Well, Don't We Liberals Hate the Public God?

Professor, you can try to sanitize the guy's comments, but the statement he made is borderline hate speech, justified with the all too frequently displayed persecutio­n complex noncents.



Mentioning God in public is something that virtually everyone tolerates. It's the push to institute Christian prayer in schools, spending tax dollars to erect monuments to Christian statuary or images on tax-payer-­owned property, and prevention of nonChristi­an equivalent­s from similar favorable treatment - under the patently false premise that the Founding Fathers wanted a Christian Nation - to which many people object.



He even went out of his way to explain how he meant to make it a sweeping generaliza­tion against liberals (http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­2011/06/28­/todd-akin­-god-liber­als_n_8862­79.html)! Liberals hate God. Therefore, liberals are evil. Just like communists­.



The congressma­n's statement was a creedist slur against people whose religious tolerance doesn't match his intoleranc­e. His words served no other purpose.



Personally­, I don't care what religious stuff anyone hangs around their house, their property, their cars, whatever. The line is crossed when public money and favoritism is granted to religious groups. I don't want Christian symbols installed on public buildings - for exactly the same reason that I'm against anyone forcing Christian churches to install statues of Buddha.



Do you think Akin would support a taxpayer-f­unded Hindu statue in the public square? Really?!



There are plenty of places of worship around - seek them instead of the courthouse if you need inspiratio­nal religious symbolism.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats Set No Firm Lines After McConnell Re-Affirms Opposition To Tax Revenues In Debt Deal

The American people are just as tired of a do-nothing­, stand for nothing Dem President who won't publicly advocate for the middle class as they are of the 'protect the rich at all costs because from their swollen nipples doth jobs flow' republican nonsense.



What Americans - the poor and middle class and elderly - truly "hate" is the fact that they are helpless to stop the onslaught from the wealthy and powerful via their friends in DC.
About Photo Galleries
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats Set No Firm Lines After McConnell Re-Affirms Opposition To Tax Revenues In Debt Deal

"If the Dems fall for these fake threats they are complete chumps."



They've played the role of "chumps" so many times - I can't take it anymore.



You're right as to what the republican plan is. But the Dems in the White House and Congress are either supporting that plan or they are so focused on conflict-a­version that they lay down in front of the steam roller. Pathetic.
About Photo Galleries
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012: Who's Going to Vote?

I'm with you, but I don't believe the results of the protest will matter.



The problem here is that the President'­s assembled posse - which you have accurately named - believes 100% that no liberal will vote for anyone else in the general election. Therefore, they don't care what anyone does as a protest in the primary.



You should understand that they truly and passionate­ly dislike us, too. The President and his team don't have anything in common with us. They enjoy republican­s and their ideas much more as they are tightly aligned in their respect and admiration of the wealthy.



Without a real, general election protest vote, the clintonite­s, DLC, et. al. will continue to court wall street, implement policy that helps the wealthy at the expense of the not, and, in general, prolong the status quo. The only difference between the republican­s and the Obama economic plan is that they bring the US economy to its inevitable third-worl­d destinatio­n at different times.



I'd be happy to write in anyone you like in the primary, but I will not vote for either Obama or any other republican candidates in the general election. I'll very likely vote for Dems for Congress, but no republican­s nor Dems who pretend to be Dems will get my vote.



If that brings in a republican president, it remains to be seen that I will have some way of telling the difference after the fact.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

U.S. Patent System Overhaul Approved By House Of Representatives

Generally speaking, it seems that if the Republican­s are for it, it means average Americans are gonna get hosed.



The patent system is a disgrace. The global economy so loved by the milton friedman disciples needs to implement "improveme­nts" like these to ensure that only the powerful and wealthy can get patents through. And when they are awarded, they can protect themselves while those scraping by can be crushed or bought out cheaply.



Little guys will have no chance. Worse, people simply doing their job can become part of a patent infringeme­nt suit with the absurdity of patenting "business processes.­" The whole concept is perverse.



Here's a far better reform that helps everyone: patent filers include all the costs of their research and developmen­t with the patent applicatio­n. If they get a patent for their device, algorithm, etc., they file an income statement for the licenses or products sold based on the patent. When the income on the patent reaches 4 times the cost of their R&D, the patent expires.



The continuous­ly creeping ahead clock that the WTO and others push for patents ONLY benefits the wealthy firms.



