Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles
5651-escaped-slaves-virginia-020112.jpg
To My Old Master | A Letter From a Former Slave
 1558-elizabeth-warren-042009.jpg
FOCUS | Washington Is Rigged
 5552-food-stamps-061510.jpg
Dishonest Fox Chart: Food Stamps Edition
 5636-grover-norquist-smirk-070311.jpg
FOCUS | Grover Norquist's 'Impeach Obama' Fantasy
 5442-chris-hedges-061211.jpg
FOCUS: Corporations Have No Use for Borders

Paul Krugman: "It's slightly sickening to realize that the big winners in the midterm elections are likely to be the very people who first got us into this mess, then did everything in their power to block action to get us out."

Portrait, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, 06/15/09. (photo: Fred R. Conrad/NYT)
Portrait, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, 06/15/09. (photo: Fred R. Conrad/NYT)

go to original article

1938 in 2010

By Paul Krugman, The New York Times

06 September 10

Here's the situation: The US economy has been crippled by a financial crisis. The president's policies have limited the damage, but they were too cautious, and unemployment remains disastrously high. More action is clearly needed. Yet the public has soured on government activism, and seems poised to deal Democrats a severe defeat in the midterm elections.

The president in question is Franklin Delano Roosevelt; the year is 1938. Within a few years, of course, the Great Depression was over. But it's both instructive and discouraging to look at the state of America circa 1938 - instructive because the nature of the recovery that followed refutes the arguments dominating today's public debate, discouraging because it's hard to see anything like the miracle of the 1940s happening again.

Now, we weren't supposed to find ourselves replaying the late 1930s. President Obama's economists promised not to repeat the mistakes of 1937, when F.D.R. pulled back fiscal stimulus too soon. But by making his program too small and too short-lived, Mr. Obama did just that: the stimulus raised growth while it lasted, but it made only a small dent in unemployment - and now it's fading out.

go to original article

 

Comments  

 
+53 # Guest 2010-09-06 09:23
With all the Corporate factories having moved to countries with cheap labor - it is no wonder that there are no jobs here. Tax those overseas American products to the level that there is no incentive but to bring the jobs back to the USA.
 
 
+19 # Guest 2010-09-06 15:30
"Taxing overseas American products to the level that would bring US jobs back to the USA" is exactly what NAFTA made impossible.
 
 
+12 # Guest 2010-09-06 21:55
To Texan for Peace: NAFTA made bringing jobs back to the USA impossible? That "giant sucking sound" that Ross Perot predicted for NAFTA was absolutely correct.....however, it wasn't Mexico that sucked out all the jobs.....it was, and remains primarily China. Simply go to any retailer of any commodity, from underwear to garlic, and Made in China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, or India is what you will most likely find. Good luck finding Made in Mexico, or Made in Canada. Go to Mexico and Canada and you will now sadly find much of the same. Had NAFTA really worked for Mexico and the US, perhaps the immigration issue would be a lot less severe.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-06 19:16
would you rather factories bring those repetitive assembly line jobs back? Or, should we instead start focusing on creating a truly modern economy based on leadership in cutting edge technology?

Decrying that buggy whip factories are gone seems to be a pointless exercise.

Trade sanctions are also a product of vestigial economic thinking - this would also punish American workers by extension. To remedy this I recommend you read Robert Reich's seminal work: The Work of Nations.
 
 
+14 # Guest 2010-09-07 00:14
I teach those people who work on those 'repetitive assembly line jobs' and who now are forced to go back to school to find a job that can't be outsourced overseas. They have been cutting back and working hard studying for no money. Meanwhile, on Wall Street, the fat cats (in those worthy, intellectually satisfying jobs betting both for and against unsuspecting Americans) are doing nothing, nothing! to better the American economy.

So yes, I want those jobs back. I want our economy - that is, the nation's - to be more important than the corporations' profits (which have been doing quite well in this economy, as you know).

A restructuring of our corporate laws that legitimize corporations and govern how they do business is called for now.
 
 
-8 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-07 14:33
A restructuring of our corporate laws that legitimize corporations and govern how they do business is called for now.

It turns out, some Marxists who have beeing arguing for years that what we have to deal with is State-Monopoly capitalism are right. Yet (instead of phasing this CORPORATE welfare (and PUBLIC welfare as well), the remedy offered by experts like Krugman is mainly focused on artificially stimulating the purchasing power of the consumers ("spread the wealth") and other measures that increase the power of the state. Why do not we go into the opposite direction and learn a bit from "silent Cal" (Coolidge) who more or less successfully handled the 1919-1920 depression (cut DRASTICALLY taxes and spendings). Of course, if you believe that FDR took us out of the Great Depression rather than WWII, no other alternative will appeal attractive except the New Deal-type measures. After all, Obama was billed by some as our second FDR.
 
 
+3 # Texas Aggie 2010-09-11 23:25
Your comment about WWII bringing us out of the depression supports Dr. Krugman's arguments better than anything he could say. The reason that WWII was so instrumental in job creation is that it caused the biggest deficit spending program up until that time. Thanks to that deficit spending, we were able to create many new jobs. It's only a shame that they weren't productive jobs that produced something useful that would augment people's lives rather than something that went bang and caused destruction without leaving any positive results.

The moral equivalent of WWII would be a vast program of green job creation where infrastructure is built that continues to produce a payoff long into the future. Rebuilding our power grid, putting in wind farms and solar powered arrays, research on capturing wave and tidal power, carbon sequestration, and numerous other areas with potential long term benefits are just what the economy needs. It's called investment in the future.
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-07 03:07
Would that be Robert Reich...the guy primarily responsible for getting us in this mess? Many people are happy to have those repetitive factory jobs. You are using the same argument that is used with the illegal aliens...that they only take jobs that no one else wants...which is total crap! Lots of people want to be carpenters.
 
 
+10 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:15
You may be thinking of Robert Rubin Ron. Reich is the former Clinton Secretary of Labor. He could have saved us from the dread "Globalization" of poverty, if Clinton had allowed him to stay. Rubin was Clinton's Sec. of Treasury and he did indeed set the stage for our demise. Of course, Clinton cheered him on while sacking Reich.
 
 
+9 # Guest 2010-09-07 07:55
As soon as 100% of the non-service work force can be employed in cutting edge technology jobs, then, no, we won't need the assembly line jobs. Until that utopia is realized, we need jobs that Joe Average can do.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:11
Alas, Cynthia, you have drunk the Koolaid and fallen yet again for the metaphorical buggy whip argument, which is much too simplistic for our times. Indeed, we could grow our economy back to a very competitive level if we protected our workers and our manufacturers from the predators of capital and the slave labor governments offshore. The argument that we can wish our way out of the coming depression with yet more technology is goofy on its face. Already we have shipped our tech jobs offshore, since we do not have a lock on education or technical skill. Using your argument, we would end up having to wait a hundred years until the offshore sweatshops were unionized and workers standard of living increased. Only then would the Oligarchs consider bringing jobs back to a then-depressed slave labor market in the US.

So called "free trade" is the culprit and rejecting slave-made goods is the solution to restoring our economy. It really is that simple.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 07:56
I'm so glad to see this discussion - it seems outsourcing is a major problem that does not get noticed when discussing economic solutions.

In addition to taxing overseas products and services two other steps could be taken: the government should not buy products and services from overseas (e.g. passports are now produced overseas) and there could be laws making information that should be secure available only to domestic companies.
 
 
-8 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-07 14:51
The government should not buy, governmnet should tax overseas product...

What are you talking about? What else do you suggest to tax? The capital goes where profits are. Instead of stretching your tax hand overseas, you better cut taxes (and spendings too) here in the States. Outsourcing is perfectly fine and no need to impose on it any US taxes. May be it will teach Americans a lesson and force some of them eventually to take works in the fields now worked by illigal Mexicans. When you are pumpered and cushened by your nanny state and get used live in debt, it is hard to get back to reality. I was stunned and shocked (when I came to the States in 1990) with some American friends who openly wondered why I always paid my Master Card bill in full rather than a minumum payment: "Come on, man, you are a fool, everybody lives on credit." Sometimes, it is useful to stand a couple of days in a soup kitchen (both for GM and common folks). Might be a good shock therapy.
 
