Fire Eric Holder

At least clinton had the sliver of integrity needed to fire the sin eaters that became bloated in his administration. Obama is so cynical (or spine-free) that he can't even manage to make that token gesture.



dubya's 4th term continues with business as usual...
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Good Grief, Barack Obama!

"The Constitutional amendment you're talking .... has never been proven by any court, .... which I doubt you'll get!"



Lame. And I mean, seriously weak on two levels.



First, when you are in a leadership role, you have to work to get things done. Sometimes that means forcing a festering issue up to the surface, you do it. What citizen wants to be known as a deadbeat nation? Even if the case lost in SCOTUS (their jurisdiction), the court of public opinion would be massively for the President and could've helped the 2012 elections.



When I was in elected office, I had a couple lawyers telling me, "you have no chance of winning this in court." I asked why. They shrugged, effectively saying, "that's what everyone has accepted." I asked why others lost and heard why. I said, "but our case is nothing like that. So get the hell on it." We won all three of them. And every provocation against the municipality stopped afterwards.



Your suggestion is also weak because your exact reasoning has been used against Obamacare. No one has ever forced US citizens to buy a universally required product from private industry before that bill. You probably didn't accept that "scary courts!" argument back then because you thought the bill was better than nothing. Well, you can't have it both ways - you lead and deal with consequences, or you quit.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chelsea Clinton Eyes Health Projects With Her Father's Foundation, Work On Gay Rights

That's really nice.



But seriously, when is the family royalty-worship going to end in this country? I can't take these HRC 2016 comments. We demand change in DC but we keep putting, literally and figuratively, the same people back there, election after election.



And then we send their spouses, brothers/sisters, and their kids. Enough! Our problem isn't propagating the status quo, it's ENDING it! Was it the founders' intention to create a class of ruling elite families?!? My guess is not - and for reasons that should be obvious.



Whoever thinks another Clinton in DC is going to help anyone in the 99% has a 'kick me' sign on their back. Stop waxing nostalgic about the clinton family. HRC will not be any different than Obama, who has been barely different than dubya. They all LOVE their corporate financiers, likely much more than any concern for the 99%.... or has the money collected by the clinton foundation come from a big lottery ticket payout instead of wealthy international industrialists (the same gang refusing to pay taxes or give up slave labor)?



And don't ever forget who supported and signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall which doomed us to economic disaster. Snap the out of it, people....
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Good Grief, Barack Obama!

Even when Obama had a majority in Congress, he wasted his political capital (and tons of time!) scurrying around the republican caucus on his knees and letting the neos own the midterm election messaging. He squandered his best chance to make a big impact.



Obamacare is a very feeble compromise, although it IS an accomplishment. But on virtually all other matters (e.g. the Constitution CLEARLY negates this ceremonial 'debt ceiling' nonsense, yet even with that weapon at his disposal, he won't use it), he brings a wad of silly putty to a gunfight EVERY time. Last debt ceiling fight cost us a lot of tax revenue from the 1%. In fact, I believe the last tally I read (on HuffPo) for that deal was that the 1% scored breaks on the order of $20 billion and the unemployed/etc. scored around $4 billion. Honestly, I could NEVER look myself in the mirror ever again if I was in his shoes and had made that deal.



With friends like that, we 99% are just ducks in a barrel.



So even if the House comes back to Dem majority, there is absolutely, positively, unarguably no reason to have any confidence whatsoever that this President will change his insidious timidity and move anything else forward for the 99%.



In the meantime, enjoy those delicious crumbs!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Good Grief, Barack Obama!

Part of the process is that you deliberately propose substantive, wildly popular bills as standalone legislation. Start with simple tax loophole closure. Toss in something like Senator Warren's college loan proposal. Propose a few bills that do things like mandate the identification of donors to these new PAC organizations.



In other words, produce bills that would require ridiculous pretzel logic to try to justify burying them or voting against them. THAT is what you club them to pieces with - incontrovertible proof of working for the wealthy.



Immigration is going to be a very difficult and controversial bill. I know the President is being pushed to do something in order to keep Spanish-speaking constituents support, but that's not the topic to pull the opposition's pants down over because the public is still very divided.



As far as comparing me to a TP extremist, that's pathetic in every way. If the TP espoused any law or societal structure that has ever succeeded in the history of man, then you can compare. Obama's method is to negotiate a TP proposal of 2+2=8 to 7.5. My methods aren't extreme, Obama's is.



