Yawn.

The word preconditions has a literal meaning, and there is one in the dictionary. But we are talking about a specific context here.

"Preconditions" in this context clearly means the other side has to make a substantive concession before the meeting takes place; or it will not happen at all if the concession is not made. Do you need examples or do you comprehend?

A reasonable understanding of this issue is that Obama would not require concessions on the subject of negotiations themselves before he would meet. Is that really so hard to understand. Is it really so hard to understand that this position in and of itself is what Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain are opposed to.

You are being obtuse if you think that saying the meeting would have to be in the interest of the US, or be worth the time of the President, somehow violates the meaning of "without pre-condition". Obama was not announcing open casting calls. This is not hard to understand.

Posted at July 23, 2008 4:05 PM in response to The AP Calls Obama Out On Summits

Keep rubbing, I am sure you will get some response eventually.

Posted at July 23, 2008 3:52 PM in response to The AP Calls Obama Out On Summits

flaccid

Posted at July 23, 2008 3:32 PM in response to The AP Calls Obama Out On Summits

If McCain picks Jindal then he has to say goodbye to the primary rationale for his campaign: that heis far more qualified to be president than Obama by virtue of his great experience.

Your VP pick is the person who you say to the American public can be president the day after the inauguration. If Jindal at 37, with no foreign policy experience, is ready to be president, then so is Obama. Game. Set. Match.

McCain may have crashed a few planes in his time, but I don't think he is suicidal.

Posted at July 22, 2008 4:08 PM in response to Out on a limb: Jindal or Pallin

Just wondering, is there any discussion of Thomas Schelling in this book. If not you may want to check out the simple experiments he did with sorting. Very slight preferences for one type of neighbor over another can easily result in rather extreme segregation.

Posted at July 21, 2008 10:10 PM in response to A Simple Calculation

And John McCain jumps the shark.

Tune in next week to see if he lands safely or crashes again.

Posted at July 18, 2008 1:30 AM in response to McCain: Obama Is An Extremist, "I Don't Know" If He's A Socialist

Sorry pet peeve, for the record:
SSI (Supplemental Security Income)is a program for indigent retirees and disabled is is paid for out of general revenue. There are few retirees still on SSI.

OASDI is the Old Age and Survivors, and Disability Insurance that you become eligible by working and paying payroll taxes for a sufficient period of time. The benefits, which are considerably higher than SSI benefits, are paid out of the payroll tax and the OASDI Trust Funds.

McCain is getting the latter.

Posted at July 17, 2008 6:41 PM in response to Third Rail: McCain Receives Social Security

If only blacks weren't such racists we could all just get along...

Those $%#*@'s always ruining it for the rest of us.

Posted at July 16, 2008 11:41 AM in response to Obama Campaign Criticizes New York Times Story On Poll

Alex,

The need is there, so we can either talk about it or ignore it. Not sure ignoring it has gotten us anywhere. I think you are trying to hard to find the correct political interpretation. The fact is this is what he really believes. It's not like this hasn't been a conversation in the African American community fromore than a century.

As for universal policies versus targeted ones, you have a decent point. These program have be tremenedously helpful for many many people.

For the most intractably poor, however, I think we underestimate how intensive an intervention they need. EITC is helpful if you are employable. Universal college education is grand but if you are hopelessly behind by the age of 5 it doesn't help. We have to start talking about life chances and that brings us down to individual lives where the role of personal responsibility and policy have to intersect.

Maybe the whole issue is too difficult not to be caught up in the maelstrom of politics and maybe that's why we are still no where near addressing it adequately.

Posted at July 16, 2008 9:34 AM in response to Responsibility for Racial Inequality

You are a troll so why should I respond to you. I take it you don't actually know anything about anti-poverty policy, so you stick to your insulting armchair political strategy snark.

National prosperity: we will not make progress on poverty unless we have a growing pie to re-allocate. Large scale re-distribution of a shrinking pie is extremely unlikely. Look at what happened during the Johnson and Clinton Administrations.

I don't know where Obama stands on Hope VI and housing policy, so I said so. That's of course only one part of anti-poverty policy. In Chicago, very near Obama's own neighborhood they finally at long last destroyed the ghetto stockades otherwise known as the Robert Taylor Homes and Stateway Gardens. I am sure he is familiar with the strategy. I'll research his position.

Personal responsibility is not just for "poor black people" but in fact for everyone. And while it is often necessary, it's not sufficient. But if you think people of all stripes growing up in non-intact families with too little education and too much interaction with the criminal justice system have a decent chance in life, you are deeply mistaken. The point is whatever path is extremely difficult and those designing policy better have the courage to address what is structural and what is personal.

Posted at July 16, 2008 9:19 AM in response to Responsibility for Racial Inequality