 
+9 # Guest 2010-09-07 21:19
...uh, and how many soup lines do you see in Western Europe and other socialist states? I haven't seen any in Canada. And poverty as a result of economic and political injustice isn't shock therapy...it's criminal. And why should Americans take work that pays wages below the legal limit, or otherwise volunteer to be abused even worse than we are so that some bloated corprocrat can make even more? I suggest that better shock therapy would be putting some of those corprocrats out of business for good. Let THEM work for a living for a change instead of screwing us for a buck.
 
 
+1 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-08 04:52
In responce to "uh, and how many soup lines do you see in Western Europe and other socialist states? I haven't seen any in Canada."
you missed my point. The point is that, while you still can see some soup kicthens here in US, you will never see them in W. Europe and Canada, where "mama state" takes care of such things. Soon they might be gone in US if the US public opinion seriously decides to go Greek/French.
The only thing I totally agree with you is that the corporate bastardas from GM and Goldman Sachs SHOULD be allowed to fail) must be standing in the same lines in the same soup kitchens.
 
 
+2 # Texas Aggie 2010-09-11 23:33
And that you never see them in W. Europe is exactly the point. If the government doesn't protect the people from predators, who will? The corporations??? The only way that people can protect themselves is by uniting and using their combined forces in a single entity. That entity is known as the government, and its purpose is to ensure the welfare of the people. Those predators who argue against the "nanny state" are the same predators who the people need protection from.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 13:29
And when the foreign made goods built by foreign companies are cheaper, where will the American workers jobs be?

You need Americans to quite buying foreign by choice. That is the real solution to job security.
 
 
-4 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-08 05:01
Quoting
And when the foreign made goods built by foreign companies are cheaper, where will the American workers jobs be?

You need Americans to quite buying foreign by choice. That is the real solution to job security.


American jobs will be gone for better or worse. This is the answer to your question. You either learn another marketable skill or sit on welfare for a couple of years, looking for another job. Stop this romantic nonsence about calling people to stop buying foreign-made goods. It is certainly not a real solution. Even many progressives on this forum will agree with me on this point. You remind me an early 19th century Luddite in England who wrecked factory equipment because industrial life destroyed their home workshops and idillic pastoral life.
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-08 21:48
Quoting
Interesting, Fletcher's mood is a mirror image of my own mood in 2008 when I had to vote for these pathetic creatures (McShame and Sarah), considering them the lesser evil. It seems, mine freund, we are doomed to be trapped into this Dem/Rep double game forever.

AHA! Mein freund! I guess we do have much in common!
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-08 11:48
Are you kidding? It's darn near impossible to find American-made products in stores; how can we choose to "quit buying foreign"? Believe me, if I could find American-made products I could afford, I'd NEVER buy another product from China!
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-12 00:17
Use it up. Wear it out. Oh, that's right. We are supposed to be a consumer society. It's supposed to make our economy better. Do we really need all this stuff? My brother and I have wasted a goodly portion of our lives dealing with family hoarders/shopaholics. It is sick. It's contagious. We're in recovery.
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-11 20:30
Yes and then lets also stop all those foreigners from buying Levis, Apple, Carrier, Coca Cola, all those pharma products etc etc. Lets allow only Americans to buy them exclusively. Keep our jobs and our products home and let our own people pay the Made in America prices our companies charge for these, to support our way of life. Who wants globalization anyway.
 
 
+11 # Guest 2010-09-06 09:44
There is NOTHING wrong with the US economy. Note for example:
The ultra rich, or those with investable assets of at least $30 million, increased their wealth by 21.5 percent last year, and investing in residential real estate has regained appeal among the wealthy, according to the "2010 World Wealth Report" by Capgemini and Merrill Lynch Wealth Management.

http://www.us.capgemini.com/worldwealthreport2010/

It's time to stop complaining, get rich, and join the Tea Party!
 
 
+29 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:21
Uh, to those giving this a thumbs down: I think Phillip's comment was pure snark. Rather well done, even, but perhaps a bit too subtle -- it almost sounds like right-wing blather, but not quite. Read again! :-)
 
 
+40 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:30
Yes, my comments were meant to be entirely sarcastic. In hind sight, I realize that there's nothing funny about the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer (and more numerous).
 
 
+26 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:55
The Ultra Rich? Like the Banksters, corporate executives etc. All those who contributed to the current problem and have cornered all the bail-out money? Investing in the very instruments that caused the problem. There is a lot wrong with the economy. The rules benefit the rich and powerful, who never pay for their indiscretions and who rely on the taxpayer to get bailed out.
 
 
+9 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:56
Just read your later post. You got me!
 
 
+20 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:27
Considering the nonsense that many "conservatives" write, it's not surprising that you would take my comments seriously. In fact, on other sites I routinely post things like "how dare that socialist-communist-fascist-liberal-Muslim-foreigner Obama say that pregnant women be deserving of pre-natal health care - if they were pregnant when they switched jobs, that CLEARLY should be treated as a non-insurable pre-existing condition!". You'd be amazed at how many people end up agreeing with me. Pretty scary... and it's not even Halloween (or Election Day) yet!
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-09-12 00:31
Scary indeed. My daughter-in-law had a high risk condition only seven years ago. Despite wanting a baby, a "pre-existing condition" coverage denial resulted in the necessity of an abortion. Doubtless, the same abortion opponents are the ones who shockingly agreed with your cynical post. There are 44 other nations, all with universal health care, that have fewer pregnancy-related maternal deaths than the US. We don't rank much better on infant death rates either.
 
 
+17 # Guest 2010-09-06 12:32
Could you be more specific, please.
What is the path to becoming rich?
Inherit? Steal from the poor?
Become a Banker and legally rob people?
Any other suggestions?
Most Tea Party members (beside Ms Palin, Ex-Repuke politicians, and Fox News Liars) seem to be on the old and poorish side!
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-06 13:14
Need a little more detail on how to achieve #2 (get rich).
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:00
Jes, JET-Tax, the Job Exporting Tax. But this is self defeating. They just will raise prices and the consumer gets the shaft again.
 
 
+16 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:03
Wasn't Hitler Time magazine's "Man of the Year" in 1938?

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The German people were also coming out of the Depression, and they found their leader, didn't they?

I'm saving my crayons, so someone else can draw the parallels.
 
 
+9 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:05
Quoting
Wasn't Hitler Time magazine's "Man of the Year" in 1938?

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The German people were also coming out of the Depression, and they found their leader, didn't they?

I'm saving my crayons, so someone else can draw the parallels.


Well pluck me magic twanger Froggy! Just what parallel might your crayons be drawing?
 
 
+13 # goodsensecynic 2010-09-06 13:28
On the other hand, I seem to recall that Fidel Castro got the nod, perhaps in 1959.

Whatever one's political stripe, it seems that Time has a certain enthusiasm for men who are dedicated to a cause.

And, like him or not (at least in comparison to the fascist-United Fruit-MAFIA axis that ran Cuba beforehand), at least Fidel has displayed "staying power" through parts of eleven presidencies.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-06 19:40
The parallel you should all be noticing is that the present day Time did not have the balls to name Osama Bin Laden man of the year in 2001. That goes hand in hand with the media shutdown before the Iraq war as the few dissenting voices left were soon squelched bullied by the ratings war waged by Fox Noise Channel. This thing used to be based on impact whether it is fame or infamy, honor or notoriety, good or evil. Now it must pass the public feel-good PC test. The choice of Hitler was not an endorsement. I recall that Stalin was selected at least twice. Once in a heroic WWII setting and later as the iron curtain despot.
 
 
+22 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:13
Think Obama and the "team" turn off any media which contains op eds by Krugman. He and his advisors will not allow themselves to influenced by this outstanding economist. And Obama is supposed to be one of the very intelligent presidents we have had. Nothing he is doing in regard to the economy proves that to many of us.
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-06 12:13
Obama is intelligent the same way folks said Bush was someone you could have a beer with (yeah! if you were the prince of Saudi Arabia).
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-07 00:25
Obama is intelligent. But he's not intelligent like GW. He needs to stop playing the beleaguered Carter and get out and campaign!

Oh yes, I think GW was brilliant! He brilliantly fooled the religious right that he believed in Jesus. He brilliantly fooled the tax-conscious that he was going to cut their taxes. He brilliantly fooled the world that Iraq was the enemy of peace. He did all this fooling because he knew the most important fact about being president: the campaign doesn't end after you're elected, and the people don't care what you do, compared with what you say you do.

Obama has to end his messiah complex and get out and campaign. Otherwise, he will deserve to be called a coward just like Dukakis.

BTW: Giving GW any credit for anything regarding Iraq was stupid like nothing else. Only Mondale's bunting was worse!
 
