San Diego Housing Bubble News and Analysis

From blog comments:

"Eight years of Bush have not been kind to science. And given the challenges we are facing (e.g., how to sustain well over 6 billion people without destroying our planet), this is not the time to short-change the scientific enterprise. Sadly, there is much evidence that McCain will carry on the Republican trend. Picking a running-mate that believes the Earth is 3000 years old, and that humans have nothing to do with global warming, does not inspire confidence."

Check these out. If it wasn't so scary to live in a country that might elect her, it would be funny.

On Foreign Policy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg

On the Bush Doctrine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciFIpFyWw7k

I liked the Year 2000 McCain much better.

I'll be voting for Obama since of the two, he's clearly the superior choice.

Obama is the better choice.

McCain is old. Early-stage dementia.

Time to turn the page, Obama/Biden '08.

Gandalf

Gandalf: We're discussing weaponry, specifically combat shotguns, on another thread.

That's way better than talking about that dunderhead McCain and Obama.

Hey Gandalf:

How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown

Zeitgeist, what the hell are you babbling about? Sure you don't like Obama and his numbers have gone down amongst registered Independents, but what have you got in your corner? Really I want to know. Palin? Limbaugh? Cantor? Bachmann? Romney? Even Paul is unelectable as much as Kucinich.

If you think your party looks any more esteemed or has garnered more respect with their recent behavior you are so wrong it's laughable. I'm laughing now.

Beck/Limbaugh 2012.

Eugene, we may not agree that real estate bottomed in Q4, 2008; but we did agree on the Obama vote.

I'm not optimistic that Obama can deliver on his promises, but hope is better than nothing for those facing hard economic times.

Now about those lower-class social conservatives in the Red States (and in East County) who consistently vote against their pocketbooks, well... let them eat cake.

Obama is too much of a softy. We need some tough economic love in my opinion.

Sdgrrl: Speaking as a conservative (not a Republican; as I've said before, I haven't voted GOP since Dole in 1996), I am watching a fast forward self destruction of the truly liberal wing of the Democratic Party.

Forgetting Obama's plummeting poll numbers for a second, focus instead on his sudden inability to successfully articulate any sort of coherent policy approach on any one of a number of issues.

Healthcare and Afghanistan are the two largest ones, in my mind. On healthcare, Obama squandered a golden opportunity to lay out his case to the American people and "make the sale". Instead, we're treated to a circus side show by the Administration, culminating with the thoroughly vile Pelosi accusing average citizens of being "un-American" for engaging in the most basic right (1st Amendment) of all: Assembling and speaking out about an issue that gravely concerns them.

On Afghanistan, pay particular attention because this war will be Obama's Vietnam. There is no clear cut mission and this war is being waged in a country which has ejected countless foreigners before, going back to Alexander the Great. We are expending ever more blood and treasure in this swamp of a country and the very people (liberal and left wing Democrats) who condemned Bush's "War of Choice" are now engaging in the self-same conduct in this "War of Necessity". Iraq, however, was actually somewhat functioning as a viable country, versus Afghanistan, which ranks perilously close to Somalia in various rankings regarding lawlessness, violence, corruption and lack of any sort of cultural or societal underpinnings.

Yes, the GOP has become a tired joke and a broken brand. The Dems, who were handed a glittering opportunity and control of all three branches of government, have managed to very nearly put it into the ditch and do so in about 200 days. Bravo!

Allan, would you agree that taking away someone's right to free speech un-American?

Were the people that Pelosi was referring to exercising their right to free speech or were they preventing others from exercising theirs?

I'm not a fan of Pelosi, and I don't necessarily agree with what she said, but there is an important distinction here. Furthermore, I fully support "Obama = Hitler" signs and questions about death panels. But there's quite a difference between "speaking out about an issue" and disrupting civil discourse for the sake of disruption. What about the poor old lady who wanted to ask how she will be able to afford her meds but couldn't ask because she was shouted down by some loonies? What about her 1st Amendment right?

But overall I agree with you that the Dems are being a bunch of tools at the moment.

To all Barack Obama supporters and voters:

Hope is not a foreign policy.

Hope is not an economic policy.

There were many of us here who told you Obama was incompetent.

There were many of us here who told you Obama was an empty suit.

Unfortunately we have been proven correct.

There are a lot of life-long Democrats who have already figured this out.

No matter how badly Republicans do, these facts remain unchanged or unmitigated.

We told you so we told you so we told you so.

And I say this with no joy or malice in me. Just the facts.

