Poem: Lola Haskins

I finally dumped my 8 years old wallet and replaced it with a new one I had in my drawer (it's been there for the last 5 years). In the process of emptying out the old wallet, I found a short poem, by Lola Haskins. It's titled, "Love":

LOVE

She tries it on, like a dress.
She decides it doesn't fit,
and starts to take it off.
Her skin comes, too.

This was one of two poems I had in my wallet. Not sure why I had that particular one in there, other than the fact that it's one of the most poignant poems I've ever read. Can't you just feel the unnamed woman's anguish? I am still in awe of how the last line creeps up on unsuspecting readers, only to bludgeon them so matter-of-factly in the end.

Book Rec: Factory Girls

I am in the middle of Factory Girls, a fascinating book about migrants in China:

Factory Girls

The book is a fantastic read. The writer, Leslie Chang, traveled to China and got to know various factory workers, all of whom migrated from small towns into large cities. She wrote about their experiences, and even seamlessly includes her own family's migration to America. The women profiled are incredible human beings, and reading about their lives should be required for every American high school and college student. What struck me most about the migrants is their desire to do anything to move up in society, including enrolling in "white collar" manners classes. Even though the migrants' wages are absolutely meager--about 50 dollars a month--they forge forward, determined to leave their mark in the city. Think Grapes of Wrath, but Chinese-style. Thanks to Jeff E. for the recommendation.

Yahoo (YHOO) Update

Here is the latest on Yahoo (YHOO):

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Yahoo-to-replace-Yang-as-CEO-apf-13601499.html

Mr. Yang is going to step down. Bostock has the easiest decision ever--Susan Decker is right there. She takes over Mr. Yang's spot, and using her position on Berkshire's board, talks to Warren Buffett about a partial sale to Microsoft. Mr. Buffett, of course, knows Bill Gates very well. Mr. Bostock can't possibly screw this up...or can he?

Louis Brandeis

A friend picked up the Brandeis train (courtesy of The Green Bag) last month. Isn't it a beaut?

Brandeis has a special place in my heart for these words:

The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone--the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect, that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment. (OLMSTEAD v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438 (1928))

"The right to be let alone." Such beautiful words. Too bad it's just a dissent, and therefore not legally binding.

On Prostitution

Re: sex workers, the keys to legalization seem to be as follows: 

1) criminalize excessive and unwanted solicitation, which allows the workers to avoid coercion; 

2) legalize prostitution, which requires police protection and presence for both customers and workers, furthering increasing the safety of the transaction; 

3) tax the transaction, thereby funding other services, like education as well as the police squads assigned to the "Hamsterdam" districts; 

4) require STD testing and databases of all participants before any activity; 

5) place all districts far, far away from "core" business activity, including K-12 schools; 

6) provide housing dormitories and free health care (in exchange for waiving some privacy rights in order to study physical changes or some other constructive health care purpose, and only when the workers themselves choose to see a doctor for more than the required STD-testing) to ensure that they can save their money (think military-style housing); 

6) require that at least 10% of all earnings be set aside into an irrevocable retirement fund until age 50 and put into a balanced fund; 

7) require 5% of all earnings be put into a liquid account accessible upon exiting the business; 

8) require maximum employment of 15 years (I'm not sure about this step, but the idea is that at some point, just like prison rehabilitation programs, the participants would re-enter "core" societies with marketable skills); 

9) apportion some tax revenue to the workers to decide what to do for communal purposes, allowing an indirect education into economics and politics.

Bonus: Police protection is necessary to prevent trafficking and mafia involvement--the whole point of legalization is to eliminate the underground economy; again, the idea is to shift police resources away from undercover work and targeting the informal economy into protecting consensual behavior; 

You'll notice I included social services, too, but in non-traditional forms--free housing, vocational job training, healthcare, and financial independence.  

You'll notice I want a time limit to get the women and men out of this business eventually. 

