- invade Russia
- prayer before work
- mandatory abstinence

At this point, I really don't see how Palin could be any worse.

I don't think that word (worse) means what you think it means.

When the government is divided, you don't expect anything to happen?

Dude, I'm (almost) as pissed as you are. But suggesting that Palin could run Stalag 13 as well as Colonel Klink, let alone keep the US Government and the entire world economy from total implosion, is simply beyond the pale.

Well, for all we know, had McCain become President, the Dow would be at 14000 and unemployment at 7%.

But alternative histories and hard, and future histories are even harder.

And completely meaningless. The fact of the matter is that the financial system did not implode, and we did not enter another Great Depression. Might we still? Neither you nor I have the faintest fucking idea. Nor do we have any idea who or what was or will have been most responsible if it does or doesn't in the future.

Nonetheless I am (almost) as appalled as you are at the old boy's network that still inhabits the corridors of financial power at Treasury, The Fed and the White House.

---

It's my understanding that Barney Frank is hard at work coming up with financial reform legislation. Will it have any potency whatsoever? I have no idea. Why has it taken a year to get to even this point? I have very little idea.

It does seems like the 535 members of Congress are only capable of doing one thing at a time. And that badly. Our method of producing legislation in this day and age seems hopelessly inadequate to the task.

On the other hand, Republicans are not all completely insane. When you are about to muck with the entire financial system of the United States (and therefore, indirectly, the rest of the world too), or when you are about to muck with the health care system for 300 million people, you probably need to be careful and not be overly hasty. So there must be balance. But the scales are weighed in the wrong direction.

The Senate was designed, more than 200 years ago, to slow things down. The Senate, god bless its soul, has written itself rules that are designed to slow it down even more. It's absolutely amazing that ANYTHING gets passed by the Senate, given its byzantine rules, it's points of order, its filibusters and its holds. And Harry Reid.

If Obama is partly to blame (and I agree that he is), then Reid should be drawn and quartered. For the life of me I can't figure
out how someone who exhibits the leadership abilities of a dead gerbil rose to such power. You'd think that Obama could perhaps
inspire him to action, but it seems he's unreachable.

Still, There is always hope.

Obama has lost support across the board and that's no surprise. No matter who was elected President in November he or she would have lost support from almost everyone because of the economy.

I'm impressed. I honestly would not have expected you to have such an impartial assessment.

So, given your track record, we should be able to confidently conclude that the Democrats will lose about 10 seats max in the
House and pick up a seat in the Senate.

But let's evaluate this a year from now. Prognostications so far out make for amusing arguments, but are of almost no value.

Democrats ran on being 'clean'

Between that, and the 'transparency' (you know, except like when it would be bad, like, you know), the Democrats are really giving new meaning to "go long promises, and short performance".

Oh, I know that.

But to hear the Obama crowd talking, "it will be different this time".