Afx: I completely agree with you. On another post, I pointed out that there was definitely an element that was showing up and being intentionally disruptive at various Town Hall meetings and that is wrong.

Further, I would also say that I vehemently disagree with "Obama = Hitler" signs and for the same reason that I vehemently disagreed with the "Bush = Hitler" signs: Whether or not you support the President, he is the President and you respect the office. I think this sort of demagoguery, regardless from the Left or Right, is wrong and is tearing at the fabric of civil society.

My dad had a great expression: "I may disagree with everything you say, but I will die for your right to say it".

One of the reasons I find Pelosi so reprehensible as both a person and an elected official is the utter hypocrisy, combined with her complete and total disconnection from the very people that elected her. During the BushCo years, she was the first to encourage people to dissent and protest and was totally silent when people were viciously attacking the President and his policies. Now, suddenly, it's become "un-American" to speak out and those that don't agree with the current Administration and it's policies are now hooligans and tools of the Right.

Yes, I'm sure there are instances where some of these protesters are paid to be there and be disruptive, but we're also seeing an ever growing legion of average Americans that are justifiably worried and not just about healthcare, but about a government sprawling out of control and spending trillions of dollars on what appears to be an ever larger series of boondoggles.

I would bet money that you, as a liberal, are looking at the same situation that I, as a conservative, am and are just as horrified and appalled. And that gives me hope, both for our country and it's future, because it means that Americans are still engaged and can still be enraged. I don't foresee a violent revolution, like some here do, but I do see a revolution brewing.

Not a Dylan fan eh sdgrrl? He is a poet, not a babbler and you are a twit:

http://www.metrolyrics.com/like-a-rollin...

While I agree that he is less popular now than previously, I don't think 8 months of an administration is enough to determine his eventual legacy. I think Kennedy and Reagan and W have proven than. Would you disagree?

history

Dan:

Nope, history is not yet written in stone for Barack Obama.

It could get significantly worse for him.

Allan,

I appreciate your tone and thoughtful response. I can understand how people could disagree with Obama. I can see how Obama is everything they ever had a nightmare about in regards to elected leaders. I do wish more people would argue like you about policy and not about conspiracy theories.

No one though has ever answered my questions ever about who is a viable contender for the office of the POTUS in 2012 on the Repub ticket.

Sadly, if the Repubs had never given voice to the wingnut Repubs and their talk about religion, creationism and obstruction of science they never would have alienated people like you and I probably. I want a religious home and a secular government.

It wasn't just Bush. I know Repubs are sick of hearing about Bush, but it was also the Repub party who were the most fiscally liberal group of people. They are responsible for so much of what is going on and yes those in office are still having to clean it up and no six months is not long enough to do it.

Was the bailout the right thing to do? I don't know and I've said that before, but what would have happened without it? If you were in charge what would you have done? Honestly, would you have sat back and watched the markets correct themselves in a noble Rand ideology ? Watched AIG go under and just dealt with the consequences? Would McCain have just sat back and watched it to? Probably not. He would have tried to appease his party and then saw exactly what was going on and how bad it really was.

The bailout is working, definitely not as fast as the fickle populace would like it, but at least we are seeing money being paid back:
http://money.cnn.com/news/storysupplemen...

Obama sold his health care policy when he was elected with a huge electoral mandate. There is no point trying to sell it to that portion of the population who will never be swayed; because they will never be swayed.

He has been weak with it in actually creating a bill and getting it to congress, because he thought for a moment that it could be bipartisan in any way. The Republicans are obstructionist in regards to health care and hopefully the Dems have realized that the Repubs will never help them and just move forward without them.

He has created the circus and a sideshow? Not the protesters who yell Heil Hitler to a Jewish man talking about Israel's health care or the woman screaming I want my country back from the illegal Muslim Kenyan?

Pelosi is vile? How about Gov Perry of Texas superficially calling for my home state to secede from the Union. I watched the news today and people were picketing in Austin for Perry to now make good on his threats. Over and over I heard these folks saying they hate the USA. Why? Because they have a president they don't like; a man who will be out of office as an absolute guarantee in 7 years? Where was this anger two years ago when a dry drunk idiot running this country in to a ditch?

You're right the Dems aren't doing the greatest, but I have noticed some things:

My religious views aren't front and center and i don't have a bunch of evangelical wing nuts arrogantly smiling as they go in to the White House.

No Jack Abramoff scandal; it could always change.

No terrorist threat color grids going crazy on my television.

A President who doesn't want to alienate Muslims and look in to leaders souls; I know I bring that up often, but it never fails to astonish me.