Prostitution is not something most people want to do, but it happens, it will always happen, and we must choose where we want our resources to go and whether we want a society that favors above ground or underground systems.  Re: imbalances in power, they exist in almost every single business transaction. Does anyone suggest all results of imbalanced power relationships are automatically immoral? Shouldn't the touchstone of the analysis be voluntary consent, safety for all parties, and fair pay rather than subjective criteria? In other words, shouldn't the analysis center on how to avoid using the worker as a means rather than imposing a legal structure based on subjective criteria, which will only drive the business underground? 

Blue Dog Democrats

The WSJ's November 14 letters section (A16) introduced readers to a Blue Dog Democrat, Jim Cooper. I am a registered Democrat, but am fiscally conservative, which makes me a Blue Dog Democrat.

Rep. Cooper makes the point that the federal government "is still using unaudited cash accounting despite the availability audited, accrual numbers. The federal government is the only large enterprise in the U.S. that is exempted from normal accounting rules. If you want the truth, check out the 'Financial Report of the U.S. Government' (available at http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/)."

That link leads to this one: http://www.fms.treas.gov/frsummary/index.html

A politician who isn't lying, and who's showing us where the truth is? Just doing the former would make him special in Washington, but the latter, too? Bless those Blue Dogs.

Michael Lewis on Wall St Corruption

Michael Lewis always has great stuff:

http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom

My favorite parts? Here you go:

In Bakersfield, California, a Mexican strawberry picker with an income of $14,000 and no English was lent every penny he needed to buy a house for $720,000...

He called Standard & Poor’s and asked what would happen to default rates if real estate prices fell. The man at S&P couldn’t say; its model for home prices had no ability to accept a negative number. “They were just assuming home prices would keep going up,” Eisman says.

Oh, the hubris.

Poem: How do you like them apples?

It's the weekend, so not much on the economic front to report. The government might take our tax dollars to give to GM and Ford, but that potential giveaway comes next week. For now, some poetry:

http://paulgoetz101.wordpress.com/2006/11/15/federico-garcia-lorca/ [Broken link]

Same poem, different link:

https://www.poets.org/poetsorg/poem/gacela-dark-death

Federico Lorca, who wrote the poem above ("Gacela of the Dark Death"), had a fascinating, but sad life:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federico_Garc%C3%ADa_Lorca

Bay Area Homeowners in Trouble

According to The SF Chronicle and Zillow.com, around 20% of California Bay Area homeowners have no equity in their homes:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/11/11/MNN0142MCG.DTL&

Zillow's estimated prices are not 100% accurate (that's the nature of an estimate), but it's very hard to price houses in this market; therefore, Zillow might be the closest thing we have to getting what I call the "misery numbers."

Hat tip to Barry Ritholtz for linking to the SF Chronicle article first.

Poem by Judith McCune

I keep this poem in my wallet. It's from The Atlantic magazine (March 2000, page 96), and I've kept it there for eight years. Like my eight-years-old wallet, it is fraying and may soon become unreadable. I wanted to post it here so that others may read this little-known poem. Click on the link below to read the entire poem:

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/poetry/antholog/mccune/theguest.htm

I can't post the entire poem because of The Atlantic's copyright (a question for the IP and copyright lawyers out there: once the author is dead, does the copyright to her work diminish in any way, even though the owner of the copyright is the magazine, not the author?). In any case, I will quote the last stanza only to entice you to read the poem:

Now when Chiqui asks me how I've slept, I lie: Just fine, I say, though by this time I've learned the Spanish word for shame.

Copyright © 2000 by The Atlantic Monthly Company.

The poem neatly summarizes my old-fashioned world view. It has hard-working immigrants, caring family members, and a continuity of time (expressed through different generations of the same family). It also juxtaposes old-fashioned values against modern values in a way that makes the new values subservient to the old ones. Whenever I read McCune's poem, I fall in love with its style and content all over again.

