The Lame-duck President and the Swan-like Senator

From the Wikipedia page of Senator-elect James H. Webb:

On November 28, 2006, it was reported that at a White House reception for those newly elected to Congress, Webb attempted to “avoid” President Bush, whom he criticized frequently on the campaign trail, and declined to stand in the presidential receiving line or have his picture taken with the president.

Reportedly, the president found Webb and asked him, “How’s your boy?”, referring to Webb’s son, a Marine serving in Iraq. According to reports, Webb replied that he “really wanted to see his son brought back home”.

Bush responded,”I didn’t ask you that, I asked how he’s doing.” Webb responded that that was “between me and my boy”.

Accounts claim that Webb was so angered by the exchange that he was tempted to “slug” the president, and later when recounting the incident divulged “I’m not particularly interested in having a picture of me and George W. Bush on my wall,”

By now, this little incident between President Bush and Senator-elect James Webb of Virginia has raced through the media tracks so many times, it has become dizzyingly blurry and confusing. Many pundits and editorial writers with spare pens and spare time to write have weighed in to add their precious bits and pieces of unalloyed and unsolicited wisdom to this fray. Silly me, that’s what media pundits are expected to do and which they do with gusto.

Anyway, most possible discernible angles have been amply covered and vivisected by pundits of widely differing political stripes. Revered conservative columnist, Mr. George Will started the proverbial ball rolling, laying the blame on Mr. Webb for exhibiting such a disrespectful attitude toward the exalted office held by widely-ridiculed President George Bush. For her part equally renowned Ms. Peggy Noonan “creamed” the buttered-toast side of Bush inferring that the president did not show presidential “grace” with his curt retort to Mr. Webb’s initial response. A credible sign of the escalating loss of grace in public discourse and demeanor, she appears to opine. And the ball has been bouncing back and forth, all across traditional media and the blogosphere. So fast and furious, a detached observer may find the overall scenery muddled and confusing.

One may wonder how in this enlightened and overly-informed world we live in, these “simple” matters appear difficult to resolve and have to be subjected to bountiful discourse and incessant hand-wringing. It would appear that most public issues cannot be plotted out as either black or white, but typically as shades of gray.

But are there still widely-held traditional values and standards that do not change and have withstood the harsh onslaught of time and strife? And don’t these “absolutes”, if we could call them such, still count to help resolve issues similar to this with judicial firmness and finality?

Anyway, why not ask the opinion of the detachedly uninitiated, out of the loop, not so sophisticated, and whatever, you know, the man on the street side of things, and see what he thinks. Take me, for example.

Thus, like it or not, here’s my rather puny take, randomly scribbled, as understood from different sources read.

It is common knowledge that Mr. Webb “dislikes” the president though for what exact reason opinions are quite divided. And judging from the way President Bush has regarded and responded to those who do not share his views or the way he runs his presidency, which is with almost nonchalant inattention to their criticism and name-calling, he has not responded in like manner. Meaning, he does not in turn “dislike” Mr. Webb tit for tat, not publicly at least.

Now, the White House, occupied and represented by the President, hosts a reception for ALL newly-elected members of Congress. If Mr. Webb so dislikes the President that he cannot stand his presence, why did he attend the affair in the first place, knowing Bush as the host will try his best to greet and exchange shoptalk with everybody present? Unless he was angling for a confrontation, a public one at that. And that he got, regardless. So, he should have stayed home instead.

For his part, the President’s retort, “I didn’t ask you that”, may not be the most tactful nor polite way of handling and deflecting any possible outburst, but cannot people see it in their hearts that anybody suddenly and unexpectedly rebuffed in that manner may not have the perfectly-scripted answer at that precise moment and thus as a result, what came out was a rather challenging and maybe, inappropriate reply. Of course, the body language and/or the tone of voice could have revealed more of the President’s real attitude toward Webb’s initial reply. But publicly, Bush has been quite circumspect in his pronouncements, even granting his apparent inability at times to articulate his ideas in as deft and artful manner as those of his contemporaries or those who had occupied his exalted office in the past.

Thus, regardless of what Mr. Webb thinks of this person occupying this most exalted nationally-elected position, and as he is now himself a newly elected public official in this same republic, he ought to convince himself to show proper respect, deference, and decorum before that presence, and most especially in any public setting. And to publicly report that he had entertained the “temptation” to physically assault the president adds more to that disrespect for the office. It would have been to the unquestioned benefit of everybody concerned had Mr. Webb kept that thought privately.

For his part, I would think that the President would be taking the high ground and elevating his and his office’s stature even more, if he would just publicly accept and apologize for that blurted retort to Mr. Webb’s initial reply to his question, not necessarily because he meant it as a brusque retort but simply because Mr. Webb may have taken offense.

Then, we can all say, Amen.

Graphics credit

An Issue Close To "Home"

As many may be aware the almost perpetually surging housing market in the US is in its painful throes of a steeply downward spiral of home prices or values for the past several months. Some areas more affected than others, while still other areas less perceptibly so.

But the more pressing issue now has become not whether overall real estate prices are going down, but whether the downward trends can show us that we indeed had a market bubble rather than surging markets firmly founded on good solid Economics fundamentals. And additionally, whether the bottom has been reached.

And the mostly subdued discussions, whether in the channels of traditional media or in the blogosphere and the Internet in general, continue to thrive amidst market fears that the slowly emerging data suggest that the bottom, whichever place it now resides, has not yet collided with the free-falling prices.

Invariably, one curious about the real estate markets learns to ingest and try to understand such germane concepts as housing starts, home sales, median prices of homes, sales of new or existing homes, interest and mortgage rates, conventional and unconventional modes of contracting mortgages, and not quite a few delving on more Economics concepts such as whether market indicators are leading or laggard, statistics, and then some.

For many homeowners, and there are ever growing millions (at times reported at about 68% of the household population), are necessarily quite interested and attuned to the hard-to-define vagaries of these markets. After all, for most homeowners, their homes are their single biggest and most valuable investments in their life times. And nothing could be more suspenseful and traumatic than to be silent and helpless witnesses to the observable diminution in value of ones' biggest estate holding. Silent and helpless witnesses, since individually there is really nothing much that one can do but sit and wait about for either a loud or soft thud announcing the markets hitting bottom, which most times like a lightning strike, the sound heard typically comes after the flash. And then wait out some more, with the ever renewed hope that the climb back of home values will somehow ensue in a most expedient manner.

The sub-group of homeowners most affected by all these is the group that has houses already listed for sale in this chaotically unpredictable market, never mind the many housing developers who hold unsold inventories trying their level best to dispose of their hot potatoes. Significantly slashed prices and very liberal credit terms, including seller giveaways, are said to be the choice approaches in luring otherwise hesitant or gun-shy prospective homeowners to taking the great plunge. But I suppose most homeowners trying to selling existing will not have pockets deep enough to offer those goodies, without burning themselves with actual losses.

I unfortunately find myself in this thorny predicament having initially listed our old house at the later half of September of this year. It could have sold easily were it not for the prospective buyers reneging on the terms meted out to them by their bankers. We wasted some precious time there, and not helped much by the fast coming winter time, when home sales are traditionally expected in cadence with the temperature to dip low because of the holidays. Aside from precious attention of prospective buyers being distracted by the upcoming excitement and merriment of crassly commercialized Christmas tide, available funds are instead invariably channeled toward expenditures for gifts and celebratory gatherings and outings.

Thus, the onset of the long wait, a bit disconcerting and costly.

I do feel I hold an ace in my sleeve. The optimist in me rearing its ever helpful head.

More gravely hit by this current housing debacle has been the newly-developed areas where new housing developments have been introduced, areas once sparsely populated. But other areas, especially older ones close to and around urban centers have more stable and price-insulated markets given that because of land use saturation not many new housing developments have been introduced. Which would have invited more homebuyers from other areas or encouraged existing homeowners to trade up and which in both instances create the overall effect of increasing the inventory of houses for sale over an above the normal inventory acquired through the normal flow of people leaving and entering the area.

And my unsupported prognosis is that such is the case with Daly City, especially the old part of the city that borders contiguously with San Francisco to the north. Land tracts available for new housing are practically nil even with the continued influx of new residents. This may indeed insulate the specific area from too harsh housing price fluctuations.

The city has traditionally been defined as a bedroom community, where workers from nearby San Francisco find comparatively affordable and conveniently located domicile.

While the state of California may be considered an epicenter for this upheaval because of the astronomically higher past gains in home prices, the above-described factor may help blunt some of the rippling effects of this price temblor.

On the downside, one has to realistically consider that many prospective homebuyers may already by priced out of the market considering the very high current prices.