Not as many religious wingnuts decrying homosexuality and then getting caught hitting on young congressional pages, not as many bathroom altercations or ministers having meth fueled gay sex. Why? Because they don't have as strong of a voice since they are not whispering in the Presidents ear and we are not watching so closely what they are doing.

Of course the Dems will lose favor and be voted out. It absolutely will happen eventually and it should, because then it would be a permanent one party rule. I still cannot forget the absolute arrogance of the Repubs when they held all the cards in their hands. It was sickening and such a corrupt environment that I ran to the other side. Are the Dems angels? Absolutely not, but the culture under Delay, Cheney and Hastert..dear Lord disgusting.

What should be done with Afghanistan? I'm not sure. I know that the Taliban is still there and that there was extreme voter intimidation to the point women had there fingers cut off. Should we allow the Taliban to infiltrate again and practice their idea of Sharia? Should we give up a footing in both Iraq and Afghanistan with its prime position so close to Iran? I don't know?
I don't know if this should be called Obama's Vietnam...I really don't know.

Thank you Zeitgeist, coming from a loon who thinks Obama is building internment camps for Liberal World domination your opinion for the rest of the time I must see it will and has never meant anything to me. I hope you have ten brothers that are exactly like in every way. For every one of you you create 100 others that will run the other way. When you find that Kenyan birth certificate or you know someone that must go to an Obama internment camp I will personally give you the biggest Piggy apology in history. Douche.

Beck/Limbaugh 2012

Sdgrrl: You sure covered a lot of ground in your post and I'm almost not sure where to begin, in terms of responding.

I don't disagree with many of your points and as far as the fall of the Republicans go, I always quote Lord Acton: "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely". After 20+ years at the helm, an institutionalized arrogance had set in, with predictable results.

I don't really have anything against Obama, but I tend to agree with Surveyor's assessment of him as an empty suit. I didn't see bi-partisanship at work on healthcare, I saw inexperience and an intellectually superior aloofness. I'm often struck by his almost clinically technocratic nature, which at times is positive (he tends to stay cool and distant in times of stress), but is often negative (too dispassionate when discussing issues that are emotional, like healthcare or America's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan).

Who steps up for the Republicans in 2012? Good question. I hope to God it's not Palin, but I'm not really afraid of that happening. I happen to like Pawlenty, but as really more of the best choice of a bad lot. My wife, like you, is a Texan and I saw Dubya for what he was during his governorship of Texas.

The true conservatives in the Republican party, like Barry Goldwater, are long gone. Even Reagan's vaunted "revolution" was more rhetoric than reality, given that Reagan raised taxes and went on a spending spree of his own.

I guess what I'm saying is that I agree neither side has a large contingent of angels. What scares me more about this Administration and Congress, is that we're seeing what happens when the radical Left is in power and it's much akin to what happened under Dubya when the radical Right was in power. Clinton, for all his faults, finally decided to hew close to center and did manage an effective Presidency, especially in his second term. And power is ultimately what the entire conversation ends up being about. Strip away the rhetorical flourishes from both sides and it's about seizing and then retaining power. The potential long-term damage from this untrammeled spending spree (and it started under Bush) is terrifying and we're just standing here and watching it happen.

Actually, I'll use this dupe to address your question on Afghanistan.

Speaking from experience on counterinsurgency operations, I will say this: The greatest danger in Afghanistan is what is referred to as "mission creep". We saw it in Vietnam, where we landed the 1st Marines at Da Nang in 1965 and within a few years, had 500,000 troops in country.

There isn't a clear plan in Afghanistan. There are several competing ideas and thoughts and the most dangerous of these center on nation building, which in a country like Afghanistan is sheer lunacy.

So, the choices really boil down to two: One, get the major combat forces the hell out and focus on what was successful in 2001: Emphasis on Special Operations Forces (SOF), backed by air power and drones and with a specifically focused mission (interdicting the Taliban and al-Qaeda), or, Two, commit tens of thousands of additional American soldiers and Marines, which will cost many more billions of dollars and longer casualty lists for years and years to come.

While the answer really is obvious, the question becomes what Obama is politically prepared to do. In many ways, the questions he's facing are not different from those faced by LBJ in 1964, and we all know how that turned out.

Allan, in no way am I a military scholar, so my words are just that- words.

Its hard for me to imagine Afghanistan being seen as a Vietnam by the public until we get the casualties that were sustained during Vietnam. It was definitely the huge casualties, with no goal and no end in sight that made the Vietnam War so unpopular. The Dali Lama said something to the extent "People don't mind suffering as long as they know there is a reason". Which is why during WWII and its huge casualties we still supported the war; there definitely seemed to be a reason and victories won.