Ariel Investments

Ariel Investments CEO John Rogers, Jr. beat Michael Jordan in a 1-on-1 game back in 2003. The video is here:

Ball Don't Lie

WSJ Link

Just for this, I am going to buy some Ariel funds someday (http://www.arielinvestments.com/). I love the way Mr. Rogers Jr. calmly walks away after the game instead of getting excited or trash talking. That's the temperament--calm but determined--a good mutual fund manager should have.

CEO Lanni Leaves MGM Mirage

MGM's CEO Lanni is leaving MGM Mirage:

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN1338744220081113

Jim Murren will likely replace him. Here is an old transcript of a 1998 interview with Murren:

http://www.fool.com/foolaudio/transcripts/980813_mgg.htm

Mr. Murren seems much more candid than Mr. Lanni. Earlier this year, I posted a review of the 2008 MGM shareholder meeting--see 2008 MGM Shareholder Meeting--in which Mr. Lanni seemed far too sunny and upbeat about his casino's prospects. You can't blame the man for trying, though.

I hope next time I'm in Vegas, I won't get a horse's head in my hotel room after this blog entry. An experienced dealer in Reno once told me, "Back when the mob was running Nevada, things ran much more smoothly." I bet.

General Electric at 12 Year Low

General Electric (GE) stock hasn't been this low since July 1, 1996. GE stock went as low as 14.58 per share today.

Yesterday, the stock tanked because the federal government suddenly reversed course and said it would not be buying bad debts. GE issues debt and also owns various financial subsidiaries, including insurance companies. Absent a government guarantee, various pieces of GE's financial portfolio would be less attractive to buyers. However, GE immediately issued a press release noting that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approved GE Capital Corp. to participate in the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program--meaning up to $139 billion in short and long-term debt is going to be guaranteed by the federal government. (See AP article.) I guess when one door closes, another opens.

Today, GE's stock tanked because of rumors that GE was cutting its dividend, which stands at a hefty 7%. GE denied the rumors, but its stock fell anyway.

I am a major buyer at these levels. I picked up three thousand shares yesterday and just bought another thousand shares this morning at around 15.24 per share. My average buy price is around 16.25 per share.

Update on November 13, 2008: I sold my 4000 shares of GE at 16.74 today. Had I waited just five more minutes, I could have sold my shares at 16.90, meaning I would have made another $600+. That's fine--I'm not greedy. GE stock closed today at 16.86. It will probably go up more tomorrow, but I had too much invested to sleep comfortably if I held my shares overnight.

If you go back and look at my "Stocks Update" posts, you can view my short-term trading record. I also sold the GOOG and AMAT shares I bought yesterday.

The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.

Techcrunch on Yahoo

Yahoo's share price is almost in the single digits:

Techcrunch

It's like watching a train wreck. Susan Decker needs to call Warren Buffett and get some advice.

Buying Opportunity?

If you are a high risk trader, today's volatility might create a good entry point for short and long term trades.

Today, I bought GE, AMAT, and GOOG. My largest purchases were in GE--I now own over 3000 shares of GE at around 16.55 a share.

Traders still have twenty five minutes to buy (or sell) before the market close.

The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only and does not constitute investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities or make any kind of an investment. You are responsible for your own due diligence.

California's Ailing Government

The AP's Judy Lin reports that California faces a $28 billion deficit:

SJ Mercury

And the hits just keep on coming...

Famous Speeches

Here is a website with transcripts and some audio/video of famous speeches:

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speechbank.htm

Here is a speech by Barbara Jordan--before Obama, Barbara Jordan spoke of change:

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barbarajordan1992dnc.html

And here is the text of one of my favorite speeches, by Barry Goldwater:

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barrygoldwater1964rnc.htm

We see in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society. And -- And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We don't seek to lead anyone's life for him. We only seek -- only seek to secure his rights, guarantee him opportunity -- guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed...

Balance, diversity, creative difference: These are the elements of the Republican equation. Republicans agree -- Republicans agree heartily to disagree on many, many of their applications, but we have never disagreed on the basic fundamental issues of why you and I are Republicans.