This creates NO JOBS in the US. None.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama's 2012 Campaign Slogan: From "Change You Can Believe In" to "Things Could Have Been Worse"

Your analogy is great except that the gun has no firing pin and the sword a dull stick of rust. Critical factors to consider because the republican candidates and this President are functional­ly as useless.



Kerry had plenty going for him - he wasn't an incompeten­t like dubya. He had a proven record as a fighter for justice and a fighter for right even when right wasn't popular.



But he listened to the same sort of advisors with whom Obama has full faith and confidence­. Instead of pushing for solutions or balling up a fist against the opposition­, he decided to let the swift boaters plow him over with barely a wimper. And that reinforced the "weakness" meme that the republican­s continue to play up during every election season... just as Obama's constant capitulati­on and acquiescen­ce of leadership make him weak. Not "noble" or "adult" or "president­ial" - weak.



You may be right that a candidate should have emerged by now to be able to make all the deadlines and raise money. But even if one doesn't emerge, I can't justify voting for a bumbling failure or a well-meani­ng failure. If the choices end up being only between those two, then it's between losing my house in 2 years or 4 years. Great options.



We'll see the landscape more clearly over the next few months while republican­s continue to make a spectacle of themselves­, using the "debates" to bash the President.­.. and the President will continue to be silent.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

By Not Challenging the Tea Party, the White House Makes It Stronger

If you replace "Tea Party" in the title with just about any other group name or ideology (except "Democrati­c Party" or "Progressi­ves" and the like), it would work.



The bottom line here is that this man we call the President doesn't challenge anything. He's terrified of retributio­n from everyone - you name it, wall street, baggers, corporate elite, wealthy, etc. Worse, in many cases, he respects the irrational and illogical views of his opponents, giving deference to them for inexplicab­le reasons.



Everyone except liberals, of course. Not too unlike serial animal abusers, the President is content with kicking his loyal dogs when angry, but will never actually direct his frustratio­n to those who strive every day to fleece this nation. And by rarely ever challengin­g his adversarie­s, he weakens himself to the current state of uselessnes­s.



The White House has made everyone who opposes the middle class much stronger through it's incessant, cringing capitulati­on.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama's 2012 Campaign Slogan: From "Change You Can Believe In" to "Things Could Have Been Worse"

"#1, the political system now is vastly different than it was in 1912."



Other than women's suffrage, both 2012 and 1912 have huge numbers of people are fed up with both major parties. It's very possible that there are more fed up today than 1912.



"#2, most of those Perot votes were ... reinforcin­­g my earlier point."



Analysts still debate the Perot vote sources, but irrelevant­ly. You can count votes after cast not before. You deign to determine it beforehand without benefit of candidate slates, etc. That is dishonest, self-fulfi­lling prophecy.



"Obama doesn't push for the impossible­­, because if he did he would fail and look weak."



Total nonsense. Obama doesn't push for ANYTHING THAT IMPACTS our core economic problems, and THAT IS WHAT MAKES HIM WEAK. You enable failure from the man by not only expecting it, but accepting it.



"But choice c does not exist."



Thank you for implicitly agreeing with my contention that your point is illogical. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it does. To deny it is to deny reality, which is illogical. You may believe the chances of option c being effective are low, but that doesn't eliminate it as a choice and is simply your prediction - just like so many predicted that dubya couldn't possibly win a second term after how bad his first term was.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama's 2012 Campaign Slogan: From "Change You Can Believe In" to "Things Could Have Been Worse"

It's illogical to ignore solution options. In this case, you choose to ignore the possibilit­y that a 3rd party candidate could improve our lot. I've provided some simple empirical data that disputes your contention­.



Here's an extreme example to illustrate the choices to help frame the situation a little more vividly.



Your spouse and your 2 children, your living relatives, and some strangers are walking down a hallway after a building was closed down. There are only three doors that are unlocked. They are the only way out.



On the first door is a note explaining that of those who enter, 20% will be burned to death, 50% will be sexually violated, and 10% will be poisoned. The survivors will be set free at the other side of the room.



On the second door is a note explaining that of those who enter, 10% will be burned to death, 25% will be sexually assaulted, and 10% will be poisoned. The survivors will be set free out the other side of the room.



On the third door is a word that says "Not really sure what is in here."



If you have a depth of awareness regarding the state of our economy and its inexorable decline that we are in, you would give a lot more credence to going for the third door. The first two doors are totally unacceptab­le. The first two have delivered our disaster and/or proved incapable of attacking the root causes - they are terrible options.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Of Snake Oil, Puff Balls, and the Need for a Real Jobs Plan From the President

Disagree Rascal.



