Lunchtime Digestion of Yesterday's Reading

Yesterday, I printed out the following articles/op-eds for the day's reading:

Matt Yglesias' Sept. 18th article: Obama's foreign policy advantage
NY Times: Democrats set terms as bailout debate begins
NYTimes (as recommended by the lovely staff of the American Prospect): Conservatives Try New Tack on Campuses
NYTimes: 2 Candidates Urge Greater Oversight in Bailout Plan
Robert Reich at TPM: What Wall Street Should do to Get Its Blank Check
Economist: Global Finance is being torn apart; it can be put back together again

I know, these weren't the bulk of my usual sources. But the bailout is so out of my comfort zone I was testing the waters in the mainstream.

Oh, this one is from last week, but on a gray cloudy day like yesterday, a newsreel like this one left me with such a warm, hot-cocoa-and-breakfast-in-bed comfort: Palin's Transparency Proposal Already Exists in DC (the punchline fills you with joy!)

I think Yglesias puts foreign policy discussion (and specifically its recent absence in the campaigns) into a single, beautiful sentence:

"Pocketbook concerns are always dear to the electorate, but it would be nice for voters to give some consideration to the question of whether the right lesson to learn from the Bush years is that we need a president who believes strongly in the power of war to solve problems."

I do so appreciate the earnest and well-researched opinions of my like-minded sources here, but wonder, considering how explicitly the Obama camp is drowning out all other issues with the booming economic wails of today, would giving voice to Matt's distillation above really ring so poignant to the swingvoter?

In moments of cynicism like this, I'm happy to report that in the last week, the greatest most sobering go-to is FiveThirtyEight, which means the pretty site is plastered with blue. Today there was a link to the blog of the professor that my brother recommended but whose name I'd forgotten: Tom Holbrook. He supposedly knows his shit with election stats and trends and bumps. I recommend checking out his site.

Now, because my lunchbreak is almost over, I also wanted to get out a comment I read last night at Echidne of the Snakes. She's writing about the bailout and Paulson's heinous proposal to BE the invisible hand, the sentiment rocketed me back to October 2001 and the Patriot Act.

"One part of me thinks that the draft had those totally unacceptable bits about no laws allowed for the very reason that people would get up in arms about them and then any compromise would seem like a victory, while in reality the industry and its cronies got exactly what they wanted." Read her post here.

So it seems, from my timid gauge of "what's happening out there, man," Paulson and Bernanke will not exactly get their way. Is it a sign of not being jaded enough that I almost want to giggle at their ridiculous backing: "yes, it's not the perfect plan, but we need to do something right now! now! really, this very instant! do it! do it!" Which really begs, quis custodiet ipso Paulson?

more later.