This is a Party. This Republican Party is a Party for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists.

That's from 1964, back when Republicans knew what they stood for. How will the GOP recover from its 2008 defeat? All they have to do is look at the not-too-distant past for answers.

________________

Here's a link for the lawyers--speeches by U.S. Supreme Court Justices:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/speeches/speeches.html

How Did You Vote?

This is the Ron Clark Academy presidential debate. Gotta love the token white guy.

Lyrics to “You Can Vote However You Like”

Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
I said, you can vote however you like, yeah

Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like
I said, you can vote however you like, yeah

(McCain supporters)
McCain is the man
Fought for us in Vietnam
You know if anyone can
Help our country he can
Taxes droppin' low
Don't you know oil's gonna flow
Drill it low
I’ll show our economy will grow
McCain’s the best candidate
With Palin as his running mate
They’ll fight for gun rights, pro life,
The conservative right
Our future is bright
Better economy in sight
And all the world will feel our military might

(Obama supporters)
But McCain and Bush are real close right
They vote alike and keep it tight
Obama’s new, he’s younger too
The Middle Class he will help you
He’ll bring a change, he’s got the brains
McCain and Bush are just the same
You are to blame, Iraq’s a shame
Four more years would be insane

Lower your Taxes - you know Obama won’t
PROTECT THE LOWER CLASS - You know McCain won’t!
Have enough experience - you know that they don’t
STOP GLOBAL WARMING - you know that you won’t

I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA
Stick with McCain and you’re going to have some drama
We need it
HE’LL BRING IT
He’ll be it
YOU’LL SEE IT
We’ll do it
GET TO IT
Let’s move it
DO IT!

Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah

Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah

I’m talking big pipelines, and low gas prices
Below $2.00 that would be nice

But to do it right we gotta start today
Finding renewable ways that are here to stay

I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA,
Stick with McCain you gonna have some drama
MORE WAR IN IRAQ
Iran he will attack
CAN’T BRING OUR TROOPS BACK
We gotta vote Barack!

Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah

Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah

Where Will the GOP Go Next?

Here are some articles on the battle for the GOP's future--will the Republican Party be able to contain the competing viewpoints of its reformists, traditionalists, and secular conservatives?

David Brooks: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/opinion/11brooks.html

National Review: National Review Corner

Rod Dreher: Crunchy Con

Yours Truly: Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Palin's Got to Go

And, just for kicks, a biblical perspective on immigration: Dr. Lindy Scott

Retirement Options for the Self-Employed

If you're self-employed, you have access to multiple retirement accounts, including a SEP IRA, a SIMPLE IRA. and, if you run your business just by yourself, an individual 401k. But how much asset protection do you really have with these retirement options? I can't vouch for the accuracy of the information below, because it's from 2005, but the basic information appears to be useful:

http://www.financewin.com/html/Taxes/200511/IRA-Protection-10193.htm

Because I save a lot of money in my retirement accounts, I've always been concerned about what would happen if I somehow received a judgment against me. Perhaps I need not have worried.

On October 17, 2005, the bankruptcy reform law, formally named The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (11 USC 101), went into effect and apparently protects most retirement accounts.

SEC. 224. PROTECTION OF RETIREMENT SAVINGS IN BANKRUPTCY.

   (a) In General.--Section 522 of title 11, United States Code, is
amended--
           (1) in subsection (b)--
                   (A) in paragraph (2)--

[[Page 119 STAT. 63]]

                         (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and''
                     at the end;
                         (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking the
                     period at the end and inserting ``; and'';
                         (iii) by adding at the end the following:
           ``(C) retirement funds to the extent that those funds are in
       a fund or account that is exempt from taxation under section
       401, 403, 408, 408A, 414, 457, or 501(a) of the Internal Revenue
       Code of 1986.''

Basically, it appears the bankruptcy law allows you to protect most retirement accounts against creditors when you declare bankruptcy. For more information, you should contact a CPA or tax attorney.