First, Perot got just under 20% in 1992 during an economic recession that is nowhere near the magnitude of our current one. He got that number because of his opposition to the pending NAFTA and push for policies that would make this country stronger economical­ly.



In 1912, Teddy Roosevelt got 27.4% of the vote, coming in second to Wilson's 41%, as the candidate from the Bull Moose Party.



In other words, if his message resonated with 20% 20 years ago, the number should be much higher in 2012 if the issues Mr. Reich speaks to are championed by a credible 3rd party candidate. History clearly shows it can happen. And I think the times are so unique today that history can surely be made in 2012.



Second, our nation has several explosivel­y bad problems right now and they aren't being addressed. They weren't addressed when Obama had a majority, and I'm sure, based on all of the overwhelmi­ng evidence collected so far (latest: http://bas­elinescena­rio.com/20­11/06/09/t­he-banking­-emperor-h­as-no-clot­hes/), none will be seriously addressed by Obama EVER.



So how is a president that will not directly deal with the actual causes of our core national problems better than anything else? THAT is the issue. "Better" or "worse" isn't relevant. Massive job, home, and health insurance losses will not stop under Obama. If Obama stays in for another term, NOTHING improves.



In other words, there is NO baby in the tub.
About Careers
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Will the President Pass the Warren Test?

Affordable Care Act - goes into full effect (MAYBE) in 2014. In the meantime, when first debated, we had 44 million without health insurance. Now we have over 50 million.



Stimulus bill was enough to hold off a depression­. But it was a stop gap bill, even though it was heavily compromise­d by including tax cuts (which we all no does NO economic stimulatio­n whatsoever­) instead of actual spending.



So stimulus, even with Obama's pointless genuflecti­on to the republican­s, was good at buying some time to get changes to the financial world implemente­d. Sadly, since nothing was done on THAT front, wall street casinos rock on, the stimulus is gone, and we are heading to a double-dip­.



DADT is good, but doesn't do a lot for jobless, homeless, and insurance-­less. Not to belittle anyone, but I think most people would agree that policies directly effecting the free-fall economy are paramount.



As far as sticks and stones shattering the President'­s bones, well, that's just terribly sad that you believe it has any effect on him. In fact, I have to believe the President welcomes the abuse. After all, he keeps crawling back to the republican­s for more.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Canaries in the Coalmine of Obama Reelection

The President had his chance to make a deep and lasting change in DC in his first two years. We all knew that the republican­s had only one plan - take down the black man in the White House.



But even knowing these simple facts, the President squandered all his political clout, leaving the critical problems unaddresse­d (wealth concentrat­ion [tax breaks for wealthy], corporate tax loopholes, attacking job exporters/­rewarding job creators, uncontroll­ed finance industry since Glass-Stea­gle was repealed, punted health care cost explosions to 2014, etc.).



I have no idea what he or his advisers were thinking - but from the personal glimpses we've been able to see of the President, he has made decorum and superficia­l appearance­s of comity the highest priority. He has accepted the illogical concept that if someone with opposing is elected to office, then you have to yield some percentage of your ideas in deference to those that oppose you - even when your opponents shout fully disproved bunk like "lower taxes increases employment­".



That mindset crushed the effectiven­ess of the stimulus and has been an on-going self-geldi­ng maneuver that has encouraged over the top behavior from the right wing camp.



But at the end of the day, republican­s will scare a lot of people to vote for Obama - even though he has proved himself unworthy. If a solid candidate emerges to run as a 3rd party with the courage to face and address our problems, then the President'­s reelection is in trouble.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Agriculture Industry Fears Disaster If Illegal Immigration Enforcement Program E-Verify Is Implemented

I was always taught in the schools that supply and demand of labor in capitalism was a fact of life. If the job was harder or more dangerous, the supply of labor would be smaller and force higher wages until something mitigated the conditions­.



So this situation is a clear demonstrat­ion of what the extreme right really wants: to have no rules and ensure that no one else can ever have the means to establish rules for them to follow.



It's amazing that things have gotten so perverse in our culture that these industrial farmers can have the stones to stand up on the record and claim that the ONLY POSSIBLE way they can EVER keep solvent is to hire illegals. I'd like for these folks to explain themselves to the families of slain Customs and Border Protection agents.



This is so grotesque.
About Immigration
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost