As IF Times

link A Statement from Rush – The Rush Limbaugh Show.

Well, our boy Rush was probably a bit indelicate in his characterization of Georgetown University law student, Sandra Fluke.   For those unfamiliar with the story, Ms. Fluke  is the law student who insists that the estimated $3000 cost for contraception during her law school career should be covered by insurance.  This seems like an awful lot of money for what many may consider to be a private pursuit.  Limbaugh could certainly have characterized her demands a little differently.  Perhaps she has delusions of grandeur.  Perhaps she is very ambitious.  Perhaps she wants to be the Wilt Chamberlain of law students.  Perhaps she was pursuing a double major.  Like many of us, he was obviously somewhat taken aback by her confident claim that $3000 would be consumed while at the same time studying law.

Naturally, Limbaughs’ clumsy attempt at humor has attracted a firestorm of condemnation from all corners of the public and the lefty media, who as we know, are stout guardians of women’s rights and sensibilities.  In this day and age, most people are probably indifferent to how Ms. Fluke spends her ‘down’ time.  In fact, most would say, ‘you go girl’. However, many in this group may feel a bit put out by the notion of having to subsidize her non-student activities, if only out of jealousy.  In fact, it can be argued that if her activities are to be subsidized by insurance companies, which means all policyholders, then other women should also have an equal chance at fullfullment.

It’s entirely possible that other women, or men for that matter, may aspire to have to spend $3000 on contraception, but don’t have the advantage of natural pulchritude that Ms. Fluke may have.  To even the playing field, there should therefore also be subsidies for make-up, haircuts, waxing and possibly fashion advice.  Lower tier schools can even incorporate this into their recruiting pitches.  Not only will they guarantee the cost of ‘extra-cirrucular’ activity, they will also spend the money to make sure students have a good chance of using it up while in attendance.  That’s one way to get kids to stay in school; heck they may stay 8 years!  After this, to graduate ‘summa cum laude’ will have an entirely new meaning.

link Markets Start to Anticipate Obama Victory in November – Fast Money – CNBC – CNBC.

This is a classic “as if” scenario.  Despite demonstrable incompetence and ill founded principles offered during the incumbent’s stay in the White House, the narrative is being pushed that the ‘stability’ offered by the Obama reign is somehow benign for the financial markets.  Only those who are still subscribing to the tooth fairy fantasy; those that are on their 3rd hit of the bong or those from California could possibly subscribe to this delusion.

The fact is, markets are anticipators of events, usually 6 to 8 months into the future.  For example, when the stock market suffered the massive swoon in early 2008, it was partly in anticipation of the Democratic victory in the fall of that year.  While the write downs in bank and mortgage valuations did substantiate the big selloff, it was the anticipation of a incoming regime that was expected to be unfriendly to markets that started the cascade.

At the moment, the Republicans are almost finished with their circular firing squad process of vetting their candidate to oppose Obama during this year’s November elections.  It appears that the presumptive victor, Mitt Romney will prevail and consequently, an experienced and capable economic individual will resume control of the Presidency.  It is more likely that this assumption is the scenario causing  the markets to advance.  To subscribe to CNBC’s version of reality is to assume that people have come to accept and embrace out of control spending, skyrocketing deficits and a sure but steady neutering of America’s economic and social system.  In other words, they assume that people have thrown up their hands and accepted that the U.S. will become Greece, Portugal or even worse, California.

While of course people will always adjust to whatever reality is thrust upon them, it’s a stretch for anyone to claim that the financial markets are stabilizing ahead of an Obama victory.  It’s as if someone chose to go back to eat at a particular restaurant after becoming violently ill when they last ate there.  It’s the logic of  ‘the devil you know’.  Sounds like spousal abuse to me.