 
+4 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-07 15:07
Quoting
Think Obama and the "team" turn off any media which contains op eds by Krugman. He and his advisors will not allow themselves to influenced by this outstanding economist. And Obama is supposed to be one of the very intelligent presidents we have had. Nothing he is doing in regard to the economy proves that to many of us.


What is meant to be is meant to be. Do not blame Obama, although I do not like his ecoonomic policies. I feel sorry for the man who became a hostage of the economic crisis. After all, as any good Marxist economics textbook will tell you, capitalism develops by cycles: from crisis to crisis. If a politician happens to be in charge of a country during such a nasty time, he/she is doomed anyway. He/she is always bad in the eyes of masses who want an instant solutions
 
 
+11 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:29
A Communist acquaintance--a member of the CPUSA--maintained back in the 1950's that FDR deliberately provoked Japan into bringing the US into war by, among other things, virtually ignoring the sinking of the USS Panay in 1937. This so that the US would be forced into the deficit spending required to climb out of the Depression: 'twas no accident that brought us out.
 
 
+7 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:34
That myth has been traveling around since 1941 and simply won't die.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 07:18
Quoting
That myth has been traveling around since 1941 and simply won't die.

That Pearl Harbor was a false-flag operation is no mere "myth." There is only one journalist-scholar who went through 200,000 documents and interviews for almost twenty years, investigating the causes of the Pearl Harbor attack. His copiously footnoted book is Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, and it makes it irrefutably clear that FDR followed a plan of specific provocations, cooked up by Arthur McCollum, to coerce Japan into attacking - and that he and a small group of advisors, receiving updates from Japan's military and diplomatic codes, which had been cracked, had ample warning of the attack, where and when, and allowed it to happen by keeping the key commanders out of the loop.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:03
See also: Gore Vidal, "The Golden Age." He gives a complete outline about how FDR provoked the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though this is a novel, Vidal's research is extensive.
 
 
+1 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-07 15:11
Quoting
See also: Gore Vidal, "The Golden Age." He gives a complete outline about how FDR provoked the attack on Pearl Harbor. Though this is a novel, Vidal's research is extensive.


Novel!! Cheeers!! These are the books from which we the people draw our info about history and politics.
 
 
+12 # goodsensecynic 2010-09-06 15:14
The notion that the USA "provoked" Japan into WWII is indeed one that's been around for a while (though it's not a "Communist" exclusive.

Another version has it that FDR wanted to get the US involved because of his genuine opposition to the Axis powers.

He knew, however, that "isolationism" was rampant in the USA, that a sizable proportion of the social, political and economic elite (Charles Lindburg, Joe Kennedy and Henry Ford, for example) were Nazi sympathizers and that jumping into a second conflagration in Europe would not sit well with the public.

So, the attack on Pearl Harbor (the other option being Clark Field in the Philippines) was more-or-less "invited," as an excuse to declare war.

The same gambit was tried in 1965 (the phony "Gulf of Tonkin" incident and 2003 (the phony WMD). The main difference was that Pearl Harbor was real.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-07 15:59
I would like to end this dispute about Japan and the attack on Pearl Harbor. It went like this. We were supporting Chang Kai Shek in China and dumping many millions into Chinese support against the Maoist rebels. The Japanese invaded Northern China and screwed up our game plan. We went to the Japanese and told them to knock it off. They ignored us. On the final warning we told them we knew exactly where their oil moved and that we would blockade it's supply if they didn't back-off in China. 2 weeks later they bombed Pearl Harbor and 2 days after that they took out out half of the European fleet in the Indian Ocean. Check Wiki or anywhere else (Japan war Oil)
 
 
+14 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:30
It's illegal to import prison made products from outside the U.S., but, by our standards, one cent below the minimum hourly wage is slavery. Importing what we need, above what we can produce, is reasonable, but, buying it, because it can be produced for less than our minimum wage also damages our economy. What about the concept of a maximum wage? If one was limited to earning a mere 5,000,000 dollars a year, all those underlings, who helped produce that corporate wealth, could share in the spoils. How much do we need, anyway. We tire of the Charity: Give to the rich, till it hurts.
 
 
+15 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:46
A maximum income sounds so arbitrary. My proposal is for incomes over $5,000,000 set a marginal rate of 120%.
 
 
+16 # Guest 2010-09-06 12:42
thomasaf: The problem is how many shop at Walmart etc? Look for made in USA tags there. People shop there because it is cheap. The companys that make don't pay American minimum wage because things made in the US don't sell like things made in China at 1/2 the price.

In China they have been shooting corrupt business people. Here they bribe congress and the senate and they give them multimillion dollar bonuses. Wake up and think when you vote. Don't reelect the same crooks just because they bought the most expensive ads. There are a few reasonably honest politicians out there.
 
 
+13 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:46
Obama is so lame, lame, lame. Please, don't vote for him again. But don't vote Republican either. Where is a third party when we need one? Had you people not allowed yourselfs to be brainwashed over decades that the two-party system is the best, you could now have one. Our only hope presenty is a strong Democrat leader with brains and a spine, who rolls up his sleeves and pounds on the table once in a while and has the guts to make decicions that are in the best interest of the people rather than endlessly fidgeting with treacherous compromises. There is still Kucinich.
 
 
-1 # Guest 2010-09-06 18:33
I'm going to say it--Hillary was the best candidate for President, but the male dominated media and the DNC sabotaged her candidacy. She has the guts to stand up to the far right, to corporations and to special interests where Obama flounders.

After watching what the male establishment did to Hillary, I had to think long and hard about voting for Obama. Like many others I didn't think he was experienced or seasoned enough to take on the right.
 
 
+1 # Texas Aggie 2010-09-11 23:43
Given Hillary's history, there is no reason to believe that she would actually WANT to stand up to the far right, to corporations and to special interests, guts or no guts. She has a long history of being partial to the right wing in her economic outlook.
 
 
-5 # Guest 2010-09-07 00:34
Kucinich is a grand-stander. He is deliberately outspoken and liberal. That doesn't make him right.

If all the liberals would finally wake up and realize that something called propaganda is effective and must be addressed, even used, if one wants to fight the conservatives, there may actually be more liberals in power.

Obama used propaganda - hope, yes we can, etc - to reach the average 'public' man and woman. GW and Palin know how to do that. Beck is a page right out of Kazan's "Face in the Crowd" playbook.

We must, must, must sing our mythology for the future.

Oh but we don't want to get our hands dirty. We want to vote for some good third party candidate who has no chance to do anything, except make us feel good.

Wake up America! To paraphrase one of the best Bush (senior) quotes, if you don't like the moral murkiness, get out of politics!
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 09:55
The reality is - if you don't stand with the Democrats and vote for every Democrat you can, then the Republicans will win, take control again and continue to ruin our country far faster and far worse then anything the Democrats would do.
Voting for anybody else is voting for the Republicans. That's how we ended up with Bush! Not voting at all is STILL a vote for the Republicans.
If you’re disappointed now, how disappointed will you be when the Republicans win.
VOTE!!! Tell your friends that voted for Obama to VOTE. WE MUST VOTE!!!
WE NEED MORE SEATS NOT LESS!!!
We are running out of time, stop criticizing. Get on board.
The Dems make mistakes, the Republicans make disaster!
Use your brain to get Obama voters to vote for all their Dems. Face the reality, we have to make what we have work otherwise it’s back to the Republicans making more disaster for the middle class and the country.
 
 
+54 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:49
It is 1938, in a real sense. Fascism, for the U.S. is lurking, at a tea bag rally, in a corporate boardroom, in the enclaves of Congress, on the radio waves, across the internet, on your latest Fox news "fair and balanced" reports. It's seeping into the conversation's of people heading for church services, the thoughts of parents dropping their kids off at public schools and "folks" gathered for barbecue's on this Labor Day. I believe Obama is a good man but, to be honest, not the President I had hoped for. We needed a champion, a warrior of sorts, who could fight for the ideals progressives have believed in for decades. What we got was a pragmatist who simply does not possess the ability to confront the enormous forces aligned against him with the type of indignation and anger that would resonate with a plurality of Americans. We are still, in many ways, a primitive psychological species. The need to confront violent rhetoric sometimes demands an equally forceful response.
 
 
+18 # Guest 2010-09-06 13:21
Quoting
The need to confront violent rhetoric sometimes demands an equally forceful response.


Write to him and tell him exactly that. Every time I write to him, he seems to get a little more forceful. I am disappointed, too. He is allowing the opposition to have too much power. Build some freakin railroads. Put us back to work.
 
