Infamy...

Trying to make Mr. Edwards a high profile "fall guy" for such important campaign finance litigation as was at issue in his trial was too cute, by half, in my opinion. It seems to me that there was good evidence to highlight grievous abuses, but the prosecution did not believe that their efforts to reform the federal election laws to prevent corrupt practices could effectively pillory just anyone indicted for public ridicule - and thus underestimated the instantaneous celebrity produced in the current "social network", I think.

Pearl...

Celebrating temporary downturns in the recovery as "evidence" of failure - rather than not having extended unemployment relief, not raising the debt-limit, not extending government loans to the auto industry, etc., strikes me as too cynical, by half. WWII metaphors about "negotiation" during war maneuvers, with regard to eventual Republican party attacks, should be avoided. However, I doubt they will be able to resist eventually divulging their deception by patently refusing to compromise on the debt-limit again, or falling into furious delirium about whether to sunset the Bush tax cuts. I have not forgotten that there was almost a "grand deal" (which Mr. Boehner cannot deny neither), but Republicans objected to revenue increases and mindlessly rebuffed the Democrats for "unbridled spending" (when the President was unmistakably willing to make deep concessions on 'entitlements'). Offering "solutions" for which there were no problems cleverly occupies the "loyal" Democratic opposition with the task of re-enforcing the bastions of social posture formerly won.

Harbor...

Infrastructure banking is working in Chicago, stimulus/investment worked to brace against decline (when not otherwise diverted by statehouses) and create private sector jobs (swing states), industrial (auto) loans saved jobs, "triggers" calmed fears/uncertainty and diverted nihilistic Republican folly (full faith and credit steadied); but, I fear that incrementally diminished increments will result from the determined declension of personal rights, civil services, social ambitions, collective responsibility, and regulatory defenses of government proposed by "the party of no" (Jobs Bill is blocked in Congress).

Next "unfriendly" objective...

I say that more belt-tightening austerity is the weak plank of the supply-side (Romney-Ryan) platform, and I think that voter suppression and union-busting is inexcusable (Scott Walker), I hope that "war powers" disappear in relation to "demilitarization" (Syria), and public cases against (sentencing) all combatants not otherwise disappeared or criminals (John Wu) not heretofore indicted are targets at which to aim. [!] Why, I also ask, should one increase sensitivity to the very "market forces" that threaten to "infect" international partners (which Republicans promote)?

Duck and cover...

It should have been anticipated that he notion of "moderation" which smaller bottles of corn syrup and soda might achieve would be missed because of "libertarian" outrage. Doing less of something (investment) for bad reasons - Republican platform - can be advertised as good, but doing more for good reasons (investment) - is surely more difficult to sell in hard times.

Comments

Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Latest Headlines

Who rejected United States-North Korea peace talks?

There were conflicting reports on Sunday regarding a recent proposal for United States-North Korea peace talks which was allegedly made before North Korea"s recent nuclear test

U.K. Pound Falls As Markets Get Brexit Jitters

Bloomberg said on Monday the pound had sustained its biggest fall against the dollar in 11 months

Clinton: I'll defend Israel but push for 'two-state solution

Hillary Clinton believes both Republican candidates Donald Trump and Ted Cruz "missed the mark" with their approach to the Israel-Palestinian Arab conflict

Community Archive

Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?

As runaway climate change continues to wreak havoc on the planet, it’s getting harder and harder to disagree with the idea that we’re in the middle of a potentially massive extinction event. It’s also getting harder and harder to ignore the potentially criminal liability of at least some fossil fuel companies for causing this mess.