And when perusing the poll data, please note how many favor the Dems over the other side. The public has been taught that Dems are just as bad as republicans and my whole point here is that Obama MUST reverse that if we are to take back the House after all the gerrymandering.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The 1 Chart That Reveals Just How Grossly Unfair The U.S. Tax System Has Become

You, of course, missed the point. Hence my assessment of your remedial analytical skills proves true.



But it's easy to predict with folks like yourself who are blinded by your own selfishness and ego. Regardless of how much money you get from whatever you do, you feel that YOU have a special right above others. Like Leona Helmsley, you feel "taxes are for little people." Only poor people should be allowed to be pulled over by the police for reckless driving. You're so singularly important - and everyone else and every rule is just an obstacle for you. You are so special - we owe you a debt of gratitude. You don't need data to be right, all you need is a moment to blurt out an opinion and it divinely becomes fact.



Well, the news for you is that Narcissism is an illness, not a basis for a functional society. Every successful and failed nation is testament to that and to the dysfunctional, self-worshiping libertarian silliness you hold.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Good Grief, Barack Obama!

For starters, recess appointments.



Most importantly, forcefully campaigning against the intransigence by changing his strategy from 'smoke-filled-room negotiations' to an all-out public appeal for all voters to pay attention to daily activities of their representatives will yield massively better dividends over the mid-terms and beyond. Name names, cite the transgressions, the statistics, and tie it all in to how the 'bring down Obama' strategy is a 'destroy main street' strategy (tho, admittedly, as a worshiper of wall street, the President's credibility in pulling that off is strained). The fact is that until he gets a Dem majority across the board, only tiny, insignificant things can be accomplished.



So there is simply NO justification at all to invest time in trying to achieve "bipartisanship" and its insignificant advancements. Passing a bill is a battle - fixing the economy is a war... and the war cannot be won unless the public is brought into the debate and they begin to understand better how the republican party is working against us all (there are a disconcerting number of Dems who are also working against us and I'd call them out, too).



Now, you may disagree with my suggestion. However, it's worked for Presidents in the past. And this President's strategy is most clearly and obviously a failure. So the only wrong - the only illogical and unreasonable - answer here is to keep doing over and over that which has been failing and hope for better results.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Good Grief, Barack Obama!

Been saying this for years. It was clear to everyone that this was going to be the case from inauguration day in 2009. I'm continuously amazed at this truly quixotic spectacle.



And I think it's safe to say, Obama will not ever change.



Sadly, history's recount of his administration is going to be one filled with as much amazement over the benchmark of electing our nation's first non-white President as it will of bewilderment over how someone so dynamic could be so incredibly incapable of allowing rudimentary intellect to overcome his stubborn, emotional attachment to the currently impossible achievement of "bipartisanship".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The 1 Chart That Reveals Just How Grossly Unfair The U.S. Tax System Has Become

Junior, in the real world, people of all stripes want something for nothing. When they are poor, you call them deadbeats and vilify them. When they are rich, you call them shrewd titans of industry and drop to your knees in front of them.



At the end of the day, people who try to find ways to avoid paying their fair (or any!) share of taxes in exchange for the benefits of living and operating in this nation should be paying up.
About Taxes
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The 1 Chart That Reveals Just How Grossly Unfair The U.S. Tax System Has Become

Romney did no work at all last year and paid an effective rate of about 50% less than mine after I worked 60 hour weeks for the same year. Are you saying he got an unfairly good deal? Or does society owe him something because he's been able to legally extract more money from the economy than I have?



If you make more, you have benefited more from the publicly funded resources this nation offers and you should pay more.



Your 3rd grade-level analysis doesn't do anything to help your credibility. I had similar opinions when I got out of college and thought I knew how things worked. Then I got into the real world and realized how far off I was. Textbooks are quaint.
About Taxes
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Why the Justice Department May Be Right

If you blindly take the word of folks like gw bush, dick cheney, mitch mcconnell, george petraeus, et. al., then you have less than nothing. You have a 'knock me down and take whatever you want' sign around your neck. But that wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that enabling these "leaders" to get re-elected and do whatever they like ends up knocking me and my family down, too.



You want to believe them because you want to see that everyone is good at heart and will do the right thing for the country. But there are thousands, if not millions, of people who are not like that. And many of them are in the highest places of corporations and government.