Defamation In The Blogosphere

Last week, the California Supreme Court came out with a ruling that will definitely be added to the scanty jurisprudence that applies to the fledgling medium we call the blogosphere. In a landmark decision on the Barrett v. Rosenthal case, the high court ruled that internet users who post (to websites and discussion groups) material created by others are immune from liability.

To translate loosely to possible scenarios in the blogosphere, blog owners (or publishers), for examples, are not liable for items posted in their blogs’ comments sections. Nor are commenters themselves liable for quoted excerpts from other sources, unless the commenter himself is actively involved in creating the original written piece.

Gleaning from the few reactions from the blogosphere, they appear to be mixed, some favoring the decision while another side frowns on its possible unintended repercussions. The decision appears to be making a clear delineation between traditional media and the new media with the latter represented largely by the blogosphere; and what appears to be with the latter being favored with a more watered-down application of the laws of libel. That is, journalists in traditional media (or MSM) are being held to higher standards as compared to their step cousins in the blogosphere.

Maybe a little backgrounder may help in plumbing the profundity and cultivate a deferential appreciation of the legal facets that all interplay in this latest decision.

A quick visit to this site will provide a primer of basic facts in the understanding of defamation as it applies to the blogosphere.

A basic fact to remember is that slander is spoken defamation, while libel is written defamation, the latter applying to bloggers and commenters in blogs.

Here we speak strictly about what is legal or not, with no references as to whether adjudicated written material contribute to civility in public discourse or promote charitable interaction in the polity.

Thus, of curious interest to bloggers may be some leading examples in California jurisprudence regarding what would be considered libelous or not:

The following are a couple of examples from California cases; note the law may vary from state to state.

Libelous (when false):

• Charging someone with being a communist (in 1959)
• Calling an attorney a "crook"
• Describing a woman as a call girl
• Accusing a minister of unethical conduct
• Accusing a father of violating the confidence of son

Not-libelous:

• Calling a political foe a "thief" and "liar" in chance encounter (because hyperbole in context)
• Calling a TV show participant a "local loser," "chicken butt" and "big skank"
• Calling someone a "bitch" or a "son of a bitch"
• Changing product code name from "Carl Sagan" to "Butt Head Astronomer"

Lastly, note also that public figures are held to different standards from your typical folks where libel is concerned.

A public figure must show "actual malice" — that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth. This is a difficult standard for a plaintiff to meet.

Songs Tag

Got tagged in a musical way over at Tubby’s Comments. And am honestly quite clueless about this business of tagging, so am taking the safe route and just playing it by ear by copying the format.

Click to read more.

A Day In The Life: US Election Day

A Chronology:

November 6th, Monday 11 a.m.
Had a bit of dilemma about the Election Day scheduled tomorrow. Since I had moved to another city in another county and had not transferred my voter’s registration, I will have to drive 70 miles in order to vote.

So decided with the wife to drive to Daly City, San Mateo County, a day earlier so as to have time to vote the following day. And since we had some other businesses to transact, this was the best thing to do.

Drove the truck and got to Daly City at past noon. Got to the old house that we are trying to sell and started to settle in, with the barest of amenities since we have already moved our stuff out of the house that is now at escrow.

However, we weren’t prepared for the phone call of the real estate agent basically telling us that there is a material hitch in the sale – the prospective buyers are not amenable to the monthly amortization quoted them by their bankers. So things are on hold.

Anyway, did not allow this to faze me, so proceeded with the intended chores that I knew awaited me – trim the yards since we had not been to the house for over a month.

With nothing much to do in an empty house except for the basic appliances, focused on getting some sleep early.

November 7th 8 a.m.
Walked to our voting precinct, situated in a nice park and nestled close to a little hill. (Pictured above). Were gaily welcomed by the poll watchers, composed entirely of minorities – an African-American, A FilAm lady, a Sino-American lady, and a couple of Hispanic Americans scattered in what looked like the main meeting room of the park clubhouse. A quite typical setting in this part of California.

While we have voted for countless number of times on the same precinct number, this time the wife’s name was missing. Funny because she is the one who was born and registered a US citizen. And the poll watchers could not explain why. Just remember that these poll watchers are paid volunteers, who come in only during election time and maybe, a little time for training. Anyway, that was easily solved because she was handed a provisional ballot.