You are right; without a clear plan Afghanistan could resemble Vietnam, but Vietnam was lost in the public's eyes and it seemed that brought it to a close before the job was complete. The public...isn't to involved with Afghanistan, it's definitely not a huge political platform like Iraq was.

I don't know the military logistics that will keep Afghanistan calm and cool. What worries me though is the scenario that we do pull out of both Iraq and Afghanistan- Iran then gets a foothold in both countries. Iran rubs elbows with its old relatives, the Shia in Iraq. Its possible the Shia of both countries will exact revenge on the Sunni population, but most important is Iran's influence and proximity to the nation.

Iran gets a foothold in Afghanistan, because the country is so fragile and easy to take over.

Iran then secures a relationship with Pakistan on good terms again. Suddenly, we are looking at a huge Iranian superpower with Pakistan and its nukes at their side.

So- we pull out, but I fear if we do when we go back the job will be even harder with enemies coming from all around with an enemy footing even more strong and nukes on the table.

Those are my fears, but I don't know.

sdg- Sticks and stones. Just because I do not agree with your world view does not make me a loon. I say you are a twit because you behave in a superficial, condescending way. You are a typical uninformed, petty, name calling person who resorts to taunts and insults when the argument does not go your way. Do not bring my family into this discussion. I did not bring yours into it. Your guild mentality shows what a real xenophobe you really are.

Sdgrrl: As a military history buff, I'd be the first to agree that Vietnam was fought on the battlefield and lost on the home front.

I don't think we're in danger of losing 60,000 troops like we did in Vietnam, but, remember something here: Prior to Vietnam, the only serious reverse we suffered was the Korean War, and that ended in a stalemate. There was nothing in our history that prepared us for a loss and Vietnam changed the landscape, both historically and culturally, and it's been with us ever since.

We're now seven years into Afghanistan and our troop commitment stands at 60,000+ and some commanders are suggesting even more US troops are needed. Our NATO allies are a joke (according to a friend of mine who's there, ISAF (the international contingent) stands for "I Saw Americans Fight") and the various European countries, including Britain, are growing weary of the cost and casualties.

Also, don't forget that Afghanistan proved the Soviet's undoing and largely due to time and money, rather than casualties.

I hear what you're saying about Iran, but does that mean we commit ever larger amounts of troops and more money and time, in what appears to be a growing quagmire?

I don't know, either, but I do know this: We don't have the money, soldiers or time to spend on this. Not if we plan on truly building a nation out of the mess that's there presently.

I agree with this person about the government:

"More proof that Bush and Obama are the same person.
Hopefully people will simply have all purchasers sign a form stating that these are collectables and are not to be given to individuals under 12. There must be some simple way around this foolishness."

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/135807.html

Oh give me a break Zeit. Really. You hide behind a Dylan song and use it for your own benefit to taunt Gandalf. Then if I criticize it you say oh its Dylan and he's not a babbler. No, Dylan is not a babbler-you using his lyrics to fit an immature taunt is babbling to me.

I'm uninformed? How? Is what I said about the Bush/Repub years untrue? Did eight years of Bush make this country better or worse? Did the Repubs bend over for the religious right or not? Was there not a huge culture of corruption with Abramoff around? Sorry, am I just not forgetting these things fast enough for you? Would I be informed if I went to websites with a Repub agenda? Would I be informed enough for you then?

What argument doesn't go my way? Over and over I say I can see how Obama could be unpopular in many people's eyes. I understand how his policies could be a nightmare to some.

Argument? Your awesome BS refuted claims of Obama's birth or his concentration camps. It doesn't need to be argued by me really, because any journalist worth their paycheck has refuted it for me any way.

Would I be informed if I believed Obama was illegal and was setting up camps for conservative evil doers? What that fit your hole in a shoe box "world view"? Could I then be appreciated by you?

Have I not asked you time and time again about your ideas for the 2012 Repub ticket? I have heard you criticize over and over the Dems, but you have never once given one coherent answer from your side.

Have I not said time and time again I don't know if the bailout was right, or that I know anything about Afghanistan other than my fears of Iran gaining a foothold.

For Pete's sake.

I'm a xenaphobe? That's awesome seeing that my mom is Korean and my fiance is a Jewish/German. Please give me one instance of my xenophobia. Please.

I'm a superficial twit and you are a far right robot. If you are going to post inflammatory/loony post about concentration camps and birther conspiracy theories I hope you can take the heat.