 
+15 # Guest 2010-09-06 16:10
Bella,I plan to do exactly that. I wonder nowadays who the President is reading. If he's reading the N.Y.Times one might have thought he would have got the message by now. He needs to get on TV, bring out the graphs, the statistics, the FACTS about how supply side economics have caused the current malaise we are in and how the whole trickle down theory only works to the benefit of the wealthy. He needs to act both engaged, and, quite frankly, pissed off. If it were me I'd go one step further. Tell Americans, no make that DARE Americans to put the god damn Repiglican party back in power. Tell the people of this nation that if they think watching lifestyles of the f*****g rich and famous is somehow going to lead them to gold then go ahead and give it a try. Then tell them using all the information at his disposal the absolute and insane fallacy of such thinking. End the speech with a reminder that being an enabling "chump" is really not badge of honor but a reminder of how easy it is to "fool" the "folks."
 
 
+18 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:29
You're exactly right DaveW. I like Obama. He seems like a really intelligent, nice guy. I can even think of practical applications of pragmatism. But when it comes to rolling up ones sleeves and getting down to brass tacks, having some stones and standing for something...I regret to say that he is a coward. The stimulus plan and all that he has accomplished is so pragmatically neutered of any real power that it is trifling and destined to soon be reversed if the Rethugliecons win power back. Obama could have championed single payer and won unstoppable power among the electorate, but in this and everything else he's done, he wimped out following the paths of least resistance. I guess that's being pragmatic in Washington but standing on principle no matter what is an aspect of leadership he lacks and for this we're all going to get punked when the Repukes take it all back. Let's hope it doesn't happen but I doubt Obama can repair his own damage let alone that of the lying right.
 
 
+10 # Guest 2010-09-06 16:20
Daniel, We've all heard that old saying that "nice guys finish last." My Dad used to say to me "don't do things half-ass." That's what Obama has settled for. Half-ass measures that have only painted him as weak to the right and ineffectual to the left. I find myself perversely wishing the Democrats will get the living s**t kicked out of themselves in November, especially the Ben Nelson's and his ideological acolytes who p**s blue and vote red. Maybe America, a nation that traditionally can only get around half of its voters to go out and mark a ballot simply needs to get kicked in the teeth once again. Sorry we've got to kicked with them.
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-07 04:34
[quote name="Daniel Fletcher"]. The stimulus plan and all that he has accomplished is so pragmatically neutered... Obama could have championed single payer and won unstoppable power among the electorate, but in this and everything else he's done, he wimped out following the paths of least resistance.

All too true, Dan! Let me flush out my case for agreeing:

1) As Democratic Nominee winner, he consigned an undivided Jerusalem to the Israelis--something a US President has no business doing. 2) As President, he appointed the altogether untrustworthy Timothy Geithner to be Secretary of the Treasury. 3) He kept on Gates and Petreaus, and chose as Secretary of State an opponent whose hawkish foreign policy he had eloquently and intelligently criticized. 4) He made Ken Salazar Secretary of the Interior. 5) He authorizes continued building of THE WALL on our southern border--a monument to the KNOW-NOTHINGISM we Americans should long since have left behind.
 
 
+7 # Guest 2010-09-06 19:23
Dave W., what an intelligent and well written response !
Yes,, thinking folks sorely need a champion of sorts.

I believe we can have progress,, but there are so many liars with lots of money to weed out and defeat ! Keep talking out loud, and keep posting my friend!
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-07 07:18
Shea, I remember the moment so well. It was exactly 8:01pm on election night in November of '08. CBS news had just declared that Barrack Obama had been elected President of the United States. My wife and I were with a group of friends at a local bar/grill. I started to cry. My wife seemed kind of embarrassed. I really thought we had that champion. I just read in my morning paper that Obama has put fewer people in the federal judiciary than anyone since Nixon in his last term. The AP story says Obama's response to GOP obstructionism has been "tepid." I'll keep talking out loud, but, to be honest, I sometimes have the overwhelming urge to cry again. I'm a 54 yr. old white guy who went back to college in my late forties. I got A.A.'s in sociology and history. I met a 18 yr.old Black kid in one of my classes. He used to say me and him would run for President/V.P.in 2012. He told me he needed an "old white dude" on the ticket to make it work. lol I miss him. I feel like crying again.
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-06 21:10
I agree. Dave. I think Obama lost the game while he was still President-Elect. He accepted the basics of the Paulson Plan. Paulson was for money to the predatory corporations, without strings or accountability. Obama said: o.k. As a result, the bailout was a disgusting spectacle to the people who had worked hardest for Obama's election. It was far less effective than it should have been. It should have been conditioned on enforceable promises to renegotiate junk mortgages and to ease credit to small businesses. Instead this was ridiculously left to the predators on the ground they could do it better if left alone. Obama is a faux-progressive. He has enemies he does not deserve. But he no longer deserves the friends he once had.
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-07 07:29
Tom, Feeling awfully depressed this morning. The bailout you speak of I guess was the "head's up" for a lot of us. The lack of drive for a single payer option in the health care bill. The war escalation and spending. I read recently in The Nation, that the U.S. government is dramatically expanding its presence in Guam even as we speak. We are going to wipe out about 2/3 of some of the world's most pristine coral reefs so that we can anchor up to three nuclear powered aircraft carriers at a time. The people of Guam, an American property that has no voting rights or representation in D.C., are understandably furious. They will pave over large segments of their beautiful island to accommodate our military people. Empire marches on and Obama is, we must all now accept this, just another occupier of the king's throne. But, dear God, I had such hopes!
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-07 07:49
I think there should be a recognition of the power of the right when evaluating Obama's accomplishments . A Republican party that thinks more of regaining power rather than considering what is best for the country; a propaganda machine that succeeds in convincing a large portion of the public that he is a socialist, a Muslim or a foreigner; a business community that can convince us that the economic problems are rooted in high taxes and restraints of regulations. We are told that Obama has been in office so long that we shouldn't be "blaming Bush" but how long does it take to recover from 10 years of war while instituting tax breaks and tearing down regulations and unions.
 
 
+12 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:50
....you probably missed the part about the parasitic central bank being the root cause of all economic problems
 
 
+34 # Guest 2010-09-06 10:51
I hope I don't live to be 100 with the country being run by the same idiots who gave us 1980 to 2008.

THAT IS SCARY !!!!!

I remember the 1980's and the cry for:

TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS !!!

It all went up and none came down.
 
 
+13 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:31
Yes, one of the great lies foisted on all of us. It NEVER trickles down. Everything is sucked up and for this we are becoming pauperized. It's been happening for 30 years now and maybe more.
 
 
+31 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:04
I only hope the Dems and Indies don't stay home on election day. I know they are much too smart to vote for the GOP or the Tea Party candidates but their followers are all fired up and will indeed go to the polls and vote. We outnumber them .We must vote to keep the Dems in charge or else it will be the end of our coutry as we know it.We cannot afford to go back to the policies that got us into this mess.Do you want endless investigations as Issa promises?Do you want to see the end of the middle class? Want to see the Constitution destroyed? Think about it.
 
 
+13 # Guest 2010-09-06 16:10
Oh my God! Boehner in charge! (I'm from Ohio.)
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-07 00:37
I hope the Indies stay home. They are more often than not the crazy Tea Party type.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:15
I beg to differ, cynibunny. Indies more often than not vote Dem, Green, etc., and not Tea Party (read: Republican).
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:17
Too late, Missy. All of the "or else" things you list already HAVE happened. Our country as we knew it IS gone, the Constitution has been shredded (e.g., the Patriot Act is still in force), and the middle class is going down for the third time.
 
 
+33 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:06
It doesn't have to be this way. We have allowed the elite to share their profits with the politicians that made it all happen. And then the world crashed. The only fix is to have the rich get us out of this, because the poor can't. And that requires increased taxes on all incomes (wages and investments) over $250, 000 per year, at least until our economy has stabilized. The problem, however, is that the elite have been funding the elections and the politicians are reluctant to interrupt the cash flow.

Nothing is going to change until we have public funding of campaigns. What is it about political bribes do we not understand?

