same

Posted at July 1, 2008 9:38 AM in response to Fake Left, Cut Right

I am glad you understood Obama's agenda so clearly. I have not had your ability.

Posted at July 1, 2008 9:35 AM in response to Fake Left, Cut Right

what is really sad about the "new" Obama, is that there does not seem to be any NEED politically for his Sister Souljah attack on the progressive left. He is beginning to fit in well with our wonderful congressional DC Dems. I think Congress has issued their 437th subpoena to no effect. A suggestion: if you do not intend to follow up maybe you should stop pretending and just stop the farce of oversight altogether. It just makes Dems look weak and stupid.

Posted at June 30, 2008 11:32 PM in response to Fake Left, Cut Right

"Has Corporate America Turned Callous Toward Its Workers?"

I'm waiting for Mr.Greenhouse's future article detailing the past beneficence of Corporate America towards its workers. It will be a shorter treatise than this post, I think.

Posted at June 30, 2008 10:06 AM in response to Has Corporate America Turned Callous Toward Its Workers?

I had thought the McCains fell in the class that benefited from the bail-outs guaranteed by the "Large Corporation, Important Wealthy Individual Assistance Act" which unsurprisingly was passed with a large number of Democrats as well as all Republicans in Congress. (This bill has to be distinguished from efforts to extend unemployment, assist returning veterans,...) This assistance act was deemed by its supporters to be essential to keep the economy running smoothly.

Posted at June 29, 2008 8:56 AM in response to Cindy's Illiquid Assets?

facetious, wily, and insightful. however....

The Democratic majority currently seems to be content to allow the Most Despised Human in the World to continue to destroy this country and Iraq (despite the economic idiocy (orthodoxy) of Krugman et.al promoting the utter and transparent bullshit that our economic miseries are not joined at the hip with the George's Excellent Iraq Adventure). Why a Democratic Majority would call the brakes on the demented (but, popular by comparison with Miserable Failure) McSame is a logical leap I cannot follow.

America's constitutional government is broken. The country club set in both parties do not seem to want to look at the reasons. And somewhere in the analysis has to be the grotesque power of Corporate America on all aspects of American life. Trying to reform lobbying and political contributions will never work; the rich and powerful will not willingly relinquish control; but expropriation might have a salutory effect.

Posted at June 24, 2008 8:17 AM in response to Impeach Obama!

And although many libertarians at the time would tell you, that although they abhorred segregation and racism there was nothing wrong with "separate but equal" IN ITSELF.

Posted at June 20, 2008 9:24 AM in response to More on the Long Tail of Income

one further point on the libertarian silliness...perhaps Mr Lee in his infinite wisdom can explain why there is no member of the US. Senate who is not a multimillionaire (ok, I exaggerate. but it is pretty f*** close). Money and power are married; this is a "fair" game only in the childlike fantasies of our pure, above-it-all, libertarians. Money begets money and money controls the rules of the "game". When juveniles like Mr. Lee pontificate about a "just" economy, they are trying to drag the discussion to some "ideal model" of a free trade economy that does not exist, that has not existed and that never will exist. It is not "fair" or "just". You can find those only in the dictionary. Instead as anyone who has passed intellectual puberty knows, but not the young Mr. Lee, the economy functions for those who control it. And the gang that controls it now is the wealthiest top 1% of the nation. So sorry Mr.Lee, that is inequitable; if the economy cannot function for all of us; then we must expropriate those who will not use their power, wealth and ownership for the common good.

Posted at June 19, 2008 11:45 AM in response to More on the Long Tail of Income

Timothy, yes, yes, I agree if there was inequality, (even gross inequality, let's go even further, even super, super, gross, gross inequality) and we had no poverty, no homelessness, and everyone had access to quality education and education then I wouldn't have a problem with inequality as such. Duh. This is really a juvenile, fatuous,superficial, facile point; we are not characters in some Ayn Rand fantasy; here on earth, in modern day America, inequality comes packaged with human suffering for great numbers. Not some ideological construct without flesh and blood.

(You are not a kid in some honors program at the University of Minnesota anymore. Grow up. It's time.)

Posted at June 18, 2008 10:15 PM in response to More on the Long Tail of Income

oh to be able to think as clearly and deeply as our libertarian friends.

"I think the reason people regard inequality, as such, as a problem is that they've got a deep intuition that such an unequal distribution of wealth could not have arisen without wealth being taken from the poor and given to the rich."

The problem with inequality is apparently is our deep intuition (wrong of course) about how inequality might have arisen. Clearly it is not the perceived problem by many (albeit ignorant non-libertarians) that many, many people are homeless, hungry, without shelter, access to healthcare, without adequate education, while others in our society, already filthy rich, have now become more wealthy, more powerful, more indifferent to the suffering of those who are in need, and more willing to spend fortunes on preserving their growing power and wealth. Do not get the wrong impression. Mr.Lee is shilling for the plutocrats and oligarchs. Just read his rot carefully. It is all there.

Posted at June 18, 2008 5:56 PM in response to More on the Long Tail of Income