I miss Marion. She was much more entertaining and less sensitive than you. Sorry I hurt your feelings. I wish you a very happy marriage and a long life. It is too early to predict who will be around for the 2012 elections at this time. I have not looked that far ahead. I think Casca knows much more about the future than I do.

Hah! That's awesome. I think anyone who goes to these sites and post and refutes anonymous opinions should hardly have their feelings hurt. You make a lot of accusations and yet you back it up with nothing; cut and run?

I too wish you a long happy life and you are not going anywhere and i'm not leaving...oh we will run in to each other again.

I'm a xenophobe though? That's awesome! I'll mull that one over as I'm eating my kimchee while using my shamash to light my menorah with my extended fam and supporting my black president whose father came from Africa.

I agree Allan- I have no idea how these wars will end and what the ramifications will be in ending them. I think Iraq has a better chance of sustainability than Afghanistan only based on their commerce; oil vs. opium.

I don't know how Iraq's ethnic groups will get along though. Will Shia's accept a Sunni president and vice versu without an American presence? Is it almost better to divide the country into two states? I don't know. Then you would have a diaspora of each ethnic group. It's tough. Don't forget about Hezbollah(Lebanon) and Syria and how they could help the Shia populace and a possible Shia/Iranian superpower:

http://books.google.com/books?id=UPUUL2H...

I don't know if we should commit more troops in Afghanistan. I really don't.

I agree our country cannot afford two nation building wars. I have to talk about Bush, Delay and the Repubs who were in power at the time of the wars:

http://books.google.com/books?id=s4OeoaU...

These men who wanted to look tough on war and keep their base happy with tax cuts drained our accounts and left us where we are today.

They fed from the trough when they were in office and left others to pick up the pieces.

Okay-I'll stop with the Repub bashing.

Allan- I have no idea how we are going to get out this mess unscathed (sigh).

Sdgrrl: Objectively speaking, don't you see the trap here as far as partisanship goes?

While I would certainly be the first to castigate the Republicans for some really stupid actions and actors, I would also turn right around and do the same with the Democrats. Congress is enjoying horrible approval ratings and for very good reason: They're doing an awful job.

What's been created by very smart operators like Carville and Rove and Begala is a balkanized, polarized America. We're riven by pointless wedge issues (gay marriage? Really?) and deflected from the issues of real substance (Education, Energy, Infrastructure, Economy... shall I go on?) that no politician, Dem or Repub, in his/her right mind wants to touch. We are sitting here fiddling while Rome burns and blaming "the other side" for all of the ills.

As far as an Iranian superpower goes: I'm no expert on the Middle East, but I think Iran is already done. The clerics and hardliners have discredited themselves as nothing more than a power-hungry group of radicals and they've shown a willingness to do anything to maintain that power, including rigging elections and siccing their brownshirts and Gestapo on those Iranians who were demanding nothing more than fairness and a right of franchise.

This is an educated, literate, pro-American/pro-Western populace, and one that's fairly youthful. Watch out.

Allan,
You missed your calling. You also might have sdg reread my posts. She has made many erroneous accusations about them. She either is a very poor reader or prefers to see what she wants to see. I think the three you mention have created a vast divide, but I usually see Rove back his arguments up with stubborn facts. The other two are nothing more than over paid operatives and has been consultants.

Zeit: Thank you (I think). Don't you feel we all suffer from a certain degree of confirmation bias? I can't abide HuffPost or DailyKos and I would rather read PowerLine or RealClearPolitics instead. I don't watch Fox News, but I also avoid CNN like the plague.

I'm sure I fall prey to some of the more questionable accusations surrounding Obama and the Dems, but I also know that much of what I see and read is real and, more importantly, verified by sources other than conservatives. I think the mass exodus of independents has exposed Obama and his beliefs and I think it's going to get far worse from here on out.

Referring to him as an empty suit as Surveyor did, isn't a pejorative to me, it's an apt description. The very things that made Obama effective on the campaign trail, including coolness under pressure while Hillary was trying to carve him up, his soaring oratory and the message of "hope" and "change", is now working against him. Now, he has to deliver on the message and the tempo and dynamic of the campaign has been replaced by having to actually govern the country and he's being exposed as an inexperienced leftist ideologue. Again, not a put down, but an observation based on watching him operate.

I believe the Dems as a party are also experiencing the triumphalism and arrogance of a party that's been out of power and is now back in, and they're trying to do everything at once and attacking anyone or anything (i.e. Orszag and the CBO) that gets in their way.

And, I have the sense it's going to get even more interesting going forward.