It takes some work and you have to replace your rose-colored lenses with those that let in all the light. Reality is unpleasant, but it's better if everyone dealt with it head-on with courage than hide behind blind faith.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Why the Justice Department May Be Right

OK, so you have nothing except the word of investigators AND the concordance of a couple folks who despise civil liberties as a general concept. To be clear, republicans have NOT confirmed there was a leak - they are merely, as usual, supportive of any civil rights transgression that suits their personal feelings.... there is a HUGE difference that you're overlooking. At the same time, there are a myriad of republicans running around decrying the AP issue in the same breath as the other issues. As usual, the republicans are wisely playing both sides of the fence in order to corner off the ring with persistent attacks against a wall-flower President who won't fight back.



Besides, in general, if McConnell is FOR something, it's almost always a tremendous idea to be fully against it. And if all you've got in your corner is blind faith in this President bravely doing the right thing and a vote of confidence from Mitch McConnell, you have absolutely NOTHING AT ALL in your corner.



Neo c0n lies (like those continuously told by McConnell) are just as bad as lies from Dems. If you choose to believe the latter aren't capable of lies, then you should be ashamed of yourself. No more free rides for anyone.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Why the Justice Department May Be Right

Bombs! Airplanes crashing! Al Qaeda!... stir and serve to get immediate public buy-in. By the way, how many people bought into the yellow cake story and wouldn't let go?



Information for this story can be leaked via e-mail, in person, voice over IP, or intermediaries. Calls to/from several AP offices will not likely help find any but the sloppiest of leakers. And if they were so sloppy, they should have been discovered by directly examining the phone records and accounts of the potential leak suspects. After all, if a leaker called the AP, it'd be in the leaker's phone records - no need to fish around AP's records!



I didn't believe that nonsense yellow cake story back under dubya and given the current administration's record of attacking whistle-blowers, I don't buy this one either. It makes more sense that this is a cover story for a fishing expedition.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Don't Buy It

If you can flatly accept the proposition that the cover story is true, then the logic here holds some water. However, this assume that the FBI had absolutely nothing on anyone with the ability to leak. It makes a lot more sense to me to gather all the phone and travel information you can on that group since they are obligated to comply if they have clearances.

Again, assuming the cover story, deciding to look at all the calls going to/from several news offices can only be total desperation. If there were calls from investigated parties going to AP or reporter personal phones, they'd have been found without having to get AP's phone records. So now they're going to look at every call at AP to see who was involved and spread the dragnet to all of them? Doesn't seem very feasible direction to take because the leak could have been in person, email, letter, txt msg, or VoIP call - all paths that AP phone records ignore.

If you have any cynicism about this, it's just as plausible that there is something else of interest to investigators in the AP phone records and this story was made up to provide some cover. The data they gathered can be misused in limitless ways by the powers that be... while it's highly unlikely to identify any leak source.

Bombs! Airplanes crashing! Al Qaeda!... stir and serve to get immediate public buy-in. By the way, how many people bought into the yellow cake story?

I didn't believe that nonsense story back under dubya and given the current administration's record of attacking whistle-blowers, I don't buy this one either.

Apple's Cook Pushes Corporate Tax Changes, Argues It Would Create U.S. Jobs: Report

"We are not proposing that it be zero. I know many of our peers believe that."



So the cash rate for raw profits is 35%. What are the odds that the number he'll propose is much closer to 1% than even 10%?



And when Apple took advantage of the last repatriation holiday that bushy handed out, how many jobs were created in the US? Even if that tax holiday cash was put into the bank and it earns terrible interest, it should pay for hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs for years to come - where are they???



Because, seriously now Mr. Cook, if Apple makes around $30 billion a year in profit without increasing jobs in the US, how is another $2 or $3 billion going to do it?!?! Shareholders can't tolerate any wasteful hiring until you make that magical 30-billion-and-first dollar? If $30,000,000,001 is the natural point at which companies can begin to safely expand or explore new businesses, can you please tell us the economics textbook chapter that's in? Did Adam Smith mention this concept anywhere?



