FastCompany.com reports that a Vatican cardinal is blaming greed for the financial crisis:

The world’s financial crisis is the result of greed, and an example of what happens when God, basic rights, and the common good are ignored.

Don Boudreaux has a nice, non-theological answer for the accusation of greed:

“Greed” certainly can be unleashed to do harm, but it can also be harnessed to do good.  Any compelling explanation of any observed economic reality must take “greed” as a given while identifying the specific incentives provided by prevailing social institutions.  If these institutions make serving the needs of others the best path to personal gain, then “greed” is harnessed for human betterment.  But if these institutions make predating on others - either through force or fraud, or either intentionally or unintentionally - the best path to personal gain, then “greed” will indeed lead people to act destructively.  In either case, though, it is the institutions and their accompanying incentives, rather than “greed,” that explain economic reality.

There is little utility in blaming greed. It is more useful to point out actions that can be reversed, such as bad legislation.

Another problem with punishing greed is that everyone is greedy.  Whether people get a loan on a $250,000 house that they can’t maintain the mortgage on, or whether a mortgage broker collects a fee for selling mortgages the actuarians say won’t get paid off, or whether people collect high-risk mortgages and sell the groups of securities, people are all being greedy. Shall we punish everyone?  Or is the market doing a sufficient job of punishing right now?

Despite some promising discoveries, the cause of autism is unknown and a cure does not exist. Research is crucial. Every 20 minutes another child is diagnosed with autism. Not only must we find ways to improve the quality of life for children and adults with autism, but we also must find a cure.

If you’ve met me in person, you have a chance to help. You can donate to Autism Speaks through our team’s web site, or if you will be in the area that weekend, you can walk with us. Your voluntary donation will be tax deductible, match-able depending on your employer, and guaranteed not to be used in the buyout of bad mortgages.

We invite you to walk with us and/or support us with your donations to Autism Speaks to fund essential research. Send me an email or comment that you’re interested, and I’ll send you the link to the team’s web site.

But Sunday was weird.

At the end of the Synod-prepared service, we recited the LWML Pledge and sang the two LWML hymns. The Pledge and “Serve the Lord with Gladness” aren’t bad at all, but the whole congregation then sang “Lutheran Women, One and All” (RTF lyrics).

Did Synod forget there were guys still in its churches?

I’m not having a coronary over this, but I just think it’s funny. My wife and I exchanged some humorous looks: I told her I would be singing they rather than we.

“This bill is a $700 billion check to build confidence in our financial markets. It’s a remedy, not a cure, and I’m afraid there’s nothing in this bill preventing us from having to write another $700 billion check in the coming weeks or months. If Central Ohio families and businesses are footing the bill to stabilize our ailing financial markets, they deserve a cure.”

No thanks are due the second time around, on an even more expensive bill. He voted Yes.

On his congressional web site, Rep. Tiberi writes:

“The bill the House voted on today is a heck of a lot different than the earlier version brought up on Monday. My main concern Monday was that the assistance in the bill would never reach local banks, small businesses, and Central Ohio families. I was also concerned that taxpayers who did nothing wrong would end up footing the bill to stabilize our financial markets. I believed it was important to have the right bill, not necessarily any bill.

“Today’s version, while not perfect, is a vast improvement. The FDIC insurance increase will help provide small businesses and entrepreneurs in Central Ohio with increased confidence that when they do business at local savings institutions, their money will be safe. Mark to market clarifications alter outdated rules to allow for accurate accounting of assets. This should help to relieve pressure on local financial institutions. During a time of economic uncertainty raising taxes on the middle class is not good policy. This bill includes provisions to prevent tax increases, keeping hard-earned money in the pockets of Ohio families.

“While we can’t guarantee financial security, I believe today’s bill gives local banks and businesses access to the credit and liquidity they need, while giving families more confidence in our financial system. These steps provide our financial markets the tools they need to put our economy back on track.”

This couldn’t have been “the right bill.” It still contains the bailout. It still rewards the lenders. If the FDIC increase, the one-year Alternative Minimum Tax fix, and the mark-to-market rules were beneficial, they should have been voted and passed separately, rather than serving as lubrication. $110 billion dollars in “answers” came at the cost of $810 billion, and nobody is fixing the cause. This was a lose-lose deal.

Issue 1: Constitutional Amendment for earlier State Issue filing deadlines: Yes

There are compelling issues For and Against Issue 1. The case “for” involves taxpayer expenditures for advertising issues which ultimately don’t make the ballot. The case “against” involves the potential for an referendum to get delayed over a year after the Ohio legislature passes a law that the public may not like.

I’m inclined to vote Yes, because saving taxpayer money is a good thing, and the petitioning process delays the change the lawmakers were planning to make. Good laws are rarely written in haste.

Issue 2: Constitutional Amendment to Issue Bonds for Environment and Conservation: No

It’s funny that the “for” argument says twice, in bold, underline, and/or italics, that this doesn’t raise taxes. Yet taxpayers do pay for additional debt incurred by the state. In a down economy assuming $400 million in debt isn’t be a good idea.

Issue 3: Constitutional Amendment to Protect Personal Water Rights: No

Ever since Kelo v. New London I have been quite vigilant about property rights. Looking at this text, though, I am stumped as to the point of this issue. It says the private individual has rights, until the government trumps those rights. Perhaps if a neighbor was using water under or around a person’s land, this amendment might come into play. The Ohio Supreme Court has already ruled that a person has reasonable use rights to the water under their land; are people afraid the Court will reverse that decision? We probably should wait until the Court screws this up to fix it.

Issue 4: Proposed Law Requiring Paid Sick Leave for Employees in Ohio

Withdrawn from the ballot. Good thing, too. Mandating benefits takes a weapon out of the employer’s hands for attracting the best talent. It also raises employment costs and harms small businesses.

Issue 5: Referendum on Payday Lending legislation: No

We’ve argued this before. While payday lending shouldn’t be an activity of first or even second resort to citizens, this choice of last resort shouldn’t be taken away from citizens. This is nanny-state thinking.

Issue 6: Constitutional Amendment for a Casino and Casino Tax: No

On the simple question, I would vote to allow casino gambling, but this question isn’t so simple.

This amendment allows the establishment of one casino, creating an instant gambling monopoly in Ohio.

The amendment stipulates that the owner of the casino spend $600 million. Why not let the casino owner manage his own cost? Maybe he could build a cheaper, more profitable facility?

Finally, this amendment sets aside any local and state laws, including zoning laws, that would prevent the casino from opening. This has the potential of overriding the desires of the people most directly affected by a casino in their backyard. People have cause for concern about their property values. They should be able to work out a compensation deal with the casino owner for permission to use the land. Moreover, does this give the owner the right to flout environmental, building, and inspection laws that would prevent the casino from opening?

Debaters: Quit telling me about your opponent. In fact, quit telling me about you. This is probably the biggest stage you’re going to walk on. Use it to convince people of your principles. Talk about how increasing drilling will or will not lower gas prices. Tell us where you think government screwed up in the financial sector. Don’t tell me that you’re qualified because you can see Russia in your backyard, or because you’ve been in the national camera for decades.

It will be interesting whether Gwen Ifill, who has been completely outed as in the tank for Obama, will actually pull punches on Gov. Palin in order to make herself look impartial. She is going to be accused either way: being weak on Palin by the left, being gotcha to Palin on the right. She should have recused herself.

Entry question: What would a debate drinking game look like?

One drink if:
Presidential candidate is mentioned
President Bush is mentioned by Biden

Two drinks if:
President Bush is mentioned by Palin
Biden goes personal on Palin

Three drinks if:
Biden gets angry
Biden flirts with Palin
Palin blows a basic history question

All in all, nobody really blew their foot off. Biden definitely knows more stuff, but I thought Palin did better talking to Joe Six-pack.

9:32 Biden’s closing statement is pretty strong, but again, it’s vote for Obama because he’s not Bush-McCain.
9:31 Biden wants a referendum on Bush.
9:30 Nice closing statement by Palin. Positive and “unapologetic.”
9:28 Palin goes back to principles on the last question.
9:24 “It didn’t take me long…it took me about 5 years.” Biden admits his ideological litmus test with respect to Supreme Court justices. I appreciate the honesty.
9:23 Now Biden is getting angry about McCain being the maverick. It’s a three beer!
9:21 I actually like the Biden background info.
9:19 Unapologetic. Nice one from Palin.
9:18 I also don’t like this question about “what’s your Achilles’ heel.” It’s equally useless in job interviews.
9:17 Biden’s attack on Cheney doesn’t reflect well on Biden.
9:16 Dumb question about the legislative role of the vice-president. He’s President of the Senate! That’s part of the checks and balances.
9:14 Biden is right about no federal funding for NCLB…but I would argue against the necessity for a national education program in the first place.
9:12 Nice bit of levity over bad jokes.
9:11 “There you go again.” Mentioning the Bush administration in every breath.
9:10 Biden tries to fight back about who’s in touch with their constituency.
9:09 “He has never asked me to check my opinions at the door.” Useful bite. But she goes populist again.
9:07 I agree. A Biden administration would be tragic. But he’s not answering the question about how his administration would be different than Obama’s.
9:06 Biden is trying to argue policy vs. Palin arguing McCain’s military experience.
9:03 Palin calls Biden a flip-flopper since he joined the Obama ticket.
9:02 Biden is going to lose a lot of people with his Bosnia explanation.
8:59 Biden sighed? Didn’t he watch Al Gore?
8:53 Palin’s change message seems vacuous when she doesn’t cite anything that went wrong in policies regarding Israel, and Biden is right to attack it.
8:51 I don’t think you can have a two-state solution when it is still in the constitution of one of the parties to drive the other party into the sea.
8:51 I don’t remember hearing anything about McCain not sitting down with Spain. Might be on FactCheck.org tomorrow. (Update: It was.)
8:49 Palin scores with the “they hate America” and the women-hater lines.
8:43 I’m not quite sure of the point of the question about Pakistan vs. Iran, but Palin correctly identifies the less stable leader of Iran.
8:42 Biden pushes the timeline. The argument against the timeline is that it gives terrorists a deadline to wait and attack after the timeline.
8:41 Palin: We cannot afford to lose. Biden: I didn’t hear a plan!
8:38 Both sides seem to have found the acceptable middle on “gay marriage.” No “gay marriage”, no limitation of visitation rights for gay couples.
8:36 Senator Biden, it really is OK for the market to provide alternative energy solutions. Government isn’t the only answer.
8:35 ARGH. No caps! Capping carbon emissions is evil.
8:35 Ugh. She pronounces nuclear like President Bush.
8:34 Palin’s going to hit him on the 10-year to market line. She has to.
8:30 Palin ties energy independence to conservation. Doesn’t want dirty countries to produce our energy. Nice mention of cyclical patterns.
8:29 Palin pits the East coast politicians vs. the West’s desire to drill. Crazy funny.
8:27 What is this, a future-telling debate?
8:27 Gov. Palin, credit markets aren’t seizing up if banks are still offering loans at currently low rates.
8:25 Windfall Profits Tax? Does Senator Biden know how much in taxes oil companies pay to the government?
8:23 Palin challenges Obama on his energy voting record, giving tax breaks to oil companies.
8:22 It’s funny to hear a Democrat talk about wasteful spending.
8:20 Health care plan debate. Both sides lose.
8:19 Biden doesn’t like “fairness” being classified as “redistribution.”
8:17 Palin challenges Biden on “patriotic taxes.” I’m sure Biden will have an answer for this.
8:14 Palin seizes control away from the deregulation hits, in a nice move.
8:12 Biden hits on deregulation, something that could have been prevented if Palin mentioned CRA.
8:09 Palin attacks corrupt lenders and goes populist. Totally missed CRA and yielded half the battlefield.
8:08 Palin successfully counters Biden criticism over McCain’s “fundamentals are strong” remark.
8:06 Palin laid inaction on Fannie Mae/Freddic Mac on “the Senate”, eye-gesturing at Biden.
8:05 Palin tries to establish credibility with the common American.
8:03 Biden blames the last eight years for the financing woes. The Community Reinvestment Act is much, much older.
8:03 Palin: “Can I call you Joe?” Interesting.
8:01 Central: Gwen Ifill gives the rules.

From Holiday’s article:

“Who are you voting for?” I asked another homeless man. “Baraaaack,” he replied. “I want him to do his thang, you know, do his THUG THIZZLE, you know…”

As I started interviewing the homeless men, it became clear that some of their “buddies” who drove them to the polls were pushing quite an agenda. I am not saying all volunteers did this, but there were certainly a few. It appeared as if the homeless guys were being bribed with rides, food, and who-knows-what to go “vote.”

My new THUG-THIZZLE friend told me that he wasn’t even from Ohio and that he was getting on a Greyhound to go back to Chicago. Yet he was voting in one of the key battleground states? How was that fair?

Thurber also links to a YouTube video where a Republican poll observer was turned away from the site. This doesn’t look good for our Democratic Secretary of State.

Puhleeze.  Neither can any normal American, i.e., one that is neither a lawyer nor a political junkie.  Once again, the MSM is showing the distance between what it considers to be the sine qua non of politics, and what normal people believe matters in an elected leader (i.e., her common sense and judgment).  My bet is that this will sway the electorate . . . not one bit.

Liebau may be right about the “normal American”, but one would hope that a governor would be a little bit of a political junkie.

photo credit: adamsofen

The first ones that came to mind were cases that would be relatively safe: Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson. If I were really ornery, I’d say Marbury v. Madison, which introduced the country to an activist judiciary. If a liberal were ornery, he or she could say Bush v. Gore.

But if you really want a winning answer, the case to disagree with is Kelo v. New London (Wikipedia article), where the Supreme Court ruled that potential tax revenue was enough “public use” for a government to seize property and give it to private developers. This was a complete clusterbombing of private property rights by five Supreme Court justices.

Any others come to mind?

She went to a Vacation Bible School, where every day they had a skit that showed a Bible story. On Day Five, they had a skit that depicted the death and resurrection of Christ. She exclaimed, “That’s the story Dad knows!”

I also got to attend the girls’ first day of school, at a preschool hosted by an ELCA church. While the kids were in circle, the teacher explained that they would memorize a new Bible verse every month, and that verse would be a rule how we are to behave. My girl raised her hand and asked, “Are you going to talk about Jesus, too?”

The girl has been listening.

Credit: JohnMcCain.com

Tomorrow night, Oct 2, the Plagiarist-Gaffe Machine meets the Hockey Mom-Beauty Queen at Washington University in St. Louis, 8pm Central Time, with the moderator in the tank for Barack Obama.

I’ll liveblog it, but if there’s enough interest, I’ll just create a short post tomorrow and we can slug it out in the comments.

Who’s in?