GM's Woes

The AP has finally reported that GM might be going bankrupt: AP Story on GM

The press, as usual, is slow to catch on. I predicted GM's bankruptcy last year, in a letter to The Metro: [Metro Letter]

[A]lmost no one in the private sector receives pensions or lifetime medical benefits, and all the private companies who used to offer such benefits, such as General Motors and Ford, are changing their policies and are slowly going bankrupt.

I hope Lee Iacocca was wrong when he (reportedly) said, "As goes General Motors, so goes the nation." But Mr. Iacocca seems to be blessed with accurate foresight--see Where Have All the Leaders Gone?, published May 2007:

Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course." Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic. I'll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out!

It's just a little bit of history repeating...

Reason #3947 to Be Libertarian

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance--not just against foreign influence, but also against our own government agents. Our government has spent our money going after a man, Sayed Mousavi, who wanted to promote cell phones in Iran. He also did not report a portion of his taxable income (for which he should be punished financially). The government used a law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to convict him. Yet, no one believes this man is a terrorist except perhaps the American government and their lawyers. The most distressing detail is that our government removed Seyed Mahmood Mousavi's American citizenship by claiming he lied on his citizenship application. They apparently used mis-translated documents as evidence. 

To those would say America is a place where all citizens can breathe free post-Obama, the government's prosecution of Mr. Mousavi is a harsh lesson that vigilance must remain high. Even if Obama issues executive orders nullifying enforcement of the Patriot Act, such as canceling Executive Order 13224, more laws exist to harass citizens and non-citizens in America. 

Laura Donohue, a Stanford fellow, once said that counterterrorism activity increases "executive power both in absolute and real terms. This changes the balance of power at a federal level between the branches of government. It changes the relationship between the citizens and the state." Executive Order 13224, mentioned earlier, gave the White House and the Treasury the power to freeze assets of those they suspect of being terrorists and those they suspect have associations with terrorists. In other words, citizens "can have their assets frozen without being found guilty in any court of law for actually having any association with terrorism itself." "Between October 2001 and April 2005, 743 people and 947 organizations had their assets frozen underneath this order. 98% of the people, and 96% of the organizations, appeared to be Arab or Muslim." (Laura Donohue, Commonwealth Club speech, 9/11/08, page 20-21 of the November 2008 The Commonwealth magazine). 

Unfortunately, Obama is not proof that this country has progressed past its religious intolerance. Obama is Christian. Bobby Jindal, another political up-and-comer, converted to Catholicism. If you are not some form of Christian in America, and you have innocuous ties to Middle Eastern countries, the government is apparently willing to charge you with a crime. I realize Mr. Mousavi may have violated a trade embargo, and if he knowingly violated the law, jail-time is warranted. What terrifies me is our government, rather than prosecute him specifically for his violation of the trade embargo, actively expanded its prosecution to remove his citizenship--despite no evidence that he was a terrorist or danger to his community. 

Also, I've never heard of International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). It seems that so many laws have been passed, the government can classify any transaction with a Middle Eastern country or charity as illegal. Overly broad laws effectively intrude on personal associations and the right of peaceful assembly guaranteed under the First Amendment. For example, if I believe that my association with others can be used against me in the future, I may alter my behavior and self-banish myself from others who share minority religious or political views. Thus, the Patriot Act and other laws similar to it--which apparently do not require any malicious intent or actual damages--have the effect of violating the First Amendment by their mere existence. 

If you are interested in more information on domestic surveillance laws and activity, get the November 2008 edition of The Commonwealth magazine. One section of Donahue's speech is titled, "Better than the Stasi," referring to domestic law enforcement activities.

Norwegian Poetry

Props to the Norway for having such an eloquent king. From King Olav V of Norway:

When I look back
I see the landscape
That I have walked through
But it is different
All the great trees are gone
It seems there are
Remnants of them
But it is the afterglow
Inside of you
Of all those you met
Who meant something in your life

King Olav V
August 1977

Cars and People

Reason #1044 I hate cars and the driving culture:

Cars and Cities

She makes great points about cities being more hospitable when they are not built around an automobile culture.