PLEASE! - when will all this ridiculous lying end?!? If we absolve Apple of any tax burden, Apple will not add any jobs at all - that is the fact. No other corporation will, either. It's utterly amazing that this thread still passes as 'reasonable.'
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Apple's Cook Pushes Corporate Tax Changes, Argues It Would Create U.S. Jobs: Report

Also, to qualify for a lower rate, there must be a minimum amount of state and local taxes paid. This 'shopping around for states to see who will give away the most' needs to end - or more specifically, large corporations need to pay their fair share of ALL the taxes. When states give away their rights to these companies to set up shop, they just go to the Federal government for money to fix roads, build airports, and generally deal with all the other cost impacts of industry. That's simply unfair.
About Tim Cook
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

10 Examples of Bush and the Republicans Using Government Power to Target Critics

Methinks that "unpleasant" is about the nicest possible adjective to use in this case.



I don't know how far you go back, but I remember Bill Clinton doing this same sort of thing when he was in office and republicans squealed. Difference was that, back then, an occasional sacrificial lamb was all the republicans really needed to be content. That served bubba's legacy well and only scarred the Democratic Party a little.



However, today, the scene is quite different and this co. ward lee conduct has been harmful to Dems in general because this President reflexively accepts all blame for virtually anything that he's accused of.



Polls still show the public generally not considering Dems as leaders for solutions and I believe Obama and his staff have no concern about this because they value the man's legacy more than solving our problems. Idk how history will find Obama, but his legacy would be best served by getting up in the morning to publicly lambaste the republicans in Congress, continuously promote the solutions that the majority of citizens prefer, and even if zero legislation passes during the entire term, he'd be a success if the public debate became focused on real problems and real solutions.



Instead, we get this theater of the absurd from both sides and a growing number of Americans is catching on to it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

10 Examples of Bush and the Republicans Using Government Power to Target Critics

This is a good list. But we all already knew this.



Why did the President ask for the IRS Director's resignation on this - after they'd already done an audit and disciplined the offending people who slowed down approvals of non-profit status applications. All I've heard so far says no one was even denied their non-profit status.



And this is besides the fact that this whole category of non-profits ('political education for the general welfare') is bogus. The debate should be moved to why we need such a category at all in this day in age and understand how many are actually engaging in the intended activities (my bet is roughly 0).



Under Obama, when the republicans scream and cry, heads begin to roll (who was the woman in a Federal agriculture position from whom Obama demanded a resignation for talking about how she learned the struggle in America isn't white vs. black but rich vs. poor?) as Obama has determined that surrendering to the right wing is the best policy. Seems to be the default strategy.



So who's next up for head of IRS? My bet is the President finds some TP guy to help avoid another public confrontation with the republican extremists.... as if that'll work (see Coburn). It's incredible that this man hasn't learned that he'll be attacked no matter what and that his focus should be on doing the right thing instead of the thing that makes the smallest waves.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama IRS Scandal: Acting Director Of Tax Agency Resigns (UPDATE)

Wow - by perusing the comments, it's clear the tea-bangers are really losing it.



Fact is that extra scrutiny of charitable non-profit applications is about as big a nothing-burger as there can be. Abuses were reported, investigated, and malefactors disciplined - just like you'd expect. So instead of eliciting grown-up reactions like, "Good job weeding out the bad actors - don't let it happen again," we get this nonsense.



It's a testament to the churlish nature of the libertarian and extreme right fringes that this has become such a big deal.... but it wouldn't have been a big deal if Obama wasn't so infatuated with the right. Instead of Obama asking why resolving the problem isn't enough and why these folks demand vigilante justice for "scrutiny" (are there published records claiming outright, unfair denial of applications?!?!), we get this bizarre overreaction to a bizarre overreaction.



When the right wing screams, Obama runs around in a panic, lopping off heads as fast as possible until the crew from whom he so desperately wants love and respect calms down and they begin looking for the next monster under the bed.



This endless quest for validation from people whose entire lives are wrapped around rationalizing their often groundless opinions would be funny if it weren't so terribly embarrassing. Eric Holder's team is spying on journalists and he's still in place while this IRS Director is pushed out. Totally upside down.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Day the Obama Administration Went All Nixon On Us

You have to do more homework.



Robert Rubin was Clinton's treasury secretary at the advent of the Glass-Steagall repeal and was outspoken in his enthusiastic support for it. The whole thing revolved around Cit's violation of G-S when it was permitted by Clinton's FTC to merge with Travelers. Then Rubin quit and made millions working at, where did he go?? Oh yeah - CITI!