If politicians are going to be beholden to their funders, those funders should be the taxpayers. And at $5 per taxpayer per year it would be a bargain. Even at 100 times that. We MUST lobby our senators and representative to co-sponsor the bill at:
http://fairelectionsnow.org/about-bill

Jack Lohman ...
http://MoneyedPoliticians.net
 
 
+11 # Guest 2010-09-06 13:24
I've always wanted public funded elections ..

but the supreme court has always said that free speech is restricted by not allowing the rich to support with money their choice of candidates .... our only weapon is to VOTE !
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:38
No, the supreme court has not always said that money equals free speech. This supreme court (the conservative constitutional one that gave W the presidency) overturned years of rulings upholding limitations on corporate giving.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 09:25
Quoting
No, the supreme court has not always said that money equals free speech.

True as far as it goes.

This supreme court (the conservative constitutional one that gave W the presidency) overturned years of rulings upholding limitations on corporate giving.


Also the truth and nothing but the truth. But the decision in re Citizens United v. FEC would probably not have gone as it did without the precedent of Buckley v. Valeo (1976) identifying money as speech, and that in turn built on J.C. Bancroft Davis' insertion in re Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1886) which granted corporations the Fourteenth Amendment rights of natural persons and effectively exempted them from the responsibilitie s associated with natural persons' exercise of those rights.
 
 
+10 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:41
And now the corporate media is trying to buy the internet. Write the FCC and tell them to maintain net neutrality. This is a menace.
 
 
+7 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:55
Public funding is OPTIONAL, thus candidates can opt to not take private money and it does not violate free speech.
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-06 16:16
As I said before, I'm from Ohio. Kerry won in Ohio according to exit polls, but Bush won according to voting machines. An investigation was inconclusive. We need to face the fact that elections are vulnerable to fraud. Does anyone believe that Republicans are above that sort of thing?
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:20
No doubt in my mind that shrub rigged the election, with Ken Blackwell's and Diebold's help. I saw Ohio called for Kerry on election night, but lo and behold, by the next morning, the state had gone to shrub. It was a very sad day for us Ohioans.
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:36
It's a great--and wonderfully simple--idea. And as long as all that money is available to buy candidates and elections, it won't change. It's a Catch-22. How do we break it?
 
 
+5 # aquarian 2010-09-06 11:06
You guys act like that is what you want, so that is what you will get. Think small - get small results. Thanks a lot, everybody.
 
 
+19 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:09
Yes, we need the Job Exporting Tax, the JET-Tax. Yes, everything will get more expensive, but the jobs will be here. We will be working, but not very gainfully, unless we achieve fair wages through unionization. But, of course, that thought doesn't fit into your propaganda poisoned brains. Workers, on your own you will always lose. You need the uniting strengths that come through Unions. (Or should we call them Associations, to defuse the bad connotations?) That's why the powers that are don't want Unions, they want you weak and defenseless. And you so eagerly oblige! Every time you suckers fall for their false arguments, even as you get evicted from your homes and go bankrupt on medical bills. Hey, whatever happened to the "Employee Free Choice Act" Ha, ha, ha!
 
 
+24 # Guest 2010-09-06 11:31
"It's slightly sickening to realize that the big winners in the midterm elections are likely to be the very people who first got us into this mess, then did everything in their power to block action to get us out." ...

I THINK THEY GET AWAY WITH THIS BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT CORPORATE INTERESTS. JUST A FEW GLOBAL CORPORATIONS OWN ALMOST ALL MEDIA NOW AND GLOBAL CORPORATIONS ARE ALLOWED TO USE AS MUCH MONEY AND MEDIA AS THEY WANT TO INFLUENCE OUR ELECTIONS AND LEGISLATION.
The fundamental questions and answers we can ask and answer about all this are,
1. Why do we allow just a very few GLOBAL Corporations to OWN ALMOST ALL Media Enterprises in America for whatever purposes they have in mind. AND..., without even the requirements of operating under a FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?
2. Why do we allow ANY money outside of ONLY Public Funding into OUR Election Process?
3. Why do We contract almost all Government functions out to Corporations like We are Corporate Cash Cows for them?
 
 
+11 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:41
Quoting
1. Why do we allow just a very few GLOBAL Corporations to OWN ALMOST ALL Media Enterprises in America for whatever purposes they have in mind. AND..., without even the requirements of operating under a FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?
2. Why do we allow ANY money outside of ONLY Public Funding into OUR Election Process?
3. Why do We contract almost all Government functions out to Corporations like We are Corporate Cash Cows for them?


...because our political culture, and yes, our civic culture as well, is rotted with corruption through and through. A revolution of the elites against the rest of us has been in engagement for many years, and basically they've won. It's a mop up operation now unless of course we muster the counter-revolution so richly needed. Not a military revolution actually, but tax revolt, protest, great suffering in non-violent resistance. When we all hurt badly enough we will have no choice. A cultural revolution will come. It must.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-06 17:40
I say to the Democratic Party, if you want power, then you HAVE to become a Party of the People again. You have to put on a pair of steel clackers, stop fearing 24 hour CONservative Newz Psychols, act together an believe that it will lead to more chips falling your way.

You will never overcome Global Corporate CONservative Media until the narrow grip is broken and Media is back in the hands of a hundred, separate, different and diverse owner-entities and they are required to under the rules of a strong FAIRNESS DOCTRINE.

AND.

You have to take all but Public Funding out of elections.
You have to shut down the American Government Cash Cow and stop making EVERYTHING about OUR GOVERNMENT open to the control of some Corporate Enterprise by way of contracting out ALL Government functions.

Government IS NOT a Business no matter what Corporate CONservatives would like Americans to believe.' Remind the American People just how much Government actually has their backs.
 
 
+15 # Guest 2010-09-06 12:38
The knottiest part of the Gordian knot that America's guts have become is the military-industrial complex -- the tie-up between political power and the so-called "defense" industry.

The reason Obama is lame is that he is just another tool of the military-industrial complex, like every other powerful Republican and Democrat.

We continue to think that it matters whether we vote Republican or Democratic. But both parties are utterly corrupt members of a conspiracy to bleed America white.

Every vote for a major-party candidate is a vote for the military-industrial complex.
 
 
+9 # goodsensecynic 2010-09-06 15:23
Good as far as you go ... but let's not forget that Eisenhower had originally meant to warn against the "military-industrial-congressional complex," but was persuaded to leave out "congressional" lest he hurt Republican candidates.

Let's also not leave out the financiers and the enablers in the corporate-owned media, not to mention the educational system which educates/socializes/indoctrinates (take your pick) young people to either believe uncritically in the system or to cynically withdraw from it.

Let's join with Eisenhower's ghost and sing out a warning against the "military-industrial-financial-ideological complex."

I could probably go on, but this is enough to chew on for the moment.
 
 
+15 # Guest 2010-09-06 12:56
I choose to believe that Obama, if elected to a second term, will take the kind of progressive actions necessary to return America to a country of opportunity and progress. I believe that Obama, in his first term, has chosen to take a "middle of the road" course to avoid alienating the political/industrial complex that runs Washington and "the best congress that money can buy".

There is little any president can do, except be the moral compass of the country by speaking truth to power. It is my hope that Obama will be elected to a second term and will become the voice for reason for the common man.

Politicians are silent on the issues of great importance to our future because they are politically unpopular. I hope that in a second term, Obama will put those important issues in front of the public. True and lasting change will happen when an educated and motivated public forces the issue.
 
 
+12 # Guest 2010-09-06 13:35
Gotta do more than hope... We can hold each other's feet to the fire after we maintain our majority. Get enthusiastic about this election!

Stop with the analysis and get on task!

Do you want the party that will rebuild America or the party the will give tax breaks to the rich?

Repeat as necessary.
 
 
+9 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:50
Ludite, I just wish he were taking progressive actions NOW. The middle of the road approach when confronted with the opposition he faces is a complete joke. Speaking truth to power? I'd like a ton of that NOW, not in a second term. He's backed down from speaking truth to power so often that I don't have a reason to believe he is capable of it. Obama had, among other issues, single payer and he put it in front of the public and then compromised obscenely. I agree though that "true and lasting change will happen when an educated and motivated public forces the issue." God knows it will have to be us because it hasn't been Obama so far. The day I see him get mad as hell and not going to take it any more on our behalf, I will believe...but not one minute sooner. He's made pragmatism another word for cowardice and I'll vote Democrat only because cowardice is the lesser evil of right wing corruption...some what. As for educated public? Really? Where?
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-06 13:03
I miss Bill.
 
 
+14 # Guest 2010-09-06 13:24
FDR ignored the sinking of the Panay in December 1937 because he had given a major policy speech in Chicago in October of that year suggesting a quarantine for the Axis Powers and it polled as a dead letter among a public intent on worrying about the economy. The United States did stand up to Japan for its continued aggression in China and got spanked in the pants for it at Pearl Harbor. FDR knew we were going to be attacked by Japan the week prior to it but did not know where. He and his advisers sights were set on the Philippines, Wake Island and Guam and they were right about it. Pearl Harbor was not on our radar screens. White Anglo-Saxon American leaders thought Japan incapable of that. The real point is made well by Mr. Krugman that we need bolder action to fix a weak economy and that deficit spending is just the ticket. The mid-term elections if won by Republicans taking back both houses of Congress will be a disaster for this nation. Though if you are rich, pop those champagne corks.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:06
Everybody, including Paul Krugman, misses the point. Jobs will NOT be brought back here unless labor is reduced to the level of those countries that allow such super exploitation. Also, it was mentioned in a quick side note on a Business Report (PBS) that production will be brought here to a degree BUT using the advanced technologies that have REPLACED labor in so many industries. We are in the middle of a technological revolution that has seen the disappearance of once good paying jobs that allowed workers a "middle-class" standard of living, that allowed workers to actually buy back many of the products they made! We are in a race to the bottom and just bringing production back to the good ol" U. S. of A. will not stop that. This is capitalism, pure and simple.
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-06 15:45
Nothing can save the American workers except a return to ANTI Monopoly Laws.

The smallest corporations are being eaten alive and we will be held subservient to the Elite.

I see no solutions if Money is allowed to rule over people.
 
 
+7 # Guest 2010-09-06 16:33
When capitalism is used as an end (for profits, first and foremost), rather than as a means (to support and enhance the common good), the result will always be greed and corruption. Capitalism is not evil in itself, but only when it is used to make the obscenely rich even richer, at the expense of the rest of us.
 
 
+1 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-08 05:12
Quoting
When capitalism is used as an end (for profits, first and foremost), rather than as a means (to support and enhance the common good), the result will always be greed and corruption. Capitalism is not evil in itself, but only when it is used to make the obscenely rich even richer, at the expense of the rest of us.


What is your monetary cap on my income to be considered obscenly rich. Whpo shall we start with? MAy be the Hoolywood celebrities? Who will be on the committee to define who is obcesnly rich or who is not? See, when capitalism is used as an end for profits first and foremost that is when it creates wealth and prosperity. When you use it a means, no capitalist will even want to create wealth, or he/she will begin to lobby the government to seek loopholes trying to bypass various rules and regulations. That is when corruption comes to the picture.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-08 07:42
Wealth and prosperity means different things to different people. To have a loving heart, and lots of people to share that love with, to me, that is true wealth and prosperity. The more love that I possess, the wealthier I am. To be able to share that love with lots of people, that is my prosperity. "The American Dream" was the biggest con perpetrated upon the American people. It insured that most would waste their time struggling, at others' expense, to become rich. While the already rich would spend their time stealing every dime they could lay their hands on, from the strugglers. What's better: a nation where only the top 5% are wealthy, or a nation where all the people's needs are met abundantly? Of the people, by the people, and for the people. One for all, and all for one. The common good comes first. Always. Let the revolution begin.
 
 
-2 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-08 11:20
What a beautiful socialist dream! What a wonderful statement you made! I might use it in one of my future books.

You have asked, meine freunde, "What's better: a nation where only the top 5% are wealthy, or a nation where all the people's needs are met abundantly?" Of course, the answer is the nation where ALL the people's needs are met ABUNDANTLY. But there is a little problem here. So far human beings did not invent this type of society. Those who tried brought more misery and suffering to people than "capitalist bastards." Coupled with your brave exclamation "let the revolution begin," your passionate phrases about sharing your love and so forth, reminded me a good old wisdom: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." Eh..do not even want to continue... I only wish I could take to Cuba to live for a year as a Cuban. Could have been a good therapeutical remedy for you. All right, go on with your revolution. Let's see what you will accomplish.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-08 12:11
Love is not a dream, its the only reality. Its everything else that is the illusion.

Those who tried to have this kind of society failed because they tried to pour "new wine into old bottles". A new world requires new people, a revolution in every heart! (Good intentions also take you to heaven, my friend.)
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-09-08 22:01
Quoting
Love is not a dream, its the only reality. Its everything else that is the illusion.

Those who tried to have this kind of society failed because they tried to pour "new wine into old bottles". A new world requires new people, a revolution in every heart! (Good intentions also take you to heaven, my friend.)


Bless you. When I finish healing, I want to believe as you do. I'm working on it.
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-09-09 10:01
Thank you, Daniel Fletcher. You are my family.
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-09-09 23:35
Quoting
Thank you, Daniel Fletcher. You are my family.


...and you are mine good friend!
 
 
-3 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-09 08:28
OK. Welcome to your Brave New World. Yet, some quesitons remain. How will you make sure that your "new bottles" and not old? What are you going to do with the "old people."? Who is going to decide who is qualified to be considered a "new person" and who should be relegated to the historical dumpster as the as an "old one." What is your criteria? What is your litmus test?

About Love. Love is good, and I love Love. But, please, do not impose your love on me. Otherwise it will be qualified as a rape.
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-09-09 09:56
"Ah, sweet mystery of life." Some things cannot be explained. They must be experienced to be known.
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-09 23:39
Quoting
OK. Welcome to your Brave New World. Yet, some quesitons remain. How will you make sure that your "new bottles" and not old? What are you going to do with the "old people."? Who is going to decide who is qualified to be considered a "new person" and who should be relegated to the historical dumpster as the as an "old one." What is your criteria? What is your litmus test?

About Love. Love is good, and I love Love. But, please, do not impose your love on me. Otherwise it will be qualified as a rape.


I like you Anres. Oh, and I think you're missing the point. I get as wound up as you, but genierae is writing something much bigger than your response grasps. With all due respect, love is the only motive I know of that is beyond corruption, is selfless and giving, and call me delusional, but maybe our only hope after all. No other capacity within us seems to be accomplishing much.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-08 21:59
Aw Andres, Please establish for us a system that HAS actually worked historically. Isn't it all something of an ongoing experiment? I mean, the invention of socialist economic models caused much harm and large scales...and good on some large scales too. Capitalism has caused genocides, mass murder and so forth...and good on some large scales too. And by all means, I'd love to live in Cuba for a year. I'd love to live in Denmark for a year as well. So? I have lived overseas and can tell you with certainty that the US is worse than some capitalist economies and worse than some socialist economies, socially, politically, historically. I think the jury is still out and America has a lot to worry about. Right now, we're not likely to stand up to historical judgement very highly in the future. What do you think Andres?
 
 
+1 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-09 08:45
Dear Daniel,
I have to admit that your postings are among the best on this forum in terms of arguments you make and questions you pose. Answering your rhetorical question: no, there is no system that HAS actually worked historically by providing everything to everybody. And there will be no such system. Yes, quest for a "system" is an ongoing experiment. My personal judgment (which certainly might be biased) is based on the comparison of US and those countries I happened to live (Soviet Union and then after 1990, "capitalist" Germany). So far I find social,economic and political system (as imperfect as it may be) in US is more user-friendly than in other countries. Perephrasing Winston Churchill, I can say that capitalism is a rotten system, but it is the best among other rotten systems. I guess we have different personal experiences, which obviously drew you to different conclusions.
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-09 23:50
Andres, you are sooo refreshing. I admire and respect you even though I don't agree on many topics. I must say though that experience is a valid teacher and I try not to unilateraly oppose what you're saying and the conservative model in general. I would like to think that we could actually meet in the middle of lots of debates. I wish civility came more easily to me and I admire your civility with me. You model a kind of respect I must work at mustering up for those I disagree with. In fact, with you in mind I will endeavor to become better read on Russian history from Tzar Nicholas to present. I won't garuantee the outcome, but I will try to see if I can better understand the points of view you hold. Please recommend a couple of good books to read. I'm sure others would be as interested as I.
My experiences are extensive, but the universe is sooo big and I will forever be sooo small. I read about 40,000 pages a year so I am open to any suggestion you make and will do some real homework!
 
 
+14 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:07
Unabashed maximization of profits; the raping of the workers, the environment, nations, you name it. Unless the unemployed, part-time, contingency workers unite in their common interests, including undocumented workers, of all nations and backgrounds, we are doomed. The class that sucks the wealth from our labor is global and they are remaking the world in their image, and for their class only. With robotics and electronic means of production, we are going to be "eliminated." Read Jeremy Rifkin's excellent book, "The End of Work," 1995, with updated forward in 2004. We need to better understand our history.
 
 
+8 # angelfish 2010-09-06 14:34
Give this President a fighting chance. Y'all gave "dubya" eight, long, murderous years to inflict the damage, it's going to take President Obama at LEAST that long to bring us out of it. You need to excise the "blue dog" Democrats and also get rid of the incumbent Republi-WON'Ts who have sat on their hands for the past 20 months obstructing and emasculating ANY meaningful Legislation for the people. They then have the audacity to blame THEIR inaction on the President! WAKE UP, AMERICA! Remember "dubya's" fouled up quote, "Fool me once..."
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-06 14:44
Much Obama bashing going on here when it really comes down to a lame Dem majority - a bunch of turkeys who wouldn't be able to all walk across the same street together and the party of "NO!" who put into practice the adage "divided we fall united we stand."
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-06 18:09
Quoting
Much Obama bashing going on here when it really comes down to a lame Dem majority - a bunch of turkeys who wouldn't be able to all walk across the same street together and the party of "NO!" who put into practice the adage "divided we fall united we stand."


Your comment is vastly simplistic and wrong. Obama is a coward and that isn't Obama bashing. That's a FACT. He, and most democrats, behave like wimps. The right totally frames the arguments of the day and good old Obama, Mr. Pragmatic himself, doesn't waste a breath seriously fighting back against the lunatic fringe which happens to be the entire right, and I do mean the whole shooting match. Sure, I'll vote Democrat with great regret and relief only in their being the lesser of evils. But don't you dare write off the disappointed as Obama bashing. I say he is a coward and will be a coward even if reelected. I didn't ask him to fix anything in two years, but what he has done is pathetic.
 
 
-1 # Guest 2010-09-07 06:09
Daniel, I am with you every word of the way. This truth--cowardice--is at the heart of the matter. I'd like to say otherwise. To an astounding degree, Obama is an image without substance.
 
 
-1 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:30
Absolutely right, Daniel. Just the example of the single-payer option proves your point, but there are a dozen more instances.
 
 
-2 # Guest 2010-09-07 15:07
Dear Ohgahad: Many of my friends--all progressives--say: "Give Obama a chance! Look at those monsters stalking him." I don't like to look at the monsters--they're so incredibly ugly--NO style, VERY bad smell! But I HAVE been looking at Obama--laser-like focus!--from when he won the Democratic nomination I worked to help him win. How explain Ken Salazar? (It would have been an accident if BP hadn't happened.) How explain Geithner: this faux boy-scout who didn't quite get around to paying taxes (Secretary of Treasury, for Gahd's sake!) who shoveled billions of dollars to predatory corporations with a shovel handed him by Paulson? How explain the incredibly stupid wall that is being built on our southern borders at Obama's order? These are not thing OTHERS are doing to him. These are acts of a guy with his heart in the wrong place.
 
 
+16 # Guest 2010-09-06 15:06
The minute Obama took office the Republicans knew they would not cooperate with anything he came up with because they knew the country was in a mess (their earlier contribution to us) and knew it would be difficult to dig out, especially in just two years, and that if that didn't go well, the voters would most likely hold Obama responsible--and vote accordingly. The Dems were totally stupid to not catch on to this scheme early enough to say "screw them" and just get on with their programs. The repubs thus have been throwing wrenches into the gears of government for two years, a trick Gingrich perfected to get the repub landslide with "contract on America".
 
 
+7 # Guest 2010-09-06 16:40
Angelfish, you are exactly right. We give up on Obama after less than two years? How fickle is that? If the American people want to know who's really to blame, I suggest that we all go to the nearest mirror, and take a good, long look.
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-06 18:15
Quoting
Angelfish, you are exactly right. We give up on Obama after less than two years? How fickle is that? If the American people want to know who's really to blame, I suggest that we all go to the nearest mirror, and take a good, long look.


You're wrong. I look in the mirror long and hard with a picture of Obama in my hand and I beg to differ. HE is to blame and HAL says it right. He has all but pandered to the right. I voted for him because I believed in what he represented and HE has failed at his own vision. I didn't ask him to fix the whole 9 yards in 2 years, but what he has accomplished, no matter how you dress it up, is pathetic. If he had so much as accomplished single payer or at least really fought for it, this would be the New Democratic Century, and this would be true if he fought for us steadfastly win or lose. I will vote for this coward because the Repubs are worse, but I'd suggest that Obama, for God's sake, and you, took a longer look in the mirror.
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-09-08 05:28
Obama is not a miracle-worker, and he has to compromise with congress, in order to get things passed. He had NO cooperation from Republicans and he had many blue dog Democrats to contend with. Obama didn't fight for the public option because he knew it was useless. There's NO way he could have gotten a better healthcare bill, but he did get one that can be improved on as time goes by. He has gotten quite a lot accomplished in a very short time, if you will just look at it with calm eyes. Obama is a uniter, its in his DNA, and he wanted to bring opposing sides together. His inexperience blinded him to the true nature of Republicans and how rabid they are in their hatred of him and the Democrats. Instead of attacking him, why not work to educate the ignorant people in your town, who believe the Republican lies? Instead of being negative, why not turn your angry energy into positive action? This country can't take much more of this division, we must come together, or we will not survive.
 
 
+5 # Guest 2010-09-07 02:42
If the American people want to know who's really to blame, I suggest that we all go to the nearest mirror, and take a good, long look.

And there's one more piece of the problem: Americans are too easily distracted to take a "good," let alone "long" look at anything. Half of adults never read another book after highschool, and in my small town, more people turned out for a cage-fighting event than voted in the last election. As Jefferson said, more or less, if you want democracy without educated voters, you want the impossible. The real question is whether Americans are informed enough to care enough to save ourselves? Or so culturally and politically ADD that we'll vote the the guys that got us into this and have no plan for getting us out?
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-08 05:32
The American people have been conditioned to focus on "bread and circuses", and now most are unable to focus on anything else.
 
 
+4 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-09 08:49
Quoting
The American people have been conditioned to focus on "bread and circuses", and now most are unable to focus on anything else.


As much as I agree with you on this, I have to tell you, genierae, that we have no other people for you.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-07 08:36
genierae, I look in the mirror and I see someone who took to the streets to protest the Iraq war and the Patriot Act, and who marched to demand shrub's impeachment. Someone who has sent endless letters to the White House and to Congress to plead for single payer, the end to offshore drilling, and the end to the wars. Someone who has worked to elect progressive candidates and put my money where my mouth is. And my mirror tells me that Obama talked a good fight, but when it came down to it, he caved on all the causes he pledged to support. I don't see him in the mirror with me!
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-08 05:48
Observer 47, I also protested the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, Afghanistan, and every evil and stupid thing that Bush and co. were dishing out; alienating my family and co-workers, and getting my car tampered with, verbally attacked in public places, shunned by people I thought were friends. I sent letters to the editor, to congress, to columnists. I put home-made signs in my car windows, which got me flipped off a few times. Etc. Yes there were many of us who saw through Bush right away, but those who were asleep outnumbered us. As for Obama, his story has yet to be fully told, I'm not going to judge him so soon.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-06 18:32
....and yes, I'd vote for Obama even if he is an Uncle Tom. Quite a thing for a WASP to say, but it is sadly true with but one difference...he is this for the majority of us all. For some crazy reason I thought he was kindred to the progressives, you know, one who stood for the common good of all, but I don't see that now. I'm tempting to say he's just another corporate toady but I don't really think so. I do think he is mismanaging and misleading and no, I don't really know what his priorities are. I don't know whose good he stands for. He's too busy making compromises to know. What I do believe is that he is not a champion of the middle class, the working men and women of the country and represents an Ivy League elitism that is out of touch with the masses. He's too pretty to get himself bloodied. Definitely NOT someone I want in my foxhole with me. But yep. Take heart. I'll vote for him any way. Okay? Feel better? (Yeah...right.)
 
 
+2 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-09 08:59
You've got to be an Uncle Tom if you want to be President of all Americans. What do you expect him to be, Al Sharpton or Jessee James Jackson? His tragedy (I am speculating of course) is that, being indeed groomed in a campus bubble as kindred to the progressives, he now tries to be a Rorschach man, bowing down to various interests, trying to satisfy everybody. And he is not doing it well with a "grace" like FDR, for example.
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-10 00:02
Quoting
You've got to be an Uncle Tom if you want to be President of all Americans. What do you expect him to be, Al Sharpton or Jessee James Jackson? His tragedy (I am speculating of course) is that, being indeed groomed in a campus bubble as kindred to the progressives, he now tries to be a Rorschach man, bowing down to various interests, trying to satisfy everybody. And he is not doing it well with a "grace" like FDR, for example.


You're growing on me Andres! I guess I am a romantic at heart. I like the idea that the President should be a heroic person, one who represents the best of our culture, a paragon of virtue who puts a face to all of the best in us. This may doom me to disappointment I suppose, but we have had such leaders in the past, one of whom you've named. If it history that makes great men/women, we're a tad over due and desperate. I just hoped Obama was the "one" and he never will be short of a miracle.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-06 19:23
Too many people missing the point.

Obama let Geithner et al convince him that our problems were due to 1) Bush economic policies, and 2) a down business cycle.

The problems are in the fundamental structure of the economy and are systemic - sans the regulatory environment that grew out of the Great Depression - later to be dismantled by GOP true believers.

This is why the band-aide fixes aren't working - and that it (the stimulus) was too little thanks, to GOP/Tea Party hand wringing about deficits.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-06 20:27
If one takes Paul's article and follows it through the link, back into the Times, one sees that Paul is making the Keynesian argument for government spending to put wages back into generous play, so that purchasing by ordinary people can get the economy humming again. Surely Paul is right here. His primary piece of evidence is the recovery that occurred during WWII and continued beyond it. But Paul is leaving out a crucial difference in his comparison of FDR to Obama. OBAMA BLUNDERED AT THE VERY START! One reason it's so hard for Obama to now increase the stimulus through a further deficit is because he signed onto the Paulson Plan as President-Elect and gave taxpayer money away to predatory corporations in a way that disgusted more than half the Progressives who voted for him. Obama is a faux-progressive; and his ability to deal effectively with the economy is over.
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-08 05:55
Tom ONeill, Two points: One, it was the Bush administration that "gave taxpayer money away to predatory corporations". Two, I don't recall Obama ever saying that he was a progressive. Did he?
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-06 21:55
it is a $MONEY$ culture values - wars for profit, surgeries for profit ($500,000 + per year salaries of specialists) - ROME is burning.

Result - 60% of US bankruptcies are due to medical bills. The game is to maximize profit by any means- even if it will lead to our destruction. It is a system - again Obama like Gorbachev - is too little too late.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 04:15
No surprises here. They are simply following a script. The economy and markets are simply in play, and the president and both parties are simply puppets. It's all about power, prestige, and self reward--with zero concern for the collective nation. In layman's terms, zero concern for all of us. The nation is divided. Unguided. Selfishness and ignorance rule. A once great nation is now easy pickings. In the aftermath, be sure to thank those who planted the seeds that brought us down.
 
 
+7 # Guest 2010-09-07 05:30
We are here again because we didn't learn how to sustain a peacetime economy.
Which is why we constantly go to war with somebody.As the military budget gets larger there is less to sustain our infra structure.
Greed is what gets us into this, where those that have most want more. In an economy where more people have money or at least access to it, more money gets spent on day to day things. When the top 1% owns 95% of the wealth the bottom 70% don't have a lot of money to toss around. If that bailout started at the bottom the money would have got to those who know how to earn it in the long run but at least it would have relieved the burden of those at the bottom. Instead, the banks got theirs and the rest of us got left with the debt. It hurts more cause it was our money to begin with.
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-09-07 06:10
To listening to some of the Cable TV reporters, they keep saying that only one/half of the 815 Billion Dollar Stimulus money has been dispensed. When will the remaining money be given out and spent/?? I am sure that we would all like to know.... Our States, bar none, need this money. It should certainly help the unemployment
problem. However, I would certainly like to know if the one/half Stimulus money is still to be given out, or it has
all been dispensed.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 06:59
What we truly need is to bring our tax system into the 21 century. Our top tax bracket is 275,000. This is ok for 20th century New Zealand. We need at least 10 more tax brackets for incomes starting beyond the now existing top bracket and up to the now existing 8 figure incomes. they should also continue to pay the FICA tax. It is the workers that made these people so wealthy it is time for them to help pay the retirement of the workers that got them to where they are. This will fix any existing problem with social security. It will also give sufficient tax income to create some much needed jobs sponsored by our government. Do not listen to the Tea party BS, they are primarily funded by corporate cash. Note this should be a non partisan concept even the GOP do not make that kind of money.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 10:06
Man, you folks just don't get it. Your are right to complain but your complaints without contrast with how much worse our country would or will be if the republicans take over will just help them win. At this point you all better get on the band wagon or expect this November to be a blood bath. Things didn't get done the way you wanted because we don't have ENOUGH seats. We need all of your help to get as many Dems elected. If you voted for Obama you should have at least enough sense to support him or everything will get much worse with more deregulation, more corporate interests, more trickle down. None of the conservative ideology has ever worked except for the wealthy. Look how the middle class has lost wealth and the extraordinary increase of wealth of the very few since Reagan. Vote for your Dems whether you like it or not… Wake Up and Get Real. VOTE!!!! Tell your friends to VOTE!
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-07 10:08
Yeah, politics suck. But there is a difference. Just to make it simple, we have a choice, either you vote for a Clinton party or a Bush party. And sure, Clinton made mistakes but I’d rather have Clinton type mistakes than Bush mistakes. Ralph Nader said there was no difference between the parties and we got Bush. You don’t vote or vote for a third party you are voting for the Bush party. SO quit crying, politics sucks and it is the choice of the lesser of two evils but one choice gets us to hell a lot faster. VOTE for every Dem you can. If everyone who voted for Obama votes for their Dem then we’ll have more seats and maybe get a chance to improve things even more.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-07 10:33
We need to make this article the concept for a Democratic ad. It would go something like this>
The Add would start:
Written Out and Spoken

What is the Republican Plan for the Economy if they take control of Congress.

Fade to pictures of soup lines.

Written Out and Spoken

This is what you get with deregulation, small government and advantages for the wealthy

Some kind of picture displaying opulence of the wealthy of that time…

` Written Out and Spoken

Do you really want to give the Republicans another chance?

More Great Depression pictures
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-09-07 22:02
What was the Democratic plan for health care? Pan to crowds of the diseased homeless once employed and middle class who now can't afford it despite Obamacare. What was the Democratic plan for economic recovery? Pan to any yacht club and focus in on the parking lot and check out the Bentleys, etc. What was the Democratic plan for the wars in the middle east? Pan out families getting evicted, the lines at the soup kitchens and the vets dying from DU. What was the Democratic stimulus plan? Pan out to some government finance office printing press printing out billions in bailouts to the people who brought us down.

What was the Democratic plan for law and order? Who knows? Pelosi said impeachment was "off the table" and Obama wants to put all that nasty stuff in the past even though our future is crippled with so many untold consequences for such irresponsibilit y.

But yet, I'll vote for Democrats once again because it would be worse than voting for Republicans. But does it really matter?
 
 
0 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-08 05:23
Interesting, Fletcher's mood is a mirror image of my own mood in 2008 when I had to vote for these pathetic creatures (McShame and Sarah), considering them the lesser evil. It seems, mine freund, we are doomed to be trapped into this Dem/Rep double game forever.
 
 
+8 # Guest 2010-09-07 13:41
A result of dumbing down of the U.S.A., pure and simple. Sad to see how ignorance and fat cats duping the other 99 percent of Americans work so hard to further enrich the rich and to impoverish themselves is leading the country down the path of becoming a third-world country.
 
 
+6 # Guest 2010-09-07 14:54
I have to give credit to the Christian Right, JR! Their creativity is such that they have invented a Christianity that has NOTHING of that "bleeding-heart-liberal-Jesus-'whatever-you-did-for-one-of-these-the-least-of-my-brethren'" stuff, and is perfectly suited to their purpose. Their wonderfully crafted religion has everything to do with them, and nothing to do with God.
 
 
+4 # Guest 2010-09-08 06:06
Jesus was talking to the same kind of people when he said, "Oh ye hypocrites and liars, how long must I endure ye?" Two thousand years later, we're still enduring them!
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-09-07 17:57
Now what to do about it... apart from what the 20th century tried to kickoff, circa 1938?
 
 
-3 # andresorges1960s 2010-09-08 11:26
And you certainly belong to that 1% of enlightened masters who know how to change our life, dont' you?
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

You Are Not Logged In

Forgot Username? rsn Forgot Password?