny the sea level rising?  I guess if you don't believe in evolution or want to avoid offending those who don't believe in evolution, you have to deny the Ice Age too because it wasn't in The Old Testament.

Then, of course there is ObamaCare, where it is now clear that the cost curve of health care is bending downward.  It is difficult to separate the effects of ObamaCare and the effects of the Great Recession, but one thing is clear, the old system allowed our cost of health care to go from 9% of GDP in 1980 to 17% of GDP presently.   I guess I should be glad our cost of health care is only 12% of our monthly budget.  Meanwhile, the supposed best health care system in the world for that highest cost level in the world produces a worse than median outcome (that is the lower half for the statistically challenged) in the developed world for diabetes, infant mortality and life expectancy.  And all the GOP can whine about is how great it would be to go back to the old pre-ObamaCare system that bankrupted almost anyone who got sick while they were not covered by employer paid health insurance.  The old system was broken, so if you are going to repeal ObamaCare, you better have a solution. I know any GOP readers will not want to hear about it, but Heritage Fondation/RomneyCare/ObamaCare was the GOP solution to this unending increase in the aggregate cost of health care.

And finally, there is the complete irony that the GOP Senators are now completely aligned with the hard core conservatives in Iran who want a bomb.  They know that as long as they can sell oil, they will have enough money to build a nuclear bomb.  And sanctions cannot stop the selling of some oil, look at ISIS from whom nobody will admits to buying oil but they still get $$$ from somewhere for their oil.  The Nuclear Wanna Be conservatives in Tehran know there is no way their capacity can be bombed out of existence.  They know that a growing economy with an improving life style for the population combined with tight international supervision is the only thing that can stop them from building a nuclear bomb. And that is who the GOP Senators who signed this letter have aligned themselves with.  Do these guys think about anything from a base in reality?  It seems like all they can do is say, if Obama wants it, we are against it.

They think they aligned themselves with Bibi Netanyahu, but his denial of reality aligns himself with those Tehranian based conservatives.  And his denial of a Two State Solution shows he has no grasp on reality on almost anything other than his domestic political position.

I don't know which of these is most outrageous, but it really makes me sad that the Democrats cannot come up with some candidates to challenge Hillary.

Human Capital vs Redistributionist Progressivism & Why Not Hillary is best

I thank David Brooks for outlining this predicament and highlighting for myself why I am a Human Capital Progressive and not a Redistributionist Progressive.


Link to David Brook's column




I have been rather silent on the Democratic side of the 2016 Presidential campaign because there hasn't been much to talk about.  On the GOP side, I am just thankful that Jeb Bush, who is not a wild eyed crazy, is getting some early traction, although it is far to early to say whether he will be successful navigating the Primaries.

On the other hand, I don't relish the thought of another Bush Presidency because, frankly, I don't think he or George II are of the caliber of the George I for clear thinking and belief that balance in needed in government.

But this is about the Democrats.  I hope someone runs against Hillary or even that "E-mail gate" convinces her that she should just enjoy being Grandma.  Because, I think the GOP can beat Hillary.  She will have been part of the NY/D.C. scene for 24 years in 2016.  If that doesn't make you establishment, I don't know what does.  And I don't think someone who is part and parcel of the mess we have in D.C. can be a solution (that goes for both parties).   "E-mail Gate" illustrates how out of touch with reality Hillary is.  Yes, she will promote policies that I believe in, but she is also too desperate to be President.  Why else would a 67 year old even contemplate running for President?

As for the Progressive change in focus from Human Capital to Redistribution, while it is fine to focus on income inequality as an issue, it remains true that you can only find so much money in redistribution and that is primarily by closing loopholes of which there are only a couple of significant ones left.  You cannot raise marginal rates any higher:  the GOP won't allow it and it is bad economic policy to have a dollar of income taxed at greater than 50% on the margin and we are not far below it now (39.1% Fed + 2.3% Medicare (I think I have that right) + whatever State rate someone has, 7.9% in NY).

Redistribution, other than closing the Carried Interest loop hole, is a losing proposition in this country.  The fact that we have a Supreme Court dominated by Conservatives who see no evil in Citizens United is thanks to Bill Clinton whose Monica Lewinsky scandal cost Al Gore the 2000 election.  Now Hillary will probably run, may well lose because of her desperation, and the liberal justices who retire between 2017 and 2021 will be replaced by conservative justices.  Money will be dominating U.S. politics for decades to come.

I don't know who is a great Democratic candidate for 2016.  I just know Elizabeth Warren progressivism is a losing proposition.

Guantanamo Diary, Where is the Obama Administration on this?

I am almost done with this book.  It is a complete indictment of the insanity that revolves around Guantanamo.  Of course, there are bad guys at Guantanamo and I believe they should be in a proper jail, where they can be given a death sentence by our patriotic gang members who would also be in the population of a maximum security prison.

On the other hand, there are clearly some very innocent people still in Guantanamo.  Mohamedou Ould Slahi, the author, is a Mauritanian who was arrested in Mauritania, had not been in Afghanistan since he was a jihadist fighting the Russians (and being supported by the CIA), went to Germany and learned computers, which he was working at in Mauritania, when the CIA decided they wanted to question him about the Millennium Bombing plan, of which there is no evidence that he ever participated in.  For that, he has been in the CIA's custody ever since September 2001.  And he even won a Supreme Court decision that he was entitled to habeas corpus, but he is still in Guantanamo and has not been sent back to Mauritania.

Why does the Obama Administration keep a guy like this?  Unless the book is a complete set of lies, which neither the author's lawyer or the book's editor believes, the only reason for keeping him can be what he knows about the torture techniques used on him and the fear of some liability arising from that.  And if the CIA has evidence that he is lying, convict him in a judicial setting and put him in a proper jail.  Because right now, I think he is innocent and this is a shame on the United States of America.  Killers and rapists have gotten less punishment than this guy who did nothing wrong except somehow come to the attention of the CIA as someone to investigate.

His arrest and torture are an indictment of the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld Government.  His continuing incarceration is an indictment of the Obama/Panetta etc Government.

Putin Kills Again (but he is learning to cover his tracks)

Watching Putin operate I have come to realize we are getting to see how a Mafia Don gains and maintains power.

Putin learned from his shooting down the Malaysian Air Jet that you have to create the path of deniability in order to avoid blame for things you are obviously responsible for.  He hasn't done that in the Ukraine so Russia is suffering from the sanctions that the West was able to agree to.

Now he has had a political opponent murdered, but by immediately calling for an investigation he has created a path of deniability unless someone (very unlikely as they would likely be murdered as well) can actually prove who the killer was and get them to talk, which would likely involve getting at least 2 or 3 other people to talk if you can even find them.

Russia deserves better than this, but as I have written before, Putin is modeling himself on Peter the Great and no doubt will use the power of government to stay in power until he dies of natural causes in 20 or 30 years, at which point I will likely be dead and won't see what happens next.

I don't understand why the neo-conservatives in the U.S. were saying we needed a President like Putin a year or so ago.  They are probably hoping people forget what they said.

Farewell, Russia, home to 1/4 of my heritage.