I defy you to find a credible source where Rubin or Clinton spoke out against the repeal. It doesn't exist. They worked tirelessly for 4+ years to repeal it! The undeniable fact is these guys locked arms with republicans and sold us out!



As it happens, I work inside the MIC. In 2007 I was in a meeting where our lobbyists answered the burning question 'who will be more friendly to us, McCain or Obama?' The answer was immediate and final (i.e. no dissension), "There'll be no difference between them on defense."



So imagine my non-surprise now with the President dutifully working to restore sequestered defense cuts.



I understand your determination to disbelieve that your beloved Dem presidents have put it to us all. I was that way for a while. What changed me was people's staunch refusal to believe that dubya made up "intelligence" to justify his Iraq war. It was because they didn't want to admit someone could betray America like that. And now more than ever, none of us can afford to be that willfully blind any longer.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Day the Obama Administration Went All Nixon On Us

For starters....



I'm talking about bringing in the same people (literally and figuratively - many direct rubin disciples) into the Cabinet who gave the finance industry everything they wanted when Clinton joyfully signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999.



I'm talking about what the author of this post is talking about - the hypocritical ze@l for secrecy after running a campaign in the shadow of the bush disgrace with a theme about returning to an open government.



I'm talking about pushing on one hand for getting our troops home as soon as possible and then caving in to fears for being perceived as weak - callously keeping our presence in Iraq until leaving on the final day that bush signed for in an agreement with Iraq. We will stay to the last minute in Afghanistan, too... accomplishing absolutely nothing.



I'm talking about avoiding honest communication with the public - barely conducting any more press conferences than dubya.



I'm talking about attacking Social Security with 3 major assaults (so far) - while bush only had one: privatization.



BTW - I'm currently in the middle of Stiglitz's latest book on inequality. If you read that, you'd see how little Obama is achieving for America.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin Will Not Run For Senate In 2014

Imagine the challenges faced by the people making up all the scandals to keep you guys staring in slack-jawed horror at glittery pieces of tin foil floating in the air while the real work of bankrupting you and the middle class so that the rich can eventually own us as serfs goes on at full speed.



Sadly, you're so entrenched in that make-believe world that your crew misses the irony that this administration has aided and abetted the republican crusade to turn the country over to the wealthy.... the "enemy" who has been on your side the whole time.
About South Dakota
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Did It For the Money

Yeah..... just because we keep putting foxes on guard at the chicken coop doesn't mean we should expect hens to continue to disappear.



We must wait until after she's on guard and the hens start to disappear. And even then, it could be that hens are just running away and leaving no forwarding address. I'm sure it happens.



This woman's (family, really) track record of abuse should NOT be taken into consideration. It's only our blind loyalty to the President that matters.



After all, any goofball could appoint someone who's an outsider with no history of devastatingly bad business experience nor financial/political ties - a REAL MAN appoints someone with a disastrous worker- and customer-hostile record and says, "YeeeeeeeeAH! Take that, Senate!!"
About Jack Lew
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Kelly Ayotte Defends Her Background Check Record Amid Tough Ads

I have posted comments here out of supreme frustration over Harry Reid's pathetic work as Majority Leader. His endless and absurd embrace of the strategy that you should never bring a vote to the floor that won't get passed is nothing but re-election insurance for hack politicians. If you never bring a controversial vote to the floor, politicians can't build a record.



And so long as they have no record, they will claim to support xyz, claim to have worked tirelessly for xyz, and blame everyone else for not getting xyz accomplished. In other words, they're never held accountable for anything.



My trail of comments is littered with demands to bring every bit of legislation to the floor that is meant to deal with our real problems so that the public can start doing the accounting at election time.



FINALLY, the old buzzard brings a controversial vote to the floor. And what happens? Democrats gain some mid-term targets of opportunity. Hacks are in a panic.



So I hope that Harry continues to take whatever supplements or herbal enhancements he's been using to get even this most meager of legislative works to the floor for a full vote. It's better for the public and democracy (that it seems to help the Democratic Party more is irrelevant). The shell game approach has been bad for everyone.... except for the hacks.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Cities Call For Smartphone 'Kill Switch' To Curb Thefts

"Representatives of the tech giant did not respond to requests for comment."



Does anyone really think that phone manufacturers - especially Apple - would implement technology that would alter behaviors which ultimately provide them with higher revenues?!?? Anyone?!?!