For the first time, we were asked whether we wanted to vote electronically or by paper ballot. But there was only one electronic machine and though it was early and voters were just starting to trickle in, we did not want to be delayed. We decided on the usual paper ballot which when completed is fed into an electronic sensing machine.

Since we carried with us our thick 191 page General Election booklet issued by the California Secretary of State and the accompanying Sample Ballot booklet of 20 pages, the ensuing voting was easy and quick, aided by the sample ballot already marked.

This time around the sample ballot looking much like the actual ballot was four pages long, with each the size of two bond papers joined together. This was only a state-wide election, but the many propositions sure added more heft to the ballot.

November 7th, 1 p.m.
Started the drive back to our new place hearing not much radio coverage of the elections, which campaigns have been very hotly debated and contentious over the last several months.

But then remember most precincts nationwide do not close till 8 p.m. Except that while it may be 8 p.m. in the east coast, it would still be 5 p.m. in the west coast.

So got home and attended to usual chores attendant to taking any trip that far and long. Even had time to put on the old sneakers and sweat pants for a quick jog around the park quite visible from the house.

It is now November 7th, 9:21 p.m. and so this would technically be live-blogging.

Voting has now finished in all of continental USA. I still have to hear from TV or radio about far-flung Hawaii.

Anyway, as expected the Republican-dominated Congress is slowly changing composition with Republicans losing seats. But as it stands as of this minute, the Republicans still have to lose 3 seats in the Senate to give away control. However in the House, the Democrats are already enjoying a 6-seat margin.

But there are still many races to be tallied. Remember in the west coast, the election ended only about an hour and ½ ago.

Update:

November 7th 9:45 p.m.
It looks like even this early, barely an hour and 40 minutes after the polls have closed, Arnie the governator of California has clinched his re-election. A strange combination this Arnie, registered a Republican but with a Kennedy-Shriver wife which can't get any more Democratic than that.

But the fight to watch is still that in Virginia were both candidates are literally running neck-to-neck. This is between Republican George Allen, once projected as presidential timber, and Democrat James Webb, one time Navy Secretary.

November 7th, 10:38 p.m.
It looks like a couple of Senate contests are too close to call, eventhough for at least one race initial count has completed. Two issues may come into play. One is that if the margin is very little, the losing side has recourse to an automatic recount of all votes. And the second is that the absentee ballots will have to be manually counted. And in some states, it is reported that absentee ballots are counted a day or two after election day.

But overall, Democrats still have the opening to wrest control of the Senate, too. After all, right now they need only 3 seats to get it and at least two races are leaning either way.

November 8th, 7:57 a.m.
The Republicans continue to hold control of the Senate but their control may end if the two contested races fall toward the Democrats. Even this late, the Missouri race is still up in the air with the Republican candidate (Talent)holding a lead of a couple of thousand votes; while the Virginia race has the Democrat leading but will surely be contested. And the history of recounts has shown that rarely has the count been overturned. Whatever the result of the recount, the presidential aspirations of Virginia's George Allen has been dashed to pieces.

One harangued Democratic timber who surely is sighing in relief is Sen. John F. Kerry, since many had predicted that his most recent "botched joke" gaffe could derail the expected Democratic landslide in Congress.

Last Update:

November 9th 8:25 a.m.
Putting an end to this account, NBC has announced that the Virginia Senate seat goes to Democrat James Webb, giving control of the Senate to the Democrats. But I still have to hear if defeated candidate, George Allen, has given his concession speech.

Earlier yesterday, Pres. Bush punctuated the proceedings by formally announcing the resignation of Defense chief Rumsfield. Noticed that during the almost hour long TV appearance, the Prez appeared quite animated, and surprisingly, very self-confident.

Thus, Election 2006 is now part of history, specifically that history of the 6th year of a sitting president mid-term elections where since post-war, the incumbent's party has always lost considerable seats in Congress. Is this worse than the past? Let the punditry roll.

Ironic that this late, I still do not know the fate of the local officials that I voted for, being many miles away. Specifically the FilAms who I voted for.

Lawyer and former Mayor Mike Guingona, who has now become more publicly visible with his appearances as host on the Filipino Channel, was seeking re-election to his Daly City council seat.

Together with a FilAm lady named Anette Hipona who was seeking a first term. Now, what could be more Filipino than that last name?

And lastly, well-credentialed Anthony Fel Amistad, who was seeking a county seat. I believe his second run for it having failed the last time.