Tech Geeks

Since Warren Buffett mentioned geeks earlier, I've been meaning to post something for my tech geeks--here are some links you might find useful:

http://kadster.blogspot.com/2008/08/destinations-for-open-web-knowledge.html

Just leave your financial formulas at home, and no one gets hurt.

More Reasons You Should Vote Libertarian

This article should make every American mad as hell:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081108/ap_on_re_us/halberstam_fbi_file

Basically, the FBI spent taxpayer monies to spy on one of our best American writers. Many people associate David Halberstam with military or political history, but I found him through his sports-writing. I highly recommend Everything They Had: Sports Writing from David Halberstam.

Don't you just love the FBI's response when they were asked why they were spying on Mr. Halberstam? "[The file] speaks for itself." &!%$##^

Dick Armey's Conservatism

In today's WSJ (11/7/08, A17), Richard "Dick" Armey correctly pinpoints the problem with McCain's campaign--a failure to communicate convincing pride in individualism and small government:

The modern Republican Party has risen above its insecurities to achieve political success [in the past]. [We] understood that big government was cruel and uncaring of individual aspirations. Small government conservatism was, by definition, compassionate--offering every American a way up to self-determination and economic prosperity. Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006 because voters no longer saw Republicans as the party of limited government. They have since rejected virtually every opportunity to recapture this identity...The evidence suggests we are still a nation of pocketbook conservatives most happy when government has enough respect to leave us alone and to mind its own business.

The last line is pure poetry. Unfortunately, Dick Armey has the fatal flaw of many Republicans--cultural myopia, which has led him to make insensitive statements against minorities. Cultural insularity was a major problem in McCain's campaign and especially in its VP choice, because unless Republicans convince Americans they stand for more than just quota-type diversity, their ranks will not grow. If you don't believe me, take a look at the Arizona audience for McCain's concession speech, and compare its diversity with the people in Grant Park and worldwide who supported Obama. The United States has changed demographically, but the Republicans seem oblivious.

Cultural insularity is the main reason Sarah Palin was such a controversial choice. Picking her meant the Republican Party consciously closed itself to independents who didn't favor a robust Christianity or who valued intellectualism. Palin famously refused to specify what she read (see Couric interview) and admitted she hadn't traveled much outside of North America before her VP nomination (see Gibson Interview, 9/13/08). But Palin aside, the Republicans desperately need a plan that will make them more attractive to people in larger cities, who tend to be less religious and more diverse. The solution is simple: if Republicans want to beat the Democrats, they must agree to advocate smaller government, lower taxes, and more legal immigration.

The failure to have a coherent immigration policy doomed the Republicans and will continue to doom them as long as they are viewed as a white, Christian party. This is because the electoral college system favors states that attract the most immigrants (or whose residents have the most children). For instance, despite winning only 53% of the popular vote, Obama won around 70% of the vote that matters, the electoral college vote. He won by focusing on diverse, larger cities, and he prevailed even though he received only 30% of working-class white votes. In short, Obama won because he understood that a vote in California is worth more than a vote in Alabama.

Assuming the electoral college system continues, sensitivity to legalized immigration and ethnic and religious diversity will be necessary to win the White House. Every single state with more than 19 electoral votes has either a large immigrant population or is not majority white. Meanwhile, many Republican strongholds, like Alabama and Kentucky, are experiencing depopulation or are sustaining population levels mainly because of foreign immigration. In fact, without immigrants and their children, America would have a negative population growth rate. Assuming naturalized citizens favor legal immigration and do not agree that Christianity is the only path to morality, any continued attempt to support Sarah Palin or persons like her as representative of the Republican Party will exclude immigrants and residents in mega-cities.

Still Pro-Palin? Look at a sample of mega-cities, like Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, San Jose, San Francisco, Miami, New York City, Philadelphia--in all those cities, the white, presumably Christian population is a plurality, not a majority. Outside of Texas, guess how many cities with over a million residents are majority white? Only one--Phoenix, Arizona--and the Republicans already tried winning with that hometown hero.

If you continue to disagree that a pro-immigration, non-religious platform is necessary for the Republicans to recapture the White House, you should study Santa Clara County and North Carolina. Both are microcosms of America in terms of changing demographics.

In Santa Clara County, more than 40% of the residents were born outside the country. An astounding 69% voted for Obama, and only 28% voted for McCain. Those numbers demonstrate how out of touch the Republican Party has become with non-Caucasians and non-Christians. Republicans should be more popular in California--after all, Californians recently elected a Republican governor, and the Republican Party's platform of less spending and lower taxation should appeal to high-earners and people concerned with the state's budget crisis. Yet, Republicans cannot gain a reliable foothold in any county where immigration has exploded. This failure to do better in diverse counties, even in states that badly need fiscal discipline, shows that the Republicans' strategy of focusing on whites, Christians, and senior citizens at the expense of other groups is not viable. This is not to say that Republicans should exclude their core groups of support and suddenly focus on minorities. That strategy shift won't work, either. For example, despite having consistent support from Florida's Cuban population, Republicans lost Florida. In addition, foreign-born Americans are only 12% of the national population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2004 survey.

What's the solution? Again, it's surprisingly simple: Republicans need to focus more on fiscal responsibility, advocate more legal immigration to appear progressive, and excise the fundamentalist religious right from their ranks. To do this, Republicans must cast out Sarah Palin and expressly affirm the separation of church and state. Indeed, despite being accused of practicing fundamentalist Christianity, Sarah Palin never delivered her version of JFK's "Catholic speech" or an Obama/Jeremiah Wright rebuttal. By failing to publicly and openly address concerns that her religious beliefs would interfere with her ability to govern the nation impartially, she hurt the Republican Party in all major urban areas. She also lost an opportunity to show that she understood American values, an opportunity a previous Democratic candidate did not forsake. Historians now agree that JFK won in no small part because of his stand against the commingling of church and state:

I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end...

And it represents the kind of Presidency in which I believe--a great office that must neither be humbled by making it the instrument of any one religious group nor tarnished by arbitrarily withholding its occupancy from the members of any one religious group. I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office...

I am wholly opposed to the state being used by any religious group, Catholic or Protestant, to compel, prohibit, or persecute the free exercise of any other religion.

If the Grand Old Party wants true reformation, it will condemn in the strongest possible language any Republican who believes that a particular religion is required to gain God's favor. Ironically, this shift will probably cause the Christian right to create the first viable third party in America, which will gain Senate seats from the Midwest and allow them a firmer, more consistent voice in politics. Thus, my proposed solution would create a win-win-win situation.

Still unconvinced? Take a hard look at the evolution of North Carolina. Less than ten years ago, North Carolina voted for a senator, Jesse Helms, who was opposed to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and who filibustered the idea of having a national holiday for Martin Luther King, Jr. (as you can see, minorities and immigrants have legitimate reasons for not voting Republican). North Carolina voted for Jesse Helms from 1973 to 2003--twenty long years. Recently, however, North Carolina voted out Helms' successor, Elizabeth Dole, in favor of a Democrat, and previously, it elected one of the most liberal Democrats, John Edwards.

The story gets worse for the Republicans. North Carolina voted Republican in every presidential election from 1968 to 2004--until Obama. That's quite a shift from Senator Jesse "Anti-Civil-Rights-Act" Helms in the last ten to twenty years--and the children of recent immigrants, both legal and illegal, haven't even hit voting age yet. North Carolina shows that if Republicans do not disavow themselves of their Palin/Helms strain of right-wing religion and cultural insularity, they will lose America. Not just "real America," but America, period. After all, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States say nothing about Christianity, Jesus Christ, or the Bible. Also, in 1797, George Washington signed the Treaty of Tripoli, which declared that “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”

Demographics are destiny, as the saying goes. For now and the immediate future, the demographics are decidedly in favor of a party that respects and favors legal immigration, diversity, and separation of church and state. That's good news for Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bobby Jindal, and others prescient enough to see the future of American politics.

_________

Blog Post on Immigration Policies of Obama and McCain:

http://claresays.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/mccain-obama-and-immigration/

Update on April 2, 2009: not that it's conclusive evidence of anything, but Newt Gingrich agrees with me.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/02/gingrich-warns-of-third-party-in-2012/

Update on April 2012: for better or worse, urbanization is happening world-wide, not just in the United States: "In the hundred years between 1950 and 2050, the global population is undergoing an irreversible structural transition in the way we live.  Drawn by the economic, lifestyle and social opportunities of urban dwelling, the world's population is migrating from rural areas--accounting for 70% of global population in 1950--to cities--accounting for 70% of of global population by 2050 based on United Nations projections.  In 2009, the percentage of the planet's population living in urban areas crossed the 50% threshold and by 2037 cities in developing nations will contain half the world's total population." (from Credit Suisse, April 2012)

Update on March 2017: "Hillary Clinton, more than others, has a worldview problem because the vast majority of the electorate has already told itself a story about her... I believe there isn't enough money in circulation to persuade those voters that have already made up their minds to change them." -- from Seth Godin's All Marketers are Liars (2005), pp. 81, hardcover.

Update on December 2017: the Republicans won the 2016 election through a twice-divorced candidate who married a legal immigrant, presumably employs numerous immigrants in his businesses, and who has no religious piety or knowledge. Unfortunately--or fortunately--I was wrong about Bobby Jindal's potential. 

Yahoo and Microsoft Saga Continues

Jerry Yang reached out to Microsoft and was met with partial rejection. Yahoo had increased around 7% this week on rumors of a Microsoft buyout. Today, Steve Ballmer shut down any hope of a buyout, causing Yahoo shares to decline by around 14%.

Continuing the romantic analogy I've used to describe this situation (Yahoo Shareholder Meeting (2008)), Ballmer basically said he is willing to sleep with Yahoo but not marry it--in other words, he will partner with Yahoo but not buy it. Yahoo must feel terrible knowing that Wall Street values its stock more by Microsoft's intent than on its individual growth prospects. Can't a woman just be independent and attractive? The market is treating Yahoo like an old woman with no other prospects, no job, and no education, who needs to find a man quick or be cast into a dungeon. It would be funny if it wasn't so wrong.

Yahoo can do fine on its own. Its home page continues to rank in the top two for visitors. It is doing very well in Japan. Also, the recession will help Yahoo keep more of its American talent. Yahoo's salesforce might be its biggest problem--it needs to focus on getting major ad accounts to boost its revenue, and it has lost some key sales personnel. At least now, Jerry Yang can't be completely blamed for Yahoo's stock price--he reached out to Microsoft and was rejected. It's time for Susan Decker to talk to Time Warner and buy its AOL property. After all, the best revenge in romance is finding another desirable partner.

California's State Budget

California will raise taxes to stem a massive budget crisis:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081106/ap_on_bi_ge/california_budget

Two items in the article tickled my tragedy bone:

1. The additional 1.5% raising of sales taxes. It's being called a temporary tax, but as we know, the government rarely retracts a policy when doing so would mean a reduction in tax receipts. In addition, this tax will fall disproportionately on the poor and middle classes and will discourage holiday spending. I am not opposed to raising sales taxes in general, but now seems like a terrible time to do it.

2. The state's admitted over-reliance on capital gains tax receipts. Apparently, our controller was basing budget projections on an ever-increasing stock market. Are you kidding me? Someone ought to send Sacramento a self-destructing copy of Dow 36,000 pronto. The origins of California's financial and housing crisis come into clearer focus with each passing day--total blindness and overzealous optimism are never a good pair.