IMEIs can be tracked and blocked easily in this country. OCONUS, different story. But it'd be easy to restrict the usefulness of stolen phones to an export-only product simply by having all US carriers block phone IMEIs. The fact that this doesn't happen should tell you all you need to know about 1). the type of persons who run the communications service and manufacturing firms and 2). the answer to my above rhetorical question.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama At Ohio State Commencement: 'I Dare You.. To Do Better'

Yup!



Obama's speech is really, in sum, his surrender: "I can't for the life of me do anything to improve a damn mess.... nor do I feel comfortable starting the clarion call for Constitutional Amendments to fix the campaign finance problems.... so it's up to you to figure it out."



[Only] In that context, can I see any honesty in his words.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama At Ohio State Commencement: 'I Dare You.. To Do Better'

""You've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems," Obama said."



Unfortunately, the President doesn't grasp the dripping irony here as he's failed miserably to do anything other than wear out a hundred pairs of kneep@ds trying to curry the favor of the source of those "voices." He's done (although he talks about it sometimes during campaigns...) nothing to prove them wrong or turn the tide.



Not that a commencement speech is the best place to rip into the sources of those "voices," but it would be a thousand times more impressive for Obama to start vigorously fighting for the 99% at this event with the same unwavering determination that the republicans and Obama's Cabinet members bring to their fight for the 1%. Perhaps having the courage to actually state whose "voices" these are would have been enough of a start.... but he's too weak to even do that.



I suspect these "kids" that were hurled into the job cesspool at the end of the speech would appreciate some sort of a fight for them far more than yet another hollow pep talk from a punchless fighter like Obama.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Wayne LaPierre: 'How Many Bostonians Wished They Had A Gun Two Weeks Ago?'

NRA evangelists live in terror - wherein, in their general confusion with reality, the act of being so terrified that you have to load yourself up with guns to go out to buy a bag of chips at the grocery store is mistakenly conflated with "machismo." Guns to the NRA faithful are like a soothing binky to a disoriented and nervous infant.



They are scared of others and of living in a world with people who are not exactly like them. Wrapping themselves in the Constitution with other people who ARE like them makes them more comfortable. Then when they leave their little rallies, it's back to the scary, scary world where people live who can read and understand the words "well-regulated" and can handle the reality that dangers exist while you're alive - but can get along without carrying an armory in your car.
About NRA
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

GOP Census Bill Would Eliminate America's Economic Indicators

I sure hope the President can continue with his best Droopy Dog imitation and avoid confrontation with these tools of the rich. Sadly, throwing the elderly to the wolves with needless Social Security cuts isn't going to be enough to make the 1% happy.



The goals of these republicans on behalf of their masters is not very hard to understand. They want to turn this nation into an aristocratic fiefdom for the rich. And right now, the only thing standing in their way is a doormat who, when blamed in the media for causing/allowing the Boston bombing to occur by a republican 'leader' could only muster, "He's not right about that."



Dude won't even defend his own honor - what hope (!) do the unemployed and underemployed have? Great times ahead for our kids. Great times.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Logic Deficit: Why Were Reinhart-Rogoff Ever Taken Seriously?

Taking that particular question on directly may not really be right, either.



Consider how anything written or proposed that the powerful (and their republican henchmen) don't like (generally those that deal with facts and reality) are openly derided, usually as the first and the last word on the subject in the media, as "egghead elitists who don't know anything about how the real world works."



Until egghead elitists confirm their beliefs - then they are geniuses who 'get it.'



Bottom line is, the rich own the media, most of the politicians, and a good number of academics. So maybe a better question would be, "Why would any citizen believe anything that confirms the beliefs/policies of those who have been wrong about the economy for 30 years is anything but part of a campaign to help continue the maximization of their friends' accumulating wealth?"



OK, maybe it's a little wordy, but I think it makes the point.



And part of the answer, I think, is that too many people don't want to believe that the economy (or even this nation) is of, by, and for the 1%. I'm afraid that we are fairly well doomed at this point.



I saw yesterday that Obama is nominating a former industry executive and lobbyist to head the FCC (Dems since Clinton have demonstrated they're as comfortable being bought as republicans). And so the game rolls on... how much higher can your Internet and cell bills climb?... we'll see!
About Deficit
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost